WellPoint shares sink after profit misses analyst estimates

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc. reported second-quarter profit that missed analyst estimates as higher medical costs and lower enrollment weighed on results. The company trimmed its full-year forecast.

Earnings excluding one-time items were $2.04 a share in the quarter, the Indianapolis-based company said in a statement Wednesday morning. The result was lower than the $2.08 average of 19 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.

WellPoint shares dropped more than 12 percent, or $7.41, to close at $54.01 on Wednesday, their lowest price since September 2010.

Net income fell 8.3 percent to $643.6 million, or $1.94 a share, from $701.6 million, or $1.89, a year earlier.

Revenue increased to $15.4 billion from $15.1 billion.

Full-year profit is expected to be $7.30 to $7.40 a share, the company said.

The lowered forecast will hurt “a stock that investors already dislike,” Thomas A. Carroll, a Stifel Nicolaus & Co. analyst in Baltimore, said in an e-mail. “There was lots of talk of medical trends rising and higher utilization. That will have sector-wide implications.”

WellPoint, along with its competitors, benefitted from lower medical costs last year, as Americans stayed away from the doctor amid unemployment rates that topped 9 percent. Those costs have stabilized this year, making it harder to increase profit, said Ana Gupte, a Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. analyst in New York.

“Cost trends have been flattening out as opposed to declining,” Gupte said in an interview before the announcement. “Last year, the whole industry had a really favorable tailwind, whereas this year, it’s been a different story.”

CEO Angela Braly has tried to add business ahead of President Obama’s health-care law, which is also expected to squeeze profits. The company said July 9 it would pay $4.9 billion for Medicaid insurer Amerigroup Corp. In June, it agreed to pay about $900 million for eyewear retailer 1-800 Contacts.

The company released results before the market opened. On Tuesday, shares of WellPoint, the nation's second-biggest health insurer, fell less than 1 percent to close at $61.42. Through Tuesday, the stock was down 7.3 percent for the year.

Analysts had estimated full-year profit of $7.76 a share on average.

Membership in WellPoint medical plans fell 2.3 percent, to 33.5 million, driven down by what Chief Financial Officer Wayne DeVeydt called “the competitive nature of certain markets” in Wednesday’s statement. The declines came in the insurer’s commercial accounts, where WellPoint raised fees for some policies. That eclipsed gains among government-backed Medicare and Medicaid plans.

“We are disappointed with the need to lower our guidance, but believe it is the right action to take, given the challenging market we see,” Braly said.

The insurer on June 15 said full-year profit was forecast to be at least $7.57 a share. The company also said that day that it would pay $90 million this year to settle a lawsuit over its decision to become a publicly traded company in 2001. That charge, along with costs from the 1-800 Contacts deal, are being taken this year, the company said in statements last month. The Amerigroup purchase is set to close next year.

UnitedHealth Group Inc., the biggest U.S. health insurer, announced earnings last week that beat analyst estimates, as enrollment climbed in Medicare plans for the elderly and Medicaid plans for the poor. The Minnesota-based insurer also raised its full-year profit forecast for 2012.


  • Acceptable
    I am very happy with the WellPoint Report. It appears to me that WellPoint is positioning the company for the 2014 start of the Affordable Care Act. While people align with one side or the other, a well managed company that is planning for the full implementation of the ACA is a good investment in my book. The healthcare needs of the nation will not go away, those needs will simply move to a back burner for the near term.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.