Insurance is outside my circle of competence. ASR Nederland had great results 2019 with relatively few insurance claims, which can vary dramatically per year.
Benjamin Graham Defensive Analysis:
SECTOR: [FAIL] ASR is an insurance company and therefore this methodology is not applicable.
SALES: [PASS] The investor must select companies of "adequate size". This includes companies with annual sales greater than €260 million. ASR's sales of €4 493 million, based on 2018 sales, pass this test.
LONG-TERM DEBT IN RELATION TO NET CURRENT ASSETS: not applicable.
LONG-TERM EPS GROWTH: [FAIL] Companies must increase their EPS by at least 30% over a ten-year period and EPS must not have been negative for any year within the last 5 years. Companies with this type of growth tend to be financially secure and have proven themselves over time. ASR does not have a long enough track record as an independent company. The IPO was in 2016.
EARNINGS YIELD: [PASS] The Earnings/Price (inverse P/E) %, based on the lesser of the current Earnings Yield or the Yield using average earnings over the last 3 fiscal years, must be "acceptable", which this methodology states is greater than 6,5%. Stocks with higher earnings yields are more defensive by nature. ASR's E/P of 13% (using last years earnings) passes this test.
DIVIDEND €1,8/€33 = 5 %
Conclusion: ASR Nederland atill seems priced well below intrinsic value with a margin of safety at the moment, similar to NN Group.
Risk (2 years ago) ? : "Volgens Stef Smit van Consumentenclaim moet ASR op grond van het vonnis zo'n €7000 betalen aan de klant. Hij stelt dat er zo'n 200.000 polissen met de naam Falcon Levensplan zijn verkocht; ASR wil geen aantallen noemen." Possible downside of €1,4 billion ( €7000 x 200 000) is less than the discount between Graham Value and Price today. I can't find the specific provisions for the "woekerpolis" claims in the annual report...