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. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT