Efficiency is often an overlooked criterion within the investment world. Sure, people turn to margins and measure how much they are shrinking or expanding by, or look at the rate of which the growth is rising or falling. But one criterion that is almost always overlooked is the efficiency per employee. In this article, I will attempt to shed some light on the efficiency of Ford (F) and its competitors, as well as the broader S&P 500 (SPY).

In an attempt to boost employee morale and looking to increase future sales, Henry Ford, the founder of Ford Motor Company, made a drastic move:

In 1913 Henry Ford made a bold move and literally doubled the wages of his employees from $2.50 to $5 a day, after the huge success of the Model T doubled his profits. By sharing the wealth, Ford saw a tremendous surge in output

On Jan. 10, it was announced that Ford (F) would be doubling its dividend. What great news for those who have been long-time shareholders. Those who invested before 2008 and held strong not only watched their dividend get slashed to nothing, but also watched Ford nearly collapse on itself as it traded all the way down to $1. Since then, however, shares have rebounded and the dividend was reinstated, for $0.05, in December 2011.

Ford felt that this was an appropriate payout, as it was looking to restart its dividend plan without running the risk of having to reduce or halt it in later years. So what does it say now when Ford has doubled its quarterly dividend, up to $.10? It says a lot, actually. For starters, it shows investors that Ford is confident it will never have to slash, reduce, or stop paying a

While I do believe in the long-term prospects of Apple (AAPL) and have recently created a long position via outright shares (in my trading account), I was looking for a safer, less volatile manner of gaining exposure in my IRA account. I did not wish to suffer through heavy volatility and violent price swings. After all, I am saving this money for the long-run and while I truly believe that Apple with regain its swagger, I am not ready to go through the trouble of being very overweight this company.

To counter this problem I have looked to the PowerShares QQQ Trust ETF (QQQ). The fund has a high concentration of its assets allocated to Apple. At 18% of invested assets, Apple represents the largest holding in the ETF. Although this allocation is not as high as it was in the past -- about 20% in the fall

I thought it would be best to let the dust settle on Apple (AAPL) before attempting to write an article about it. There used to be a lot of hype and hysteria surrounding Apple, on the bullish side. Now it all seems so down and pessimistic. I've decided to step in and buy shares below $500 because of its future earnings power, solid dividend, ability to innovate and its deeply undervalued condition. I will use this article to further expand on my reasoning behind being long.

I had previously written an article before earnings came out, to caution investors on the emotional rollercoaster that is typically associated with a company's earnings report. I suggested that worried investors -- are any of them not worried? -- wait until the conference call to make a decision on whether to buy or sell Apple.

Well, we all know how the

There's been a lot of talk about Ford (F) with its recent earnings beat, great January sales numbers and -- oops! -- European headwinds. Despite all the good things Ford has done recently -- and we will go over them -- the American automaker continues to be dogged by losses in Europe. For 2013, Ford expects to lose about $2 billion from European operations. This is certainly not good, but will eventually be overcome. Many investors would wonder why you would want to buy into something before the problem is resolved rather than after. The reason is simple: future potential gains.

When a company announces something bad like this, investors, traders, and fund managers "bake" this news into the stock price. Essentially, this is saying that despite the losses expected in Europe, Ford's stock price has already factored this information into its current value.

Since

Microsoft (MSFT) has been a hotly debated stock for a while now. Its new Surface tablet has been cheered by some and hated by others, along with the new Windows 8 software and the Windows smartphone. CEO Steve Ballmer has been largely inefficient at product development and innovation since he took over in 2000, which has led to the stagnant price action that Microsoft's stock has seen over the last decade. But at some point, Microsoft has to become a "buy." Is that time almost here?

The one main argument Microsoft bulls tend to make is the dividend. The burst of the tech bubble in 2002 and the financial meltdown in 2008 have severely hindered Microsoft's stock performance since the new millennium began. But with a large cash pile, the dividend payments have continued to flow. With a yield of 3.5%, Microsoft does do a good job of

When picking stocks for your portfolio, you typically run into some trouble. No decision is easy, no matter what kind of goals you have. Whether it's income, growth, speculation, wealth preservation, or a balanced portfolio, decisions come up after narrowing down your "top" selections. "This stock, or that stock? McDonald's or Yum! Brands? Ford or GM?" Believe it or not, this scenario comes up very quickly and leaves many investors scratching their heads. Today I'm looking at Coca-Cola (KO) and Pepsico (PEP) to see which one belongs in my portfolio.

Both of these beverage companies have become very strong, fundamentally solid brands. To see which is better though, we'll analyze the growth of earnings per share, revenues and the dividend. We'll also look at the key metrics (described in deeper detail later) and valuations by using the P/E and PEG ratios. We'll start with a look at

I'm always seeking to perfect the holdings in my long-term portfolio, which is much different than my "trading" portfolio. In my trading portfolio, I'm geared more towards short-term moves and am okay with certain risks. However, with my long-term portfolio, I am constantly seeking to be properly invested. Buy-and-hold doesn't apply to the markets the way it once did. Now it's more of a buy-hold-rotate-and-reallocate strategy. I focus on core holdings and growth stocks, while using ETF's to diversify my holdings.

Nike (NKE) has been a stock I've had my eye on lately. Nike is a brand I use and love. Whether it's sweatpants, hoodies or running shoes, I love the design and quality that comes with them. Just like all the other stocks I am already long, I will put Nike to the test to see if it fits my investment goals. If it doesn't fit my investment

Coca-Cola (KO) has been an established beverage company for decades, heck for more than a century even. Investors from 30 or 40 years ago have made a killing on their investments, especially after dividends and stock splits. This isn't to say other companies haven't provided similar returns to Coke over the years. Names like McDonald's (MCD), Wal-Mart (WMT), and Disney (DIS) are just a few companies that have lined investors pockets over the years. The question remains, however: Can today's Coke investors get the same treatment as those investors 40 years ago? Lets look at the company at a more in-depth level to find out if the fundamentals are still as bright.

Before digging through any of the fundamentals, lets look at the charts. Below I'll show the three-year chart and the one-year chart. Both with use the RSI and MACD readings and three

Coca-Cola (KO) has just been one of those companies. One that you recognize instantly when you see the brand and is all over the world. It has made a fortune for those who invested a long time ago, and those investors probably still have it today. A big attraction to owning Coke is the ability to continue growing and its healthy dividend. In this article I want to take a deeper look at the dividend and see if Coke still has the same ability to continue the payout.

First let's look at a 3-year chart, just to see where exactly Coke's share price has been. The chart will utilize the RSI and MACD measurements as well as three simple moving averages. We will use the 50-day, 100-day and 200-day simple moving average in an attempt to illustrate the overall trend. Below is the 3-year chart:

(click to enlarge)

Source:

A hot debate has been going around about which fast food company is better to own, McDonald's (MCD) or Yum! Brands (YUM). The battle essentially boils down to growth versus stability. McDonald's is viewed as the undisputed king of fast food. It has a strong dividend and is widely available all around the globe. Yum! isn't the same concrete, cash cow that McDonald's is. Yum! was a spin-off from PepsiCo (PEP), and includes restaurants such as KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut. Yum! has growth on its side, while still paying a dividend and having stability. So that begs the question, which is better?

In this article, I will attempt to draw on key comparisons -- from valuation, to the dividend, and to growth -- to see which one belongs in investor's portfolios. Again, each has its own strong points, so it depends on what that investor

After spending considerable time dissecting Disney's many facets, I have found it worthy of a long-term investment. Aside from revenue or earnings growth, I looked at another area many investors like to see growing on a regular basis. This factor can be quite important, especially for long-term investors. Yes, I'm speaking of the dividend.

Disney (DIS) isn't typically thought of when considering income stocks. And why would it be? The yield is relatively low, at just 1.5%. The annual dividend payout of $0.75 certainly does not entice many income seeking investors. But when you break down Disney's payout, it definitely becomes a consideration. Let's take a deeper look and see where Disney fits in all of this.

Before getting into the dividend breakdown, let's take a quick look at the 3-year chart of Disney. The chart below has RSI and MACD measurements, as well as three moving averages. The

I want to write about one of my favorite long-term holdings, The Walt Disney Company (DIS). Disney has a fantastic business model, that incorporates theme parks, sports (with ESPN), children's shows, and cinematic movies. The list goes on, but what keeps investors on board after Disney shares gained 40% in 2012? I will attempt to break down Disney's growth and look for growth potential in the next several years.

Disney is a favorite among many long-term shareholders. How can you not love the little mouse in the house? Okay, that was a joke, but seriously, how can Disney not be a favorite among other shareholders? However, the question becomes truly mind-boggling when considering whether the growth fits the price. Does Disney trade at fair value, or is it overvalued? As much as we love the mouse, we need to take a deeper look to see.

Below are the 1-year

Man, what a hard day it was for Apple (AAPL) shareholders. The bulls -- assuming there's any left -- witnessed the final strand of price support give out for Apple on Tuesday. The stock has been weak over the past few months, after it peaked in September around $705, but has found support near $500. In fact, often times, the stock would bounce before that, around $505 or $510. But not this time.

Shares of Apple were trading just below $500 in the pre-market -- at around $498 -- before plunging $15 or over 3% in early trading. The stock finally closed at $485.92, the lowest since early 2012, when Apple was in the beginning stages of its parabolic run after a blowout fourth quarter earnings result. So after riding the Apple-train from $450 (or lower) to $700 and seemingly on its way back to $450, many investors are

Throughout 2012, I have been a big supporter of McDonald's (MCD) in the mid-$80 price range. Despite investors claiming that McDonald's had lost its edge in the burger market or would continue seeing slowed growth, I still saw it as a good buying opportunity. While it certainly is true that there is increased pressure from competitors, I think McDonald's is so powerfully positioned, that the company cannot be moved -- easily that is.

There are headwinds, there's no doubt about that. Growth is slowing in some areas and the new management has got to fix things for McDonald's to start firing on all cylinders once again. An interesting article was brought to my attention regarding the food sector in general. Fellow Seeking Alpha contributor Bret Jenson provided me with the following article about why restaurant stocks will perform poorly in 2013. The main bearish viewpoints of

Over the last several weeks, I have been compiling a list of stocks and have been researching them to see if they fit in the "growth" section of my long-term portfolio. The portfolio consists of the following other sections: Core, Hybrid and ETF. While I will do a breakdown of these positions later, today I am focused on the growth sector. These stocks need to be companies that have sustainable long-term growth. I'm not looking for speculative positions or "fly-by-night" hype stocks. I want companies that I can count on over the long haul.

I have done an individual analysis on each company in the following table below. Each analysis for the given company is hyperlinked at the bottom of the article and is right here on Seeking Alpha, in case anyone is interested in reading a more in-depth review. Below is the table with the company name, current price

Starbucks (SBUX) has demonstrated mixed performance over the last several quarters. While some are bullish based on brand recognition and high growth, others are bearish about commodity costs and increased competition from companies such as McDonald's (MCD) and Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (GMCR). I want to take a look at some of Starbucks's growth over the past few years, as well as how the valuation has fluctuated.

Let's start with a couple of charts for Starbucks. The first one is a 3-year chart accompanied by RSI measurements and MACD readings. The three moving averages are the 50-day, 100-day and 200-day simple moving averages. These are here to show investors the overall trend and price strength -- or weakness -- over the past several years.

3-Year Chart (click to enlarge):

Source: Stockcharts.com

For the most part, the trend is up. However, it becomes more of a concern

Last Thursday, January 3, automakers revealed their annual sales figures in what turned out to be a great show. American auto sales look to finally be turning a corner, with Ford (F), Chrysler and General Motors (GM) posting the best December since the 2007-2008 recession. Ford has had a miraculous comeback in 2012, where the stock dropped to as low as $8.82, the 52-week low made in early August. Since then however, shares have rallied 54%, to $13.60, the highest price since July 2011. Have things finally shifted into Ford's favor? Let's look at the sales numbers and see.

Ford continued its dominant grip on the top-selling vehicle in America, the F-Series truck, with 645,316 vehicles leaving the lots in 2012. That's over 64,000 more than last year, an increase of 10%. The Ford F-Series has been the best-selling truck for 36 consecutive years and

I recently wrote an article about Visa (V) and why I am bullish on the credit card giant. When looking at Visa's competition, there are several names, but none bigger than MasterCard (MA). When I do my own analysis, I like to make it available online, hopefully helping other investors find the right choice for themselves. Instead of simply doing an analysis on MasterCard, I decided to compare Visa and MasterCard to see which is better. Who knows, perhaps both will have a place in your portfolio.

First let's look at a couple of charts. For the purpose of looking at long-term growth, we will use the 3-year chart for both companies. These charts will use the 50-day, 100-day and 200-day simple moving averages, to show the respective trends over the 3-year time span. The charts will also have RSI measurements and MACD readings. For further simplicity

eBay (EBAY) has been a huge player in the online market for consumers. Though not as large as Amazon (AMZN), eBay has been able to stay relevant, to say the least. The acquisition of PayPal has been huge and has boosted eBay to new heights. But is the growth real? Today, I want to take a look at eBay and see if its growth is the real deal. First, let's take a look at the one-year and three-year charts:

Click to enlarge images.

One-Year Chart

Source: Stockcharts.com.

Three-Year Chart

Source: Stockcharts.com.

On the one-year chart, we used the 20-day, 50-day and 200-day simple moving averages. We did this because it is a shorter time frame than that of the three-year chart. But it looks great. The chart is strong, with eBay finding strong support from the 50-day SMA and has not tested the 200-day SMA once.

The three-year