The stock market is a dangerous game to play if you do not have a strategy. One of the most common and oldest strategies is buying low and selling high. To identify a stock to buy, i.e. a value buy verse a stock that is overvalued, can be assessed using fundamental analysis. This is the type of stuff that the traditional retail investor will do.
First, you must ask yourself, does the company make money? Is it profitable, and if so, how does it compare to its peers? This can be done by looking at revenue and net income. Second, they will look at ratios, like price to earnings, return on equity, and future growth. Price to earnings is the dollar amount an investor must put in to get a dollar back. Return on equity reveals the portability of the company based on how much money or equity a shareholder must put in. Investors will compare these metrics them side by side and try to understand the story behind the numbers.
Fortunately for us all of our "companies" or "stocks" are in the same industry and make money the same way - its fantasy football, bruh. Using fundamental analysis is going to help us determine whether Kaeptivating is a buy or is Persian Lives Matter a sell. See the below metrics and how we will convert business to fantasy. Which is a dangerous game and one that Draft Kings and Fanduel are fighting. This is obviously simplified and probably a waste of time. I should also note that these comparisons aren't completely transferable...
Revenue - Points Scored
Net Income - Points Scored v Points Against
P/E Ratio - Points / Wins
Return on Equity - Wins / Waiver Wire Moves
Future Growth - Average Week to Week Change
Miscellaneous
The final chart is known as a candlestick graph. This shows the lowest score for each manager, the first week score, latest score (week 13), and the high.
Revenue - Points Scored
This is fairly straightforward. You want to be above the league average, the red vertical line, not below the average. This chart just shows the raw ability to score. Like many companies that can make lots and lots of money it doesn't necessarily translate to "wins". This is the most basic, but still helpful metric to determine if a team is a buy or a sell. You can easily eliminate Jesse, Scott K, Caleb, and Christie, but circle Brent, Ben, Scott H, Sean, Dan, and John (just to name a few). I should point out the production of Ben, who was second overall in scoring, yet he missed the playoffs. We need further metrics to narrow it down.
This is fairly straightforward. You want to be above the league average, the red vertical line, not below the average. This chart just shows the raw ability to score. Like many companies that can make lots and lots of money it doesn't necessarily translate to "wins". This is the most basic, but still helpful metric to determine if a team is a buy or a sell. You can easily eliminate Jesse, Scott K, Caleb, and Christie, but circle Brent, Ben, Scott H, Sean, Dan, and John (just to name a few). I should point out the production of Ben, who was second overall in scoring, yet he missed the playoffs. We need further metrics to narrow it down.
Net Income - Points Scored v Points Against
Rarely do we see multiple companies directly square off and offer the same product and we get to see the actual plus / minus in that matchup. Its not like Apple is facing off with Windows one week and then moves on to IBM the next. But this can help us see what teams are rising above their given matchups week in and week out. For instance, while Dan doesn't generate a ton of revenue his team is great at beating out his opponent. Or take Ben, who was second in revenue, but is barely in the black - or green in this case.
Both Brent and Sean have been in the top four in the last two metrics.
P/E Ratio - Points / Wins
This "P/E Ratio" is total points divided by wins. This is showing the cost of a win. You don't want to be spending too much for a win. That is a bad strategy. So if we assume a point is worth a dollar it would cost you ~853 to get a win with Jesse's team. This is rough picture of a team's efficiency. Take for instance the regular season's leader in wins, Brent, his cost per win is the lowest at 142.33. I know this isn't the best comparison, but it does show an interesting look at what a win is worth. You don't want to be spending more than 250 a game.
Return on Equity - Wins / Waiver Wire Moves
This is unlike the others in that it shows how well a team drafted. I simply took the number of wins and divided by the number of waiver wire moves. I understand that you may not have started the player you picked up, but a decision was made that your roster was lacking and you needed to pick someone up. I gave numbers for just a few teams, as I did in the last chart, to help clear the clutter and show some highs and lows. Sean made just seven moves all year and got nine wins. It was working for him! This isn't perfect as Jesse made just two moves and got two wins. It's not perfect, but it does further explain the story of the team. Scott K for instance made 15 moves, but those didn't translate to wins. You would not want to invest your hard earned cash into his team!
The most moves made was 35 by me. This translated eight wins. I did not draft well and had to go back to the wire early and often. This diluted earnings for my shareholders, but I got to the playoffs.
Future Growth - Average Week to Week Change
I took the averages of the changes from week to week. This is really a measure of volatility.You can see that Cameron and Jesse had the highest here. Cameron had some ridiculously high marks. On the opposite side is Sean who was actually negative, which shows that his team never had a breakout week. Brent's is also low. I think this goes to show that consistency is important to a successful season. Can have earnings all over the place...
Miscellaneous
The final chart is known as a candlestick graph. This shows the lowest score for each manager, the first week score, latest score (week 13), and the high.
Let me know what your thoughts are.