Saturday 17 December 2011

Learn to love stockmarket falls


  • 13 Aug 07

Most people are net buyers of stocks throughout their lives, which means that market falls should be welcomed rather than feared.


You could be forgiven for thinking that there had been some major ructions in the stockmarket over the past couple of weeks. There’s been talk of crashes, collapses and crunches, with well-known Wall Street pundits shouting and screaming (if only for effect). So far at least, though, we haven’t even seen the 10% drop that people arbitrarily consider is necessary for a ‘correction’ and the All Ordinaries Index is still above where it stood in March.


The truth is that fear and panic get people’s attention and the media is well aware of it. But it’s at times like this that investors need to stand back from the crowd and make a cold assessment of what’s going on. No doubt some companies are affected by recent turmoil in global debt markets, but some have, and/or will generate, all the cash they need for their future investing plans and have little to fear from a recession, which might in fact help them take market share from competitors. Yet these companies have been getting cheaper along with everything else and we’ve been licking our lips.


Only a few stocks have so far drifted into our buying range – Corporate ExpressTen Network and Servcorp (almost) – but we’re hopeful of bigger falls and further opportunities.


It’s a truism to say that, all things being equal, you’ll do better from stocks if you buy them cheaply. But what people forget is that for most of their lives, they’re net buyers, or at least holders, of stocks. And the ideal situation is to reach retirement with enough in your pot that you never have to become a net seller. So for most people, for most of their lives, stockmarket falls are good things.

Price and value


The crucial point to understand is that the price of a stock and its value are two different things. The market sets the former and we spend our days trying to estimate the latter. To make our life easier, we generally avoid poorly managed, debt-laden or cyclical businesses where predictability is poor, and we look for a margin of safety to protect us against an error of judgement – the more uncertain we are about a company’s value, the greater the margin of safety we require.
Most of the time, price is pretty close to value. But sometimes it gets out of whack, and occasionally by enough to give us a decent margin of safety. It’s these situations that present the greatest opportunities for canny investors and the greatest dangers for those who succumb to understandable but irrational mood swings. Preparedness makes all the difference.


Imagine you’re researching a company, Little Acorn Limited, which operates in a predictable industry, has decent management and pays no dividends. It reinvests all its profits, meaning that returns are entirely in the form of capital growth. You’ve done the work, and are as comfortable as you can be that Little Acorn will grow earnings per share (EPS) at 10% per year, from the current level of $1.00, with very little chance of variability.


Deeming Little Acorn to have all the right stuff, you buy the stock for $15 – a price-to-earnings ratio of 15. If your estimate of earnings growth is accurate, then EPS will grow from $1.00 to $2.59 over the next decade. If the market is still happy to pay a PER of 15 at that point, then the stock will trade at around $38.85, and you’ll have achieved an annual return of 10%, in line with the earnings growth.


The future is always uncertain


Of course, the stock might trade lower in a pessimistic market in 2017, giving you a lower annual return (but an underpriced stock that’s likely to do well in future years). Alternatively, it might trade higher, giving you a larger annual return (but an overpriced stock that you might choose to sell).


Which of those possibilities eventuates is of some importance. But what happens in the stockmarket over the next week, month or year doesn’t make a lick of difference as to how the market will view Little Acorn in ten years’ time.
Great oaks from little acorns grow
Price in 2007Price in 2017Annual return
Expected$15$38.8510.0%
outcome$8$38.8517.1%
Lower$15$255.2%
outcome$8$2512.1%
Higher$15$5012.8%
outcome$8$5020.1%
So let’s say that shortly after purchasing Little Acorn for $15, the market tanks and takes Little Acorn with it – down to $8. The talking heads everywhere go berserk over the ‘blood on the streets’ and you’re staring at a ‘loss’ of almost 50%. The emotional investor gets the chance to do some real and permanent damage here. Avoid this at all cost.


Assuming that Little Acorn is still as likely as ever to grow its EPS at 10% per year and arrive in 2017 with EPS of $2.59 and a stock price of $38.85, your forecast of its future is unchanged, and your expected return from yesterday’s investment is unchanged at 10% per year. You won’t get that return if you sell out now. But if you do nothing but hold, your eventual wealth will be just as great as if the share price followed a straight line from $15 to $38.85 over the course of a decade.


But wait there’s more


If you have some spare cash, though, you can actually improve your position, by going against the crowd and buying more shares in Little Acorn at $8. At that price, your additional investment will compound at 17% per year until the shares trade at $38.85 in 2017, dragging up your average return in the process. So the market tumble has actually provided an opportunity.


Of course, the real world isn’t so neat. Market crashes can hurt the economy, affecting company profits in the short and medium term. And the 2017 value of the stock will swing based on both the mood of the markets then, and the company’s growth in the intervening years. But that’s the case regardless of whether stocks are cheap or expensive today. Which brings us back to the trusim that the less we pay for our stocks, the greater the bargains they’ll prove to be.


So remember that when the market takes a tumble, it’s just changing the price that it’s setting for stocks. The value of those stocks, all things being equal, will remain the same. You don’t have to sell your stocks, but you can choose to buy, if you have the spare cash and can find something suitable. Viewed like this, market crashes won’t do any harm to long-term investors, but actually offer you the chance to compound your money at a greater rate.

http://www.intelligentinvestor.com.au/articles/230/Learn-to-love-stockmarket-falls.cfm

Handling stock price falls


  • 30 May 03

When a stock price falls, do you sell, buy more or hold on? It all depends, but there are some techniques to help you with your thinking, and your emotions.

One of the questions we're frequently asked is how to handle a tumbling stock price. Should you cut your losses, buy more or sit on your hands nervously and do nothing?
Unfortunately, the Zen art of value investing doesn't lend itself particularly well to never-fail formulas, so absolute answers are impossible. There are, however, some basic principles that you can look to for guidance.
First of all, you should be looking to sell (or not buy) shares that look expensive and aiming to buy shares that look cheap. The direction in which a share price has recently travelled is not in itself an indicator of this.

When to hold
Secondly, too much trading will just hand the returns from your portfolio over to your broker. That means that there's usually a large grey area between buy and sell where you should be happy simply to hold.
Finally, you should always maintain a sensibly diversified portfolio so that your fortunes are not too closely tied to a few holdings.
If a share falls and you keep adding large chunks, then it might end up accounting for too much of your portfolio. That's not a happy situation even if you think it's the cheapest share on the market.
It's worth noting that all of this has just as much relevance if a stock in your portfolio has gone up in price, or even if it hasn't moved at all. What matters is the relationship between the price and the underlying value, subject to diversification and keeping your trading costs down. Putting this all together, we can get an idea of what to do in certain situations.
If a share has fallen by, say, 20%, but you estimate that its underlying value has fallen by less, or indeed grown, then generally we believe it makes more sense to at least consider buying more (subject to keeping sensibly diversified).
An example of this would be Macquarie Bank (see page 4), which we've consistently seen as being undervalued. As its price fell from above $30 last year, we continued to recommend buying and it became a strong buy in issue 114/Oct 02 (Strong Buy up to $21 - $20.39). The shares have now recovered to $27.70.

Time to sell
If a share has fallen by a certain amount but you estimate that its underlying value has fallen by more, then you certainly shouldn't be buying more. That would just compound the original mistake. Instead, you'd want to face up to the mistake and think about selling.
If a share has fallen and you estimate that its underlying value has fallen by a similar amount, then you'd sit on your hands and do nothing.
To avoid too much expensive trading, this should probably be your starting point. To either buy more or sell, your views should be very strongly held.
Our recommendations on AMP are an example of the sell and hold situations. At the beginning of last year, with its share price up near the $20 mark, we had it as a hold. But we were unimpressed by its results in March 2002 noting, in particular, that its 'international or bust attitude' was cause for concern.
So we downgraded it to sell in issue 98/Mar 02 (Sell/Switch to Suncorp - $19.12) and continued to recommend selling as the price fell (and as its underlying value evaporated).
We finally reverted to a hold in issue 113/Oct 02 (Hold while Unstable - $11.78), because we considered that the fall in the share price had finally caught up with the deterioration in the underlying value of the stock.
Since then, we've felt that the falling share price has been matched by a fall in business value (such as we're able to judge it) and have continued with the Hold while Unstable recommendation.

Different thinking
It can sometimes help to imagine that you don't actually own your downtrodden shareholding, but instead have its value in cash. If that was the case, would you use the cash to buy those shares at the current price or invest in something else?
If you find you get a definite no, then it might be time to sell. If you get a definite yes, then you'd think of buying more.
If you get a maybe, then you're probably in the area where the transaction and tax costs of taking any action would outweigh any potential benefits. In this case, it's usually best to to sit on your hands and hold on to your shares.
It's never easy to deal with a falling share price and there are no clear-cut rules to follow. But this approach, used advisedly, can be a useful way of addressing the issue. We hope it helps.

The essence of value investing

Speculation is where you might willingly pay more for a stock than it’s actually worth, in the hope of passing it on to a ‘greater fool’ at an even higher price.  It is a very dangerous game to play.   It is rather like chain letters and ‘ponzi schemes’: some people will make money along the way, but sooner or later most will find that there isn’t in fact a greater fool after all. 
And because a stock’s intrinsic value will ultimately be realised, the net effect for all investors of buying stocks above their intrinsic value will be a loss, while the net effect for all investors of buying stocks below their intrinsic value will be a gain.






  • 12 Apr 06
The word value comes in for a lot of abuse these days. You’ll often hear that ‘so and so is a value investor’ or that ‘such and such is a value share’, but it’s not always very clear what these things actually mean. For some it’s all about buying shares on low PERs; for others it’s about buying tangible assets for less than their book value; while still others claim that a stock like Cochlear can offer value, despite a PER of 36 and a price to tangible book value of 9.
So what’s the theory that can tie up all these loose ends? 
Old as the hills
The idea of value investing is, in fact, as old as the hills—or at least it’s as old as the people that have lived on their slopes. Take the ancient Yir Yoront people of the Cape York peninsular for example. They desperately needed stone axes for a whole range of daily activities: collecting firewood, making tools, building huts and climbing trees to gather honey (for an idea of how this might work, head along to the woodchop arena at Sydney’s Royal Easter Show). Yet, living as they did on a flat alluvial coastline, they didn’t have the materials or the know-how to make these vital tools.
In fact, the axes were made from a dense basaltic rock found close to what is now Mount Isa. This rock could be chipped easily into shape, but it maintained its sharp edge well, and it was skillfully crafted into axe heads by the Kalkadoon people. But the Kalkadoon lacked the stingray barbs they needed to make their preferred style of spear—which was excellent news for the Yir Yoront who lived and breathed stingray barbs.
So the stingray barbs flowed down a trade route from the north, in exchange for the stone axe heads that flowed along in the other direction. As the items got further from their source, their value increased.
A Yir Yoront would perhaps have given a dozen stingray barbs to secure one axe head, while a Kalkadoon tribesman might have offered a dozen axe heads for one stingray barb. Somewhere between the two, you might have found someone exchanging seven axe heads for five stingray barbs, in the knowledge that he could keep one barb and swap the other four for eight stone axes on the other side of his territory (keeping one and leaving seven to sell).
Value finds its own level
The increase in the price and value of the items as they moved along the trade route was a reflection of the effort needed to get them there. Everyone in the chain added enough labour capital (either producing goods or transporting them) to secure the items that they needed. If someone decided it was worth walking the extra 50 kilometres to get an additional stingray barb in return for his surplus axe heads, then he might do just that. And if someone tried to charge more for his stingray barbs than they were worth in his region, then the trade route would soon find its way around him.
Value, like water, finds its own level. Sooner or later, the true value of something—in terms of what it can do for people—will be recognised. And that’s the essence of value investing: you aim to buy something for less than it’s worth, so that you can keep a portion of that value for yourself when it comes to be realised. Indeed, as our ancient traders showed, value is not so much an investing strategy as the very force that keeps markets ticking along.
But when the items you’re trading have their price quoted minute by minute throughout the working day, something strange seems to happen. People start to care less about the value of the items themselves and become fixated instead on where they think their prices are headed.
At a basic level, that might be a matter of imagining that a stock price seems to be moving in a particular direction and that it might continue that way. At a more complex level, any number of arguments might be advanced to divine a stock’s next movement—maybe ‘interest rate concerns are expected to weigh heavily on housebuilders’ or perhaps ‘continued strong demand from China will maintain positive sentiment towards mining stocks’.
Greater fool
This kind of speculation, where you might willingly pay more for a stock than it’s actually worth, in the hope of passing it on to a ‘greater fool’ at an even higher price, would have struck the Yir Yoront and the Kalkadoon as a very dangerous game to play. It also strikes us as a dangerous game to play. It’s rather like chain letters and ‘ponzi schemes’: some people will make money along the way, but sooner or later most will find that there isn’t in fact a greater fool after all. And because a stock’s intrinsic value will ultimately be realised, the net effect for all investors of buying stocks above their intrinsic value will be a loss, while the net effect for all investors of buying stocks below their intrinsic value will be a gain.
So the aim of value investing is to make sure you buy things for less than they’re worth. That way, you don’t have to rely on an accommodating ‘greater fool’ appearing on cue. Of course, if you’re able to buy something for much less than it’s intrinsically worth, then you might find that you can later sell it to someone else for only a little less than it’s intrinsically worth. And you might then find that you can employ the resulting capital by buying something else again for much less than it’s intrinsically worth.
In this way a skilled value investor can make profits more quickly than by simply waiting for his investments to deliver up their value. But the crucial point is that time is on the value investor’s side: maybe someone will come along next year and make us an offer we can’t refuse for our investments, but maybe they won’t.

Psychology of Investing (articles)

Investing Fundamentals (articles)