Although we don't believe in timing the market or panicking over market movements, we do like to keep an eye on big changes -- just in case they're material to our investing thesis.

What: Shares of wireless-equipment specialist CalAmp  sank 10% today after its Q4 outlook missed Wall Street expectations.

So what: CalAmp's Q3 results -- EPS of $0.23 on revenue of $63.5 million -- managed to top estimates, but downbeat guidance for the current quarter is triggering concerns over decelerating growth going forward. Of course, the stock has been on fire over the past year, up more than 250% from its 52-week lows, so a small guidance hiccup shouldn't come as too big of a surprise.

Now what: Management now sees Q4 adjusted EPS of $0.19-$0.23 on revenue of $60 million-$63 million, below the consensus of $0.24 and $63 million. "CalAmp is on-track for a very strong second half of fiscal 2014," President and CEO Michael Burdiek reassured investors. Of course, when you couple today's small signs of slowing growth with the stock's forward P/E of 25, waiting for a wider margin of safety might be prudent. 

Apple will release a larger iPhone next May, according to a report from DigiTimes. The Taiwan-based publication has a long record of correctly forecasting Apple's upcoming products, including the iPad Mini.

If Apple releases a larger iPhone in May, that would be only eight months after releasing the iPhone 5s, a far shorter period than usual. On this basis, some have rejected the report as nonsensical -- but it makes perfect sense if Apple plans to adopt a product strategy developed by Samsung and utilized by many of Google's hardware partners.

Samsung's dual flagship strategy
Unlike Apple, Samsung has two flagship phone lines: the Galaxy S and the Galaxy Note. Typically, Samsung releases the latest Galaxy S in the first half of the year and the newest Galaxy Note in the second half.

This is beneficial to Samsung in the sense that there's never more than a six-month period without a new Samsung handset entering the market. Although they are not dramatically different, Samsung typically makes slight improvements from one phone to the next -- the Galaxy S4, for example, features a Snapdragon 600 processor, while the Galaxy Note III has a Snapdragon 800.

The growing importance of phablets
Samsung's phones also serve different markets. The Galaxy Note III's 5.7-inch screen is simply too large for some people; although Samsung says it is selling well, demand for the phone remains limited relative to Samsung's Galaxy S4.

Other OEMs that use Google's Android have adopted the same strategy. HTC, for example, has the One (its standard flagship) and the One Max (the oversized version of its flagship handset). Sony has the Xperia Z1 and the Xperia Z Ultra. LG has the G2 and the upcoming G Flex.

By not selling a phablet, Apple is essentially a ceding an entire market segment to Google's Android, similar in the way in which it ceded the smaller tablet market prior to the release of the iPad Mini. This will become increasingly important in coming quarters, as the demand for phablets is projected to continue increasing -- Technalysis Research predicts that next year, phablets will outsell tablets worldwide, a projection that's already come to fruition in many parts of Asia.

The iPhone phablet in 2014?
Bloomberg reported in November that Apple was working on two new, larger iPhones: one with a 4.7-inch screen and one with a 5.5-inch screen. This second handset would fit squarely in the realm of the phablet, about on par with Samsung's Galaxy Note.

If Apple splits its product line -- releasing the phablet in the first half of the year and the flagship iPhone in the second half -- it would mirror Samsung's phone strategy, allowing Apple to nearly always have a new handset on the market. If that's the case, Apple shareholders should take it as a positive. It's possible that Apple's unwillingness to release a phablet has cost it sales -- a few Apple devotees may have made the switch to Google's Android for larger phones. An iPhone phablet would allow Apple to recapture these customers, while a two-flagship model would allow Apple to release more phones more often.

Apple's management has promised new products in 2014. If DigiTimes is right, expect one of those products to be a phablet. Watches and TVs aside, an iPhone phablet could be Apple's most important product next year.

Just when you think the grocery-store wars couldn't get any more competitive, Sprouts Farmers Market  pops up with an IPO. Sprouts considers itself a specialty retailer of natural and organic foods and products. It offers meats, produce, dairy, juices, baked goods, frozen foods, bulk foods, prepared foods, vitamins, supplements, and herbal concoctions.

What it doesn't offer is just as important, since the 25,000 to 35,000 square foot stores are about half the size of a standard grocery store, such as Kroger . You won't find aisles upon aisles of frozen foods, snacks and crackers, cleaning products, laundry detergents, and non-food items.

Safeway considers itself one of the largest grocery-store retailers in the United States. It boasts 1,406 stores in the Southwestern, Western, Mid-Atlantic, and Rocky Mountain regions. Kroger has 2,414 stores in 31 states. Both Safeway and Kroger dwarf Sprouts, which has only 160 stores in eight states, but bigger isn't necessarily better in this case.

Sprouts went public on Aug. 2. So does being a public company agree with Sprouts? It would seem so based on third-quarter results.

Growing strong
Sprouts' sales increased to $633.6 million, a 24% improvement from the third quarter of last year. That growth was  fueled by additional traffic, an increase in the amount of purchases per customer, and additional stores.

The acquisition of the 38 stores of Sunflower Farmers Market in May of 2012 is included in both the third quarter of 2012 and the third quarter of 2013. However, the additional stores will positively impact the full-year results. Additionally, 55 new leases have been signed for 2014. As a percentage, that's a growth rate of 34% in new stores.

This aggressive growth strategy is more than matched in the number of stores resulting from Kroger's merger with Harris Teeter, which gives Kroger 212 new stores. However, as a percentage those 212 stores are only an 8.8% increase. Kroger's sales were $22.5 billion for the third quarter, or $9.3 million per store. Sprouts' sales were nearly $4 million per store, while Safeway sales were $8.6 billion from continuing operations, or $6 million per store.

Consolidation pains
The story isn't so sunny for Safeway, which is consolidating its number of stores. It also announced that it will exit the Chicago market by selling 72 Dominick stores. Its Canadian operations were sold to Sobey's in October. The $5.8 billion in cash from these sales is projected by pay down debt of $2 billion with the remainder going to buy back stock.

Gross margin and operating profits going gangbusters
The gross profit margin for Sprouts shot up to $190.1 million in the third quarter, an improvement of 30% over the same quarter 2012. The $190.1 was 30% of sales. The margin would have been higher but some of that gain was eaten up by higher costs for scarce produce items.

While a store like Kroger is less affected by changes in produce because it sells a wider variety of other items, about one-third of the square footage of a Sprouts is devoted to produce. Consequently, produce price changes impact the company's gross margin more severely. Safeway's gross margin of $2.2 billion declined 36 basis points to 25.8% for the third quarter based on increased shrink expenses offset by reduced advertising. Kroger's gross margin of $4.6 billion improved 4.3%, but was only 20.5% of sales as compared to Sprout's 30% of sales.

Safeway's operating profit of $81.6 million declined 0.9% while Sprout's operating profit of $36.6 million nearly tripled from the same quarter in 2012. Kroger's operating profit was $534 million, or about $220,000 per store, compared to Sprout's slightly more than $229,000 per store. Sprouts handily beat out Safeway's operating profit of $58,000 per store as well.

Can the David of grocery stores challenge the giants?
Safeway and Kroger may be the Goliaths of grocery stores, but their performance is being challenged by Sprouts. The question is if the business model of offering primarily produce, bulk goods, prepared foods, and organic products will continue to attract shoppers when compared to the convenience of one-stop shopping.

I vote yes, and so does Doug Sanders, president and CEO. In the press release announcing the third-quarter results he said, "We are pleased to report another strong quarter, evidence of our customers' desire for fresh, natural and organic food at affordable prices."

Consumers continue to flock to retailers this holiday season with tons of deals and discounts to keep them shopping. For most retailers, the holiday shopping season represents 20% to 40% of annual sales. The National Retail Federation said the 2012 holiday shopping season made up 19.3% of 2012's annual retail sales. In 2013, holiday sales are expected to climb 4% to $602.1 billion. Here are three company's trying new strategies for the holidays to capture additional revenue.

Kohl's open 'round the clock
Big-box retailer Kohl's is pulling out all the stops for the holiday shopping season and rewarding last-minute shoppers. In an attempt to outdo the competition, Kohl's is keeping all of its locations open for 100 straight hours leading up to Christmas Eve. Stores are currently open 24 hours every day until 6 p.m. on Christmas Eve.

Kohl's said in a statement, "The holiday season is an eventful time for families, and Kohl's is making it easy for shoppers to wrap up their last-minute gift giving with 24 hour access to Kohl's stores right up until Christmas Eve." The retailer is hoping that keeping its 1,158 stores staffed and stocked up through the night will help boost fourth-quarter sales.

In the third quarter, Kohl's reported a 1% decline in total sales to $4.4 billion. Same-store sales declined 1.6% and earnings per share fell to $0.81 from the prior year's $0.91. This brings nine-month sales to $12.9 billion, which is relatively flat versus last year's total.

Fourth-quarter sales are expected to come in a range of $1.59 to $1.74, according to the company, while analysts are expecting earnings to hit $1.66. A strong last week of holiday sales from the retailer could be the difference between hitting estimated fourth quarter revenue and earnings estimates and missing them.

Shine bright like a diamond
Defying the logic that consumers have to see wedding rings before purchasing them, online retailer Blue Nile ( is now bridging the gap with a holiday bet. Blue Nile has seen success and huge growth by selling diamonds online. The company will now use a limited holiday offering as an opportunity to physically show off its diamonds without taking away from online sales.

Blue Nile announced a partnership with Nordstrom's that will center around a Seattle store. Over 115 engagement rings and wedding bands will be available in Nordstrom's to try on and look at. The kicker in this "try before you buy" experiment is that no physical sales will take place, but rather customers will still have to purchase the rings online directly from Blue Nile. This is a huge step for the small internet retailer. In fact, the six month experiment inside the flagship Nordstrom's store could help Blue Nile expand into 17 additional stores with Wedding Suite Salons.

Blue Nile's recent third quarter showed its continued growth as more people shop online for big ticket items like jewelry. Total revenue of $98.9 million was a 10% increase and marked the sixth consecutive quarter of double digit growth for Blue Nile. It didn't hurt that engagement ring sales in the United States grew 7% to $57.9 million.

Blue Nile is seeing strong growth in men's wedding bands and international markets. In the third quarter, international sales grew 22.9%. China continues to be an area of focus as the company believes it can reach $100 million in annual sales in the country within three years. Another big transition for Blue Nile is its entry into fashioned diamond jewelry. While this seems like a no-brainer, it will be a big move and revenue driver for a company primarily known for wedding rings. Blue Nile could even try to get some of its newer items in Nordstrom stores as a way to showcase them.

Lease to survive
One common theme for retail in 2013 has been the decline of the big box retailer. Stores like JC Penney and Sears have seen sales fall and less traffic entering their stores. Sears parent Sears Holdings is betting on its other brand, K-Mart, with an extended holiday sales push.

After a short test, K-Mart has rolled out a national lease-to-own program to help customers purchase larger ticket items. K-Mart, which has been known for strong layaway sales during the holidays, could see a big boost in holiday sales from this new promotion. All items priced over $150 are able to be secured by customers by making a payment in store and agreeing to monthly or bi-weekly payments later on.

Unlike layaway, customers can take the item out of the store. There are certain requirements for the program, including age, earnings, and payment methods. Of course there is also the downside that items will cost more than retail if the lease goes the full term. Customers are able to buy out leases after five months of payments.

For Sears Holdings, this is a continued last ditch effort to push sales up for the struggling retailer. In the second quarter, K-mart had sales of $3.2 billion, compared to $4.8 billion for the namesake Sears brand. Same store sales were down 2.1% at K-Mart, compared to a negative 0.8% comparable at Sears stores. Sears Holdings continues to close stores and sell off assets in an attempt to save the company. Who knows, Sears might have the answer if it can continue to boost sales with leasing and layaway sales.

Final thoughts
The holiday season brings out the best in retailers with huge discounts and deals to outdo one another. Stores continue to open earlier and stay open later in an attempt for the almighty dollar. These three retailers aren't going too far out of the box, but have clear strategies to boost sales. Kohl's and K-Mart continue to operate as big box retailers and struggle with sales and profits. On the other hand, Blue Nile might be worth buying, as sales continue to explode. That said, the diamond retailer is trading at year highs and has a lofty price to earnings ratio that should keep investors on their toes.

Regardless of what you think about the regulations and restrictions imposed on cigarettes and smokers, the health risks behind the rationale for taking action is at least defensible. Not so the ban on electronic cigarettes that's expected to be signed by New York City's outgoing mayor, Michael Bloomberg. It reveals the war being waged isn't on "smoking" per se, but rather on the tobacco companies behind them.

Source: SXC.hu

According to the American Lung Association, smoking contributes to 80% of lung-cancer deaths in women and to 90% in men. Those are certainly compelling statistics that would motivate do-gooders to try and minimize the incidence of smoking, whether through regulation, restriction, public advocacy, and so on.

E-cigs, however, have the potential to dramatically alter the landscape without ham-handed policies. Because the tobacco-free product has 450 times lower levels of toxicants in its vapors than can be found in cigarette smoke, it is proving more popular than the leading smoking cessation product Nicorette, which is manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline . Despite the health risks, some people actually enjoy smoking; e-cigs give them that same sort of pleasure without most of the attendant dangers. Smoking cessation products, on the other hand, involve a rather unpleasant transition phase that some smokers would rather not endure. 

Yet because tobacco companies are also the biggest manufacturers of electronic cigarettes, they're still profiting handsomely and that seems to rub some people the wrong way.

Lorillard is the leading e-cig manufacturer with its blu eCig brand, which although still a niche market product that represents about 1% of the $89 billion total tobacco industry, the cigarette maker owns a dominant 44% share of it. It's an industry still in its infancy, but the returns are already noticeable. Lorillard, which acquired blu eCigs last year for $135 million, saw operating income grow from about $1 million in 2012 to some $9 million this year, and with its recent acquisition of the U.K.-based SkyCig brand, it provides a platform for further expansion.

Other tobacco giants, though late to the game, are forging full-speed ahead with both Altria and Phillip Morris International  unveiling plans for new e-cig products this year and announcing just last week a series of agreements to commercialize e-cig opportunities.

But regulators are already falling over themselves to halt their advance. In Europe, e-cig maker Totally Wicked got hold of proposed regulations that, if implemented, would essentially bring the industry to its knees as they all but ban or restrict the sale of refill liquids, refillable atomizers, and nicotine levels. New York City, however, chose not to take the backdoor route but rather come right out and ban them altogether. Not for health reasons, mind you, but because it could "renormalize" smoking.

Smoking activists have invested time, effort, and money in vilifying smoking and ostracizing smokers such that permitting e-cigs in public areas like restaurants, bars, and parks would undermine the negative public perception they've worked so hard to create.

Although they're healthier for the smoker and haven't been found to cause any harm to those around them since they don't produce toxic and carcinogenic byproducts like that found in secondhand smoke, they'll essentially still be segregated for use only in the home. As one of the New York City council member ban sponsors says, the e-cig makers "wanted to be treated like tobacco products, they won. I'm more than happy to oblige them today."

But those who argue the restrictions, regulations, and taxes imposed on tobacco companies are for the good of the smoker are being disingenuous. They're not so much for the benefit of smokers as they are designed to hurt the tobacco companies -- if not, why oppose a better alternative? It's not likely this move will stub out the advance of electronic cigarettes, but enough initiatives spawned by New York City's Bloomberg have found traction elsewhere around the country that we're likely to see this repeated, and that's not a defensible position to take.

Some people underestimate the strength of The Hunger Games franchise. Even if you don't like the movies, you can't deny the franchise's power. This, of course, is a big positive for Lions Gate Entertainment . I have written several times about box-office numbers over the past several weeks, but in this case, we're going to take a look at how The Hunger Games franchise is performing well on subscription video-on-demand. Is the original Hunger Games the top SVOD performer so far in 2013, or does that title belong to a movie that can be traced back to Comcast or Disney ?

Top SVOD movie for 2013 (January-October)
NPD Group recently released information on the top SVOD performers through October in 2013. In other words, the following movies are the most-watched movies on services like Netflix and Amazon's Instant Video.

The Hunger Games did indeed take first place. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. While the movie itself was a big box-office hit, the success of its sequel, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, has also played a role.

When people see a good movie, they recommend it to others. However, if those others never saw the original, then they will watch the original prior to watching the sequel in the movie theater. This has definitely helped drive demand for original movies that have sequels. You also can't forget that unlike most movies, The Hunger Games is based on a successful book series. Therefore, many people who have heard good things about The Hunger Games franchise, especially after the sequel, will read the books, watch the original on SVOD, DVD, or Blu-ray, and then watch the sequel. 

The point here is that The Hunger Games isn't just a movie; it's a franchise, and it's being explored by people in various ways. The number of Hunger Games fans is only going to grow as the next two installments are released over the next two years.

While The Hunger Games is the most impressive name on this list, let's see what two movies came in second and third place on SVOD so far in 2013.

The Avengers
The Avengers was the second-most watched movie on SVOD so far this year (through October). This isn't surprising considering the movie's box-office success. It had a budget of $220 million, and it grossed $623.3 million domestically as well as $1.5 billion worldwide. Its IMDb rating: 8.2 of 10. Its RottenTomatoes audience rating: 91%. In other words, 91% of the people who watched The Avengers enjoyed the movie.

The Avengers is a Marvel movie, and Marvel was acquired by Disney in 2009. When people think of Disney, they often think of fairytales, Mickey Mouse, and smiling faces. While these would be accurate perceptions, many people mistake this "niceness" as representative of a company that just hangs around and does OK. In reality, Disney is highly strategic and opportunistic, and it often crushes those who attempt to compete with it. That being the case, I'm a fan of Disney from an investing standpoint. Its newest release, Frozen, has been yet another home run. Thanks to such a strong brand that continuously builds strength, Disney has an ability to essentially print money with its movies.

Third place
The Lorax comes in third place on the SVOD 2013 list. The difference between The Lorax and The Hunger Games/The Avengers is that it's not a great movie according to audiences. For instance, it has a pedestrian 6.4 rating on IMDb and a ho-hum 64% audience approval rating on RottenTomatoes. At least it's consistent. The Lorax did well at the box office. It had a budget of $70 million, and it grossed $214 million domestically and $348.8 million globally. 

The Lorax was produced by Illumination Entertainment, better known for the highly successful Despicable Me franchise. By the way, a third installment, Minions, will be released in 2015. Illumination Entertainment has a financing and distribution partnership with Universal Studios, which is owned by Comcast. 

While The Lorax didn't receive a great audience reception, it did well fiscally. Also, the Despicable Me franchise isn't done pumping out hits. Both are positives for Comcast.

Profiting off the big (and small) screen
Lions Gate Entertainment, Disney, and Comcast have all proven that they're capable of generating revenue through successful movie releases. Disney and Comcast are highly diversified companies, which makes them more resilient to economic downturns. On the other hand, a movie's success won't drive their stock prices like it will for Lions Gate Entertainment, which relies heavily on its movies' success. In this regard, Lions Gate Entertainment couldn't be any hotter right now given the success of The Hunger Games franchise. In my opinion, the upside potential greatly outweighs the downside risk. However, please do you own research prior to making any investment decisions. 

It's the second largest publicly traded American company; it has received Warren Buffett's stamp of approval; and it's probably the most successful energy firm in history. 

Yet in spite of these accomplishments, many retail investors tend to skip over ExxonMobil . 

At a glance, the logic makes sense. Exxon is the slowest growing and most expensive of its peers, and the company has the smallest dividend yield to boot. But these are all bad reasons to avoid the energy giant. So to nip these bad arguments in the bud, here are the top three mistaken reasons to sell ExxonMobil.

1) Exxon is growing too slowly
No doubt about it, Exxon is a slow-moving behemoth. 

According to the company's own guidance, annual oil and gas output is expected to grow only 2% to 3% through 2017. But given the company's track record, that outlook is likely optimistic.

In contrast, other Big Oil names are expanding at a much faster rate. ConocoPhillips  is expected to post 3% to 5% annual production gains through 2017. Chevron  is doing even better. The company is expected to grow production 6% annually during the same timeframe.

But production growth doesn't matter. As investors, we should only be concerned with the returns a business generates. Not how fast the company is expanding.

Sometimes those two factors are synonymous. Sometimes they're not. 

Exxon's management team isn't interested in growth for the sake of growth. If there's an opportunity that generates a sufficient return for shareholders, they'll take it. But if there aren't enough good projects, management is happy to return excess capital to shareholders.

This means higher returns for investors over the long haul. Over the past five years, Exxon has generated an average return on capital employed (one of the better benchmarks to measure a company's performance) of almost 25% per year. That's the highest of its peers. 

Exxon isn't the fastest grower. However, the company is the best capital allocator in the business. It's not clear if Exxon's rivals have this discipline. 

2) Exxon has a small dividend yield
Weighing in at over $400 billion, Exxon has the second largest market capitalization of any publicly traded American company. But income investors would hardly describe the company's yield as titanic. At a meager 2.6%, Exxon's dividend is hardly drool-inducing. 

Many would prefer to hold ConocoPhillips, which pays out an impressive 4%. Even Chevron yields a tasty 3.3%.  

But there are two ways a business can return capital to shareholders: dividends and buybacks. To skip the other side of this equation would be a mistake. 

Year to date, Exxon has bought back $12.65 billion in stock. And over the past decade, the company has repurchased nearly half of its outstanding shares. When you factor in the company's buyback, Exxon's adjusted yield looks better than its competitors.

Source: Yahoo! Finance

In fact, on an after-tax basis Exxon's policy is even better. That's because a buyback increases our stake in a wonderful business while deferring taxes until we chose to sell. In contrast, dividends are taxed immediately and possibly at a higher rate.

3) Exxon is too expensive on a price-to-earnings basis
Finally, Exxon doubters often point out that the stock trades at a premium to peers on a price to earnings, or P/E, basis. At 12 times trailing profits, the company is certainly more expensive than comparables.

Source: Yahoo! Finance

But the truth is this metric is somewhat irrelevant. GAAP earnings usually don't accurately reflect the health of a business.

Rather free cash flow and EBITDAX (earnings before interest, taxes, deprecation, acquisitions and exploration) are the preferred metrics to benchmark valuations in the oil business. On a price-to-free-cash-flow or EV/EBITDAX basis, Exxon is trading well in-line with its peers. 

Foolish bottom line
This is not a case to buy ExxonMobil over the company's rivals, and there are many cases to be made against the company or for its peers. But please, everyone, stop using these three arguments to justify selling the oil giant. 

Those looking to invest their money in the stock market should look at more than a company's most recent quarter and fiscal full-year totals. Besides judging a company by its P/E ratio, investors should research a company's compound annual growth rate as well as its comparable-store sales growth rate to assess its continued progress in its industry. These metrics are particularly important because the longer the time period -- at least a few years -- the more telling the results.

Since it happens to be the season of holiday deals and promotions, investors are keeping a close eye on which retailers are getting the most traffic through their stores and e-commerce sites. Who is ultimately leading the way with the most annual sales growth along with the highest earnings growth: Macy's , Kohl's , Dillard's , or J.C. Penney ?

Looking at a company's growth rate
At the end of each fiscal year, it is important to calculate a company's growth rate over the past three to five years as well as its comparable-store sales growth rate. A company's compound annual growth rate will tell investors how quickly or slowly a company has been growing for a set number of years. This figure allows investors to more easily decide if the company is worth investing in. A shareholder in a company will often sell his or her shares if the company has been losing ground rather than making headway.

Taking into account comparable-store sales
In addition, with every passing quarter and fiscal year, identifying a company's year-over-year comparable-store sales growth rate is beneficial in knowing how its same-store sales are doing. A company can have a high comparable-store sales growth rate, but only own a handful of stores, which doesn't say much. On the other hand, a combination of a large number of stores along with a positive and rising comparable-store sales growth rate evidences that a company is doing extremely well as a whole.

Leading the way in retail sales
Listed in the table below are the growth rates for the following retailers: Macy's, Kohl's, Dillard's, and J.C. Penney. These figures allow us to see which retailer has been growing the fastest and which is hardly growing at all.

As one can see, Macy's has been the most consistent retailer in terms of growing overall sales and comparable-store sales. Kohl's, on the other hand, appears to be staying in place. Investors looking for a dynamic and growing company may want to take a pass on Kohl's. Dillard's, though, is actually doing reasonably well, especially compared to J.C. Penney or even Kohl's.

Like Macy's, Dillard's comparable-store sales growth for the past two fiscal years was pretty solid and the company's growth increased as a whole. It's no secret, though, that J.C. Penney has been struggling as its comparable-store sales diminished all-together. Hopefully, with J.C. Penney's latest business model and sales strategies in place, the company will be able to turn things around, and perhaps J.C. Penney's figures will look better in the next few fiscal years to come.

Foolish takeaway
With any good investment, looking at certain metrics is a good way to determine whether or not a company will be valuable to one's portfolio. Although compound annual growth and comparable-store sales are good prospects for investigation, they should not be the only measures accounted for in one's research on a company. Based on the information discussed above, investors would be wise to do more research on Macy's and Dillard's.

House prices rose a seasonally adjusted 0.5% for October, according to a Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) report (link opens as PDF) released today. After increasing a revised 0.2% for September, this latest report marks the 21st straight month of price increases. Analyst expectations were almost spot-on, having predicted 0.4% growth. 

Source: FHFA.gov 

The FHFA House Price Index is calculated using single-family-home sales-price information from mortgages sold to or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and, at current levels, is comparable to readings from April 2005.

Compared to October 2012, home prices are 8.2% higher, but the index remains 8.8% below its April 2007 peak. 

Vince Holding Corp formerly labeled Apparel Holding Corp, recently held its IPO on Nov. 22, 2013. At the opening of the market, the company's shares began trading for $29.50, climbing to upwards of $30.48 and closing at $28.66. Its public launch was quite profitable, since its IPO was priced at $20 a share.

Vince Holding Corp's performance during its IPO is yet another example of how the fashion industry is taking Wall Street by storm. Two years ago, the fashion apparel and accessories company Michael Kors rocked Wall Street with its public debut. Shares of Michael Kors traded for upwards of $25 a piece, raising $944 million by market close. Investors are thus asking themselves if Vince Holding Corp could be the next Michael Kors.

Taking an inside look at Vince
Founded in 2002, Vince Holding Corp began as a fashion designer for women's knitted apparel and cashmere sweaters. Over time, the company has expanded its brand to include a men's apparel collection, denim, leather, outerwear, and most recently, footwear. Vince Holding Corp's apparel embodies casual sophistication with an effortless, classic look.

The company is made up of the following brands: Vince, Rebecca Taylor, David Meister, Sag Harbor, My Michelle, and XOXO. It also has several private labels grouped within four distinct segments that are sold to major retailers. These segments - (1) Vince, (2) American Recreational Products, (3) Juniors, and (4) Moderates - sell day to day apparel, recreational apparel, denim, sportswear, dresses, and pants for business and casual purposes.

Over the past decade, Vince has picked up momentum through e-commerce, wholesale distribution, and direct-to-consumer sales; it also operates 27 company-owned stores, and the company anticipates opening 100 stores nationwide and expanding its brand internationally.

Trailing behind its idol
Aside from Vince Holding Corp having a field day following its IPO, it has a long way to go to catch up to Michael Kors. Looking at its net sales, the company appears to be growing steadily with sales increasing by 13% between fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2011, and then 6.8% between fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2012.

Unfortunately, the company has yet to make a profit with a loss of over $100,000 in each of the past three fiscal years. This is a concern for investors and something to keep an eye on. If Vince Holding Corp is determined to be the next Michael Kors, it needs to change its current business model to mirror that of Michael Kors.

Making necessary changes
Vince Holding Corp should expand its fashion collections to include more than just apparel, shoes, and a few accessories if it wants to succeed. Like Michael Kors, the company should add items like handbags, watches, jewelry, and wallets to its product line. This move would do wonders for the company by giving consumers more options and styles to choose from.

In addition, Vince Holding Corp should transition the majority of its sales so that they come from company-owned stores and its Vince.com website instead of coming from major department stores. If one of these retailers were to drop Vince brands from its sales floor, it could mean bad news for the company. Because of this, Vince Holding Corp should begin opening new stores as well as ensure that its website is up to par with the latest design and technology features to effectively market its products.

A glimpse into reality
One thing that separates fashion designers like Michael Kors and Ralph Lauren from Vince Holding Corp is that Michael Kors and Ralph Lauren are household names. Michael Kors and Ralph Lauren are iconic figures in the fashion industry because their labels have received high recognition among consumers and offer more than just apparel and shoes. Vince Holding Corp should learn a thing or two from these companies if it hopes to reach their level.

Looking at this chart, it is clear that Vince Holding Corp is nowhere near Michael Kors or Ralph Lauren in terms of market capitalization; this could mean future potential losses for investors. Ralph Lauren is doing the best in trailing-twelve-month EPS for fiscal 2012, earning $8.00 a share. Michael Kors, on the other hand, has the best price-to-earnings ratio due to profits banked for fiscal 2012. Vince Holding Corp's figures spell out overall disappointment unless the company can start making a profit.

Foolish takeaway
For all Foolish investors out there, placing your money on Michael Kors will likely earn you the most bang for your buck. In its most recently completed quarter, Michael Kors had a 39% increase in total revenues and a 49% increase in net income over the same period a year ago. Investors should keep an eye on Vince Holding Corp over the next several years before investing any money, however; as of now, it will not be in the same league as Michael Kors or Ralph Lauren anytime soon.

Alaska Air Group, , the leading carrier in the Pacific Northwest, has been one of the strongest performers in the airline industry in the last five years. But its business model, which has helped it post massive gains since the beginning of 2009, now faces serious threats.

Alaska Air Group 5 Year Price Chart, data by YCharts

Alaska's 2013 results were pressured by capacity growth on the West Coast. Routes to Anchorage saw a particularly significant step-up in capacity this spring. But competitive capacity growth will really take off in 2014, led by Delta Air Lines and Southwest Airlines . Meanwhile, Alaska is planning to add a variety of new routes in Salt Lake City, a market that Delta dominates.

Alaska faces significant new competition on numerous routes.

This increase in competition will probably cause margin contraction and a reduction in EPS for Alaska Air Group starting in Q2 2014 and ramping up in Q3. These headwinds make Alaska a potential short candidate for 2014.

Delta's Seattle buildup
The first set of pressures comes from Delta's growth in Seattle. Since the beginning of October, Delta has announced four sets of new routes from Seattle, Alaska's top hub. All of Delta's new routes are already served by Alaska, and on some of them Alaska has a near-monopoly position.

Nearly every large West Coast city, including Portland, San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and San Diego, is receiving new or expanded Delta service to Seattle in 2014. These "trunk" routes make up a significant proportion of Alaska's total capacity.

Delta Air Lines is adding service from Seattle to nearly every large West Coast market.

Alaska will likely need to implement heavier discounts in 2014 in order to keep its planes full on routes where industry capacity is rising strongly. With so many routes facing new competition, Alaska's unit revenue is likely to decline next year.

A second threat
Moreover, Delta is not the only carrier expanding on Alaska's turf, although it represents the biggest threat. Southwest is also boosting service on the West Coast in competition with Alaska. For example, next June, Southwest will start new flights from San Diego to Portland, Seattle, Orlando, and New Orleans. The first three routes will all be in competition with Alaska.

Southwest is a particularly dangerous competitor in San Diego, because it is already the largest carrier there, with nearly 100 daily departures. Southwest is also expanding in Portland, Alaska's second-largest hub, with new or increased service to Chicago, Baltimore/Washington, and Houston, as well as San Diego.

Compounding the damage?
While it faces threats on its own turf in 2014, Alaska is also embarking on an expansion in Salt Lake City, one of Delta's hub cities. Alaska's rapid growth in Salt Lake City appears to be the result of a "tit-for-tat" exchange with Delta.

Thus, following Delta's third announcement of new short-haul routes from Seattle in early December, Alaska Air Group stated that it would start new service from Salt Lake City to Portland, San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego.

That did not have the desired effect, as Delta soon responded with a fourth expansion of short-haul service from Seattle. But Alaska quickly doubled down by announcing three more routes from Salt Lake City: Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Boise.

Delta is likely to defend its turf in Salt Lake City just as vigorously as Alaska plans to defend its turf in the Pacific Northwest. As a result, none of Alaska's new Salt Lake City routes are likely to produce high profit margins. Alaska may find that its attempts to send a message to Delta merely compound the damage to itself.

Foolish conclusion
As one of the highest-margin airlines in the U.S., Alaska Air Group has become a natural target of competitors' expansion plans. The company long benefited from its strength in peripheral parts of the West Coast, which were not strategically vital to other airlines.

But the major airlines are now scouring the country for the last few profitable expansion opportunities. Alaska is therefore likely to confront significantly higher competition going forward than it has in recent years.

This will put pressure on Alaska's profit margin in 2014 and beyond, and will likely cause EPS to stagnate or decline. Investors should look to sell shares in Alaska while the stock is trading near all-time highs -- and the company could even be a short candidate for 2014.

Looking for some last-minute stocking stuffer ideas? Evercore, Greenhill, and Portfolio Recovery Associates may be the perfect sized stocks to buy this holiday season. In this special holiday edition of The Motley Fool's everything-financials show, Where the Money Is, banking analysts David Hanson and Matt Koppenheffer tell viewers why they think these three companies are well-positioned to thrive in 2014 and beyond.

For big integrated oil companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron , one of the biggest challenges is to find new reserves large enough to replace their huge legacy assets and allocate capital economically. For Petroleo Brasileiro Petrobras SA , the problem is different. The Brazilian state-controlled firm continues to underperform the broader markets as political meddling and a lack of free-market dynamics continue to hinder its progress.

While both ExxonMobil and Chevron underperformed the broader markets over the last five years, Petrobras lost a staggering 40% of its market value over the same period. On delving deeper, however, this isn't too surprising.

PBR Total Return Price data by YCharts

A piggy bank of sorts?
Petrobras seems to be an oversized piggy bank for the Brazilian government to draw from in order to carry out populist measures. With national elections due in October next year, the government showed its unwillingness to increase fuel prices to levels that the market was expecting due to fears of inflation, which is forecast to be 5.8% for 2013.

Investors, however, must keep in mind that Petrobras had reported a massive $5.7 billion net loss from its refining, transportation and marketing division in the first nine months of 2013. Unfortunately, these numbers don't seem likely to improve much after the price raise. According to analysts at Brazil's Itau BBA Bank, post-hike, diesel and gasoline still sell at a discount of 22% and 17%, respectively, to international prices.

Here are three reasons why Petrobras could give investors nightmares:

A lack of transparency
The new fuel pricing policy adopted by Petrobras is opaque at best. On November 29, the company announced in a filing that the new pricing policy aims to bring an "alignment between Brazilian and international prices" within "a compatible time period". But the same filing also mentions that "the parameters of the pricing methodology will be strictly internal to Petrobras" for commercial reasons. This was a perfect recipe for disaster. In other words, the market did not buy the argument. The next trading session saw Petrobras shares plunge 11%.

In order to stem the rot, the company put out a clarification the very next day that the changes won't be automatic, and that the Board still holds discretion to adjust prices within certain ranges. Analysts, however, believe that this clarification still doesn't clear the view for the market. One thing seems certain: Petrobras continues to lose money on its refined products, whether it's domestically refined or imported.

A mammoth spending plan
Among oil companies, Petrobras has the world's largest corporate spending plan for the next few years -- thanks to the discovery of some of the world's largest offshore reserves. With $237 billion to be spent between 2013 and 2017, this is definitely a huge investment. This means, on average, Petrobras is investing a whopping $47.4 billion every year till 2017. To put this into perspective, Chevron plans to spend $40 billion in 2014, down from $42 billion in 2013. ExxonMobil, on the other hand, spent $38 million this year.

But these mammoth figures don't mean much in terms of increasing shareholder value. Debt is at its highest levels in over ten years. Here's how debt levels stand for large integrated companies:

Source: Yahoo! Finance; author's calculations

We notice that Petrobras currently has the worst debt levels among integrated oil companies. At $123 billion, total debt is a staggering 42% more than its total market capitalization. Even if revenue increases substantially as the massive offshore fields come into production, investors must proceed with caution as most of the earnings will go towards reducing debt. In the long term, shareholder value may be destroyed as expected share returns may not be enough to cover the cost of capital.

Massive cost of production
With the first two factors already working against Petrobras, the final point is a foregone conclusion. However, the reason why I'd specifically point out the cost of production as a major issue is the fact that almost all of the company's oil reserves lie offshore in the pre-salt basin off Brazil's coast. What needs to be kept in mind is that costs can spiral north in the uncertain environs of deepwater drilling. Additionally, the government has mandated Petrobras take part in all exploratory activities -- successful or not. It also tightened safety standards for offshore oil platforms and refineries, thanks to the REPAR refinery fire on November 28. While these are definitely positive measures, all of a sudden the company has an extra expense to foot within the next two years.

Moreover, with near-6% inflation, costs associated with exploration and production activities, as well as those involved with building new refineries, are highly likely to go up. The central bank predicts inflation to drop to 5.6% in 2014.

Foolish bottom line
Everything seems vague with respect to the future. There doesn't seem to be a marked out plan for Petrobras' progress. The company seems big on promises, but it remains to be seen how it will deliver on these promises. For the time being, I'll stay far from this stock.

Nike  just reported earnings for the second quarter of its fiscal 2014 year, and the results indicate that the company is starting to gain serious momentum. With continued brand strength and traditionally tumultuous geographic markets beginning to stabilize for the sneaker/apparel giant, Nike should remain a viable play on global growth going forward.

Solid earnings                                                                                                                                                                               Shares of Nike fell slightly the day after the company reported earnings as revenue came in just below the consensus analyst estimate. Nike reported revenue of $6.43 billion for the second quarter, which fell short of the average analyst estimate of $6.44 billion. However, Nike's reported revenue still represented growth of 7.88% from 2012's comparable quarter.

However, the company did beat the average earnings per share estimate. Nike posted diluted earnings of $0.59, which beat the consensus estimate of $0.58 and represented growth of 4% on a year-over-year basis. 

The slight revenue miss was likely a reason that shares of Nike slipped over 1% the following day. However, Nike is still up an impressive 50% in 2013 alone.

Powerful brand                                                                                                                                                                                 A key takeaway from management's conference call was the incredible strength of the Nike brand. President of Nike Brand Trevor Edwards explained, "On a constant dollar basis, the Nike brand was up 9% for the quarter with growth across all key categories, product types and geographies." 

The brand is growing especially well via direct-to-consumer platforms. Nike's DTC business increased revenue 19% in the quarter, driven primarily by new store openings and continued strength in the company's online businesses. Standouts for the brand include the basketball and soccer categories.

On the basketball front, Nike is keeping its foot on the throttle as it is set to deliver a new sneaker from Kobe Bryant called the Kobe 9 "Masterpiece," which follows on the heels of successful sneaker launches such as Kevin Durant's KD 6, Lebron James' Lebron 11, and Chris Pau's CP 3.7. Additionally, the popular Jordan brand continues to perform well. 

On the soccer front, Nike is experiencing a ramp up in business due to the impending World Cup, which is now just six months away. Trevor Edwards explained, "Above all else, the World Cup lets Nike showcase our game-changing product innovations on the global stage." 

To capitalize on the global stage that the World Cup provides, Nike has launched team kits for the soccer clubs of France and Brazil in addition to new products like the Hypervenom boot. 

The most important takeaway here is that Nike is successfully making the most of its prominent industry positioning. This is demonstrated perfectly in the sports of basketball and soccer, where Nike is increasing brand awareness by fostering relationships with high-profile athletes and teams. Nike is in a unique position in this regard, as smaller competitors like Under Armour and even Adidas simply can't keep pace with the sports juggernaut on a global scale.

Improving markets                                                                                                                                                                     Another important takeaway from Nike's recent report is that key markets like China are beginning to stabilize. Revenue growth in China increased 5% in the quarter, driven primarily by management's direct approach to enhance efficiency. The company is now targeting consumers more specifically and this has led to a 20% increase in direct-to-consumer sales in the second quarter. 

Trevor Edwards explained, "We are confident our strategy will set the foundation for sustainable, profitable growth in China over the long-term and we are making good progress." 

Strong growth                                                                                                                                                                               Despite being a much larger company than its competitors, with a market capitalization of $68.8 billion compared to Under Armour's $9.09 billion and Adidas' $25.8 billion, Nike is still growing relatively well. The following is a breakdown of the company's projected growth rates for its next fiscal year, which ends in May 2015, compared to growth expectations for Under Armour and Adidas in 2014: 

Not surprisingly, the smallest company, Under Armour, is projected to lead its competitors in regard to both revenue and earnings-per-share growth going forward. However, Nike is projected to lead Adidas in revenue growth and it is not too far behind both listed competitors in terms of EPS growth.

Domination
Dominant is the word I would use to describe Nike's global positioning in the athletic footwear/apparel market. The company's ability to innovate is impressive, even after decades of growth. However, it is Nike's strong brand recognition and the relationships the company continues to forge with popular athletes and teams around the world that ensure global competitors like Under Armour and Adidas will remain a step behind for the foreseeable future.

As has become tradition, every year Merriam-Webster selects a "word of the year" to encapsulate the trend of the times. If I were selecting a word of the year for the launch of Obamacare's health exchange marketplaces, I believe I might suggest "delays."

The state- and federally run exchanges were all launched simultaneously on October 1, but "failure to launch" has been an ongoing theme for much of the past two-plus months.

The federally run Obamacare website, Healthcare.gov, was practically unusable for a majority of the 36 states it services throughout much of October and November. In total, Healthcare.gov completely enrolled just 137,204 people through November, or roughly 38% of all enrollees, despite having nearly three-quarters of all U.S. states in its network.

State exchanges have been a smidge better, with California and New York helping to pick up the slack for states like Oregon, whose exchange may actually be the exchange in the worst shape of all. In sum, 227,478 people have fully enrolled for health insurance through the end of November on state-run health exchanges.

Source: White House on Flickr.

Delays, delays, delays!
The theme, though, is all about delays.

The employer mandate -- the actionable part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which requires employers with 50 or more full-time employees to provide health insurance options for those employees, and requires them to pay a portion of their employees' health insurance costs if they were to exceed a preset level relative to income -- was pushed back a full year in July.

Also, Healthcare.gov's ability to function for a majority of Americans was pushed back nearly two months to an early December relaunch to accommodate the need to fix what may have been millions of poorly written lines of code.

Last week, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced that it would allow what may amount to up to 6 million people who are at risk of having their health insurance policies cancelled by insurers on Jan. 1 to claim a hardship and purchase catastrophic health insurance instead, which may exempt them from the individual mandate in 2014.

Finally -- in fact, just yesterday -- the White House announced an extension of the coverage cutoff date to obtain health insurance and still be covered by Jan. 1 by one day to Dec. 24. The news of the extra day to obtain health insurance (the previous cutoff coverage date was Dec. 23, and Dec. 15 before that!) comes on the heels of record traffic volume according to the White House, with some 1.2 million visitors hitting the Obamacare website over the weekend and another 850,000 visiting by 2pm ET on Monday.

Is this deadline meaningless?
With delays becoming sort of the norm with Obamacare, you might be asking yourself whether or not this new coverage cutoff deadline, which is merely 24-hours further down the road, is meaningless. I would actually say "Yes," but probably not for the reason you're thinking.

Most people would likely point to Obamacare's inconsistent and fluid deadlines and surmise that there's little substance to the coverage cutoff date if the administration doesn't stand firm to any of its deadlines.

As for me, I consider today's coverage cutoff date to be relatively meaningless because the individual mandate allows for individuals to be uncovered for up to three months in a calendar year without being penalized by the individual mandate.

Think about it this way. Auto insurance is mandatory in the U.S. if you drive, but you likely aren't going to prepay that bill if you don't have to. The same goes for Obamacare. While some sick and in-need Americans, as well as those who qualify for Medicaid, are more than eager to enroll now, the bulk of enrollees are simply trying to put the upcoming monthly premium bill off for as long as possible without invoking the individual mandate penalty -- which means signing up by the mid-March coverage cutoff date. That's the important date that we should all really be watching, and it's the date that'll really help determine just how successful Obamacare is at shrinking the number of uninsured people in this country.

What now for insurers?
For health insurers, it's really becoming a tale of two horizons -- the short-term and long-term. If you purchased insurers with the expectation that they would rapidly see enrollments soar, you're probably going to be sorely disappointed until insurers reports their second-quarter results next year. Both UnitedHealth Group and Aetna , for example, have dropped out of some of the few top-performing state-run markets, exposing them to the possibility of actually seeing their membership shrink because of policy cancellations on Jan. 1 that don't meet the PPACA's beefed up minimum benefit guidelines.

If, however, you've been purchasing insurers with the expectation that we're working toward a long-term solution to health reform, then I see little reason to be concerned. WellPoint , for instance, is a national insurer that purchased Amerigroup in 2012 to expand its government-sponsored (e.g., Medicaid) presence, but has generally stayed the course in states it was already operating in rather than play chess with the individual markets it chooses to operate in. Not surprisingly, it's in better shape now than many of its peers while still maintaining strong premium pricing power.

What now for Obamacare?
As I've stated previously, the growing number of visits to Healthcare.gov and other state-run websites confirms that the ideal of health care reform is alive and well. It still remains to be seen, though, if these visits will turn into enough enrollments to counteract the number of policies that will be cancelled because they don't meet the more stringent and encompassing standards as set forth in the PPACA. We're certainly getting closer to finding out that answer, but it's simply something that won't be spelled out for investors and Americans until mid-March.

The end of 2013 is fast approaching, and it's a great time to look back at your performance over the past year. To improve your investing in 2014, you have to be willing to look at the mistakes you've made so that you can correct them in the future.

In the following video, Dan Caplinger, The Motley Fool's director of investment planning, looks at four essential items on your year-end financial checkup. First, Dan notes that many investors assumed the nearly 20% gains in the S&P 500 during the first four to five months of the year would continue indefinitely, leaving themselves vulnerable to the pullback in May and June. Yet in 2013, panicking during the 8% downturn that resulted from Fed tapering fears was an even bigger trap, leaving many to miss out on big gains in the remainder of the year. As Dan points out, rate-sensitive telecoms Verizon and AT&T , as well as utilities Exelon and Duke Energy , have remained under pressure throughout the year, but it was definitely a mistake to assume that all stocks would suffer from higher rates. Dan closes by noting poor performance from following the hedge-fund crowd and explains how you can position yourself to take advantage of opportunities to get great returns from your investing in 2014 and beyond.

Follow @andrewtonner

Generally speaking, the upgrades to 4G networks have been a huge win for telecom companies like Verizon and consumers alike.

However, the rollout hasn't necessarily gone smoothly for Verizon, as a recent move from the telecom giant illustrated.

Source: Verizon

Because of its massively improved performance, 4G is a cellular data users' dream. And as we've seen since companies like Verizon have launched their 4G networks, consumers have responded to the supercharged download speeds by consuming more data over their wireless devices than ever before.

Spend money to make money
Verizon and other cellular service providers have gone to great lengths to ensure that 4G will be a profitable endeavor for them, which is certainly encouraging for their investors.

This is great for Verizon shareholders, as many of the largest U.S. telecom providers have shifted their contracts to charge for data usage. More streaming and downloading means more dollars and cents for Verizon. However increased usage also puts some pretty serious strain on these networks, as Verizon recently discovered.

In this video, tech and telecom analyst Andrew Tonner looks at some of the recent moves Verizon has had to make in order to reinforce its massively popular 4G service and the costs that have accompanied them.

Shares of 3D Systems are up an astounding 149% over the past year compared to a 27% return for the S&P 500. So just what exactly caused this incredible rally? I'll give you a hint: It wasn't related to 3D System's business results. Before diving into the exact cause of the rally, it's of the utmost importance for investors to understand the two factors that cause stock prices to go up or down in the crazy fun place we call the stock market.

Fun house: Source WikiCommons--Andrew Dunn

Mr. Market's fun house
The day to day movement in stock prices can be chocked up to a multitude of factors, but movement over the short to long term really boils down to two factors -- the company's operating performance, and what the stock market thinks about that performance.

When it comes to how the company is performing in its operations, the most popular measures are earnings, sales, and cash flow. These operating results should be looked at on a per-share basis because investors don't own the whole business and need to make sure they're not being diluted. A company can do amazingly well but investors won't get to participate in that success if the company continually issues shares, thereby diluting value for shareholders.

The second factor, and the most often ignored by investors, is how the market feels about the company's operating results. Mr. Market expresses his opinion of a company's current and future results in the form of multiples. The most popular multiples are price to earnings, price to sales, and price to free cash flow. These multiples can change quickly with Mr. Market's manic mood swings, and in the short term have the largest influence on a stock's price. Here's a illustration of how this works in the market.

As you can see the stock price is equally dependent on both the company's past performance and how the market feels it's going to do in the future. In 3D Systems' case it works out like this: $87.80 = 188.74 x $0.46. Which means that the price of 3D Systems' stock ($87.80) is equal to its price to earnings multiple (188.74) times its earnings per share ($0.46).

Now lets do an example of what would happen if the stock market changed its mind and assigned a price to earnings multiple of 50 to the company's stock, the price would be:  $23.00 = 50 x $0.46. As investors can see, the market's "feelings" can impact a stock's price far more quickly than a change in the company's operating performance. This is because it's far easier for a multiple to move by a large amount than a company's operating performance. 

Now lets see which of these two factors influenced 3D Systems' stock price the most over the past year. 

How 3D Systems' business did in 2013
3D Systems was a very busy corporation this year and continued its aggressive acquisition spree of the following companies:

• Xerox Solid Inks
• Village Plastics
• The Sugar Lab
• CRDM Ltd.
• VisPower Technology
• Phenix Systems
• RPDG
• Geomagic
• Co-Web SARL

The company also released a plethora of new products, ranging from huge industrial printers to entry-level scanners. All of this led to a 4% decrease in earnings per share, an 11% increase in sales per share, and a 20% decrease in free cash flow per share from December 2012 until today. At first glance it's hard to see why shares would increase 149% with those kinds of operating results for investors.

Mr. Market's profound fascination with 3-D printing
The real reason behind the company's share rally didn't have much to do with the company's operating results; rather, it was due to Mr. Market raising his expectations for 3D Systems by 159%. That increase is equal to the increase in the price to earnings multiple for 3D Systems' stock over the past year. Remember from the example above, 3D Systems' price to earnings multiple went from 50 to 188 which had the effect of increasing the share price by 149%.

Basically, the stock market is predicting that the company is going to grow very quickly over the next three to five years. Judging from analyst estimates and predicted industry growth, the company will need to grow its operating results by greater than 26% per year for the next three to five years on average in order for Mr. Market not to get upset.

What does it all mean?
A huge risk in investing is when Mr. Market drastically changes his opinion about how well he thinks a particular company or industry is going to perform, which is also known as multiple contraction. This principle was made famous by investing legend Phillip Fisher in his book "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits". For example, if an investor buys a stock in a "hot" industry and the market assigns a price to earnings multiple of 50 to it but in the next year decides to assign a multiple of 25, that company's earnings will need to increase by 100% in one year in order to offset the decrease in the multiple and for investors not to lose money. 

The stock market loves 3D Systems' stock right now and has assigned an extraordinary multiple of 188 times price to earnings. Even at 2014's predicted earnings of $1.11 per share, the market is assigning an incredibly high multiple of 80 times price to earnings. In my opinion, a successful investment in 3D Systems at today's price is incredibly risky due to what I perceive to be unsustainably high trading multiples, and the risk that operating results fail to keep up with the Mr Market's current expectations. 

In the video below Motley Fool analyst Blake Bos covers this topic in detail and offers investors his view on how to handle this complex situation.

There's been a lot of talk in the media about a possible "iPad Pro" launching sometime next year. And while Apple rumors are never in short supply, there are some tangible reasons why a Pro version of the iPad makes a lot of sense and why the timing is spot on.

Most PCs, as we know them, are on the way out
I've mentioned before that I think the case for an iPad hybrid -- something between a tablet a laptop -- is building, so let's rehash some of those thoughts and add in some new iPad developments as well.

The current iPad family, but there's room for one more. Source: Apple.

First, IDC data released this month showing that worldwide PC shipments are expected to have declined by 10% in 2013. That's probably not much of a surprise to many people, but it is significant because it's the first year their decline has hit the double digits. So PC shipments are falling fast, while tablet demand continues to rise.

64-bit architecture is here
Apple took a pre-emptive step toward preparing for an iPad Pro launch when it released the A7 64-bit chip in the iPhone 5s. The move signaled to developers that this is the direction Apple is headed, and that it is moving toward even higher high-end productivity and graphics devices. 64-bit tech opens the possibility for more intense video and audio editing, 3D graphics,  and other features that take up lots of processing power. Integrating a chip like that in an iPad Pro could put the device on a path toward serious productivity. Apple itself has called the chip "desktop-class architecture."

While there's been no shortage of debate whether the 64-bit chip is a serious move forward or simply a marketing gimmick, competitors like Samsung and Qualcomm have announced plans to release a 64-bit chips since Apple's news. So the market is clearly moving in that direction. An anonymous Qualcomm employee recently told HubSpot that Apple's 64-bit chip "hit us in the gut" and caught the rest of the industry off-guard as well.

But a better chip isn't the only reason why Apple may be on the road to an iPad Pro. Reports have surfaced since at least July that Apple is working on a 12.9-inch iPad, and may bring two of those versions to market. While iPads of that size are obviously rumors right now, it does match up with data from IDC showing that consumers are trending toward larger tablet purchases.

iPad Air. Source: Apple.

What's in a name?
And then there's the simple marketing changes Apple has made with the iPad. The company dropped number designations from the iPad name first, reverting to just the simple "iPad" name. Then, with the recent launch of the new iPad, it borrowed the "Air" name from its MacBook line, further implying that a Pro may be on the way. A two-tiered iPad lineup (aside from the Mini) makes even more sense when compared to Apple's product structure across much of its key devices: the iMac and the Mac Pro, the iPhone 5c and the iPhone 5s, and, of course, the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. Even now, it seems Apple has a placeholder in the second iPad spot as it currently still sells the iPad 2.

As for a time frame when the iPad Pro will debut, it seems the calendar fourth quarter of 2014 is a good guess. Apple has launched its last two iPads in October and November, and the holiday season has obviously been a huge sales time for iPads over the past few years.

As for other iPad Pro details, Apple will need to design its own keyboard that seamlessly integrates with the iPad Pro in order to separate itself from the iPad Air. More internal storage space and a faster processor are a given, but an Apple-designed keyboard with some sort of trackpad-like integration will be key. Users will need to be able to do more than just swipe the screen in order to have serious productivity features, whether from a trackpad feature or enhanced home button with sensors.

So there it is, a Foolish iPad Pro prediction for 2014. I'll revisit this article next year to see how I did -- whether I was right on the mark, dead wrong, or somewhere in between.