IBJNews

WellPoint shares droop despite profitable quarter

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc.'s third-quarter earnings trumped Wall Street expectations, but the health insurer's stock tumbled Wednesday after President Barack Obama won re-election, a victory that could help cement the future of his health care overhaul.

The overhaul aims to cover millions of uninsured people starting mostly in 2014, which means more business for insurers. But it also imposes fees and restrictions on the sector that are expected to squeeze profits for companies like WellPoint, which focuses large portions of its business on covering individuals and employees of small businesses.

Shares of WellPoint dropped 5.5 percent, or $3.35, to close at $57.85 Wednesday.

Citi analyst Carl McDonald said in a research note the company's results would be viewed "quite favorably" without the election's impact.

"There's been an undercurrent of concern among many regarding the potential for bad news out of WellPoint's third quarter earnings, but the trepidation wasn't warranted," McDonald wrote, noting that the insurer easily beat expectations.

WellPoint earned $691.2 million, or $2.15 per share, in the three months that ended Sept. 30. That's up 1 percent from $683.2 million, or $1.90 per share, a year ago.

Excluding investment gains, adjusted earnings were $2.09 per share.

Analysts expected $1.83 per share, according to FactSet.

The insurer's revenue, also excluding investments, was $15.13 billion, which fell short of analyst expectations for $15.3 billion in revenue.

WellPoint said its enrollment slid more than 2 percent to about 33.5 million people compared to last year. Losses in individual and employer-sponsored health coverage more than offset gains the insurer made in its Medicaid and Medicare businesses.

The company operates Blue Cross Blue Shield plans in 14 states, including California, New York and Ohio.

WellPoint had not recorded a quarterly increase in earnings compared to the previous year since the first quarter of 2011, and the insurer's performance had frustrated several large shareholders. Chairwoman and CEO Angela Braly abruptly resigned with about a month left in the third quarter, and the company named John Cannon, its executive vice president and general counsel, to serve as interim CEO.

Wednesday morning's stock decline blunted the 5-percent growth shares had seen since Braly left.

While the overhaul is expected to give insurers millions of new customers, the industry will pay a hefty price for that additional business.

Insurers will start paying annual fees in 2014 that total $8 billion that year and rise after that. The law also restricts how much insurers can vary their pricing based on things like age and health, key tools they use to ensure that they have enough money to pay medical claims.

The overhaul also will require them to cover everyone who applies starting in 2014, even those already sick with expensive conditions such as diabetes. Additionally, the law stipulates that insurers spend certain percentages of the premiums they collect on care or pay rebates to customers.

Analysts have said that insurers like WellPoint will see their profit margins squeezed the most by these limitations and premium spending rules.

But Morningstar analyst Matt Coffina said Wednesday he thinks WellPoint is positioned well for the overhaul. He said the company has experience selling individual policies and a well-recognized brand that should help when coverage expands.

In July, WellPoint lowered its 2012 forecast to adjusted earnings ranging from $7.30 to $7.40 per share. It reaffirmed that forecast on Wednesday.

Analysts expect, on average, earnings of $7.38 per share.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Agreed...
    For-profit health insurance only cost to healthcare as they function as unnecessary middleman. The federal government could do it much more cost effectively and we could utilize the private sector to process the claims. Hopefully, people wake-up one day and realize there IS a better way.
  • What is Wellpoint profiting on anyway?
    Wellpoint does not provide health care to anyone. What exactly are investors "investing" in? The virtual certainty that people need health care for preventive reasons, to cure an ailment, to avoid early death and to minimize human suffering? Why should anyone who does not offer health services profit from the provision of health care by others? The profit motive drives up everyone's costs, and hurts small businesses that want to offer health coverage to employees.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Why not take some time to do some research before traveling to that Indiana town or city, and find the ones that are no smoking either inside, or have a patio? People like yourself are just being selfish, and unnecessarily trying to take away all indoor venues that smokers can enjoy themselves at. Last time I checked, it is still a free country, and businesses do respond to market pressure and will ban smoking, if there's enough demand by customers for it(i.e. Linebacker Lounge in South Bend, and Rack and Helen's in New Haven, IN, outside of Fort Wayne). Indiana law already unnecessarily forced restaurants with a bar area to be no smoking, so why not support those restaurants that were forced to ban smoking against their will? Also, I'm always surprised at the number of bars that chose to ban smoking on their own, in non-ban parts of Indiana I'll sometimes travel into. Whiting, IN(just southeast of Chicago) has at least a few bars that went no smoking on their own accord, and despite no selfish government ban forcing those bars to make that move against their will! I'd much rather have a balance of both smoking and non-smoking bars, rather than a complete bar smoking ban that'll only force more bars to close their doors. And besides IMO, there are much worser things to worry about, than cigarette smoke inside a bar. If you feel a bar is too smoky, then simply walk out and take your business to a different bar!

  2. As other states are realizing the harm in jailing offenders of marijuana...Indiana steps backwards into the script of Reefer Madness. Well...you guys voted for your Gov...up to you to vote him out. Signed, Citizen of Florida...the next state to have medical marijuana.

  3. It's empowering for this niche community to know that they have an advocate on their side in case things go awry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrst9VXVKfE

  4. Apparently the settlement over Angie's List "bundling" charges hasn't stopped the practice! My membership is up for renewal, and I'm on my third email trying to get a "basic" membership rather than the "bundled" version they're trying to charge me for. Frustrating!!

  5. Well....as a vendor to both of these builders I guess I have the right to comment. Davis closed his doors with integrity.He paid me every penny he owed me. Estridge,STILL owes me thousands and thousands of dollars. The last few years of my life have been spent working 2 jobs, paying off the suppliers I used to work on Estridge jobs and just struggling to survive. Shame on you Paul...and shame on you IBJ! Maybe you should have contacted the hundreds of vendors that Paul stiffed. I'm sure your "rises from the ashes" spin on reporting would have contained true stories of real people who have struggled to find work and pay of their debts (something that Paul didn't even attempt to do).

ADVERTISEMENT