Wilson Sons and Ocean Wilsons: Undervalued Play on Brazilian Infrastructure

January 11, 2018 in Audio, Best Ideas 2018, Best Ideas 2018 Featured, Best Ideas Conference, Communication Services, Deep Value, Equities, Ideas, Small Cap, South America, Special Situations, Transportation

Adam Sues of Yacktman Asset Management presented his in-depth investment theses on Wilson Sons (Brazil: WSON33) and Ocean Wilsons (London: OCN) at Best Ideas 2018.

Wilson Sons is a Brazilian infrastructure company, with operations in port terminals, towage, OSVs, shipyard, and logistics. 90+% of EBITDA from core terminals/towage business, where WSON33 has key advantages as the #1 tugboat operator with ~50% share of harbor maneuvers and monopoly-like position on container trade in two ports via long-term concessions. Deep economic downturn in Brazil and recently completed capex cycle means WSON33 is under-earning versus potential, yet it trades at less than 10x depressed earnings. Earnings can double on recovery with high incremental margins and little growth capex, backed by ample FCF and 50% payout ratio.

Another way to invest is via Ocean Wilsons, a holding company for the Salomon family who invested in WSON33 back in the 1950s. OCN trades at ~35% discount to its NAV made up of (i) 58.25% stake in WSON33 and (ii) a fund-of-funds investment portfolio managed over the long term. Backing out portfolio, paying less than 5x look-through earnings of WSON33.

About the instructor:

Adam Sues is a Portfolio Manager at Yacktman Asset Management. He joined the firm in 2013, and is portfolio manager for the AMG Yacktman Special Opportunities Fund. From 2010-2013, he was the founder and author of Value Uncovered, an investment website focused on value-oriented stock research and fundamental analysis. Adam holds a B. A. in Business Administration from Mount Union College and an MBA from the University of North Carolina Kenan-Flagler Business School.

Members, log in below to access the full session.

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:

Greenhill: Well-Capitalized, with Recent Vote of Confidence by Management

January 11, 2018 in Audio, Best Ideas 2018, Best Ideas Conference, Equities, Financials, Ideas, North America, Small Cap, Special Situations

Matthew Sweeney of Laughing Water Capital presented his in-depth investment thesis on Greenhill & Co. (NYSE: GHL) at Best Ideas 2018.

Greenhill is a boutique investment bank and an interesting special situation. The company has struggled to keep up with competition in recent years due to employee attrition and a less-than-ideal revenue mix. Believing their shares undervalued, management recently attempted to execute a levered recap, whereby it raised $350 million in debt to repurchase more than 50% of their outstanding shares through a tender offer and subsequent open market purchases. The CEO and chairman both concurrently invested $10 million in the company to gain exposure to the levered upside the recap would create, and the CEO volunteered to take a 90% pay cut in exchange for additional equity. The tender did not go through as envisioned, as there were not enough sellers. This creates a situation with few sellers in the near term, and a large buyer at prices only slightly below the recent market quotation. Greenhill is in a competitive business and faces some challenges. However, the two people who may know the most about the firm’s prospects recently voted with their wallets. Banking is ultimately a people business, and GHL has been aggressively recruiting new managing directors. The strong balance sheet and levered equity upside has strengthened the recruiting pipeline, which should drive revenue in the years to come. Much of the equity upside should be linked to management buying back stock, and the downside appears well-protected in the near to intermediate term. Multiple paths exist to the stock doubling (or more) in the coming years.

About the instructor:

Matthew Sweeney is the Founder and Managing Partner of Laughing Water Capital. The firm employs a concentrated equity strategy while focusing on companies that are dealing with some sort of structural or operational difficulty that is judged to be easily solved by an incentivized management team if given enough time. Matt began his career at Cantor Fitzgerald where he focused on equity idea generation for institutional clients. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree in History from the College of the Holy Cross, and a Masters degree in International Relations focused on the Middle East and Terrorism from Seton Hall University. Matt is a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA), and former Vice Chair of the New York Society of Security Analysts (NYSSA) Value Investing Committee.

Members, log in below to access the full session.

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:

Preview of Franklin Covey: Completing Transition from Sales to Subscription Model

January 10, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Ideas

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Patrick Retzer, founder, president and chief investment officer of Retzer Capital Management, based in Milwaukee. Patrick is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

Franklin Covey is a global company specializing in organizational performance improvement by providing training and consulting services in seven areas: leadership, execution, productivity, trust, sales performance, customer loyalty and education. They have consistently created shareholder value in a tax efficient manner, having bought back $62 million of stock in the past 11 quarters and carry almost no net debt.

FC is a high gross margin, high free cash flow company that is completing the transition from a traditional sales revenue model to a subscription based revenue model. As typical, that transition was rough on the stock, as formerly one-time sales convert into subscriptions that get recognized over the term of the subscription so GAAP revenue declines and GAAP earnings can go negative as a growing business in this transition will have higher expenses with less revenue. Looking at fiscal 2017 financials, that’s exactly where FC appears to be now, as GAAP revenue is similar to where it was in fiscal 2013 and earnings have gone negative. Consequently, the stock is where it was in late 2013.

However, if you drill down on the 4th quarter results recently released and listen to the 1 hour plus conference call while following along with the 47 slides, you can see that they have clearly turned the corner in the transition and also have four inflection points now working in their favor.

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:

The content of this website is not an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security. The content is distributed for informational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice or a recommendation to sell or buy any security or other investment, or undertake any investment strategy. There are no warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or results obtained from any information set forth on this website. BeyondProxy’s officers, directors, employees, and/or contributing authors may have positions in and may, from time to time, make purchases or sales of the securities or other investments discussed or evaluated herein.

Preview of School Specialty: Underfollowed, Underappreciated Micro Cap

January 10, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Ideas

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Patrick Retzer, founder, president and chief investment officer of Retzer Capital Management, based in Milwaukee. Patrick is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

School Specialty filed for Chapter 11 in January 2013, largely due to a debt-financed acquisition program and dramatic cuts in school budgets resulting from the real estate crisis. Apparently, the acquisitions were not fully integrated in the whole and many inefficiencies resulted. The Company emerged from reorganization in June of 2013 and hired a new CEO in April of 2014, who brought in several new team members and embarked on a plan to make to the Company efficient and position it for growth both organically and from modest acquisitions that would leverage SCOO’s sizeable presence in the marketplace.

Over the past few years (see slides 15 and 16 in the attached Q3 investor presentation), SCOO has successfully refinanced their debt (April 2017) to reduce interest expense and provide flexibility to execute acquisitions, enhanced the IT systems and technology platform, launched Process Excellence initiatives (resulting in multi-million-dollar annual reductions in SG&A), implemented a Team-Based Selling Model and launched the 21st Century Safe School value proposition. Revenue, on a seasonally adjusted basis, troughed in 4Q2014, in fiscal 2015 SCOO saw revenue growth in 2 of 7 categories, in 2016 in 5 of 7 categories. Over the past 3 years, current management has reduced SG&A over 8%, or about $19 million while growing TTM revenue from $628 million to $661 million. Their Q3 investor presentation provides excellent insight and detail of their progress thus far. Specifically, I believe SCOO currently presents a compelling investment proposition, for the following reasons:

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:

The content of this website is not an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security. The content is distributed for informational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice or a recommendation to sell or buy any security or other investment, or undertake any investment strategy. There are no warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or results obtained from any information set forth on this website. BeyondProxy’s officers, directors, employees, and/or contributing authors may have positions in and may, from time to time, make purchases or sales of the securities or other investments discussed or evaluated herein.

Preview of McCarthy & Stone: Largest UK Retirement Homebuilder

January 10, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Ideas, Letters

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Mark Walker, a global equity investor at Seven Pillars Capital Management, based in London. Mark is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

The following is an excerpt from a letter of Seven Pillars Income Opportunity Fund.

We believe there are three sources of permanent capital loss: (1) business risk: the risk that intrinsic value declines due to a change in the competitive or regulatory environment, or declining standards of stewardship for example; (2) balance sheet risk: the risk that the capital structure is imprudent given the characteristics of the business and industry, and that equity value may be transferred to debt owners, and (3) valuation risk: the risk that we pay a price that is inconsistent with a wide margin of safety. Buying companies at steep discounts to private business value lowers the odds of permanent capital loss, even if the future unfolds in a less favourable way than expected.

We believe that our ownership of the shares of McCarthy and Stone (MCS) is consistent with our focus on downside protection. MCS is the largest retirement housebuilder in the UK. MCS buys land, secures planning consent, builds, sells and manages housing developments specifically designed for retirees.

Business risk

In our view the risk of intrinsic value erosion is modest due to a number of factors:

Competitive position. In MCS’s 40 years of operation, it has enjoyed a dominant position within a largely uncontested niche. Major homebuilders have tried and failed to enter this market. MCS is the dominant provider of owner-occupied retirement housing in the UK; it built its first development in 1977 and has a 70% market share today. Private competitors include Churchill (MCS’s nearest competitor but with only a fifth of the volumes), Pegasuslife and Beechcroft but these are much smaller, regional operators. A significant portion of retirement housing is publicly owned and takes the form of ‘sheltered housing’, owned by local authorities, the majority of which was built in the 1960s/70s. Apartment design is fairly standardised; MCS’s scale and ability to utilise repeatable processes is a cost advantage. MCS also enjoys planning advantages due to the social value of its products. It is subject to less onerous Section 106 and CIL charges than mainstream developers and other land users, which relate to obligations to contribute to local infrastructure.

Low development risk. MCS acquires sites through conditional purchase contracts, mainly conditional on the granting of planning consent. In many cases contracts will include commercial viability clauses which give MCS the flexibility to cancel purchases for projects which become uneconomic. In market downturns, MCS can exit conditional contracts and sell land to non-residential interests such as supermarkets and other commercial interests. Customer credit risk is modest; retirement homes are typically sold to equity rich cash buyers not usually reliant on cheap debt.

Long-term and aligned management incentives. The prior management team was focused on operating margins but not asset turns/capital efficiency. They were therefore not incentivised to maintain through-cycle capital discipline. An incentive plan was put in place by the current management team, a feature of which is a three year vesting LTIP in part driven by return on capital employed.

Balance sheet risk

MCS finances its operations from operating cashflow; shareholder equity represents 90% of long term capital. Financial gearing has dramatically reduced since the financial crisis from 10x net debt/operating profit to 0.3x today. Working capital is a much larger use of cash than fixed assets; this low level of operating leverage complements the prudent capital structure of the business.

Valuation risk

MCS’s current market cap is £800mn and its enterprise value is £830mn. With reported net assets of £700mn, invested capital in the business is currently £730mn; the quoted value of the enterprise is just 14% higher than this. This for a business currently generating 20% ROCE (return on capital employed) and targeted ROCE of > 25% on new investments. There seems to be a substantial opportunity to reinvest operating cash flows into the development of more homes for a long time. MCS estimates that almost one million households are in the optimal bracket of being 75+, living alone/with a spouse, and having high housing wealth. Yet only 140k units have been built to date in the UK. This c800k shortfall is large in the context of the market leader’s targeted production of 3k pa.

Yet the current valuation implies that MCS can barely out earn its cost of capital, let alone reinvest significant levels of cash into value accretive projects. Our variant perception is that this is a better managed and more appropriately capitalised business since the capital ill-discipline of the financial crisis, and that a significant runway for supernormal capital redeployment should facilitate satisfactory compounding of earnings, assets and dividends for a very long time.

download printable version

Preview: S&U, Underappreciated Non-Prime UK Auto Finance Company

January 10, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Financials, Ideas

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Matthias Teig, co-founder and partner at Rothorn Partners, based in Geneva, Switzerland. Matthias is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

S&U plc is a family controlled British specialty finance company. After the sale of its home loan business in 2015, its main source of revenues is Advantage, a fast-growing non-prime motor finance business. Aspen Bridging is still in a test phase, but this real estate bridge finance business could potentially provide diversification and offer additional growth in the future. With a market cap of ca GBP 280mn and a free float of ca 26%, S&U shares are not very liquid and therefore the company is below the radar of most institutions and the sell side. A recent PE of ca 12 and a dividend yield of ca 4% seem attractive given its successful track record and growth potential. H1 revenues were up 33% and EpS increased 21%. The balance sheet is healthy with gearing at the end of July 17 at 56%. RoE of 16% in H1 can be improved as the business continues to grow and the balance sheet is levered up a bit more.

S&U was founded in 1938 by Clifford Coombs and is controlled by the Coombs family in the third generation with the twins Anthony and Graham Coombs as Chairman and Deputy Chairman. S&U is short for Sports and Utilities and in its early days, the company sold household goods (pots and pans, towels, blankets, …) door to door and collected payments on a weekly basis. The original consumer credit business was transformed into a home loan business in the 70ies, which was sold to Non-Standard Finance plc in 2015. Since 1999, S&U has built a non-prime motor finance business called Advantage. Non-prime is a type of loan, where the customer is not perceived to be credit worthy by a traditional bank. Usually, there were issues in the client’s credit history, but clients at least have a regular income.

On average, a typical Advantage car finance loan amounts to GBP 6100 with 4 years maturity at a relatively high flat interest rate of 17.9% pa. Loans are structured as hire purchase financing, which is paid off in monthly instalments secured against a car. Hire Purchase is different from PCP (Personal Contract Purchase), which is generally used for new cars. With PCP, payments cover only the depreciation of the car and the PCP provider keeps the residual value risk of the car. With hire purchase, the loan covers the full value of the car and ownership is transferred to the client, when the last payment is made. PCP is a bit like leasing and very much in the news recently because of concerns about its increasing use and residual value risks especially for diesel cars. Hire purchase is different, because the financing provider carries only the residual value in the case of default or early termination. Also, used hand cars have already gone through the steep part of the depreciation curve.

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:

This document is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice. While the author has tried to present facts he believes to be accurate, the author makes no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this note. The author and related entities hold a long position in the described security at the time of writing, but he might change his opinion and position without notifying readers. Please do your own research and with all investments, caveat emptor.

Stress-Induced Mental Changes

January 10, 2018 in Human Misjudgment Revisited

“Here, my favorite example is the great Pavlov. He had all these dogs in cages, which had all been conditioned into changed behaviors, and the great Leningrad flood came and it just went right up and the dog’s in a cage. And the dog had as much stress as you can imagine a dog ever having. And the water receded in time to save some of the dogs, and Pavlov noted that they’d had a total reversal of their conditioned personality.” –Charlie Munger

This article is part of a multi-part series on human misjudgment by Phil Ordway, managing principal of Anabatic Investment Partners.

download printable version

Munger also cited the connection to programming/de-programming and cults.

Update

Also known as Stress-Influence Tendency.

  • “Everyone recognizes that sudden stress…will cause a rush of adrenaline…and everyone knows that stress makes Social-Proof Tendency more powerful.”
  • Light stress can slightly improve performance – say, in examinations – whereas heavy stress can cause dysfunctions or depression.

One of the more vivid – and financially tragic – examples I’ve seen of this tendency was in the GFC. Many, many people were acting in their personal and professional portfolios based on responses to these tendencies rather any reasoned thought process. Many people’s lives were ruined or considerably worsened because they listened to someone on TV and sold at the depths. Many others were forced into it by practicalities, of course, but even Steve Bannon cites the example of his father sitting glued to the TV in October 2008 and being convinced to sell his entire retirement savings – a grubstake in AT&T amassed over five decades working for the company. “As he toggled between TV stations, financial analysts warned of economic collapse and politicians in Washington seemed to mirror his own confusion….[On] Oct. 6, financial analyst [sic] Jim Cramer told ‘Today’ show viewers to pull money from the stock market if they needed any cash for the next five years…So he did the unthinkable. He sold. Steve Bannon says the warning[s] spooked his father. ‘I could see his confidence in the system was shattered,’ Steve Bannon recalls. ‘He was older, in his 80s. But all these guys from the Depression, it’s a risk-averse generation because of the horrible things they saw in their youth. He was rattled.’ Marty Bannon, now 95 years old, still regrets the decision and seethes over Washington’s response to the economic crisis. His son Steve says the moment crystallized his own antiestablishment outlook and helped trigger a decadelong political hardening.”[66]

“Rationality is essential when others are making decisions based on short-term greed or fear. That is when the money is made.” – Warren Buffett[67]

[66] https://www.wsj.com/articles/steve-bannon-and-the-making-of-an-economic-nationalist-1489516113
[67] Fortune, October 30, 1989

The Evolution and Revolution of the Electric Grid

January 9, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Letters

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Ian Clark, managing partner of Dichotomy Capital, based in New York. Ian is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

The basic model for the electric grid has gone largely unchanged over the past 100 years. Large generators would send electricity out to consumers who would pay bills with no input to costs. The more consumers, the more money a grid owner/operator would make.

This has begun to change over the past decade as distributed generation resources are upending the model. Grid operators now have to balance an onslaught of new power sources from numerous locations. This increases the complexity of the grid and wreaks havoc on normal electrical grid modeling. How hard will the wind blow today? When will cloud cover increase? How quickly can the grid ramp conventional resources? Will load growth go up or down this year? All these questions need to be answered every second of every day.

This uneasiness has caused many investors to wonder about utilities, independent power producers (IPPs), and now, renewable energy companies. Merchant rates remain depressed, but excess capacity is quickly leaving the grid, and eventually a balance will form. Some areas of the country, like ERCOT in Texas, went from having a large excess capacity reserve margin to being very short supply just a few years out. When incentivized, things can change fast.

Since my presentation on Dynegy in 2017, the IPP space has seen a lot of changes, consolidation, and some improvement in valuation. However, there are still pockets of undervaluation out there, including a name that I will present this year. This company has some very valuable assets that most market participants do not appreciate – a large hydroelectric fleet coupled with very predictable cash flows thanks to long-term power purchase agreements.

I believe that hydroelectric power is the silent winner in the grid of tomorrow. It is green, it is dispatchable, it is rampable, it is near load centers, and it provides ancillary benefits.

First, regardless of what the Federal government does, many State governments have made it clear that renewable assets are the energy resource of the future. While a lot of attention has gone towards solar and wind, these will not be the only assets to fulfill renewable goals. Hydro will complement these resources, and with the right planning, hydro can enhance solar and wind by filling in energy gaps during the day.

Second, storage will be given a premium over time. While most people will speak of chemical batteries as storage, the largest batteries are in our lakes and rivers. Hydroelectric power can both ramp and store energy more efficiently than batteries and at a lower cost. State and Federal regulators are beginning to incorporate hydroelectric assets into grid reliability plans.

Third, hydroelectric facilities provide many ancillary benefits to the economy. Unlike solar or wind, hydroelectric assets will often increase property values and they also require ongoing labor/maintenance to keep the facility running.

Investors in hydroelectric get these benefits plus an asset base that can produce cash flow for decades and decades. The trade-offs to solar and wind will likely enhance the value of hydroelectric facilities. Investors have the opportunity to catch this tailwind at a deep discount thanks to the long cycles of the power sector coupled with years of excessive leverage. As always, if an IPPs can service their debt, maintain their fleet, and eventually start to grow, investors can find significant upside by investing in the right assets.

download printable version

Widen the Lens But Narrow the Focus, and Deepen the Learning

January 9, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Letters

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Brian Pitkin, founder and managing member of URI Capital Management, based in Indianapolis, Indiana. Brian is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

In Michael Lewis’ book “The Undoing Project,” he writes, based on the extensive research done by the two psychologists and behavioral economists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, that we take too little information and draw too big of conclusions. People often ask or wonder why it takes me years to get comfortable before investing in a particular company. The pithy answer is that, in the end, the tortoise beats the hare. This also has the benefit of describing in fable terms our investing philosophy; slow and steady wins the race. But a more complete answer to the why of our seemingly extreme patience lies in our desire for deep learning that can lead to deep understanding. It takes a long time to find this deeper understanding that allows for the conviction we crave.

I share the five bullets below in nearly everything I write or present about the partnership. These are not sound bites. They are guiding principles in how we approach investing well.

  • Perspective that moves past the noise of the day
  • Patience to think and invest with a long term horizon
  • Temperament to withstand emotions and volatility
  • Passion for deep intensive research
  • Conviction to our best ideas

We seek to move from a collection of facts, knowledge you might say, to understanding and, someday, to wisdom. And it takes Perspective (widening the lens of your perspective to move past the noise of the day), Patience (allowing accumulated thinking over long periods of time), Temperament (moving beyond the emotional ups and downs of a 24/7 news and information cycle), and Passion (having the passion to narrow the focus of our studies so we can go topically deep and wide) to deepen our learning and move down the spectrum of knowing to understanding. And with this deeper understanding we can carry Conviction to our best ideas.

Our long term perspective is a critical differentiator in our thinking and our investing. And I am grateful for you, my partners, in bringing a mindset that allows for such differentiating advantages. Most trading volume has a horizon of minutes, seconds and even milliseconds. Even the most long term minded investors tend to think in years. We think and invest for decades, and longer. Thank you for partnering with the tortoise.

As an aside, my son got a tortoise for his birthday last summer. Beyond my concerns about a lifespan that should far exceed Tyler’s time in our home (anyone want a tortoise in about a dozen years???), I was amazed at the surprising speed at which “Shelton” moves when free to do so………

The dangers of scratching the surface are often made apparent in headlines. Headlines are meant to grab our attention; they are not meant to inform. Let me provide just one example from the preeminent Wall Street Journal.

Headline: “Household Debt Hits a New High” –WSJ, Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Article Excerpt: The Federal Reserve Bank of New York said Tuesday that household debt totaled $12.955 trillion last quarter, up 0.9% from the spring for a 13th straight quarterly increase. That was the most on record, though the figure wasn’t adjusted for inflation of population growth. As a share of U.S. economic output, household debt was about 66% last quarter versus a high around 87% in 2009.

The headline was entirely accurate, if incomplete. So, is household debt higher or lower than in 2009? Is the headline or the article correct? The answer, of course, is, “yes”. They both contain accurate statements, or facts. Facts alone are not understanding.

The Wall Street Journal is one of the most, appropriately, well respected newspapers in the world. This is not to degrade the WSJ. Consider the headline click baits elsewhere and how they have impacted our understanding. But, as you will see, even the articles can provide incomplete understanding:

There have been repeated instances of the following portrayal, often in my beloved Wall Street Journal: in writing about the newer, online-focused banks, the rate paid on online deposits often comes up as a point of discussion. In one article about Goldman Sachs’ new online bank offering, it was stated that Goldman Sachs can pay more on these deposits because they lack the cost of a traditional bank infrastructure. While that sounds well and good, it is patently absurd. Goldman Sachs does not purposely pay people more, any more than a grocer chooses to pay higher prices for the food they sell because they might make too much money. They pay more for deposits because they must in order to grow and retain them. A higher rate paid on deposits is a sign of relative weakness, not strength. And, ever so importantly, lower rates paid on deposit are a sign of relative franchise strength.

GK Chesterton in “St. Thomas Aquinas” said the following:

“In so far as there was ever a bad break in philosophical history, it was not before St. Thomas, or at the beginning of medieval history; it was after St. Thomas and at the beginning of modern history. The great intellectual tradition that comes down to us from Pythagoras and Plato was never interrupted or lost through such trifles as the sack of Rome, the triumph of Attila or all the barbarian invasions of the Dark Ages. It was only lost after the introduction of printing, the discovery of America, the founding of the Royal Society and all the enlightenment of the Renaissance and the modern world. It was there, if anywhere, that there was lost or impatiently snapped the long thin delicate thread that had descended from distant antiquity, the thread of that unusual human hobby, the habit of thinking.”

Let us not fall into the same loss of habit. Reading can and will bring you facts and knowledge. And fewer things are more powerful than voracious reading. But it is incumbent upon us to turn those facts into understanding and, someday, to turn that understanding into wisdom. Read and learn deeply. Seek understanding and wisdom.

download printable version

The Story Behind India’s Valuation Premium

January 8, 2018 in Best Ideas Conference, Letters

This article is authored by MOI Global instructor Gaurav Aggarwal, co-founder and co-portfolio manager of Metis Opportunity Fund, based in Mauritius. Gaurav is an instructor at Best Ideas 2018, the fully online conference featuring more than one hundred expert instructors from the MOI Global membership community.

We recall very few investor meetings this year where the issue of India’s ‘expensive’ valuations didn’t come up. In a world where the vast majority of investors take a top-down approach while allocating capital. India often gets bundled within a highly heterogeneous basket of emerging markets, and its valuations, therefore, get benchmarked against an assorted universe of such markets.

Given that India’s headline PE multiple reflects a premium versus other emerging markets, it often appears as a richly valued investment destination in comparison to other markets. Comparing emerging markets via headline PE is similar to comparing two investment firms based on only assets under management.

Unfortunately, such an overly simplified observation ignores critical underlying factors such as the difference in industry representation within indices, and differentials in profitability, growth, capital intensity, and cash cycles across geographies.

Similarly, to compare such a headline multiple to how it trended historically is a forced simplification, if one is not taking profitability and cash cycle shifts into account. Just take Nifty 50 as an example. While Nifty’s revenue growth (ex-financials) has slowed considerably over the past five years, as compared to the prior 5-year period (9% versus 20%), it remains the fastest growing market among major emerging market peers. Its cash cycle has been slashed in half over the past five years (without compromising underlying profitability) as certain infrastructure and real estate constituents got replaced and working capital efficiency has broadly improved.

It is critical to provide an appropriate context when evaluating Nifty’s headline PE premium versus emerging market peers. The two vital areas one should stress upon are:

1. Industry composition differences. BRICS make up nearly half of MSCI Emerging Markets Index and little over 40% of the index if one excludes India. The low-teens PE multiple of MSCI Emerging Markets is therefore also suppressed by some of these markets where low PE industries make up most of their respective indices. More than half of China’s index constituents are financials while energy constituents have a similar weighting in Russia. A more relevant comparison, if one could call it that, would be an inter-industry comparison across these markets. While most Indian sectors still trade at a premium over EM peers, the overall valuation premium is particularly skewed by telecom, financials, industrials, and consumer discretionary sectors, which collectively comprise just under half of Nifty. In contrast, energy, which makes little under a fifth of Nifty, trades at a discount to emerging market peers. Sectors such as healthcare and materials meanwhile trade at 25-35% premium.

Exhibit 1 – Sector-wise 2017 P/E Comparison of Nifty vs. EM Peers

Note: All comparisons are made between constituents of the most liquid large cap index in respective markets. For China, FTSE China 50 index components were used. Other markets used for comparison here are BRICS, Indonesia, Malaysia, Poland, Korea, and Mexico.

2. More reliable earnings estimates: Our work across earnings announcements within emerging markets confirms that Nifty constituents report among the least differentials between actual earnings and estimates, lending more confidence to forward valuation multiples. This is a direct function of the number of estimates per company, and no emerging market benchmark components are as well covered as Nifty’s.

So, what should an ideal Nifty PE be?

When we create a sizeable intrinsic value framework at an index level, we are better positioned to provide an appropriate context to headline multiples. Based on such work, in our view, at current levels of growth and profitability, Nifty (ex-financials) 50’s ideal C2017 PE should lie in the 22-24x range, as compared to the current ~25x C2017 earnings. As we had mentioned earlier, one shouldn’t benchmark current headline multiple to how the index has traded previously since underlying fundamentals and constituents have shifted materially. However, if we were to benchmark India’s intrinsic value based multiple against arguably its most comparable BRICS peer, South Africa (on the basis of similarities within underlying growth, working capital intensity, underlying debt levels, profitability, and taxes) we conclude that Nifty50 (ex-financials) can support 45%+ premium over JSE FTSE Top-40 (ex-financials) versus the 25%+ it currently trades at.

In summary, we would discourage investors from reading too much into headline PE multiples without further evaluating differentials beyond headline earnings growth. While we wouldn’t categorize Indian large caps as cheap, we certainly aren’t in the camp that views Nifty 50 as particularly expensive in comparison to the emerging markets universe.

download printable version
MOI Global