Tag Archives: transactionname

Benjamin Graham’s Defensive Versus Enterprising Investor Performance Over The Dismal Decade Of 2000-2009

In a previous blog (see Benjamin Graham’s Value Investing versus the Robo-advisor ), I illustrated included a chart outlining the performance of the United States stock market over the course of every decade covering during the past 100 years. Stock performance over the past decade (2000-2009) was not only a net loser, including the paltry dividend income received, but it even underperformed the 1930’s depression era. If the typical investor had known this information at the start of the year 2000, I’m confident he or she would have remained on the sidelines in cash. Let’s assume that Mr. Market held a gun to your head, forcing you to buy and hold stocks over the coming decade. Further assume that you knew the performance in stocks would be terrible. Given few good options against the wrong end of Mr. Market’s gun, one might find some solace by turning to the value investing teachings of Benjamin Graham. How did value stocks perform over the dismal decade from 2000-2009? In Graham’s first edition of The Intelligent Investor , he outlined several approaches to stock selection. One approach was designed for the defensive investor, involving the selection of only stocks that met a conservative set of buying criteria with safety of principal as the primary concern. Another stock selection approach was designed for the more enterprising investor, one willing to assume more risk with the hope of gaining a larger profit. The defensive investor approach to stock selection recommends the following buying criteria: Benjamin Graham’s Stock Selection Rules for the Defensive Investor 1) Diversify your portfolio across at least 10 different securitie s, with a maximum of about 30. Over the decade from 2000-2009, we’ll review the range of portfolio returns for both a “10” and a “30” stock portfolio that met all of Graham’s criteria for the defensive investor. 2) Each company should be large, prominen t, and conservatively financed. We’ll put a company on the defensive investor list only if it had a market cap of at least $350 million. That’s about the size of a larger company in 1949 on an inflation-adjusted basis when Graham published The Intelligent Investor. Graham defined a company as “prominent” if it ranked in the upper-quarter to upper-third in size within a particular industry. We’ll give as many companies the benefit of the doubt as being “prominent” provided they were in the upper-third in size within a particular industry. A “conservatively financed” company according to Graham had total debt under half of its total market capitalization. We’ll screen out all stocks that are leveraged beyond this defensive-investor threshold. 3) Each company should have a long record of continuous dividend payments. The first edition of The Intelligent Investor was published in 1949. Graham was reluctant to exclude companies on the defensive list that discontinued their dividend payments during the 1931-1933 period. After all, that time period occurred shortly after the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined 85% in value, including the dividend income received. Graham must have felt that keeping stocks off of a defensive list simply because the dividend payments were temporarily discontinued during that awful time period was a bit restrictive. As a compromise, Graham allowed all companies to be on the defensive stock list provided that a continuous dividend payment took place on every stock back to the year 1936. That’s a historical 13-year dividend-paying history from the date of Graham’s book publication. We’ll follow a similar approach and require all stocks on our defensive list to have paid an uninterrupted dividend over the previous 13-year period. 4) The price paid for a stock should be reasonable in relation to its average earnings. Graham recommended purchasing only stocks that had a price-to-average-earnings ratio below 20. Average earnings was calculated using the previous five years of data from the income statement of each public company. We’ll follow the same approach and keep off of the defensive list any expensive stocks with a price-to-average-earnings ratio greater than 20. The charts below shows the performance of the best-and worst-performing stocks meeting Graham’s defensive stock criteria covering the worst-performing decade over the past century. The number of stocks at the start of the year 2000 that met all of Graham’s defensive selection criteria totaled 111. Ten Best – and Worst – Performing Defensive Stocks, Including Dividend Income… (click to enlarge) Thirty Best – and Worst – Performing Defensive Stocks, Including Dividend Income… (click to enlarge) As already mentioned, Graham recommended holding between 10 and 30 stocks that met the rigorous defensive stock criteria. As shown in the two charts above, quite a bit of variation in performance existed depending on what stocks were chosen from the defensive list. Diversifying across 30 defensive stocks instead of only 10 improved your worst-case portfolio return over the dismal decade, but it also reduced your potential best-case return. In general, following Graham’s value investing instruction of purchasing a number of defensive stocks stood a good chance of outperforming the broad stock market average over the course of the worst decade in history. Benjamin Graham’s Stock Selection Rules for the Enterprising Investor Graham outlined four broad categories available for the enterprising investor. 1) Buying in low markets and selling in high markets. 2) Buying carefully chosen “growth stocks” 3) Buying bargain issues of various types 4) Buying into “special situations” Choices one and two from the list are highly problematic to implement in real time. Many analysts on Wall Street have attempted to forecast the overall movement of the stock market or the future earnings of a particular company, with mixed results. Option four is a technical branch of investment, and according to Graham, “…only a small percentage of our enterprising investors are likely to engage in it.” We’ll put the microscope over choice number three on the list and look at the performance of buying only bargain issues over the past decade when stock returns scraped the bottom of the barrel. Graham’s bargain approach to stock selection involved either purchasing a stock that traded at a price below some multiple of estimated earnings or selecting securities priced below net current asset value . In a previous blog, we showed how difficult it was to estimate future earnings (see ” Does Earnings Growth Matter When it Comes to Stocks Trading below Liquidation Value? “). Given the challenges of forecasting company earnings, we’ll limit ourselves to only selecting stocks for the enterprising investor list that traded below net current asset value. Stocks that made it on to the enterprising investor list were purchased at a market price below 75% of net current asset value. No more than a 5% weighting was allocated to any one stock. If few stocks could be found meeting our rigorous value criterion, the balance of cash remained in U.S. Treasury Bills. The chart below compares the performance results of Graham’s enterprising investor approach to stock selection with the defensive approach over the dismal decade (2000-2009). Annual rebalancing took place once at the beginning of every yea r, and the capital gains taxes was assumed to be zero. Armed with the knowledge that equity performance over the previous decade (2000-2009) was horrible, you might think a defensive investor had the upper hand over an enterprising investor. In an environment hostile towards stock investing, one might assume that being as conservative as possible would be the better route to take. As illustrated in the chart below, the results are counterintuitive. (click to enlarge) Over the course of the dismal decade, bargain issues using the enterprising approach toward stock selection outperformed defensive stocks by a wide margin. Even if an investor managed to select the top-performing 10-30 stocks that met Graham’s defensive criteria, the portfolio still wouldn’t have outperformed a portfolio of stocks purchased below net current asset value. Negative-return years were more prevalent for the enterprising value investor, but not by much. Aggressive investors endured two negative-return years over the course of the dismal decade, while defensive investors endured only one. A chapter in the book, The Net Current Asset Value Approach to Stock Investing , reviewed the performance over the course of the dismal decade (2000-2009) using a maximum 10% portfolio weighting in any one net current asset value stock rather than the 5% weighting shown in the chart from above. Either way, the average annual return results are about the same and clobber the defensive approach to stock investing. Assuming an investor is willing to stomach greater monthly volatility, it pays to be aggressive even if the overall market provides few value investing opportunities as it did over the course of the period from 2000- 2009 .

Market Beginners Portfolio – July Update

Summary The Market Beginners Portfolio has had a difficult time over the past few months. The portfolio has significant potential for future growth. I chose to invest in Frontier Communication Corporation because of the future opportunity it provides. Introduction As many of my subscribers know, I have written a large number of portfolios talking for a variety of different goals. However, the original Market Beginners Portfolio represented my first attempt at creating a portfolio designed for someone incorporating multiple different points of view. The overall goal of this portfolio is to create a sample portfolio for someone with $100,000 to invest. The portfolio will be composed of both ETFs and Individual Stocks designed to maximize both safety and income for the portfolio. However, rather than focusing on just income for the portfolio, I will also be focusing on overall stock growth. This portfolio is centered towards overall growth and that involves growth both in the form of income and portfolio value. Rules Discipline is the backbone of any major portfolio. As a result, any good portfolio requires at least a few rules to help keep things in balance. This portfolio has two. The first rule is no new money may be added to the portfolio. While this is not a restriction most people generally face, it is helpful for managing a portfolio and as a result is a rule I include in most of my portfolios. The second rule is that no stock or ETF may make up more than 20% of the portfolio. While having different ETFs or secure stocks may help with the portfolio’s safety, minimizing your positions in different stocks helps to maintain your portfolio’s security. Portfolio Stock Name (Ticker) Number of Shares Purchase Price Current Price Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ ) 100 $100.55 $100.09 Chevron (NYSE: CVX ) 100 $107.70 $93.14 Pimco Strategic Income Fund (NYSE: RCS ) 1000 $9.19 $8.49 Bank of America (NYSE: BAC ) 1000 $16.47 $18.10 Monsanto Company (NYSE: MON ) 100 $118.25 $107.07 Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (NYSEARCA: VTI ) 100 $108.73 $109.96 Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (NYSEARCA: VIG ) 200 $81.18 $80.77 Original Portfolio Value: $85,430 Total Cash: $14,570 Current Portfolio Value: $83,770 Current Cash: $14,570 Change In Portfolio Value: -1.94% Portfolio Discussion The portfolio has had a relatively difficult time – it has lost 1.94% over the past few months. Much of this loss is due to a decrease in the prices of Chevron, Pimco Strategic Income Fund, and Monsanto Company. However, the portfolio has done an impressive job in Bank of America seeing that position increase by almost $2000. This helped offset some of the other more significant losses for the portfolio. As for decisions, I am choosing to keep the portfolio relatively simple. However, at this time I am making a 1000 share purchase in Frontier Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: FTR ) at $5.14 per share. That takes the cash position of the portfolio down to $9430. Frontier Communications Corporation is a solid company that has had a difficult time dropping from $8.42 earlier in the year. However, management at the company is solid and the company offers a 8.17% dividend at current prices. Cash I continue to hold a significant cash stake in the portfolio amounting to almost 10% of its assets. Future dividends should help to increase the portfolio’s cash position. The market is currently near all time highs and I am hoping to be able to let the portfolio’s cash position grow until better opportunities can be identified. Conclusion The portfolio has had a difficult time recently losing almost 2% of its value. Despite significant losses in other regions, the portfolio managed to make some of the losses back due to a significant increase in the value of Bank of America. I also chose to invest in Frontier Communications Corporation this month. The company has had a difficult time in recent months and as a result now offers a significant dividend amounting to over 8%. I hope to see this portfolio recover and continue growing in future months. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Conservative Total Return Portfolio: Sells A Winner And Welcomes Back An ‘Old Friend’

Summary The CTR sold VLO after less than a month following double digit gains. While money was left on the table, the market in this name seemed a little “frothy”. After recently selling BX, the combination of a price drop and company strategic moves prompted the equity to be “welcomed back”; BX is still best-in-breed. AAPL is nearing an inflection point, while IBM may be nearing a breakout. GM is universally hated, but that has to change (or does it). I introduced the ” Conservative Total Return ” or CTR portfolio in August 2014 and try to provide monthly updates. The general philosophy of this method has allowed me to cumulatively beat, since 1999, the S&P 500 by a wide margin. As the market has “evolved”, so have the holdings. While the investments in the CTR are conservative, the portfolio is dynamic (as is the market and its “favorites”). In the June report, I noted broadening the portfolio base to add a transport (American Airlines (NASDAQ: AAL )) and an energy company (Valero (NYSE: VLO )). Unfortunately for the diversification strategy (but fortunate for the portfolio), VLO appreciated significantly and I exited the position. Why did I exit below my target price? Simply put, VLO appreciated fast in a short time. In reviewing my investing mistakes, I have learned that in the past I have been reluctant to sell; waiting for the market to “get it right” and hit my target price. Often my stubbornness has been costly. In recent years (with a lot of prompting from my wife), I have been more prone to take a quick profit as I am skeptical of “one-way elevator rides”. So when VLO jumped more than 10% in less than a month, I decided not to be greedy and took profits. Subsequently, VLO has considered to appreciate. While the greedy side of my wishes I held on, the logical side of me believes the market is over-reacting to perceived good news and is happy I sold. I will continue to monitor VLO and my re-enter if 1) the core value has changed and/or 2) pricing becomes favorable. During the month, I re-entered a favorite (Blackstone- (NYSE: BX )) that I had previously sold for reasons similar to VLO. In that case, BX had become “everyone’s favorite stock”, which always makes me nervous. I sold my position at $42.80 and re-entered at $39.45. While I was absent from the stock, BX made some moves I “approved of”, including accelerating the sale of US single family homes. The worsening energy market also makes it more likely BX will be able to deploy recently raised funds productively (previously I was concerned too much money was chasing too few deals and the funds could underperform). Even while selling (and subsequently adding KKR & Co. (NYSE: KKR )), I maintained BX was “best of breed”. I am happy to once again be holding this winner. An error I made was not being focused enough on the markets during the short-lived Greece/China crisis. I have been looking to increase exposure to financials, but at more attractive prices. Frankly, I wanted to buy Citigroup (NYSE: C ) and missed out. I may still enter C, or another financial, but the post-Q2 earnings response to the group was a little too optimistic for my tastes; there may be another opportunity during the next mini-crises or when enthusiasm pulls back. I am OK with missing an opportunity, if it means not overpaying and having my risk/reward skew too heavily toward risk. The Conservative Total Return Philosophy The essence of the CTR method is to combine a strong value bias with flexibility, opportunism and an ability to assimilate and respond to new information. The core philosophy will always be the same; however, as the economic cycle grows older, identifying the appropriate time to “harvest” becomes increasingly important. In assessing the prospects for all of the portfolio members, I feel good that the risk-reward dynamic is positive and, on a risk-adjusted basis, market beating (taking into account the strong value provided by dividends). Feedback from readers has been a partial motivator in my broadening my market segment exposure. The Individual Stocks The core stocks in the portfolio are (alphabetically): AAL, Apple (OTC: APPL ), Blackstone Discover Financial Services (NYSE: DFS ), Ford, (NYSE: F ), GE, General Motors (NYSE: GM ), Harley Davidson (NYSE: HOG ), International Business Machines (NYSE: IBM ), JPM, KKR and Siemens (OTCPK: SIEGY ). (click to enlarge) As the above chart confirms, my positions will generally have a strong bias toward dividends, reasonable valuation and a moderate (in most cases) PEG. Below are comments summarizing my interest in the equity. The chart also contains the appropriate metrics (valuation, fair value, potential gain). Holdings Apple – APPL has a bit of room to run, whether upward valuation is based on more than iPhone sales will be clarified following Q2 earnings. I believe the watch is a non-event (a disappointment for some bulls) and payments have potential. By the end of the year, AAPL has to demonstrate the catalyst for further appreciation or risk being “dead money” (or worse). I am not a “perma-bull” on APPL (though I use the Company’s products). Blackstone – As noted above, BX was re-introduced at a price reflecting a sold risk/reward opportunity. Still the best of breed, well-funded and poised to profit from market distress and volatility (especially in energy). The harvest of US residential is viewed by the author as a positive. Discover Financial – DFS should be worth more. The stock is trading below levels of Q1, when it announced some bad news. I continue to believe the US economy is very strong, and DFS will benefit (and reflect the growth in higher EPS and stock price). Ford – F has underperformed due to the (predictable) ramp-up of the F150. The industry in general is out of favor, with investors using the excuse de jure to send stock prices lower. Yes China is slowing, but Europe is recovering and the US economy continues to do well. While not quite as cheap as General Motors , F offers nice appreciation potential and is a good “partner” to GM in the portfolio. General Electric (NYSE: GE )- I am thrilled about GE’s medium-term future. The near-term makes me a little nervous as the stock is near fully valued and there is uncertainty with respect to the Alstom and Electrolux transactions. Higher post-GE Capital tax rates also make stock appreciation more challenging. General Motors – Even more than F, GM is the stock everyone loves to hate. Looking at the numbers, it is hard to see much downside (or at least the risk/reward looks very favorable). As with F, China is concerning, but solid progress in Europe and the US should continue. Low gas prices for the foreseeable future put a backstop on highly profitable truck and SUV sales. I believe analysts are too concerned with unit sales and not focused enough on product mix. Harley Davidson – I may have bought HOG too early. However, HOG is an iconic brand and will, over time, garner the premium multiple it deserves (and has held historically). At the current 12.2x forward earnings, it is hard to see much downside (and a lot of upside). Housing prices in the US are rising; historically, HOG sales increases have been incredibly strongly correlated to appreciating housing prices (wealth effect x more retiring baby boomers). International Business Machines – IBM has been a disappointing investment. However, the Company has repositioned and is making solid progress. Improving Europe and progress in “Cloud” should drive a break-out sometime in the next 3 (or at the most three) quarters. Trading at less than 11x forward, there is little downside and much (potential) upside; a 3% dividend provides a bit of a reward for waiting. JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM )- JPM has performed very well, as have the financials. The stock has grown into its valuation and I am confident in twelve months the stock should perform well. As I have mentioned, I would like to add more in the sector, but recently investors have been a bit too eager. Siemens – Continues to be a play on recovering Europe and a weak US dollar. After GE and Honeywell (NYSE: HON ) have performed and appreciated, SIEGY remains a “show me” laggard. It may take a while, but SIEGY should deliver appropriate total returns through the investment period. Position Summary In my opinion, the positions continue to provide a nice balance of innate conservatism, multiple and earnings driven appreciation potential and exposure to a more mature stock market. Please keep in mind that my portfolio also consists of actively managed real estate, index funds (international, emerging markets and domestic) and bond proxies. I this in response to readers who thought the noted stocks were 100% of my investments and lacked diversity (if that were the case, I would agree). The CTR is a portfolio of stocks that in my opinion are conservative (strong reward vs. risk bias) and well positioned to outperform with below-average risk. I own all of the stocks in the CTR (I also own other positions which I consider speculative or otherwise inappropriate to recommend). I appreciate any feedback on individual securities and recommendations on equities to add to the CTR. This article reflects the personal opinions of the author and should not be relied upon or used as a basis in making an investment decision. Investors should always do their own due diligence prior to making an investment decision. Editor’s Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks. Disclosure: I am/we are long AAL, AAPL, BX, DFS, F, GE, GM, HOG, IBM, JPM, KKR, SIEGY. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.