An awesome compilation of research insights from the team at AQR.https://t.co/ocE53qOyTT
Thanks to @CliffordAsness and team for leading the charge to empower investors through education!
On behalf of all finance nerds, we are thankful for your generosity.
— Wes Gray ???????? (@alphaarchitect) December 20, 2018
Intelligent Investing When Asia’s Mr. Market Is Fearful
December 19, 2018 in Best Ideas 2019, Equities, IdeasThis article is authored by MOI Global instructor Sid Choraria, Asian Equities Portfolio Manager, based in Singapore.
We look forward to learning from Sid, both at the Best Ideas 2019 online conference and at Ideaweek St. Moritz 2019.
Asian markets offer a rich fishing ground for the diligent value investor. Our philosophy is to invest in great Asian businesses when Asia’s Mr. Market is irrationally fearful in the short-term so we can act decisively and concentrate only when we truly like a business and it is in the “fat pitch” strike zone, trading against irrationality to reduce the amount of mistakes.
Asia offers an incredible environment to invest in great world-class companies with long-term growth amidst attractive demographics. The key is to be disciplined on the purchase price and not look to Mr. Market as a predictor of value in the business but as a friend to trade on irrationality. In my experience in Asia, investing in sub par businesses at a great price still offers sub par results relative to the Market, and is not a sustainable strategy.
Mr. Market in the book Intelligent investor is described as a moody character. I would argue that Benjamin Graham would say Asia’s Mr. Market is more inefficient fluctuating between very depressed and very enthusiastic more frequently than the US or European markets. So as a long-term investor, Asia’s Mr. Market is a great friend to the diligent investor where patience and emotional character, combined with scuttle butt research is greatly rewarded. What differentiates the long-term track record in Asia is business quality + emotional integrity on the price.
Several reasons exist for frequent mispricing in Asia: short-term mentality in markets like China where the stock market is a casino and price and value are very separate, stark differences in governance, accounting and disclosure standards causing investors to frequently bucket good businesses with the same brush, uncertain macro-economic or political headwinds creating fear and limited analyst coverage as Asia has more than double the companies than the US. India and China, among the largest economies, fastest growing, and vibrant stock markets alone have 10,000 companies!
Within Asia, each market is very different which makes the job of a foreign investor without boots on the ground and experience difficult to avoid landmines but great opportunity for the diligent analyst with local networks. For example, in China 80% of investors are mom and pop investors who focus on anything but fundamentals, and this leads to speculation as mentioned in Seth Klarman’s Margin of Safety chapter 1. Gambling is in the blood of the Chinese investor and the stock market brings out this emotional trait perfectly. Even institutions in China have very high portfolio turnover which means stocks are NOT seen as a business but as a piece of paper.
Disclosure in Japan is challenging and varies company by company providing significant opportunity for the diligent analyst. Many Japanese high quality consumer companies are successfully selling their branded products to the wealthy Chinese and Asian consumer — who crave quality, yet local Japan analysts who cover these companies tend to be very Japan focused providing an information arbitrage. India tends to be more of a GARP (growth at a reasonable price) market and investors looking for “deep value” are going to miss out on great businesses. Countries like Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea offer value in the traditional sense, but it´s very important to pay attention to minority shareholder friendliness, cross shareholdings, capital allocation, etc as they can differ significantly.
Over many years, I have developed an exhaustive database of Asian companies that assists me mine for key factors I look for in a systematic way, quantitative and qualitative. In the last 12 months, we have met over 200 Asian companies in over 9 countries including high growth countries like China/HK, India, Vietnam, developed markets like Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and frontier markets like Bangladesh and Myanmar. While I am primarily searching for high quality businesses, I allocate a small portion of the portfolio to more illiquid securities, as there are plenty of ignored securities in Asia, that offer a Heads You Win, Tails you Can’t Lose Much scenario. The ideal bet is a large liquid security offering such odds!
We constantly take careful notes when meeting Asian companies assigning scores of 1=in, 2=out, 3=too difficult, learning from the Charlie Munger approach. Investing successfully is saying no and managing time well, as time is finite and cannot be bought. As a value investor, I prefer fishing more in the Chinese and Indian markets as they are deep markets offering plenty of great businesses. Once attractive opportunities are narrowed down, the key is to spend a substantial amount of time understanding the business, specifically its competitive position (i.e. pricing power, economies of scale, customer captivity). Then I look for an alignment with and incentives of management with shareholders (i.e. capital allocation, compensation, sticking to core competency, etc.).
Finally, I look for opportunities to purchase companies at a substantial discount to the price a rational private owner would pay for the business. A company’s intrinsic value is derived from the earnings power of its operations and corporate governance plays an significant role as well, because it determines how much of a firm’s value can be claimed by minority shareholders. We try to understand what will increase the intrinsic power of the company – this is usually as a result of strengthening its moat, new business innovation, better use of balance sheet (ROA, ROE), improvements in capital allocation etc.
I keep a watch list of 70-80 high quality Asian companies and add companies and remove companies diligently, if the moat shrinks or corporate governance disappoints. The goal is to construct a long-term portfolio that is concentrated in a dozen or small number of favorite businesses which are great businesses at highly attractive prices acquired when Asia’s Mr. Market is irrational. Accumulated knowledge about the business, industry and management often lead to greater opportunities to compound information.
At Best Ideas 2019, we will present a China A share company that is defensible in the current market context and available at an attractive price as a result of Asia’s Mr. Market irrationality. Interestingly it is a security that legendary Charlie Munger has discussed in an interview on investing in Chinese companies with durable competitive advantages.
This is the best business book most of us will read this year, or even this decade. Hard to find a topic in management and leadership, corporate governance or corporate finance, or even the psychology of human (mis)judgement, that isn’t on display here. https://t.co/FQ9IMWh6ib
— Phil Ordway (@pcordway) December 17, 2018
Favoring Recession-Resistant Equities and Cash
December 17, 2018 in Best Ideas 2019, Best Ideas Conference, Commentary, Equities, MacroThis article is authored by MOI Global instructor Jason Benowitz, Senior Portfolio Manager of The Roosevelt Investment Group, based in New York.
As 2018 draws to a close, the investment team at Roosevelt is engaged in the annual exercise of debating which critical factors could determine U.S. equity market performance in 2019. In recent years, we have generally approached each upcoming turn of the calendar with optimism, underpinned by our expectations for U.S. economic growth, corporate earnings growth, and an accommodative central bank. Last year we anticipated an additional boost from fiscal stimulus. This time around, our level of optimism is reduced but not extinguished.
As we see it, the key difference relative to the prior few years is that financial conditions have tightened. As compared to a year ago, U.S. Treasury yields are higher. Corporate credit spreads are wider. The U.S. dollar is stronger. And commodity prices are lower across crude oil, industrial metals and agriculture. On balance, these conditions make it more challenging for U.S. businesses to invest, which we expect to weigh on the U.S. economy and corporate earnings growth.
Moreover, we anticipate the Federal Reserve will transition U.S. monetary policy from accommodative to neutral, both by raising its benchmark interest rate and reducing the size of its balance sheet. Fiscal policy may provide a modest offset as the deficit widens, but far less than the 2018 tax reform. And uncertainty related to funding the government or raising the debt ceiling could weigh on capital markets next year, following midterm elections that have returned the nation to divided government.
Unfortunately, we do not expect these headwinds in the U.S. to be offset by improving conditions abroad. The European Central Bank has communicated its plans to reduce accommodation, by first eliminating its asset purchase program and then raising its benchmark interest rate for the first time since 2011. There will also be several important European political developments, including whether the U.K. can achieve an orderly exit from the European Union, and if Italy and the E.U. can reach a budget agreement.
The U.S.-China trade dispute is also likely to have global reverberations, especially as China balances its shift toward a consumer-driven economy with its need for stimulus and the burden of substantial system-wide debts. Furthermore, the strengthening U.S. dollar raises the risk of capital flight from emerging markets, particularly those with large current account deficits and dollar-denominated debts. The record $57 billion IMF bailout of Argentina this summer was one such event, and additional economies may be vulnerable. Overall we have witnessed a shift from synchronous global growth in 2017, to more divergent paths in 2018, to what may potentially be a synchronous global slowdown in 2019.
While there are many risks to be concerned about, we still anticipate market appreciation in 2019. The U.S. economy may slow from its 2018 pace, but we still expect it to grow above potential. The consumer is the engine of the U.S. economy and it continues to run well. Consumer confidence is at cycle highs. Unemployment is at peacetime lows. Job creation is healthy. And wage growth is in excess of inflation. We expect a strong holiday shopping season, though not without significant promotional activity. In the coming months, gasoline prices are expected to follow crude oil prices lower, and tax refunds could surprise to the upside due to tax reform, providing further support to the consumer. Housing is a notable exception, as higher mortgage rates have weighed on affordability and activity has slowed. However this malaise has not yet spread to autos, where sales have plateaued at a historically high level for several years now, with declines limited to the passenger car segment.
Similar to the U.S., the slowdown in Europe is also beginning from a position of strength, such that growth may persist at or above potential next year. Moreover, over the course of this cycle, European politicians have time and again demonstrated their ability to come together at difficult times and at least kick the can down the road, so to speak. We expect the current U.K. and Italian challenges will prove no different. In China, the leadership has been managing a gradually slowing economy for many years now. Though Beijing did stumble in early 2016, it has yet to collapse, and its $3 trillion in foreign reserves suggests it has the wherewithal to stimulate growth or shore up its banking system as needed.
In our view, the U.S.-China trade dispute is a wildcard. The U.S. has reached revised trade agreements with Canada and Mexico as well as South Korea, and its negotiations with the E.U. have progressed sufficiently to abate any further protectionist actions. So, tough talk from the U.S. administration may simply be an ‘Art of the Deal’ style tactic that does not preclude an eventual settlement. However, China may prove different, because the dispute encompasses trade practices whose resolution appears more intractable, and it may also be part of a larger geopolitical struggle. The recent G-20 agreement to delay further tariffs is a positive sign, but a permanent deal still appears far off. We expect developments from this ongoing dispute to continue to generate capital market volatility, and are reluctant to make a call on how it may ultimately turn out.
Overall we expect slowing but adequate growth across the major economies to drive U.S. corporate earnings growth in the mid-single digits. While consensus forecasts from Wall Street strategists may be slightly higher than this, it is the normal historical pattern for these to be revised down over time. The recent market correction has left U.S. stocks broadly valued in line with historical precedent, and therefore in our view not unduly vulnerable to further compression. Thus we arrive at our expectation for modest equity market appreciation in 2019.
At the same time that our return expectations have moderated, our volatility forecasts have increased. In the latter stages of a bull market, as the Federal Reserve raises interest rates and the yield curve flattens, investor sensitivity to the risk of recession grows markedly. We are on the lookout for signs of heightened recession risk, such as reduced payroll additions, rising unemployment, slowing freight flows, weakening consumer credit, tightening bank lending standards, and widening credit spreads. As U.S. gross domestic product grew 3.5% in the third quarter, and these data sets broadly do not suggest much more than a modest slowing, we do not expect a recession or bear market in 2019.
In 2018, there have been two market corrections to date, which is the average of what investors have experienced in a typical year over the past few market cycles—though it may have felt more severe this time following a near-record year of calm in 2017. Because of the late cycle environment and its attendant recession risks, we expect there could be similar bouts of volatility in 2019 to those experienced in 2018. We believe the combination of average volatility with more modest returns suggests that the risk to reward ratio of investing in U.S. stocks may moderate somewhat in 2019.
Our portfolio positioning reflects this later-cycle view. We hold a little more excess cash than is typical, and we have continued to shift our holdings toward more recession-resistant stocks. These are stocks that we expect to outperform in corrections that are sparked by recessionary fears, or in the bear market that we believe will ultimately arrive in advance of the next recession, whenever it occurs. That said, we hope and expect our portfolio to at least keep pace with the modest market appreciation that we forecast for next year, while our slightly more defensive positioning should provide ballast for our clients in the event of future periods of market volatility.
This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Dave Sather, President of Sather Financial Group, based in Victoria, Texas.
There are 5,280 feet in one mile and 8 ounces in one cup. Those are facts.
However, if you pose the question of whether Donald Trump is a good president, you will be met with a non-stop slew of opinions. Whether politics or investing, virtually everyone has an opinion. However, having an opinion doesn’t make you right.
Furthermore, with the proliferation of social media and 24/7 news, everyone now has a voice. Unfortunately, with everyone talking at once, a meaningful message is often lost.
Investing has factful aspects. However, successful investing requires both the analysis of facts and the correct interpretation of opinion and judgment.
As a Texan, it is my God given right and obligation to have an opinion as to what will happen in the energy sector at all times. That translates into a multitude of conversations about the investment merits of numerous oil and gas opportunities.
Making matters worse, many of our clients work in the energy sector and enjoy sharing opinions about the industry.
Knowing this, the energy markets have offered much to contemplate recently. From December 2017 to October 2018 a barrel of West Texas Intermediate crude jumped 43% in price. High times will last forever! And then, from early October 2018 into late November 2018, a barrel of crude fell by 34% giving back all the gains…and more. The sky is falling!
Hmmm… what is next?
Immediately, this provides a multitude of questions about the investment merits of energy. With oil down, surely there is easy money to be made investing in black gold. As investors ponder this, they can be squeamish about trading the underlying commodity. To diversify their bets, they hire the best of breed managers and funnel investment funds into a company like Exxon. If there is a deal to be had, surely an energy goliath like Exxon will exploit it.
It is easy to see the strength of Exxon. The entire company is worth about $330 billion in the open market. However, they own proven reserves greater than 21 billion barrels of oil. At the current market price of $50 per barrel, Exxon’s proven reserves, alone, should be worth $1 trillion. The current market cap implies a value on proven reserves of only $16 per barrel, plus you get all of Exxon’s other resources. Obviously, there is a guaranteed bargain to be had.
Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. Yes, Exxon and the major energy producers have lots of resources and talented employees.
But somewhere between “proven reserves” and “net profits” something significant is lost. Although I have a few ideas as to where the value is lost… I don’t have to know. Rather, I must have the discipline to recognize the inefficiency and imprecision of these energy stalwarts, and most of the oil patch, to consistently generate increasing net profits.
Analyzing the data and facts helps.
Exxon’s net profit is half what it was ten years ago. It should be no surprise that it trades for less today than it did in 2007. Its return on invested capital is often single digits. Those are facts.
The opinion and judgment become much more critical.
Do the professionals in the energy sector have good technical knowledge. Certainly.
What is world demand for oil next year? I can make some guesstimates, but I have low conviction.
What will be the price of oil in one year? What about five or ten years from now? I don’t know.
Will the Eagleford resource play have another resurgence? Not sure.
What will OPEC do? I have no idea, but I can probably guess they will cheat on their quotas.
What will Russia do? What will the Trump Administration do relative to oil? I can’t accurately second-guess Putin or Trump on anything.
Members, log in below to access the restricted content.
Not a member?
Thank you for your interest. Please note that MOI Global is closed to new members at this time. If you would like to join the waiting list, complete the following form:
NOTA DEL EDITOR: Este texto es un extracto de una carta trimestral de Prime Value.
* * *
Hace unas semanas Forbes y Bloomberg publicaban dos artículos con títulos significativos: Germany’s Failed Climate Goals: A Wake-Up Call for Governments Everywhere y Had They Bet On Nuclear, Not Renewables, Germany & California Would Already Have 100% Clean Power.
Esta llamada parece que la han escuchado el resto de gobiernos o quizá la conocían con anterioridad, especialmente China e India quienes contemplando las energías renovables en su mix energético, han decidido que debido a la urgencia de la reducción de las emisiones unido a la creciente demanda energética, las centrales nucleares son necesarias.
Actualmente existen en el mundo 450 reactores en funcionamiento, con 55 en construcción, liderados por China, India, Emiratos Árabes y Rusia. Junto a estas cifras cabría considerar que existen 152 planeados y 335 propuestos. La Agencia Internacional de Energía (IEA) estima que en 2040 el 15% de la energía provenga de las centrales nucleares.
Continue reading »
This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Reno Giancola, Portfolio Manager of Alignvest Capital Management, based in Toronto, Canada.
There has been a significant underperformance for the Canadian equity market relative to the U.S. equity market since January 2011. For context, at the end of Q3 the TSX was up a scant 4.6%, versus 12.9% for the S&P 500 Index.
So why do we choose to focus most of our effort on Canada? What gets us so excited to come to work every day is the belief that the characteristics of the Canadian equity market make it perfectly suited to active management, and there is tremendous opportunity to add value through research and security selection. Why?
The Canadian business environment is generally less competitive for a variety of reasons. Sometimes it’s because of regulatory protections; in other cases, it’s market conditions (large geography, small population, significant regional differences). Whatever the reason, it’s hard for large foreign businesses to enter the country and succeed in building a national business from scratch (just ask Target!!).
These barriers allow for more durable competitive advantages and persistently higher returns on capital than would be the case in more competitive markets. When it comes to the capital markets, investable assets in this country are highly concentrated among large financial institutions whose size prohibits them from investing in anything other than large-cap companies. Even the huge flow of funds transitioning to passively-managed strategies is largely devoted to large-caps where liquidity is paramount.
The result of these conditions is that we are able to find some outstanding mid-cap companies at quite reasonable valuations. In many cases, these businesses are run by owners who have the vast majority of their wealth tied to the success of the business and take things like capital allocation and financial flexibility seriously.
Many of our most successful investments are companies in this strata that are able to grow either in size (to become “investable” for a larger pool of capital) or strategic relevance (to potential foreign strategic buyers who are looking to “buy” rather than “build” their way into our country), at which point there is a step change in valuation multiples.
The key to finding these remarkable businesses goes beyond simple financial statement analysis and valuation. An investor needs to understand industry dynamics, competitive advantages, track record of capital allocation, governance, management incentives, etc. That requires gaining additional perspective through discussions with management, customers, suppliers, competitors, shareholders, brokers and other industry contacts.
We’ve spent our whole careers looking at mid-cap Canadian equities and we believe our knowledge, experience and network provide us with a significant edge in this regard. It’s not to say we won’t invest outside this sphere, but it’s where we devote most of our time and research effort. By focusing on an inefficient part of the market, and concentrating our capital among our highest conviction ideas, we believe we are in a position to generate attractive long-term returns, well above (and largely independent of) the overall Canadian equity market.
We believe that AutoCanada Inc. (ACQ-T) is a very attractive investment. AutoCanada is the largest publicly traded automotive dealership group in Canada. We first discovered the company in 2009 while at our prior firm, when it (along with the entire auto industry) was facing an existential crisis.
We were impressed by the CEO and founder Pat Priestner but felt like the company could be more effective with its capital structure and growth strategy. We joined forces with a few other large shareholders and were successful in effecting several important changes (dividend policy, capital allocation, board composition).
From 2010-2014, a combination of extraordinary growth (both organic and via acquisition) and multiple expansion took the stock from $4.00 to a high of $92, and it proved to be one of the best investments we’ve ever made. In 2014, after we had exited the position, Pat Priestner sold a significant portion of his equity which didn’t sit well with many investors. That was followed by a collapse in oil prices that weighed heavily on the Alberta economy (at that time, the vast majority of the company’s dealerships were located in Western Canada and a big part of the company’s success was selling highly profitable trucks to labourers during the preceding oil boom).
In 2016, Pat passed the CEO baton to Steve Landry, former head of Chrysler Canada and global head of Dodge. In an effort to diversify away from its Alberta exposure, Mr. Landry continued on an aggressive acquisition strategy, but a combination of higher prices paid for dealerships and poor integration resulted in anemic returns on this capital. Shortly thereafter, a balance sheet crunch forced the company into a 60% dividend cut and the wheels really started to come off.
Members, log in below to access the restricted content.
Not a member?
Thank you for your interest. Please note that MOI Global is closed to new members at this time. If you would like to join the waiting list, complete the following form:
Nice summary on what's important in banking: "High deposit rates are a sign of deposit franchise weakness, not strength." h/t @manualofideas https://t.co/DbchsXLKgl
— Chris Mayer (@chriswmayer) December 14, 2018
NOTA DEL EDITOR: Esta idea de inversión es obtenida de una carta trimestral de Andromeda Value Capital.
* * *
El último día del trimestre abrimos la posición en SurveyMonkey [SVMK] tras su salida a bolsa. Salió a un precio injustificable, pero por suerte ha ido cayendo desde entonces. Empezamos a comprar en el rango más alto y hemos acabado de construir la posición a precios muy buenos. Sin embargo, por la característica del negocio no tenemos intención de que supere el 1% de la cartera.
Continue reading »
I appreciate that @dkhos and Dave McKay considered Principles among the best books of the year (see the complete @business list below). At the same time, I would like to draw your attention to Paul Volcker’s great book “Keeping At It.” https://t.co/EYOo0F4zFr
— Ray Dalio (@RayDalio) December 13, 2018