房地产行业摘要：估值仍然合理股价回落带来重新介入的良机130206.ppt

《房地产行业摘要：估值仍然合理股价回落带来重新介入的良机130206.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《房地产行业摘要：估值仍然合理股价回落带来重新介入的良机130206.ppt（15页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。

1、,2013 年 2 月 6 日中国：房地产证券研究报告估值仍然合理；股价回落带来重新介入的良机(摘要)市场对调控政策的担忧导致股价回落，重新介入的良机逐渐显现,市场对调控升级的猜测使得地产股继前几个月强劲表现后自上周起加大波动。虽然短期内股价仍将频繁震荡，但我们认为调控升级对基本面影响有限，行业估值也仍然合理（买入评级的股票估值具有吸引力），所以股价进一步回落提供买入,两种情景假设下的盈利敏感性Underlying profit2013E 2014E,良机。,Offshore listedCOGO,Test 1 Test 2 Test 1 Test 2-1%-6%-1%-13%,Yanlord

2、,-1%,-4%,-4%,-18%,政府不太可能出台大规模调控政策；定点调控对基本面影响有限在我们看来，调控升级应仅限于一线和少数二线城市，因为这些市场的房价在供应有限、需求稳定的情况下有较大的上涨压力。我们认为中国大部分地区没有调控升级的必要，因为历史及目前的供应增速已经远超过了短期需求增速，房价不太可能持续快速上涨。但基于政策的不确定性，我们还是构建了两种销量情景假设来分析调控升级对于我们所覆盖公司盈利和净资产价值的影响：(1)测试 1：只有一线城市的销量回落至 2011 年的谷底水平；(2)测试 2：所有城市的销量均回落至 2011年的谷底水平。在测试 2 这一相对较严厉的情景假设下，2

3、013 年净资产价值中值和 2013/14 年核心每股盈利分别下降 5%和 7%/15%。在测试 1 下，开发商所受影,ShimaoGreentownEhouseLongforEvergrandeCGFranshionCOLIKWGR&FCRLAgileSunacShui On LandPoly Property(H),-1%-1%-1%-1%-1%-2%-3%-3%-4%-4%-4%-5%-5%-5%-5%,-11%-5%-7%-4%-8%-16%-5%-7%-7%-10%-4%-8%-8%-10%-9%,-1%-2%-1%-3%-1%-2%-14%-4%-15%-7%-4%-10%-10%

4、-9%-6%,-15%-11%-7%-15%-19%-20%-16%-10%-18%-17%-9%-18%-19%-13%-15%,响非常有限，分别为 1%和 4%/5%。此外，由于开发商财务状况明显好于一年,Sino-OceanOffshore median,-8%-3%,-11%-8%,-15%-20%-4%-15%,前，我们预计即便调控升级扩展到全国范围，我们覆盖范围公司的财务状况所受影,Onshore listed,响也较为温和，大多数开发商在 13 年仍拥有资金盈余（未计入目前到 13 年底新收购项目的可能）。估值处于/低于周期中值；增速预测保守我们认为，开发商良好的财务实力应是板块

5、估值避免重演 2010-2011 期间大幅向下的重要因素。此外在我们看来，当前估值仅计入了开发商财务状况和增长/回报,ZhongnanRisesunSMCWorldUnionVankeCMPGemdalePolyOCTBCD,0%0%-1%-1%-4%-4%-5%-6%-6%-7%,-1%-6%-6%-7%-6%-6%-7%-8%-8%-9%,0%0%-1%-3%-5%-6%-7%-7%-7%-19%,-8%-18%-12%-15%-10%-10%-14%-11%-10%-21%,的温和复苏的预期。我们认为我们研究范围内的开发商将在本轮周期中继续扩大其市场份额，因此未来增长表现有望好于预期。同

6、时，我们还观察到，在房价增,Onshore median-4%资料来源：高华证券研究预测,-7%,-5%,-12%,长持续受到抑制的环境下，我们覆盖的开发商在过去三年中已逐渐缩小项目收购,和投资规模，以期加快资产周转并保持净资产回报率，这可能会带动销量超预期增长。我们的首选股（位于强力买入名单）是万科 A、龙湖地产和绿城房产。风险：政府调控政策之严超出预期从而引发房价普遍下跌。*全文翻译将随后提供,相关研究中国：开发商：涨势可能因政策风险加剧回调；建议择机吸纳，2013年1月9日中国：房地产：2013年-良性循环的开始；上调目标价；强力买入万科A，2012年12月4日,王逸,CFA 执业证书编

7、号:S1420510120004+86(21)2401-8930 北京高华证券有限责任公司李薇 执业证书编号:S1420510120012+86(21)2401-8926 北京高华证券有限责任公司杜茜 执业证书编号:S1420511100001+86(10)6627-3147 北京高华证券有限责任公司北京高华证券有限责任公司,北京高华证券有限责任公司及其关联机构与其研究报告所分析的企业存在业务关系，并且继续寻求发展这些关系。因此，投资者应当考虑到本公司可能存在可能影响本报告客观性的利益冲突，不应视本报告为作出投资决策的唯一因素。有关分析师的申明和其他重要信息，见信息披露附录，或请与您的投资代表

8、联系。投资研究,2,4,5,7,9,10,2,2013 年 2 月 6 日,中国：房地产,Table of ContentsSupply outpaces demand in most cities;no new tightening neededOur base-case assumptions factor in expectations of tighteningSales in tier-1 cities:c.30%in value,but only 19%in volumesVolume sensitivity:limited impact on NAV/earningsCash f

9、low position strong enough to weather tightening impactValuation below or at mid-cycle;still upside to growth expectationThe prices in the body of this report are based on the market close of February 4,2013.The authors would like to thank OliviaXiao for her contribution to this report.Supply outpac

10、es demand in most cities;no new tightening neededExcept in tier-1 cities,where we think property prices may continue their strong recovery drivenby the supply and demand dynamics in these cities our analysis of supply in other HPR(homepurchase restriction)cities,which have registered strong volume r

11、ecovery in the past one year,suggests land supply has been maintained at above 2009-2010 average level in the past twoyears.This means that unless volume continues to grow from peak levels in these cities,propertyprices outside tier-1 cities and select tier-2 cities are unlikely to sustain a strong

12、increase incoming years.In our view,with HPR limiting the longer-term buying potential from local residents still the key buyers in tier-2/3 cities(unlike in Beijing/Shanghai,half of the buying from non-local buyers)the likelihood of volumes surpass last peak volume levels in these cities is low.In

13、addition,we expect the recovery in land sales to continue,driven by developers strongerbalance sheets.This should support supply growth into 2014 and beyond and prevent rapidproperty price appreciation.In light of these dynamics,we think there is no need to bring in newtightening measures nationwide

14、,but to confine them to tier-1 and maybe select tier-2 cities.Exhibit 1:We see greater price appreciation pressure in the four tier-1 cities vs.the rest oftop 100 cities.Tier-1 cities price index vs.top 100 cities,4.0%,Beijing,Shanghai,Shenzhen,Guangzhou,Top 100 cities,3.0%2.0%1.0%0.0%-1.0%-2.0%-3.0

15、%-4.0%Source:Soufun/CIA,Gao Hua Securities Research.高华证券投资研究,70,100,3,2013 年 2 月 6 日,中国：房地产Exhibit 2:.which is likely to continue given the tight supply outlook there in the coming18 monthsEstimated residential GFA supply in coming 1-1.5 years based on land sales in the past:tier-1 cities,(mn sqm),1

16、2mth rolling land GFA transacted(moving 1yr forward),12mth rolling land GFA transacted(moving 1.5yr forward),GS forecast,60Max5008-12 GFA sold range402009-11 avg supply,30,Min,20100Note:1)2008-2012 GFA sold include social housing.2)Tier 1 cities are Beijing,Shanghai,Shenzhen and Guangzhou.Source:Sou

17、fun/CIA,NBS/CEIC,Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.Exhibit 3:But we see sufficient supply in tier-2 citiesEstimated residential GFA supply in coming 1-1.5 years based on land sales in the past:tier-2 cities,(mn sqm),12mth rolling land GFA transacted(moving 1yr forward),300250200150,Max,12mth rol

18、ling land GFA transacted(moving 1.5yr forward),GS forecast,08-12 GFA sold range,2009-11 avg supply,Min500Note:Tier 2 cities included in the analysis above are Nanjing,Xiamen,Dalian,Tianjin,Chengdu,Hangzhou,Wuhan,Xian,Changsha and Qingdao.Source:Soufun/CIA,NBS/CEIC,Gao Hua Securities Research estimat

19、es.高华证券投资研究,4,2013 年 2 月 6 日,中国：房地产Exhibit 4:.as well as supply in tier-3 citiesEstimated residential GFA supply in coming 1-1.5 years based on past land sales:tier-3 cities,(mn sqm),12mth rolling land GFA transacted(moving 1yr forward),250200150,12mth rolling land GFA transacted(moving 1.5yr forwar

20、d)Max08-12 GFA sold range,GS forecast2009-11 avg supply,100Min500Note:Tier 3 cities included:Urumqi,Nanning,Nanchang,Hefei,Hohhot,Harbin,Taiyuan,Ningbo,Kunming,Shenyang,Jinan,Haikou,Shijiazhuang,Fuzhou,Guiyang,Zhengzhou,Yinchuan,Changchun and Lanzhou.Source:Soufun/CIA,NBS/CEIC,Gao Hua Securities Res

21、earch estimatesOur base-case assumptions factor in expectations of tighteningOur base-case price/volume assumption is listed below(for details,see 2013 Outlook:Start of avirtuous cycle;raising targets,Vanke A to CL-B;Dec.4).We believe our price increase/volumeassumptions are conservative,offer room

22、for upside.Even in the more difficult market of 2011,our coverage universe achieved 17%yoy increase in volume.,Exhibit 5:We expect a 5-10%price increase in 1H13,thenno growth till 2014,based on our expectation of possiblegovt intervention to control pace of price appreciationOur base-case price assu

23、mption for our coverage,Exhibit 6:We assume 7%yoy volume growth in 2013E vs.32%in 2012 for our coverage universeOur base-case volume assumption for our coverage universe,200180,180,Base-case,167,167,167,(mn sqm)120100,Total GFA sold(LHS),Total number of projects selling(RHS)+7%yoy+32%yoy1,836,2000,1

24、60,162,80,+17%yoy,1,502,1500,150,151,1,206,140,138,60,1000,40,120100,100,20,500,Beginning-End-0909,End-10,End-11,Mid-12,End-12,Mid-13E,End-13E,End-14E,0,2010,2011,2012,2013E,0,Source:Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.高华证券投资研究,Source:Company data,Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.,5,2013 年 2

25、月 6 日,中国：房地产,Sales in tier-1 cities:c.30%in value,but only 19%in volumesOur off/onshore coverage universe 2013E presales exposure to tier-1 cities is on average33%/30%,but their volume exposure is smaller at 19%as shown in Exhibit 7-10.,Exhibit 7:For offshore coverage on average,33%of2013E contract

26、sales are contributed by Tier 1 cities.2013E contract sales exposure by city tiers for offshore coverage,Exhibit 8:.but 19%in terms of 2013E GFA sold2013E volume exposure by city tiers for offshore coverage,Tier 1,Tier 2,Tier 3,Tier 1,Tier 2,Tier 3,100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%Source:Gao Hua Sec

27、urities Research estimates.Exhibit 9:For our onshore coverage an average 30%of2013E contract sales are contributed by Tier 1 cities2013E contract sales exposure by city tiers for onshore coverage,100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%Source:Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.Exhibit 10:.but 19%in term

28、s of 2013E GFA sold2013E volume exposure by city tiers for onshore coverage,Tier 1,Tier 2,Tier 3,Tier 1,Tier 2,Tier 3,100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%Source:Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.,100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%Source:Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.,Low contagion risk from

29、tier-1 tighteningWith prices likely just flat,not down,we believe the impact from tightening in tier-1 cities(i.e.volume correction)will not spill over much to other cities.Historical evidence indicates that thespillover effect of volume contraction in tier-1 cities to their regional hinterland is v

30、ery limited(Exhibit 11).高华证券投资研究,6,2013 年 2 月 6 日,中国：房地产,Exhibit 11:Little correlation between volume changes in the tier-1 cities and their respective regions.We see relativelyless volume volatility in Bohai Rim/PRD vs.Beijing/Guangzhou&Shenzhen during past cycles%yoy volume change comparison durin

31、g 2000-2012,100%80%60%40%20%0%-20%-40%-60%,Beijing,Rest of Bohai Rim,100%80%,Shanghai,Rest ofYRD,100%80%,Guangzhou&Shenzhen,Rest of PRD,60%60%40%40%20%20%0%0%-20%,-40%-60%,-20%-40%,Note:The rest of Bohai Rim refers to Tianjin,Hebei and Shandong,the rest of YRD refers to Jiangsu,Zhejiang and Anhui,an

32、d the rest of PRD refers to Guangdong,Fujian and Hainan.Source:CEIC,Gao Hua Securities Research.高华证券投资研究,50,0,7,2013 年 2 月 6 日Volume sensitivity:limited impact on NAV/earningsVolume sensitivity analysis(Exhibit 13)Test 1:2013E volumes in the four tier-1 cities retreat to 2011 trough level.Test 2:201

33、3E volume in all cities retreat to trough level.,中国：房地产,Exhibit 12:2011 was the trough in volumes for the fourtier-1 cities since 2006Annual aggregate GFA sold in 4 tier-1 cities 2006-2012,Exhibit 13:Key assumptions under our two volumesensitivity scenarios,(mn sqm)60,Aggregate volume in tier-1 citi

34、es,City,2013 volume assumptionsTest 1Test 2,Volume back to 201140,30,Trough volume level,.implied volume change from our current estimate,20,Only tier-1 cities,All cities,Beijing,-37%,-37%,10,ShanghaiGuangzhou,-22%-30%,-22%-30%,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,Note:we use GFA sold excluding afford

35、able housing in those 4 tier-1 cities.,ShenzhenOther cities,-26%0%,-26%-20%,Note:other cities refer to CEIC top 40 cities and exclude Beijing,Shanghai,Shenzhen and Guangzhou.,Source:Soufun/CIA,Gao Hua Securities Research.,Source:Soufun/CIA,CEIC,Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.,Our sensitivity

36、analysis shows that in our test 1 scenario,the impact is as follows:Offshore developers:end 2013E NAV down 1%and underlying profit down 3%/4%in2013E/14EOnshore developer:end 2013E NAV down 2%and underlying profit down 4%/5%in2013E/14EEver under our test 2 scenario,the impact on our end-2013E NAV and

37、 2013E-2014E underlyingprofit estimates will be still modest at:Offshore developers:end 2013E NAV down 5%and underlying profit down 8%/15%in 2013E/14EOnshore developer:end 2013E NAV down 5%and underlying profit down 7%/12%in2013E/14E高华证券投资研究,8,2013 年 2 月 6 日Exhibit 14:Our coverage developers NAV,pre

38、sales,earnings sensitivity on our two volume scenarios,中国：房地产,NAV(RCY),Contract sales(Rmb bn),Underlying profit(RCY mn),End-2013E,2013E,2014E,2013E,2014E,OffshoreAgileCOGOCOLICRLCGEvergrandeFranshionGreentownR&FKWGLongforPoly Property(H)ShimaoShui On LandSino-OceanSunacYanlordEhouse,Base-case19.212.

39、527.529.56.69.34.424.920.410.226.312.525.47.811.312.12.4n.a.,Test 1-1%-1%-1%-1%0%0%-2%-1%-2%-3%-1%-2%-1%-1%-2%-2%-2%n.a.,Test 2-5%-4%-3%-3%-7%-8%-4%-5%-5%-6%-3%-6%-5%-3%-5%-6%-4%n.a.,Base-case321499574794174532145023488344413140,Test 1-5%-6%-6%-6%-2%-1%-22%-2%-12%-16%-5%-7%-1%-9%-11%-13%-11%-3%,Test

40、 2-21%-23%-23%-22%-20%-20%-23%-19%-23%-25%-22%-21%-20%-21%-24%-24%-25%-20%,Base-case331594574595174936154724459354613144,Test 1-4%-7%-6%-8%-1%0%-17%-3%-11%-14%-6%-5%-2%-7%-13%-9%-12%-3%,Test 2-21%-23%-22%-22%-20%-20%-19%-21%-23%-24%-22%-21%-20%-21%-25%-23%-25%-20%,Base-case5,0522,67514,7068,6847,705

41、9,0252,4525,4414,0852,1326,5192,3725,4051,2982,6953,3241,07041,Test 1-5%-1%-3%-4%-2%-1%-3%-1%-4%-4%-1%-5%-1%-5%-8%-5%-1%-1%,Test 2-8%-6%-7%-4%-16%-8%-5%-5%-10%-7%-4%-9%-11%-10%-11%-8%-4%-7%,Base-case5,5453,00315,91910,9078,00810,1802,6165,1494,0022,2737,8642,7505,7281,3852,6044,2511,13655,Test 1-10%

42、-1%-4%-4%-2%-1%-14%-2%-7%-15%-3%-6%-1%-9%-15%-10%-4%-1%,Test 2-18%-13%-10%-9%-20%-19%-16%-11%-17%-18%-15%-15%-15%-13%-20%-19%-18%-7%,Median,-1%,-5%,-6%,-22%,-6%,-21%,-3%,-8%,-4%,-15%,OnshoreBCDCMPGemdaleOCTPolyRisesunSMCVankeZhongnanWorldUnion,Base-case27.645.712.111.718.216.622.220.027.0n.a.,Test 1

43、-4%-3%-3%0%-3%0%0%-2%0%n.a.,Test 2-6%-5%-6%-1%-6%-4%-3%-5%-3%n.a.,Base-case20373419107191117011251,Test 1-25%-15%-6%-15%-8%0%-2%-10%0%-4%,Test 2-32%-25%-22%-21%-22%-20%-20%-23%-20%-21%,Base-case23393619107201217212295,Test 1-25%-15%-6%-14%-9%0%-1%-8%0%-4%,Test 2-31%-24%-22%-20%-23%-20%-20%-22%-20%-2

44、1%,Base-case2,3774,2943,6114,33010,3742,4931,42616,3151,650250,Test 1-7%-4%-5%-6%-6%0%-1%-4%0%-1%,Test 2-9%-6%-7%-8%-8%-6%-6%-6%-1%-7%,Base-case2,8035,4794,2214,87412,7742,9091,58819,9032,189312,Test 1-19%-6%-7%-7%-7%0%-1%-5%0%-3%,Test 2-21%-10%-14%-10%-11%-18%-12%-10%-8%-15%,Median,-2%,-5%,-7%,-21%

45、,-7%,-21%,-4%,-7%,-5%,-12%,Note:1)for Ehouse,we use Non-GAAP net profit.2)Contract sales for Ehouse and WorldUnion are referring to primary agency sales.Source:Gao Hua Securities Research estimates.高华证券投资研究,9,2013 年 2 月 6 日,中国：房地产,Cash flow position strong enough to weather tightening impactUnder ou

46、r base case,the median level net debt to equity ratio in 2012E and 2013E for ourcoverage universe is 58%and 38%respectively(without factoring in any new acquisitions fromnow and onwards).These levels are better than they were in 2011(median level at 62%).Inaddition,all of them will be in funding sur

47、plus in 2013,whereas half had a funding gap in 2012.Our sensitivity test shows that their financials(in terms of funding surplus/(gap)remain largelyintact under scenario 1 and would be only moderately impacted in scenario 2(Exhibit 15).Exhibit 15:Our coverage developers funding gap and gearing sensi

48、tivity on our two volume scenarios,Funding surplus/(gap)(Rmb bn)2013E,Funding surplus/(gap)as%of total equity2013E,Net gearing2013E,OffshoreAgileCOGOCOLICRLCGEvergrandeFranshionGreentownR&FKWGLongforPoly Property(H)ShimaoShui On LandSino-OceanSunacYanlordEhouseMedianOnshoreBCDCMPGemdaleOCTPoly(A)Ris

49、esunSMCVankeZhongnanWorldUnionMedian,Base-case14.73.542.927.824.019.68.68.410.15.220.93.513.21.45.19.42.80.69.0Base-case11.817.217.66.813.92.62.869.82.90.79.3,Test 113.12.736.724.223.318.64.87.56.22.918.31.812.50.71.33.81.40.65.5Test 16.911.715.63.95.72.62.753.52.90.74.8,Test 27.80.319.915.114.60.54

50、.7(0.3)2.61.79.9(1.6)3.6(0.3)(3.2)(1.4)(0.4)0.61.1Test 25.58.110.32.8(10.1)(1.1)0.630.60.70.71.8,Base-case46%42%54%43%57%37%29%24%35%31%54%14%28%4%12%57%9%14%33%Base-case71%54%47%26%23%22%17%65%29%42%36%,Test 141%32%46%38%55%35%17%22%21%17%47%7%27%2%3%23%4%14%22%Test 142%37%42%15%10%22%16%50%29%42%3