Our Mistake in Lending Club

October 19, 2017 in Case Studies, Financials, Letters

This article is authored by Michael Shearn of Compound Money Fund, LP.

We always believe it is useful to expose a bad investment process even if we have a good outcome. We ended up passing on online peer to peer lender Lending Club because we believed the business model was too difficult to predict but liked the CEO who passed most of the filters we use to determine who to partner with. If you read the financial press you know the CEO of Lending Club was kicked out of the company because he was aware that some employees falsified records about a product to be sold to a customer and he refused to fire them. The initial issue was relatively a small one, but CEO Renaud Laplanche was also not forthright with his board, which led to distrust. In other words, he demonstrated bad character. Even though we avoided investing in Lending Club (a great outcome) CEO Laplanche passed most of our leadership filters (exposing a bad process). Having identified a flaw in our process, we think it is important to conduct a post-mortem to better understand how we might filter such individuals out in the future.

To judge character, we usually need to wait until we have an example of a CEO acting in the best interests of all stakeholders, when it is not easy to do so. In other words, we would like them to do the right thing even if they have an incentive to act otherwise. We call this a moment of integrity, because it tells us we can trust the CEO.

Often, we are simply looking for differences between behavior and action. On this score, Laplanche appeared to have guided the company fairly well over many years. However, although he had navigated tough circumstances earlier at Lending Club, he was not under the same pressure as he was this year when Lending Club needed securitizations to encourage investors to make additional loans. Our take is that as the business environment changed and the stock price dropped, Laplanche felt that he needed to make those deals happen, and rather than make a principled decision, he made a short-term expedient decision.

Our key question is what could we have seen in his prior behavior to help us predict this action? One of the main reasons we had so much confidence in Laplanche is that he believed in transparency and would provide a lot of information about the loans they were making. We assumed someone that was so transparent in one part of the business would also be transparent in others. The problem is we allowed this to bias our view and should have instead refrained from making a judgment on Laplanche’s character because we had not yet seen him face a true moment of integrity. As this story has developed, it seems Laplanche valued growth above everything else and did anything he could to achieve it.

The lesson is we will add a filter that our leaders must have survived much higher pain thresholds in the future and they must have made the right choices. For a capital allocator, this would include walking away from a deal after a lot of time and investment as we have seen the CEO of Brookfield Asset Management, Bruce Flatt, do multiple times. For someone like Laplanche, it would mean tabling a securitization, firing the unethical employees, and being upfront with his board, even though the company sorely needed to attract additional investors to buy its loans in order to sustain growth.

download printable version

This document is for informational purposes only. It is intended only for the person to whom it has been delivered. This document is confidential and may not be distributed without the express consent of Time Value of Money, LP. The information contained herein is subject to change; however, we are under no obligation to amend or supplement this document. This document is not intended to constitute legal, tax, or accounting advice or investment recommendations. This document shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of a security in any jurisdiction where such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to issuance of an offering memorandum. An investment in Compound Money Fund, LP involves a substantial amount of risk. Investments should only be made by investors who fully understand these risks and can withstand a loss of their entire investment.

S&P Global: A Collection of Great Businesses

October 19, 2017 in Ideas, Letters

This article is authored by Jake Rosser of Coho Capital Management.

S&P is best known for its credit ratings business. Credit ratings denote a company’s financial strength through assessing its ability to meet its debt commitments. Together with Moody’s, S&P is a government sanctioned duopoly with each company controlling 40% of the market for credit ratings. The credit ratings business is attractive with strong pricing power, recurring revenues, and high margins. Pricing power comes not just from a lack of competition, but from the favorable economics created by credit affirmation. Companies with credit ratings can raise capital more cheaply than those without. Further, regulations governing deposit and capital requirements for financial institutions often feature restrictions on the credit worthiness of investment holdings. Similarly, many investment funds are structured to only invest in certain categories of debt. Thus, not only is it more economical to obtain a credit rating, it is pragmatic as well.

There are a number of earnings drivers for the credit ratings business over the next five years, providing a favorable environment for growth. Debt maturity schedules indicate that over $2 trillion a year in debt will need to be refinanced on an annual basis over the next five years. Second, increased capital requirements on behalf of European banks has attenuated bank loan issuance. As a result, European corporate issuers of debt have been increasingly utilizing public debt markets, increasing demand for debt ratings. With low interest rates and increased regulation, we expect the disintermediation of European banks to continue. Third, emerging markets continue to represent a compelling opportunity for increased debt issuance on the part of domestic corporations as well as government borrowing. Last, public finance and infrastructure spending represent an attractive opportunity for growth. According to McKinsey, adequate global infrastructure would require $57 trillion in spending to keep up with GDP growth through 2030.

Outside of the ratings business, S&P possesses a collection of excellent businesses including a dominant index franchise (S&P 500, Dow Jones), market data subscription services (Capital IQ), market intelligence (Platts), and commodity pricing (SNL Financial). Like its ratings business, S&P’s non-ratings businesses are asset-light, highly scalable, feature recurring revenues and exhibit strong pricing power.

Like many of the businesses we are attracted to, S&P Global has significant future earnings growth in subsidiaries that are underappreciated by the market. Perhaps most promising is the company’s 68% share of India’s leading credit rating agency, CRISIL. Credit issuance in India is only in early innings leaving a multi-decade runway for growth. One of the ways we think of these types of businesses is as publicly traded “Unicorns,” which have not yet been discovered and are only in series A funding rounds.

download printable version
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.

An Eye-Opening Q&A with MOI Global Instructor Chamath Palihapitiya

October 19, 2017 in Diary

We were delighted to have Chamath Palihapitiya of Social Capital as an instructor at Latticework 2017. We were truly privileged to learn from his perspective on intelligent investing in a changing world.

For some fascinating background on Chamath and his thinking, consider these eye-opening questions and answers, excerpted from Quora (the answers are straight from Chamath):

Q: What are some decisions taken by the “Growth team” at Facebook that helped Facebook reach 500 million users? [source]

A: I think Andy [the questioner] got a lot of things right in this post. As I tell most people who ask, the key to understanding growth is two things:

1) a fundamental understanding of your product – and specifically what the key reasons people use it are. its amazing to me how confused many people are about this and unable to really discern motivations and root causes from byproducts and outcomes. knowing true product value allows you to design the experiments necessary so that you can really isolate cause and effect. as an example, at facebook, one thing we were able to determine early on was a key link between the number of friends you had in a given time and likelihood to churn. knowing this allowed us to do a lot to get new users to their “a-ha” moment quickly. obviously, however, this required us to know what the “a-ha” moment was with a fair amount of certainty in the first place.

2) a simple framework for doing your work. too many people “complexify” things in an attempt to seem smart. great things are simple. we had a very simple framework for growth that andy articulated above – acquisition, activation, engagement, virality. having this framework allowed us to prioritize our work, design experiments, build products, etc. it also allowed everyone to understand it and see how decisions were made in a logical, transparent way.

As an aside: there were some other great people responsible for Growth from the outset including Naomi Gleit and James Wang. We (me, Javi, Blake, Naomi, Alex, James) were the first ‘GrowthCircle’ or the leadership team responsible for growth. The team continues to thrive at facebook and has grown to include some other great people… [answered by Chamath on May 13, 2012]

Q: If Chamath Palihapitiya had to put all of his money in one investment today with a 10 year holding period, what would it be? [source]

A: I would buy AMZN. I think Amazon is the most interesting company right now and represents the surest path to a $5T (15-20x from current levels) market cap within 50 years. the reason i think this has nothing to do with ecommerce although ecommerce is their way of dog fooding the real reason: AWS.

AWS is a tax on the compute economy. so whether you care about mobile apps, consumer apps, IoT, SaaS etc etc, more companies than not will be using AWS vs building their own infrastructure. ecommerce was AMZN’s way to dogfood aws, and continue to do so so that it was mission grade. if you believe that over time the software industry is a multi, deca trillion industry, then ask yourself how valuable a company would be who taxes the majority of that industry.

1%, 2%, 5% – it doesn’t matter because the numbers are so huge – the revenues, profits, profit margins etc. i don’t see any cleaner monopoly available to buy in the public markets right now.”
[answered by Chamath on January 13, 2016]

Q: What is Chamath Palihapitiya’s personal net worth? [source]

A: Whatever it is now, it will be zero when I am no longer alive. I think I am fortunate enough to say this but I am merely a custodian of money. That money, while it is with me, should be used as a tool for change and progress. After that, it should be redistributed/reallocated to others who will do the same…” [answered by Chamath on December 15, 2013]

You may also enjoy the following video:

Contrast-Caused Distortions of Sensation, Perception and Cognition

October 18, 2017 in Human Misjudgment Revisited

“The sensation apparatus of man is over-influenced by contrast – it has no absolute scale but it has a contrast scale. And it’s a scale with quantum effects too – it takes a certain percentage chance before it’s noticed. Here the great truth is that cognition mimics sensation. People are manipulating you all day with contrast. If it comes to you in small pieces you’re likely to miss it.” –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
  • Cialdini’s bucket of water experiment
  • A magician removing your watch
  • Real estate brokers who dupe clients by first showing two awful, overpriced homes and then a moderately overpriced home. “It works pretty well, and that’s why the real estate salesmen do it. And it’s always going to work.”
  • Women who enter into bad marriages because they grew up in even worse homes. Ditto for second marriages.
  • The proverbial frog in a pot of water that is slowly heated to boiling.

Update

“Few psychological tendencies do more damage to correct thinking. Small-scale damages involve instances such as man’s buying an overpriced $1,000 leather dashboard merely because the price is so low compared to his concurrent purchase of a $65,000 car…One of Ben Franklin’s best-remembered and most useful aphorisms is ‘A small leak will sink a great ship.’ The utility of the aphorism is large precisely because the brain so often misses the functional equivalent of small leak in a great ship.”

Other examples of contrast-caused misperceptions abound.

  • The marketer’s or pollster’s habit mandate to “simplify, then exaggerate.
  • Corporate profits/markets, valuation, absolute returns in corporate markets
  • Relative valuation – fixed income as priced over Treasurys, or a Triple-A tranche against a triple-BBB tranche. Who cares if the relative valuation is correct if the absolute valuation is garbage? Is an extra 40 bps of spread worthwhile when comparing a Treasury and a structured subprime RMBS?
  • Non-GAAP accounting – we’ve all seen the explosion of “non-GAAP” or “adjusted” figures in company financial reports. That’s part of why it’s so important to start with standardized reporting first – what the company has to say – before they can try any magician tricks with your watch by using “look over here instead” non-GAAP numbers. And it doesn’t stop with reporting – it’s come to dominate incentives too. The term “non-GAAP” appeared in 58% of proxy filings for S&P 500 companies reporting so far in 2016, up from 27% of those same S&P 500 constituents five years ago.[37]
  • Perceptions of human progress and poverty – Extreme poverty (less than $2 per day in real terms) has been cut in half between 1990 and 2015, but in a survey just 1% of respondents correctly guessed that. More than 70% of respondents said extreme poverty had increased by 25% or more during that time.[38]
  • Anchoring to recent market prices – “I missed it”
    • Consider Buffett’s preferred valuation method (i.e., not even looking at the market price until he has his own opinion of valuation)
  • Investment measurement periods – quarterly, monthly, weekly, daily investment results…
  • Real estate purchases
  • Companies that go bankrupt slowly…then suddenly
  • Climate change
  • Stock splits – obviously pure noise, but no matter how simple the concept of one pie being cut into a different number of pieces, the contrast phenomenon and anchoring to the previously higher price briefly drove a frenzy of stock splits among tech companies in the dot com boom. Now – perhaps thanks to Berkshire – even tech companies seem to have finally swung the other way, with four-figure stock prices even emerging as a status symbol now. By my count on FactSet, there are at least a few dozen companies whose share price exceeds $500. Amazon, Markel, Alphabet/Google, Priceline, Seaboard, NVR, Constellation Software, Cable One and Graham holdings, White Mountains, and of course, Berkshire itself all have refused to split their stocks despite a price over $500 per share. And behaviors, as always, spread. Alphabet/Google’s founders explicitly consulted Buffett and modeled aspects of their IPO, strategy, organization, and culture after Berkshire, despite relatively few similarities on the surface. Others like MKL, CABO, GHC, and WTM have even more direct intellectual ties to Buffett.
    • One way to avoid some contrast-related problems of cognition in investing is to focus on market capitalization and enterprise value, not the stock price. One of my favorite tests to see whether a person is really thinking like an owner of the price or a predictor of the stock price is when I hear someone start pitching an idea – usually with multiple references to current, past and future stock prices along the way – I’ll let him go for a while and then casually ask what the market cap is. I would say at least half the time the stock pitcher has no idea, and in about half of those cases they stumble for a bit before offering a number that isn’t even in the right ballpark. That’s the worst case – it’s one thing not to know, but it’s a whole other thing to not know and try to fake it.

“Risk means more things can happen than will happen.” – Elroy Dimson[39]

[37] Audit Analytics
[38] https://www.gatesnotes.com/2017-Annual-Letter
[39] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2007-04-08/philospher-of-risk

Searching for Compounding Machines Among Financials in India

October 15, 2017 in Asia, Featured, Financials

This article is authored by Soumil Zaveri, MOI Global instructor and capital allocator at DMZ Partners.

Indian banks and financials have always been heavyweights in our family office holdings. Our keen interest toward them is driven by the confluence of a few very favorable factors, which are highlighted in this note, juxtaposed with a little bit of background and storytelling.

Diligent financial management teams and owner-operators have built exceptional long-term track records driven by resilient underwriting standards, cost leadership and customer centricity in an environment where private lenders (as opposed to government promoted and controlled entities) were allowed to start formal banking operations only as recently as 1994 (excluding a few very small, regional “old private sector” banks and non-banking financials companies (NBFCs) which operated with several limitations).

This slack in the public sector banking system combined with a growing middle-class has allowed for performance-oriented private lenders (banks and NBFCs) to reap rich rewards…

In this regard the public sector lenders had more than a four decade-long head-start in post-independent India. Although their combined market shares have consistently eroded they remain the largest financiers in terms of lending (~71%) and deposits (~74%). The majority of them have often been stymied by weak branch-level governance, poor operating performance, sub-optimal underwriting capabilities, insufficient technological infrastructure, poor alignment of interest and a reputation for inadequate customer service. These issues have manifest themselves in their “share of market capitalization” among listed banks and NBFCs, which has consistently declined and now hovers below 30%.

Public sector banks have been able to retain such market shares because their largest equity holder is less demanding of purely financial outcomes. Rather, these banks are viewed as a platform to improve the breadth and depth of banking penetration in the country — especially in less affluent villages where full service branches may not make economic sense purely from a financial perspective. While this approach has been successful in creating an extensive branch network across the country it has come with higher operating expenses and weaker underwriting standards. This has led to the unsurprising outcome that despite their >70% market-share their share of stressed assets stands at 90%. Their weaker balance sheets have hampered their ability to extend credit to grow their loan books and raise meaningful capital.

Despite these institutions’ social responsibility-based approach, India continues to be credit hungry. Household debt, mortgages and consumer financing as a percent of GDP are at fractional levels of not just developed economies but even several developing ones. All this in an environment which is known for a low base level of consumption, high housing shortfall combined with increasing disposable incomes and affordability.

This slack in the public sector banking system combined with a growing middle-class has allowed for performance-oriented private lenders (banks and NBFCs) to reap rich rewards — for example, HDFC Bank (incorporated in 1994 and now the largest private lender in India) has grown earnings at ~37% CAGR from INR 0.2 billion in 1996 to INR 122.96 billion in twenty years. Kotak Mahindra Bank (converted to a bank in 2003 and now the 4th-largest private lender) has grown earnings at ~35% CAGR. Both companies have rewarded investors commensurately over any reasonable timeframe along the way.

Despite several years of continued compounding, even today HDFC Bank’s market share is ~5% (Kotak Mahindra Bank is less than 2%). Given the market share gains that are to be had from the large, less efficient, capital-constrained public sector and the overall growth in the addressable market for consumer and small business lending, we believe businesses like these continue to possess extraordinarily long runways for growth from here on as well.

Nonetheless, one could argue that credit growth for the largest of private banks and NBFCs is likely to remain somewhat tethered to nominal GDP growth plus several percentage points for market share gains. However, smaller, well-capitalized NBFCs have proven to be particularly agile. We expect the low bases they are growing from to be even more conducive to sustained long-term performance.

For example, Bajaj Finance (a diversified consumer NBFC which pioneered concepts like no interest EMIs for purchasing electronics) has grown loans almost six-fold in five years; profits have grown at a 39% CAGR, driven by cross-selling within their franchise — 57% of disbursements are repeat clients with more than three products per customer. This is commendable given that acquiring customers is an expensive ordeal. Despite significant disruption (demonetization of 86% of currency), recent results have been solid by almost every parameter. With market share of merely 0.6% we are optimistic about their prospects.

It is hard to disagree that the degree of success of any business is dependent on several external factors. However, we believe perhaps ironically that agile financials have a strong hold on their own financial destinies (barring extreme scenarios which are a small fraction of possible alternative outcomes). Their performance during the recent demonetization has been another testament to their resilience. While we are evidently optimistic over the long haul, studying the best of these businesses has shown us that they have performed robustly despite strong headwinds even in the medium term. We believe that in adversity their recovery periods to normalize and resume growth have gotten progressively shorter as processes have grown more iterative and experiences dealing with distress have improved. As is often the case in our business, the most vexing times have also been the most opportune. This certainty factor plays an important role in our long-term conviction in a handful of these companies.

The very nature of financials make the high-quality ones particularly exceptional capital allocators. While good businesses earn juicy returns on capital, great ones have plenty of opportunities to reinvest the incremental capital at equally compelling rates. The great financials, depending on the nature of their businesses, earn ROAs of 2.5-4.0% and ROEs of 17-30%. Given the longevity of the growth runway, they are able to reinvest the bulk of their earnings back into the business at attractive returns. We have usually been advocates of them retaining more and paying out less. For example, Gruh Finance has earned ROEs of 32% and reinvested 60% of earnings in recent years. This has led to a phenomenal result — over six years shareholders’ equity has more than tripled and the company continues to earn the same high returns on equity on this much higher base — a true compounder! We would much rather they retain 15-20 percentage points more and earn 32% on it rather than paying it back to us.

Gruh has a wide moat in form of the domain expertise associated with lending to lower-income families for purchasing affordable homes without conventional documentation proof (milkmen, vendors and painters usually don’t file taxes). Deep understanding of cash flows associated with such professions is key to underwriting sensibly and managing credit costs. In a low ticket-size and granular business, operational and collection costs can take a real toll. Despite this Gruh exhibits deep operational frugality.

Gruh’s leverage is typically higher as the product is a first-and-only secured mortgage for an owner-occupied home. Typically a ~US$11,000 loan is used to finance the purchase of a ~US$20,000 home. The low credit costs (Gross NPAs ~60 bps fully provisioned) due to disciplined underwriting, efficient collections and industry-leading cost control allow Gruh to earn a higher ROA while competitors deal with prohibitively high operational and credit costs.

Mr. Market has usually appreciated the qualities of such businesses once performance is evident. This has allowed select financials to raise incremental growth capital if required on exceptional terms — at many multiples of book value! Time has shown that due to the sustained high-quality performance of such financials even subscribers at higher multiples have often gotten a great deal in hindsight.

The underlying source for high ROEs is different for each financial — given its product mix, Bajaj Finance earns a higher ROA of >3% (derivation below).

Bajaj Finance reinvests >85% earnings at rates >20%. Reiterating this result for decades has been the source code for all great financial compounders.

Of course, not every bank or financial is an emerging HDFC Bank or Bajaj Finance. For every potential compounder there are several certain capital destroyers. We have usually steered clear of segments like gold loans, microfinance, infrastructure, construction equipment, and commercial vehicles — from what we have learned some of these businesses are far more difficult to differentiate on and build superior operating cost structures or witness credit costs meaningfully lower than peers; others are more prone to excessive regulatory oversight or poor consumer credit discipline. Some of these segments have become more commoditized with more credit supply chasing stalling demand. Managements which have exited such segments have sometimes commented, “That was a mediocre business in good times and a terrible one in tough times.” We highlight a snapshot of one such business (name withheld — our intention is neither to malign nor embarrass — these are usually good people in tough circumstances).

At Financial “A”, credit costs escalated due to distress in their core markets, customers became delinquent very fast — provisions ate into profitability. ROAs and ROEs compressed significantly. Management has struggled to create any real differentiators which can trickle down to the numbers that matter. These businesses have depended on blue sky scenarios to do well and tougher times have been largely unforgiving to their profitability. The opportunity costs for investors in such businesses have often been very high.

…’edge’ may meaningfully affect the ability of a financial to lend competitively yet experience below-peer credit costs, or grow efficiently yet have lower operational costs than competitors, or earn better yields on product innovations that competitors find painful to replicate.

In searching for opportunities we look for the basic ingredients of a successful compounding recipe. Ultimately we are trying to ascertain the source of competitive advantage in each vertical and for the cumulative franchise. Such edge may emanate from several sources and will eventually show up in the numbers. For example, edge may meaningfully affect the ability of a financial to lend competitively yet experience below-peer credit costs (lower NPAs and provisions), or grow efficiently (strong loan growth) yet have lower operational costs (declining cost to income) than competitors, or earn better yields (higher net interest margins) on product innovations that competitors find painful to replicate (higher upfront costs and NPAs). It’s usually not real edge unless it has a meaningful impact on ROA. While these are quantitative measures they have their underpinnings in management’s decision making. Invariably, the largest contributor to the business’ future value boils down to a qualitative measure — management quality. It may be absolutely crucial for businesses yet developing moats and less so for deeply entrenched businesses.

Typically we want to own financials in businesses that we are able to understand but competitors find difficult to execute. The prevailing rates on assets and liabilities are largely market determined — hence an NBFC’s ability to operate efficiently, acquire customers inexpensively, streamline distribution, underwrite rationally, keep credit costs low, are all sources of advantage. Clearly certain product lines are better suited to long-term success than others — we’ve preferred businesses focusing on retail segments — housing, small business, personal, consumer loans for durables, electronics & lifestyle products — these are more granular businesses which make them adaptable to differentiate on technology, product innovation and many small operational improvements over competitors — also they are largely under-penetrated segments country wide. Dozens of such “mini-moats” add several basis points to operating results. A great example of the cumulative effect of doing things that are simple but not necessarily easy.

The banks and financials we have owned over time have been incredibly forgiving in one more aspect. We are notoriously poor market timers (not that we make any attempt). We often mock ourselves at how we’ve often bought stocks when prices were at 52-week highs. This has led to the origin of a new phrase in our discussions — “Own companies which allow you the privilege of buying high and selling low!” Though we are rarely sellers of great companies we want to own businesses which allow you to buy at 52-week highs and sell at 52-week lows and still earn a great return — given that the magic of compounding is allowed to work for several years in the interim.

download printable version

At Asian Investing Summit 2017, Soumil shared the optimal “setup” he seeks while scouting for Indian financials that have the potential to emerge as great long-term compounders for patient allocators. Soumil also shared such an idea at the conference.

Sources: Capitaline Plus, HDFC Bank Annual Reports; Kotak Mahindra Bank Annual Reports; Bajaj Finance Annual Reports; Gruh Finance Annual Reports; Bajaj Finance Investor Presentations; Kotak Mahindra Bank Investor Presentations; Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India (Reserve Bank of India); Reserve Bank of India Database; DMZ Partners estimates.

Disclosures: Positions held by DMZ Partners or associates may be inconsistent with views mentioned herein. DMZ Partners or its associates accept no liability for any errors or omissions in the given content. The material presented herein does not constitute a recommendation or offer for the purchase or sale of any securities and is provided solely for informational purposes. DMZ Partners offers no investment related products or services whatsoever. Please consult a certified financial advisor before making investment decisions. Unauthorized usage, alteration or distribution of this information is prohibited.

Emotional Tenacity and Deep Value Investing

October 15, 2017 in Asia, Case Studies

This article is authored by Peter Kennan, MOI Global instructor and chief investment officer of Black Crane Capital.

One of the challenges of traditional deep value investing is not knowing whether market price and fair value will converge during one’s investment time horizon. At Black Crane, we use our corporate finance expertise to identify and/or create events that close the valuation gap.

The Black Crane approach involves being prepared to go the journey with the companies in which we invest. We always invest in companies with solid assets and/or businesses; however, we typically invest at times of significant uncertainty, when negative events have significantly depressed a company’s share price and traditional investors have ‘headed for the hills’.

…the best opportunities to make outstanding returns arise when stock prices fall significantly post our initial investment.

To take such contrarian positions requires conviction in one’s research and emotional strength to withstand the negative noise that surrounds such situations. In fact, the best opportunities to make outstanding returns arise when stock prices fall significantly post our initial investment. It is at this point that our conviction is most tested. Are we prepared to follow our research and invest further at lower prices including providing primary capital?

When entering an investment that has the potential for significant short-term drawdowns, we reserve capacity to invest more, enabling us to be opportunistic in tough and uncertain times during the life of the investment.  This is a key element of our strategy and has significantly added to our returns over time.

Executing such a strategy requires us to have investors who understand our approach and who are prepared to go the journey with us.

An example of this approach is our investment in Elders hybrid securities. Post investment the price of the hybrids fell from approximately $30 to a low point of $8.50. We reduced our average entry price to $22. The NAV of the fund declined 8% during this period. The decline in the price was due to interim events that were perceived by the market to be very negative. Drought conditions extended for a second year and the sale process for the core business was not successful. In our judgment based on our extensive research, these were temporary setbacks and not permanent impairments to our investment thesis.

A critical element to maintaining a strong state of mind during such periods is the depth and quality of the research performed up front, prior to investment. As part of this, it’s essential to have role played potential negative scenarios: How would you feel if this happened? What would be the effect on value? What would your response be?

In the case of Elders, the response was to buy more hybrids, decreasing our average entry price and increasing our negotiating leverage with the company as our position increased from 15% of the hybrids on issue to 30%.

Six months after this low point, the rains returned, management invigorated by their continued independence reduced overheads and restored the business to health. A further 18 months later, the company acquired all our hybrids at $95. Black Crane made more than four times its money and the position turned around from negative 8% attribution to fund NAV to positive 44%.

Editor’s note: Listen to Peter’s presentation on Elders at Asian Investing Summit 2014, when the hybrids still traded slightly below Black Crane’s average entry price of $22:

Black Crane has a highly concentrated portfolio of 6-8 investments. This allows us to know our positions intimately and to have the mental capacity to deal with tough situations should they arise. We focus on solid quality businesses and assets so the fundamental risk of the strategy is low.  Whilst the concentrated portfolio can result in lumpy returns in the short term – making strong underlying conviction essential – returns are reliably positive over our investment period.

The human psyche likes consistent month on month returns and emotionally processes mark to market losses as real losses, notwithstanding the logic that they are not. Being prepared to be highly concentrated and to weather short-term drawdowns leads to superior risk adjusted returns. In essence, we are taking a private equity approach to listed investments.

Due to the emotional challenges of investing this way, we see little competition for the opportunities we pursue. Consequently, Black Crane’s corporate finance approach generates superior, uncorrelated returns with relatively low levels of fundamental risk.

download printable version

Intelligent Cloning

October 15, 2017 in Letters

This article is authored by Peter Coenen, a value investor based in the Netherlands.

During The Zurich Project 2017 I introduced the idea of Intelligent Cloning. It’s all about combining the Ben Graham thinking on risk aversion with the Charlie Munger rule nr. 1 on how to become a successful investor: carefully look at what other great investors have done. You can find the initial write-up on intelligent cloning here.

I introduced five criteria to avoid the too risky stocks and then rank the remaining investment ideas according to a Joel Greenblatt type of ranking system. In this autumn edition on intelligent cloning I elaborate a little bit more on this “Joel Greenblatt type of ranking system” and what I mean by that. And then we will have a look at the autumn 2017 results. Enjoy!

Ranking the stocks

If you use the original Joel Greenblatt ranking system, you rank e.g. 10 candidates by ROC. The highest gets 1 point and the lowest 10 points. And then you rank them by margin of safety. The highest gets 1 point and the lowest 10. You add the numbers and choose the lowest number.

If you have two companies with identical ROC and company A grows e.g. with 3% free cash flow per share and company B with a 6%, both companies are treated equally. I tend to believe that there is value in adding additional weight to company B.

The question is how to do that. During the Zürich Project 2017 I introduced the Value Creation Engine. The more aggressive definition of this Value Creation Engine is ROC times GROWTH. A more conservative approach is to add just a few extra points to the ROC for company B. In the latter case you could argue that the Value Creation Engine is a sort of adjusted ROC. This might seem a simple idea, but in reality it is not. There are many ways to calculate ROC and GROWTH. You have to decide for yourself what suits you best.

The same holds for the third variable, Margin of Safety. Joel Greenblatt used the Earnings Yield, which is EBIT/Enterprise Value, but there are many other ways of calculating the Margin of Safety and once again, it depends on your personal preferences.

The Autumn 2017 results

If I apply the conservative approach of the Value Creation Engine (VCE) with the preferences I have for Margin of Safety and then rank the stocks, first according to VCE (the highest VCE gets 1 point, the lowest 10 points) and then according to Margin of Safety (the highest gets 1 point, the lowest 10 points), add the two numbers (the lowest number comes first) and do just that for the portfolios of Berkshire Hathaway, Sequoia Fund, Chuck Akre, David Einhorn and Allan Mecham, I end up with the following results:

1. Apple (Berkshire Hathaway ↑, David Einhorn ↓)
2. Verisign (Berkshire Hathaway)
3. IBM (Berkshire Hathaway ↓)
4. Delta Air Lines (Berkshire Hathaway ↓)
5. Emcor Group (Sequoia Fund)
6. Omnicom Group (Sequoia Fund ↑)
7. PVH Corp (David Einhorn ↓)
8. Liberty SiriusXM Group (Berkshire Hathaway ↑)
9. Jacobs Engineering Group (Sequoia Fund)
10. Davita (Berkshire Hathaway)

The arrows indicate if there has been some recent activity in buying/increase the position ↑ or selling/decrease the position ↓. No arrow means no specific recent action.

Obviously, there are some limitations to this approach. Most of the financial companies and spinoffs are automatically excluded. And you might want to ask yourself the question if it is wise to “clone” the Berkshire Hathaway portfolio. Berkshire Hathaway has a limited investment universe, because of its size. They only look for “the big elephants”. It might be much more interesting to look for companies that are at the beginning of their competitive lifecycle (small and midcap stocks).

If I exclude the companies with a market cap above 5 billion USD I end up with the following ranking:

1. Emcor Group (Sequoia Fund)
2. Tegna (David Einhorn ↑)
3. DSW (David Einhorn ↑)
4. Dillard’s (David Einhorn ↑)
5. MSC Industrial (Allan Mecham ↑)
6. USG Corp (Berkshire Hathaway)
7. Boston Beer Company (Allan Mecham ↑)
8. AutoNation (Allan Mecham ↑)
9. Monro (Chuck Akre ↑, Allan Mecham ↑)
10. Valmont Industries (Allan Mecham ↓)

By the way, if I move the benchmark for VCE just a little bit higher, and I might do that next time, Valmont Industries would not be on this list.

Some final remarks. You could argue that intelligent cloning is a new quant approach, a sort of algorithmic overlay on top of all the intensive research and decision making of these super investors. But there is no such thing as an investment without your own investment analysis. I always reengineer the investment thesis and do my own due diligence and I advise you to do the same.

The greatest advocate of “cloning” in the investment world is obviously Mohnish Pabrai. He introduced “shameless cloning” in an article in Forbes entitled “Beyond Buffett: How to Build Wealth Copying 9 Other Value Stock Pickers”. So is “intelligent cloning” more intelligent than “shameless cloning”? I don’t think so. It’s just a matter of words. “Shameless cloning” is highly intelligent and “intelligent cloning” is just as shameless. Intelligent cloning is a more risk averse, conservative approach towards cloning.

Next time, the winter 2017/2018 edition on intelligent cloning, I will include the portfolios of David Tepper and Seth Klarman. Should be quite interesting!

I am always happy to answer your questions or discuss what needs to be discussed: peter@thevaluefirm.com.

Disclaimer: This presentation and the information contained herein are for educational and informational purposes only and do not constitute, and should not be construed as, an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any securities or related financial instruments. Responses to any inquiry that may involve the rendering of personalized investment advice or effecting or attempting to effect transactions in securities will not be made absent compliance with applicable laws or regulations (including broker dealer, investment adviser or applicable agent or representative registration requirements), or applicable exemptions or exclusions therefrom.This presentation contains information and views as of the date indicated (5 October 2017) and such information and views are subject to change without notice. The Value Firm® has no duty or obligation to update the information contained herein. Further, The Value Firm® makes no representation, and it should not be assumed, that past investment performance is an indication of future results. Moreover, wherever there is the potential for profit there is also the possibility of loss. Certain information contained herein concerning economic trends and performance is based on or derived from information provided by independent third-party sources. The Value Firm® believes that such information is accurate and that the sources from which it has been obtained are reliable; however, it cannot guarantee the accuracy of such information and has not independently verified the accuracy or completeness of such information or the assumptions on which such information is based. Moreover, independent third-party sources cited in these materials are not making any representations or warranties regarding any information attributed to them and shall have no liability in connection with the use of such information in these materials.

download printable version
MOI Global