Mark Joslin
Analyst · Baird. Please go ahead
Thanks, Pete. I’m happy to say that with 2019 now in our rearview mirror, we met the majority of the expectations we communicated to you for both the quarter and the year overall. I’ll recap a few of those expectations here. First, our reported EPS for the year, excluding tax benefits, was in the middle of the range we provided on our Q3 earnings call and down only 3% from the middle of the range we provided at the start of the year, despite the impact from weather in the first half of the year. As Pete mentioned, looking out from our midyear results, this was a very good outcome. We said throughout the year that our gross margin would be relatively flat on a full year basis, which was the case: Flat for base business and down 10 basis points in total with our acquisitions added in. We had a tough gross margin comp in the fourth quarter, and because of this, said that on our third quarter call, that our fourth quarter operating income would be down year-over-year, which it was, but only slightly as very good expense management with flat base business operating expenses mitigated the gross margin hit in the quarter. For the year, we targeted base business operating expense growth of 60% of the rate of gross profit growth and we’re right on target with that objective. This allowed us to post base business operating margin improvement for the year of 40 basis points, which was at the high end of our expected 20 to 40 basis points of base business operating margin improvement. One final P&L metric I’ll quote is our base business contribution margin for the year, which was 17.1%. This is the ratio of the incremental operating income generated by our incremental revenue and shows the leverage we achieved on our sales growth. Compared to our 10.9% base business operating margin, this is also a good indicator of the continued operating margin growth opportunity we have in the future. Moving over to the balance sheet and cash flow, I’ll highlight a couple of things. First, on the balance sheet. Our working capital, excluding the lease accounting change, grew 4.8% for the year compared to our 6.7% sales growth. So we had a positive contribution from working capital to our returns. As you can see on our statement of cash flows, we generated $299 million of cash flow from operations for the year, which was 114% of our net income and $180 million more than our 2018 cash flow from operations. Although we had a little help here from our 2018 inventory pull-forward, this was a good outcome for us. As always, working capital management and cash generation will continue to be a focus for us in 2020. Given both the solid growth in our earnings and our positive working capital management, we’re able to increase our return on invested capital to a record 29.3% for the year, which was up 160 basis points from our 2018 ROIC of 27.7%. Our ROIC includes the benefit from the ASU tax gain. But excluding those in both years, we still gained 90 basis points of ROIC improvement. So a very good result here. I should note that our earnings per share in 2019 as well as our guidance for 2020 largely excludes the benefit from share repurchases. In 2019, we repurchased only 149,000 shares at an average price of $148 a share, which used just $21 million in cash. As a consequence, excess cash was used to pay down debt, which was 25% lower at the end of the year from the end of 2018. Our leverage, which is measured on a trailing 12-month debt-to-EBITDA basis, finished the year at 1.61, which is approaching the lower end of our preferred 1.5 to 2x. Our belief is that rather than competing with investors for our shares, which were up 43% for the year, it made sense to be patient and save our debt capacity for the time being until external factors create an opportunity for us to buy in more robustly. As you are refining your models for 2020, let me give you some perspectives to keep in mind. As Pete said, we are expecting 6% to 8% base business growth for the year, assuming normal weather, with greater growth in the first half of the year and particularly in the first quarter, given last year’s tepid first half results, and a bit lower growth in the back half of the year. The first quarter may also pull forward some sales from the second quarter as early indicators are that the normal spring early buys may move up from last year, resulting in roughly $10 million to $15 million in lower-margin sales moving from Q2 into Q1. On gross margin, we look to once again be relatively flat for the year overall, with a decline in the first half and more significantly in the first quarter, while the back half of the year should be modestly positive. I should note that in 2019, there were a couple of forces driving our gross margin comparisons to 2018, both as a result of the pre-price-increase purchases in 2018. One impact of this was on selling price, which provided us with a customer pricing benefit in the first half of the year and was a drag on our margin comparison in the second half of the year due to the tough comp from 2018. Recall that our Q1 2018 base business gross margin was up 90 basis points and was up 30 basis points in Q2. The other impact was from vendor pricing, where volume-related purchase incentives helped our gross margin in the back half of 2018 but hurt our gross margin throughout 2019 as we were about – the benefit of the purchase volumes moved into 2018. As we return to normal purchase volumes in 2020, we expect these vendor incentives to help offset the first half margin challenges, leaving us with relatively flat base business gross margin for the year. On operating expenses, we continue to aim for base business expense growth at 60% of the rate of gross profit growth. And although that may not happen every quarter, we think that’s a reasonable but stretch target for the year. Having said that, we had a couple of benefits on expenses in 2019 which may not recur in 2020: One was the impact of the stronger U.S. dollar which positively impacted our expense line by $3 million spread throughout the first nine months of the year. Note that there’s an offsetting decline in sales in GP from currency, so only a modest negative impact on operating income for the year. The other positive expense impact was $3 million in lower incentive-based pay in Q4 as a result of our flat operating income compared to Q4 2018. So we had a $6 million in positive 2019 expense results which we aren’t counting on in 2020. Another area that could impact our 2020 expense performance is a ramp-up in technology investments of roughly an additional $1 million per quarter for a number of projects. For these reasons, I have labeled our 60% GP growth spending goal a stretch target this year, but one which we aim to achieve. Moving down the P&L. We had $3 million in higher interest and other nonoperating income for the year, which includes the impact of higher debt and interest rates for most of the year. As interest rates have moderated and our debt balances have come down, this could provide a bit of a tailwind for us in 2020. One other noteworthy comment on our 2019 results was the impact of closing our branch in Colombia, where we pulled the plug at year end after five years of effort to develop that market. The impact from this closure was a $2 million loss, with about half of the hit in operating income; and the other half, a currency hit included in the $3 million I just called out on our interest line. This created a $0.05 EPS hit for the year, and $0.04 of this was in the fourth quarter. Finally, we finished the year with an effective income tax rate, excluding the impact of the ASU benefit, of 25.1%. And we expect this to inch up slightly to about 25.5% for 2020. As I look at sell-side numbers for 2020, the biggest disconnect from our 2020 guidance, appears to be on the tax line and the estimate of our ASU impact. That concludes my prepared remarks. So I’ll turn the call back over to our operator to begin our question-and-answer session.