So, Just Average Is Best…

Tags

averaging, fear and greed, investment checklists, investment process, investment theme, noise, risk vs. reward, stock picking, technical analysis, worship the spreadsheet

It’s New Year’s Eve…and in the end, it’s been a pretty tough & frustrating year for many investors out there. [‘Less you’re Irish & stuck close to home – just look at this friggin’ chart!] And while the holiday season’s all about celebrating the year gone by & ahead, it can be tough (as the booze kicks in) not to get a little disheartened and experience some real doubt about your portfolio & your stock-picking prowess.

And the financial media’s no help – the talking heads & market strategists chatter about the biggest winners of the past year, and opine on the stocks & trends to focus on in 2016. How on earth are they be so confident & so prescient? It’s simple…’cos that’s how they get paid & promoted! Just like CEOs, just like politicians, just like your boss, the big bucks are paid almost inevitably to the big swinging dick. Not the fidgety little guy in the corner, analysing stacks of data & second-guessing himself to death. Truth is, they don’t need to be right, that’s irrelevant. Because they’re looking to attract attention, earn fees, increase AUM, etc…and ultimately, confidence sells.

Trouble is, you need to be right.

But you don’t feel confident, like they do. And so the dance continues… They go on TV, and dish out all the confident narrative & commentary you crave. Except the only obvious market truism (‘stocks go up, over time…’) isn’t a good soundbite. Instead, they analyse monthly data points. And speculate about a possible Asian pandemic. And worry over an escalating Middle East war. And hyperventilate about a junk bond-induced economic melt-down. Or a terrorist attack, or maybe even an assassination, if they get lucky. And so on, ad infinitum.

But almost inevitably, it’s all just noise…

Advertisement

The Inherent Contradictions of My Portfolio (or Who’s The Greater Fool..?) (Part III)

Tags

asset allocation, bar-bell strategy, bubbles, bullish, floating world, GARP investing, macro investment thesis, Nifty Fifty, stock picking, wall of money, wall of worry

Continued from (Part I) & (Part II).

For a moment there – yeah, go on, admit it – you really did think I’d lost my mind & mutated into some kind of wild-eyed snorting pawing charging bull!? One who’d sold off his entire portfolio, plus the family silver, and blown his entire wad on a titillating smorgasbord of the past year’s hottest large cap stocks & sectors instead?

But only for a moment, I hope, mes frères?!

OK, I may be a charging (?) bull – yup, my negligible cash holdings don’t lie… And I may well believe the market ultimately loses touch with the real world (& enters the floating world). But c’mon, did you really conclude I’d lost touch with reality?

Er, no… Or should I say, hopefully not..?

Obviously, having some kind of (global) macro investment thesis is essential for all investors. Well, it should be obvious – someone who foolishly pontificates it’s all (& only) about the micro (i.e. stock picking) could be, for example, missing out on a potentially lethal big picture. But an investor who focuses exclusively on the macro is being just as foolish. Because, of course, the micro’s where you’re likely to find the best long term multi-bagger opportunities. Don’t even fight it, macro & micro are both equally important…

[OK, I’ve gotta confess, that’s pretty much a bald-faced lie – any number of studies prove asset allocation (i.e. macro) is the dominant contributor to portfolio returns. But I’ll save you from reading ’em – instead, just ask yourself whether stock picking saved your ass in the last bear market?! Er… But hey, what can you do, at least stock picking keeps me off the mean streets! 😉 ]

And the stronger your investment thesis, the greater the discipline, the conviction, and the ultimate success of your investment portfolio & returns. But an investment thesis, whether it’s macro or micro, is not a winning lottery ticket you simply collect on, it’s not a belief or principle you defend to the death, and it’s certainly not some map that’s etched in stone. It’s about making your own luck, where preparation meets opportunity…so never grow too attached to a pet thesis. Instead, consider it an evolving premise that needs to be constantly challenged & updated. Far better to aggressively ask yourself (& the world) each day why your premise might actually be wrong – rather than devoting all your efforts to constructing some tottering edifice of proof to memorialise what might be, in the end, a long-dead thesis.

I’ve been developing this market bubble thesis for a couple of years now. To date, it stands up well to scrutiny & keeps getting stronger…but I’m also very aware it’s a thesis which will continue to evolve & be tested. And I certainly don’t think we’re anywhere close to bubble territory yet – leaving aside some obvious exceptions, investors aren’t exhibiting any of the usual symptoms: Yes, I’m sure you know ’em…a twisted market/valuation logic, a blatant disregard for risk/leverage, and/or a messianic over-confidence in future growth & returns.

Stock Picking…Art, or Science (Part IV)?!

Tags

art vs. science, asset allocation, diversification, Event Driven, GARP investing, growth vs. value, IRR, Margin of Safety, Return on Market Equity, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation

Continued from here.

Value vs. Growth:

In my last Stock Picking post, I highlighted a common value investor failing – namely, a preference for over-leveraged & illiquid small/micro-cap stocks. All too often, it seems like this kind of preference (& others like it) are simply hard-wired in…maybe you’re born to be a value or growth investor! Now, we could get all touchy-feely here & try to personality-map this out – cautious vs. aggressive, quantitative vs. qualitative, thinker vs. dreamer, and so on – but does it really matter? Far better to recognise & accept what you are – if you haven’t already, just stop reading right now & come out to your wife:

‘Um, darling, it’s time you know…I’m a value investor!’

You may even find out she knew already…

Acceptance is the first & most important step in recognising inherent investing biases, and maybe trying to curb some of the worst excesses of hard-core value investing. [Of course, the same is equally true of growth investing]. This might take years…it definitely took me years! And pride often gets in the way – sometimes it’s nice to feel different, one of a select breed of smart investors who can boast of finding hidden gems in the rubble. But this is just an illusion – true growth investors are equally select. [Yes, most people seem biased towards growth stocks (if they ever mention stocks at all!?) – but in reality, they’re fairly clueless about money & investing. At best, they’re TALT* investors…] For them, genuine growth stocks are equally difficult & just as precious to find. And let’s face it – on average, in the real world, nobody can reliably claim value investing is superior to growth investing, or vice versa.

But accepting your value investing biases, curbing your excesses, and exploiting your natural advantages, is surely the best way to maximise your comfort & your returns as an investor. Except this can ultimately prove a double-edged sword…the world you end up living in may just be a value ghetto. Sure, it may feel large enough, it may even feel comfortable enough, but if that’s as far as your horizons stretch, you’re missing out on a whole other world of opportunity out there. Forget about investment ideology – again, this is about diversification, and it’s about becoming a better investor.

If you choose to ignore growth stocks & investing, you’re voluntarily cutting yourself off from vast swathes of the available investment universe – that’s countless companies, entire sectors, new/disruptive business models & secular trends, even geographies, etc. you’re missing out on, maybe forever…how does that make any sense? And even if you heed everything else I’ve written about diversification, how meaningful will the impact be if your portfolio remains blighted by the absence of growth stocks?

Of course, the classic value objection to growth stocks is that they’re invariably over-valued. But this, my friends, amounts to nothing more than a red herring… A true growth stock always seems to be over-valued, yet its share price can subsequently look astonishingly & ridiculously cheap after the business/stock somehow manages to scale up by hundreds or even thousands of percent. The real complaint here, I suspect, is that growth investing is just too hard!?! And if you’re a value investor, there should be no shame in admitting this – because that’s exactly how it feels: You naturally take a primarily quantitative approach to investing & you always require an adequate margin of safety, but identifying true growth stocks demands a far more qualitative approach & appears to offer little in the way of safety…

The Four Mystery Horsemen, Revealed…

Tags

Aryzta, blind stock challenge, Glanbia, Greencore Group, intrinsic value, investor bias, Kerry Group, mystery stock challenge, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation

Continued from here. A week ago, I set readers a mystery/blind stock challenge – to estimate an intrinsic/fair value for four mystery companies: Conquest, War, Famine & Death. Here’s the data table I provided:

First, let me thank all the readers who participated (by blog comment & email): Congrats, you took the time to stick your neck out & provided me with what I consider a meaningful set of fair value estimates. Second, without further ado, here’s a table of the 4 companies & their actual underlying data:

[NB: For the challenge, remember I normalised to 1 billion of revenue – i.e. applied factors of 20.8%, 39.4%, 78.5% & 17.4%, respectively, to each company’s revenue & additional data points (except CAGRs).]

The Four Mystery Horsemen…

Tags

blind stock challenge, financial analysis, intrinsic value, investor bias, mystery stock challenge, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation

Last week, I published the third post in my Stock Picking series (see Parts I, II & III), and it got me thinking – I haven’t seen a good mystery/blind stock challenge in a long time! There’s obviously tonnes of great investing advice out there to harvest, but the lessons we really take to heart are those we learn via trial & error, and hard won experience…

As I’ve been banging on about, stock picking is really composed of two very distinct processes: Stock Valuation & Stock Selection. But investors often tend to confuse & conflate the two… Just like meeting a person for the first time, stock selection often boils down ultimately to a first impression – a gut feeling Company X is dodgy/above-board, enjoys positive/negative investor sentiment, is well/poorly run, always/never delivers, is high/low growth, is financially weak/bullet-proof, has huge/no business or upside potential, etc. Basically, we’re making a snap decision whether it’s a good or bad company…

Such first impressions often exert a substantial & pernicious influence on our stock valuation process. We cherry-pick data, we discern & extract more favourable or unfavourable trends, valuation multiples contract or expand, inconsistent ratios are conveniently ignored, etc. etc. Given similar financial/operating histories, quite often we (wittingly, or unwittingly) end up arriving at radically different valuations for different stocks/companies.

Of course, their respective prospects may entirely justify wildly different valuations. Sure, but for the majority of companies, they generally don’t experience hockey stick growth out of the blue, nor do they suddenly fall off a cliff… [Novice investors are particularly susceptible to the ‘hockey stick’ assumption, blithely ignoring the fact they/other investors have sometimes been waiting years already for the same exceptional growth surge!] In reality a company’s future tends to reflect its past, good or bad, far more often than investors might credit – its management & culture, for example, can be a powerful institutional imperative ensuring this is true.

Multiply this potential for valuation bias across all investors, and inevitably you tend to end up with a pretty inefficient/irrational market…at least in terms of individual stocks & sectors. [Ooh, the heresy!] But a mystery stock challenge can wonderfully illustrate how under/over-valued individual stocks can actually become in the market. Plus it’s a highly effective way to separate the (quantitative) stock valuation process from the (more qualitative) stock selection process – and when the companies stand  revealed, investors can examine (individually & in aggregate) their stock valuation process & potential biases in a far more detached and objective fashion. Ideally, it also provides some up-close insight into the perspectives & valuation techniques of a broad selection of investors.

Stock Picking…Art, or Science (Part III)?!

Tags

art vs. science, asset allocation, correlation, debt, diversification, growth vs. value, home bias, illiquidity, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation, volatility

Well, it’s not ideal publishing another post in this series two months+ after my last post…but I’m obviously no post a day pleaser. And life, Xmas, stocks & markets, and sneaking off to the movies, all tend to get in the way! 😉 A quick (re-)read of Parts I & II might be in order, if you’re so inclined? But to recap, very briefly: In Part I, I stressed stock picking is really two distinct & independent activities:

a) Stock Valuation, and

b) Stock Selection

And all too often, investors confuse & conflate the two…

But presuming your quantitative stock valuation process is nailed down, then stock selection is obviously a far more qualitative process…it’s certainly not about ranking & selecting stocks purely in terms of their upside potential. Fortunately, there’s plenty of stock selection filters you can employ – for example, to help protect against the risks posed by home bias, bottom-up stock picking, and/or a concentrated portfolio. Of course, the overall objective here is to:

i) Ensure stock selection is as much science, as it is art, and

ii) Always strive for greater diversification & superior risk/reward in your portfolio.

Here are some other filters you may find particularly useful. No doubt, as you read, they’ll strike you as perfectly obvious…the trouble is, applying them consistently is easily forgotten when you’re considering individual stock holdings & potential buys, let alone when you’re trying to manage the overall risk/reward of your entire portfolio:

Stock Picking…Art, or Science (Part II)?!

Tags

art vs. science, asset allocation, bottom-up stock picking, concentration risk, diversification, growth vs. value, home bias, Margin of Safety, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation

Continued from here.

OK, time for a more in-depth look at stock selection. [NB: We’re presuming you’re already comfortable with the rigour & consistency of your stock valuation process]. While I’m happy to acknowledge stock selection may (ultimately) be art, here I’m going to illustrate & argue why it should be mostly grounded in science. So yes, I’m sorry – I don’t have any magic tricks up my sleeve to avoid, for example, a situation we all abhor…you know the one I mean:

You dutifully winnow a list of stocks down to two finalists, do a fine job of valuing them side-by-side, and make your final/fateful selection…only to see one stock double in three months, while you ponder the 35% loss on the stock you actually bought!?

But this can & does happen to the best of us! Unfortunately, it comes with the territory… You have to remember buyer’s regret & remorse are really just symptoms of Fear & Greed. Which can be tackled in two ways:

– Ignore the Problem:  As tempting as self-flagellation is, why indulge in such a pointless exercise? Don’t forget, we’ve already assumed you’re doing a bang-up job with your stock valuation process – so you obviously shouldn’t be buying dud stocks, or forsaking a decent margin of safety! What you’re dealing with here is really just Lady Luck…and her rough edges tend to get smoothed out over time.

– Systemise Your Process:  Stock selection is an independent, but equally important, part of your investment process – and as I’ve argued before, formalising & systemising every single component of that process is the best way to subdue and kill your fear & greed. Like I said, stock selection is mostly a science..!

And as I wrote in my last post:

‘Stock valuation must be absolute, but stock selection is usually relative.’

Stock Picking…Art, or Science?!

Tags

art vs. science, growth vs. value, stock picking, stock selection, stock valuation, TGISVP, Warren Buffett

Gather some investors together, mix liberally with beer, garnish with some grub, lose track of time, and there’s a question which inevitably bubbles to the surface:

So, stock picking…is it bloody art, or is it science?!

If you’re a regular reader, you might recall my Why I Read (I, II & III) series & this more recent piece (Investing Haiku), and assume I’d argue stock picking is ultimately art. That’s understandable – and if you buy me enough drinks, I’m sure I’d be more than happy to expound on that very argument! [And yeah, maybe I can talk even more than I can write. 😉 But only v occasionally… 🙂 ] But in the hard light of day, I’d be far more reluctant – not because of the argument itself, but because of how it tends to be abused…

First, we have the experts who never really share/explain their actual investment process. Who knows if they’re afraid to share their secret sauce, if they’re looking to add some mystery & glamour (and a following), or if they’ve simply succumbed to false modesty? Intentional or not, they persuade investors their stock picking is ultimately art – so you can invest with them, slavishly copy their stock picks, or you can simply give up…because you can never hope to emulate them!

[I mean, look at Warren Buffett – here we are, 60 years into his career, still slavering over any attempt to reverse-engineer the keys to his investment process & success. Whilst lauding a schizophrenic media that likes to preach why you should invest like Buffett, and why you can’t invest like Buffett! Before he dies, Alice Schroeder needs to perform the ultimate public service – lock herself in a room with Buffett, and only come out when she’s fully documented the real nuts & bolts, facts & figures, and dollars & cents of his major stock picking successes!]