All articles

What We’re Reading (Week Ending 20 September 2020)

The best articles we’ve read in recent times on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

We’ve constantly been sharing a list of our recent reads in our weekly emails for The Good Investors.

Do subscribe for our weekly updates through the orange box in the blog (it’s on the side if you’re using a computer, and all the way at the bottom if you’re using mobile) – it’s free!

But since our readership-audience for The Good Investors is wider than our subscriber base, we think sharing the reading list regularly on the blog itself can benefit even more people. The articles we share touch on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

Here are the articles for the week ending 20 September 2020:

1. The Metaverse: What It Is, Where to Find it, Who Will Build It, and Fortnite – Matthew Ball

The Metaverse, we think, will…

1. Be persistent – which is to say, it never “resets” or “pauses” or “ends”, it just continues indefinitely

2. Be synchronous and live – even though pre-scheduled and self-contained events will happen, just as they do in “real life”, the Metaverse will be a living experience that exists consistently for everyone and in real time

3. Have no real cap to concurrent participations with an individual sense of “presence” – everyone can be a part of the Metaverse and participate in a specific event/place/activity together, at the same time and with individual agency.

4. Be a fully functioning economy – individuals and businesses will be able to create, own, invest, sell, and be rewarded for an incredibly wide range of “work” that produces “value” that is recognized by others

5. Be an experience that spans both the digital and physical worlds, private and public networks/experiences, and open and closed platforms

6. Offer unprecedented interoperability of data, digital items/assets, content, and so on across each of these experiences – your “Counter-Strike” gun skin, for example, could also be used to decorate a gun in Fortnite, or be gifted to a friend on/through Facebook. Similarly, a car designed for Rocket League (or even for Porsche’s website) could be brought over to work in Roblox. Today, the digital world basically acts as though it were a mall where though every store used its own currency, required proprietary ID cards, had proprietary units of measurement for things like shoes or calories, and different dress codes, etc.

7. Be populated by “content” and “experiences” created and operated by an incredibly wide range of contributors, some of whom are independent individuals, while others might be informally organized groups or commercially-focused enterprises

2. Twitter thread from Okta CEO and co-founder Todd McKinnon on what it’s actually like to go through an initial public offering and be a public company – Todd McKinnon

How I benefited from @okta going public:
– My control of the company increased significantly.
– Preferred shares rights & preferences go away as everyone converts to common.
– My shares along with VC converted to super-voting shares. As VCs sold their shares, my voting % went up.

How my job has changed:
– More time in board meetings (committees, recruiting, communicating with, etc).
– More time on IR & with investors (earnings reports, conferences, 1on1s – might sound repetitive, but you often learn interesting & unexpected things).

For years, we’d compensated employees with stock options & we HAD to give them liquidity. It was fun to celebrate with the team on the big day.

3. Memo on Shopify by venture capital firm Bessemer Venture Partners when it invested in the company – Alex Ferrara, Trevor Oelschig

Shopify was founded in 2007 by two Ruby on Rails core developers. One of the co-founders left soon after starting the business. The other, Tobi Lütke, stayed on and is serving as CEO. We have been impressed by Tobi. He is a young, first-time CEO who is thoughtful, has good product and management instincts. Shopify’s 24 employees are located in Ottawa, Canada. Based on Shopify’s reputation in Ottawa as a local internet startup success story, and based upon Tobi’s reputation among the developer community, the company has been able to recruit some of the best development and design talent in Ottawa at 60%-70% of the cost of similar talent in Silicon Valley or New York.

4. Tencent’s Dreams, Part II: Investing in the Metaverse Packy McCormick

A strategic decision nine years ago accidentally set Tencent up to create more value from the Metaverse than it does from its entire core business by focusing on investment over organic growth.

After reading Part I, Rui Ma pointed me to the Tech Buzz China podcast in which she and Ying Lu discuss Pan Luan’s 2018 piece titled “Tencent Has No Dreams.” In it, he argues that a 2011 decision at a management team offsite caused Tencent to lose sight of its product-focused roots.

Back in 2011, Baidu passed Tencent as the most valuable tech company in China, and Pony Ma called a meeting of his top management to chart a new course for the company. In the meeting, dubbed “The Conference of the Gods,” he asked his 16 top executives to list out Tencent’s core competitive advantages. Two winners emerged: capital and traffic.

Led by President Martin Lau and his former Goldman colleague James Mitchell, who he brought on as Chief Strategy Officer, Tencent built its strategy on this flywheel of capital and traffic.

The strategy seems to be working. Since that 2011 meeting, Tencent’s stock has increased nearly 15x, from $44.5 billion to $660 billion. Attract companies to build on its platform with huge traffic, invest in the winners, give them more traffic, invest more or acquire the winners, generate more traffic, attract more companies, and so on. It runs essentially the same playbook with foreign companies who want access to China.

5. A $200 Billion Exotic Quant Trade Is Facing Existential Doubts – Justina Lee

ARP [alternative risk premia] products combine a diverse bunch of trades, often tried-and-tested ideas beloved by quants such as the tendency for cheap stocks to outperform in the long run or for short-term commodity futures to trade below long-term ones. The composition of funds and their returns vary vastly, but managers can point to a few unifying trends that have been a drag on performance in 2020.

The March turmoil upended the normal trading patterns these strategies rely on. Then the fast market recovery whipsawed trend-following systems and forced systematic models to dial back market exposures and miss out on gains.

At the same time, many popular factors used by these funds — such as value and foreign-exchange carry — failed to rebound along with stock benchmarks.

“The recovery depended on whether you were in those main long risk categories of liquid equities and fixed income,” said Anthony Lawler, head of GAM Systematic, which oversees about $3 billion. “ARP by and large are not in those things.”

Equity value has been a persistent drag on ARP portfolios

This year is adding to growing doubts over ARP, which has lagged stock indexes in recent years but has also posted a mixed performance as a portfolio diversifier. While defenders would argue that these products were never supposed to be a hedge against traditional assets, many investors likely got a different impression from their marketing, says MJ Hudson’s Suhonen.

6. Obvious Things That Are Easy To Ignore Morgan Housel

A thing that’s obvious but easily overlooked is that feeling wealthy has little to do with what you have. It’s more about the gap between what you have and what you expect. And what you expect is driven by what other people around you have.

It’s been like that forever and for everyone. John D. Rockefeller never had penicillin, sunscreen, or Advil. But you can’t say a low-income American with Advil and sunscreen should feel better off than Rockefeller, because that’s not how people’s heads work. What would have seemed like magic to Rockefeller became our baseline expectation.

Incomes fall into the same trap. Median family income adjusted for inflation was $29,000 in 1955. In 1965 it was $42,000. Today it’s just over $62,000. We think of the 1950s and 1960s as the golden age of middle-class prosperity. But the median household today has roughly twice the income as the median family of 1955. Part of the disconnect can be explained by lots of people’s expectations being inflated by the lifestyles of a small share of people whose wealth grew exponentially over the last 40 years.

7. Upside-Down Markets: Profits, Inflation and Equity Valuation in Fiscal Policy Regimes – Jesse Livermore

If households and corporations were to deficit spend in the way that the government deficit spends, they would eventually run up against liquidity and solvency constraints. But a sovereign government is not subject to those constraints. Through its central bank, it decides the interest rate at which it borrows. And it doesn’t even need to borrow—it can finance spending by printing new money. As long as there are economic participants willing to withhold the new money, and as long as the economy has the productive capacity to fulfill any additional spending that the withholding process might give rise to, economic problems such as inflation need not emerge.This insight, most notably attributable to the British economist Abba Lerner, is a core component of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). As the insight becomes better understood in 

political circles, it will increasingly drive fiscal policies that seek to guarantee desired levels of income and spending growth in the economy, policies that have the potential to turn markets upside-down, for better or worse.


DisclaimerThe Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. We currently have vested interests in Facebook, Okta, Shopify and Tencent.

Can A Stock Be Considered Cheaper Even Though Its Price Went Up?

Does a stock going up in price automatically make it more expensive?

If the price of a company’s stock went up, it’s more expensive, right? Well, not exactly. Stocks are not something static. Stocks represent part-ownership of an actual and ever-changing company.

Because the underlying company changes, its value may go up or down. If a company’s share price rises slower than its intrinsic value, the stock may have actually gotten cheaper even after the price increase.

What determines intrinsic value?

Most investors agree that a company’s intrinsic value is determined by the company’s cash on hand and the future free cash flows that it can generate. This cash can be used to grow the company or returned to shareholders through buybacks or dividends.

Investors often use historical price-to-earnings and price-to-free cash flow ratios as a proxy to gauge how cheap or expensive a company is.

Facebook shares

Facebook is an example of a stock whose price has risen, but that has actually gotten cheaper based on its earnings and free cash flow multiples.

The chart below shows Facebook’s stock price against its price-to-earnings (P/E) and price-to-free cash flow (P/FCF) multiples over the last five years.

Source: Ycharts

The blue line is Facebook’s stock price. In the last five years, Facebook’s stock price has climbed 220% from US$88.26 to US$282.73.

The red and orange lines show the social media giant’s P/E and P/FCF ratios over the years. As you can see, the P/E ratio has trended downwards, while the P/FCF flow ratio has remained largely flat. This is because the growth in Facebook’s earnings and free cash flow over the last five years has outran and kept pace, respectively, with the rise in the company’s share price. As such, based on these valuation multiples, Facebook shares can actually be considered cheaper today than they were five years ago, even though the price is higher.

Buying stocks with high valuations

The Facebook example highlights that buying a stock at a high P/E ratio may still reap good returns for investors.

In the past, Facebook shares traded at much higher P/E ratios than they do today. Yet buying shares then, still resulted in solid returns.

What this tells us is that if we buy into a quality company that can grow its free cash flow and earnings at a fast rate, even a compression in the stock’s valuation ratios will still lead to strong share price performance.

Final words

Investors often confuse stock price movements as a change in the relative cheapness of a company. If the price of a stock rises, we assume it has become more expensive and vice versa. However, that completely misses the bigger picture.

The difference between a company’s stock price and future intrinsic value is what makes a company cheaper or more expensive.

We should, therefore, put more emphasis assessing whether the company can grow its earnings and free cash flow and the longevity of their growth runway, rather than looking at the recent price movement of a stock.

DisclaimerThe Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. I currently have a vested interest in Facebook.

What We’re Reading (Week Ending 13 September 2020)

The best articles we’ve read in recent times on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

We’ve constantly been sharing a list of our recent reads in our weekly emails for The Good Investors.

Do subscribe for our weekly updates through the orange box in the blog (it’s on the side if you’re using a computer, and all the way at the bottom if you’re using mobile) – it’s free!

But since our readership-audience for The Good Investors is wider than our subscriber base, we think sharing the reading list regularly on the blog itself can benefit even more people. The articles we share touch on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

Here are the articles for the week ending 13 September 2020:

1. The S-1 Club | Unity is Manifesting the Metaverse – MDA Gabriele

We’d be remiss if we didn’t discuss Unity’s role as a “founder” of the Metaverse, a term coined in Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash, and further popularized by media analystMatthew Ball.

The Metaverse describes a state of interoperability across digital platforms in the virtual world. To date, virtual worlds have been built as walled gardens with their own laws of physics, currencies, and customs. The Metaverse connects walled gardens the way physical networking infrastructure connected internal networks nearly 50 years ago to create the Internet. The Metaverse also powers real-world interactions by enabling multiple people to experience the same event at once and collaborate in highly immersive environments. Fans of Ready Player One will recall the ragers held in The Oasis.

Where does Unity fit in such a world?

One perspective comes from Unity’s nemesis, Epic Games. As mentioned in Company History, Epic is the creator of the directly competitive Unreal engine. In a conversation with the LA Times, CEO Tim Sweeney described what the Metaverse will enable:

“Just as every company a few decades ago created a webpage, and then at some point every company created a Facebook page, I think we’re approaching the point where every company will have a real-time live 3D presence, through partnerships with game companies or through games like Fortnite and Minecraft and Roblox. That’s starting to happen now. It’s going to be a much bigger thing than these previous generational shifts. Not only will it be a boon for game developers, but it will be the beginning of tearing down the barriers not just between platforms but between games.”

If you ascribe to Sweeney’s view, then the upside for engines like Unity and Unreal is extraordinary. Rather than merely powering game development, Unity has the potential to serve as the foundational layer — the rails — of a new, shared synthetic reality.

2. Will Money Printing Cause Inflation? – Michael Batnick

If we’ve learned anything since the government’s response to the last crisis, it’s that quantitative easing or money printing or whatever you want to call it, does not necessarily plant the seeds for higher prices in the future. If you have any faith in how markets work, then look to our borrowing costs as a clue. If investors were really worried about the size of the federal deficit, than the costs for funding it wouldn’t be at a record low.

One of the reasons that people worry so much about the size of the deficit is because they think of the government like a household. But unlike a household, the government can create more money. Unlike a household the government can keep borrowing. And unlike a household, the bill never comes due.

3. WeChat and TikTok Taking China Censorship Global, Study Says – Jamie Tarabay

ByteDance Ltd.’s TikTok often buries or hides words that reflect political movements, gender and sexual orientation or religion in most countries where it operates, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute said in a report released Tuesday. Most of the content censored on WeChat supported pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong, as well as messages from the U.S. and U.K. embassies regarding a new national security law enacted by Beijing at the end of June that has provoked protests across the city.

TikTok, which began as a place where teens lip-sync to music, has become a forum for political protest including the Black Lives Matter movement, said Fergus Ryan, one of the authors. Hashtags related to LGBTQ+ issues were also suppressed in several languages, according to the report. Other topics censored in the past included criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

4. Understanding Stakeholder Value: Where Do Profits Come From? Sean Stannard-Stockton

In our 2017 post PRICING POWER: DELIGHTING CUSTOMERS VS MORTGAGING YOUR MOAT, we explained how companies that seek to capture as much of the surplus value as possible for themselves and leave as little as possible in the hands of their customers, do not have nearly the opportunity to maximize long term shareholder profits as those companies that relentless try to increase consumer surplus.

A company that is “mortgaging its moat” as described in the post, is one that seeks to extract as much of the consumer surplus as possible from their customers and capture the value as profit for themselves. This is what a monopoly is all about. Monopoly conditions disconnect sellers from needing to worry about competition and allows them to set pricing at the level that wins the maximum amount of profits while minimizing consumer surplus. Under these conditions, there is some end point at which the company has extracted every dollar of consumer surplus for themselves and 1) they are unable to extract any more, while 2) consumers are willing to try any other even barely viable alternative just to attempt to exit the exploitative relationship they are in with the seller.

Conversely, a company that is “delighting customers” is one that, because they relentless drive up the value of their products and services by creating so much additional consumer surplus, gets no push back from consumers when they raise prices. Under these conditions, there is no theoretical limit to the amount of consumer surplus a company can create nor on the value they can capture as producer surplus (profits) via raising prices.

5. Reed Hastings Had Us All Staying Home Before We Had To – Maureen Dowd

Has the pandemic altered Mr. Hastings’s perception of the competition?

It’s the “sideways threats” that bite companies, he said. “If you think of Kodak and Fuji, competing in film for 100 years, but then ultimately it turns out to be Instagram.”

Speaking of which, I wondered if he thinks that Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg and Jack Dorsey have done enough as far as election meddling and disinformation threats?

“Every new technology has real issues that have to be thought through and, you know, we’re in that phase for social media,” he said, adding: “The car, many people think is a great invention for human freedom, but it also has killed a lot of people over time. Film got used by Hitler for terrible purposes.”

He continued: “So I find Mark and Sheryl to be sincere in trying to think these things through.”

6. Taming the Tail: Adventures in Improving AI Economics Martin Casado and Matt Bornstein

Many of the difficulties in building efficient AI companies happen when facing long-tailed distributions of data, which are well-documented in many natural and computational systems.

While formal definitions of the concept can be pretty dense, the intuition behind it is relatively simple: If you choose a data point from a long-tailed distribution at random, it’s very likely (for the purpose of this post, let’s say at least 50% and possibly much higher) to be in the tail.

Take the example of internet search terms. Popular keywords in the “head” and “middle” of the distribution (shown in blue below) account for less than 30% of all terms. The remaining 70% of keywords lie in the “tail,” seeing less than 100 searches per month. If you assume it takes the same amount of work to process a query regardless of where it sits in the distribution, then in a heavy-tailed system the majority of work will be in the tail – where the value per query is relatively low…

… The long tail – and the work it creates – turn out to be a major cause of the economic challenges of building AI businesses.

The most immediate impact is on the raw cost of data and compute resources. These costs are often far higher for ML than for traditional software, since so much data, so many experiments, and so many parameters are required to achieve accurate results. Anecdotally, development costs – and failure rates – for AI applications can be 3-5x higher than in typical software products.

However, a narrow focus on cloud costs misses two more pernicious potential impacts of the long tail. First, the long tail can contribute to high variable costs beyond infrastructure. If, for example, the questions sent to a chatbot vary greatly from customer to customer – i.e. a large fraction of the queries are in the tail – then building an accurate system will likely require substantial work per customer. Unfortunately, depending on the distribution of the solution space, this work and the associated COGS (cost of goods sold) may be hard to engineer away.

Even worse, AI businesses working on long-tailed problems can actually show diseconomies of scale – meaning the economics get worse over time relative to competitors. Data has a cost to collect, process, and maintain. While this cost tends to decrease over time relative to data volume, the marginal benefit of additional data points declines much faster. In fact, this relationship appears to be exponential – at some point, developers may need 10x more data to achieve a 2x subjective improvement. While it’s tempting to wish for an AI analog to Moore’s Law that will dramatically improve processing performance and drive down costs, that doesn’t seem to be taking place (algorithmic improvements notwithstanding).

7. Airbnb’s resurgence – Felix Salmon

Estimates from Edison Trends show Marriott and other hotel chains seeing much lower spending than at this time last year. At Airbnb, by contrast, spending is hitting new all-time highs.

Airbnb spending is running a whopping 75% higher than this time [September 2020] last year, says the research shop, based on a panel of spending data including more than 65,000 Airbnb transactions.

That means Airbnb’s revenues have comfortably surpassed Marriott’s, for the first time.


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

How People Think About Investing

A friend of mine and his colleague recently approached me to give an online presentation. My friend works in a financial advisory organisation and he wanted me to share my thoughts on how people generally think about investing and how could he and his colleagues explain long-term investing in a convincing manner. The presentation took place on 7 September 2020.

I prepared a speech and slide-deck for the session. They are meant to be viewed together. You can download the slide deck here. The speech is found below.


Hello all! Good afternoon, thanks for having me. Before I begin, I would like to thank Sam and Maxxell for inviting me to speak to everyone who’s gathered here. 

Max is my friend, and he wanted me to touch on two things today: The mentality of individual investors and how to explain investing convincingly. So I’m going to be talking about these things today, specifically in relation to the stock market, because this is where I think I have some knowledge in. For this session, I will be presenting for 30 minutes, and then we can have the next 30 minutes for Q&A.

[Slide 2]

I need to share a disclaimer too. Everything I say here today should not be seen as a recommendation of any stock or investment product, nor should they be seen as a solicitation for the purchase of any stock or investment product. What I say should also not be taken as financial or investment advice. 

Introduction

[Slides 3 to 4]

With this, a quick introduction of myself before I dive into the presentation. I was with The Motley Fool Singapore, an online investment advisory portal, for nearly seven years from January 2013 to October 2019. My role was to conduct research on the stock market and individual stocks, and communicate them to readers of Fool Singapore’s website, so I have a lot of experience interacting with men-on-the-street types of investors. I was a co-leader of the investment team at Fool Singapore and recommended stocks for subscribers to the company’s online investment newsletters.

One of my proudest achievements with the company was to help its flagship investment newsletter, Stock Advisor Gold, beat the market soundly. Stock Advisor Gold was launched in May 2016 and we recommended two stocks per month, one from Singapore, and one from international markets, including the US, UK, Malaysia, and Hong Kong. We measure the return of our recommendations by taking an average of the performance of each stock we recommend; at the same time, we also track the performance of a global stock market index. The newsletter nearly doubled the global stock market’s return over a 3.5 year period as you can see.

Today, I run an investing blog called The Good Investors together with my long-time friend, Jeremy Chia. The Good Investors is our personal investing blog, where we share our investing thoughts freely. I will be sharing this presentation deck on the blog, so you can refer to it later. Jeremy and I also run an investment fund named Compounder Fund, which invests in stocks around the world for the long run. Compounder Fund was launched in May this year and started investing in mid-July. Its mission is to “Grow Your Wealth and Enrich Society” and Jeremy and myself see it as more than just a business – it’s a platform for us to do good. 

With the introduction over, let’s dig into the meat of today’s presentation: How individual investors think about stock market investing and how to explain investing in a convincing way. What I want to do is to contrast six investing “beliefs” I commonly come across with actual real world data. And by me doing so, I think you’ll gain a better appreciation for how to better describe stock market investing to your clients.

“Belief” No.1: The economy’s bad (good), so stocks must do poorly (really well)

[Slides 5 to 8]

Throughout my career, one of the most common things I’ve heard from investors is to link the economy with the stock market. If the economy’s surging, stocks should be doing well, and if the economy’s faring poorly, stocks should be doing badly. But real-world data show that this is often not the case. 

For instance, we can look at the Panic of 1907 which was a period of severe economic contraction in the USA. It does not seem to be widely remembered today, but it had a huge impact and was in fact one of the key motivations behind the US government’s decision to set up the Federal Reserve (the USA’s central bank) in 1913. For perspective of how tough the Panic of 1907 was, when 1908 started, business volumes in many industries fell by 72% from a year ago; by the middle of 1908, business volumes had recovered to just 50% of what they were in 1907.

Now let’s look at how the US stock market did from 1907 to 1917. US stocks fell for most of 1907. They bottomed in November 1907 after a 32% decline from January. But they then started climbing rapidly in December 1907 and throughout 1908 – and the US stock market never looked back for the next nine years. Earlier, I described the horrible economic conditions in the country for most of 1908. Yes, there was an improvement as the year progressed, but economic output toward the end of 1908 was still significantly lower than in 1907. So this is one great example of why stocks and the economy are not the same things.   

I have two more examples. First, you can refer to this chart on the disparity between the stock market returns and economic growth for China and Mexico from 1992 to 2013. Despite stunning 15% annual GDP growth in that period for China, Chinese stocks actually fell by 2% per year. Mexico on the other hand, saw its stocks gain 18% annually, despite its economy growing at a pedestrian rate of just 2% per year. Second, in the second quarter of 2020, US GDP fell by over 9% from a year ago. But some of the US stock market’s largest companies actually experienced revenue growth. For instance, Amazon grew its revenue by an amazing 40%, while Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft each posted low-teens revenue growth.

So when we’re looking at the stock market, I think it’s important to focus on stocks and not the economy. They are not the same things. 

“Belief” No.2: There’s so much uncertainty now, let’s invest later

[Slides 9 to 13]

Another common thing I’ve heard individual investors say over the years is that “There’s so much uncertainty now, I prefer to wait for the dust to settle before I invest.” Today, with COVID-19 as a backdrop, this sentiment is likely to be even stronger than before.

But let’s imagine that sometime in the future, there’s one single year in which the price of oil will spike, the US will go to war in the Middle East, and the US economy will experience a recession. How do you think the US stock market will fare over the next five years or the next 30 years after this particular horrendous year? Take a second to think about your answer and remember it. 

The events I mentioned all happened in 1990. The price of oil spiked in August 1990, the same month that the US went into an actual war in the Middle East. In July 1990, the US entered a recession. But from the start of 1990 to 1995, the S&P 500 was up by nearly 80%, including dividends and after inflation. From the start of 1990 to the end of 2019, US stocks were up by nearly 800%. What’s really fascinating is that the world has actually seen multiple crises in every single year from 1990 to today as shown in the table, which is constructed partially with data from finance writer and venture capitalist, Morgan Housel – uncertainty was always around, but that has not stopped US stocks from rising over time. 

“Belief” No.3: What goes up, must come down

[Slides 14 to 15]

“What goes up must come down” is also one of the common things about the stock market that I’ve heard investors say. But the historical evidence shows otherwise. 

This chart from Credit Suisse shows the returns of stocks from developed economies as well as developing economies from 1990 to 2013 – this is more than 110 years. In this timeframe, stocks in developed economies (the blue line) have produced an annual return of 8.3% while stocks in developing economies (the red line) have generated a return of 7.4% per year. There are clearly bumps along the way, but the real long run trend is crystal clear. For perspective, an annual return of 8.3% for 113 years turns $1,000 into nearly $8.2 million. 

So what goes up, does not necessarily have to come down permanently – when it comes to the stock. But there is an important caveat to note here: Diversification is crucial. Single stocks, or stocks from a single country can face catastrophic, near-permanent losses for various reasons. Devastation from war or natural disasters. Corrupt or useless leaders. Incredible overvaluation at the starting point. These are some of factors that can cause single stocks or stocks from a single country to do poorly even after decades. By diversifying, we lower our risk.

“Belief” No.4: It’s risky to invest in stocks for the long run

[Slide 16]

The fourth “belief” I want to highlight is the commonly-held idea that it’s risky to invest in stocks for the long run. What the data shows is the complete opposite: The longer you hold your stocks (assuming you have a diversified portfolio of stocks), the lower your chances are of losing money. 

The chart I’m showing now comes from Morgan Housel. Morgan once studied the S&P 500’s data for the years stretching from 1871 to 2012 and found that if you hold stocks for two months, you have a 60% chance of making a profit. If you hold stocks for a year, you have a 68% chance of earning a positive return. If your holding period becomes 20 years, then there’s a 100% chance of making a gain. 

So instead of it being risky to hold your stocks for the long run, the reverse is true – the longer your holding period, the less risky investing in stocks becomes.

“Belief” No.5: Stocks are so risky because they move up and down so much!

[Slides 17 to 20]

There are also investors who believe that stocks are really risky financial products because they move up and down violently over the short run. But it’s all a matter of perspective. To explain further, I want to play a quick game with all of you. I will introduce two companies – both are real companies – and I want to ask you to think about which of the two you will like to own. 

The first company has been a nightmare for investors. From 1995 to 2015, it has fallen by 50% or more on four separate occasions. It has also declined by over 66% twice. The chart you see, from a Motley Fool article by Morgan Housel, shows when and by how much the company’s share price was below its high from the previous two years.

The second company has been a dream for investors. From 1995 to 2015, its share price surged by 105,000%. A $1,000 investment in the company’s shares in 1995 would have become more than $1 million by 2015. 

You have five seconds to think about which company you want to own. Ready? I’m going to reveal their names now..

Both the first and second company are the same! They are Monster Beverage, a US-listed company that sells energy drinks. What this shows is that volatility in stocks is a feature, not a bug. When stocks go through their ups and downs, it’s not because they are risky – it’s just what they do! Even the best stock in the world will not give you a smooth ride up, but this does not mean it’s risky.

“Belief” No.6: I just need to find a world-class fund manager

[Slides 21 to 22]

The last common belief investors have that I’m going to discuss today is the idea that all they need to succeed in the stock market is to find a really good fund manager. If only it were that easy..

From November 1999 to November 2009, the US-based investment fund, the CGM Focus Fund, gained 18.2% annually. I’ll need all of your help to make a guess as to what return the fund’s investors earned over the same period…

Okay, now for the reveal. The fund’s investors lost 11% annually in the decade ended November 2009. How did this happen? CGM Focus Fund’s investors piled into the fund when it was doing well, but sold at the first whiff of trouble. This caused the fund’s investors to basically buy high and sell low. 

CGM Focus Fund’s experience is not an isolated case because it happened with Peter Lynch, who is one of the best stock market fund managers the world has seen. From 1977 to 1990, Peter Lynch earned an annual return of 29% for Fidelity Magellan Fund, turning every thousand dollars invested with him into $27,000. But the average investor in his fund made only 7% per year – $1,000 invested with an annual return of 7% for 13 years would become just $2,400. The same problem with CGM Focus Fund happened to Lynch too. When he would have a setback money would flow out of his fund through redemptions. When he got back on track, money would flow back in after missing the recovery.

So investing with the best fund manager in the world is not enough – investors need the discipline to stay with the manager too.

Conclusion

[Slides 23 to 25]

To conclude, this is the important takeaway from my presentation that I hope you have: The stock market is a wonderful wealth-creation machine for investors who are able to invest for the long run in a diversified manner, both geographically and across industries.

The ride up is not going to be smooth. This is because humanity’s progress has never been smooth. It took us only 66 years to go from the first demonstration of manned flight by the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk to putting a man on the moon. But in between was World War II, a brutal battle across the globe from 1939 to 1945 that killed an estimated 66 million. This is how progress looks like.

The stock market, ultimately, is a reflection of human ingenuity. The stock market is a collection of businesses that have been formed by entrepreneurs seeking to solve a problem. And so because human progress has never been smooth, the stock market won’t be a smooth ride up. But what an amazing ride it’s going to be. 

DisclaimerThe Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. I have a vested interest in Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft.

Can We Trust An Auditor’s Report?

Accounting scandals at Luckin Coffee and Wirecard have caused investors billions of dollars. How can we prevent such a situation from happening to us?

Accounting scandals have been in the spotlight in recent months. Companies such as Wirecard and Luckin Coffee are two of the more recent high profile cases that have cost investors billions of dollars.

Worryingly, both companies were given a pass from reputable auditors before their respective cases blew up. As investors, we rely on external auditors to give us a sense of the company’s financial well being. But with the latest scandals, can we truly trust an auditor’s stamp of approval?

Nothing new

There have been many high profile accounting scandals over the past few decades. 

One major example that comes to mind is the accounting scandal of Waste Management Inc. In 1998, the company was revealed to have faked over US$1.7 billion in earnings from 1992 to 1997. Then CEO, A. Maurice Meyers was eventually found guilty along with other top executives and the SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) fined Arthur Anderson, the company’s auditor, over US$7 million.

But the case that truly shocked the world came a few years later in 2001- Enron. Enron was a US energy, commodities, and services company. In that year, it was discovered that the company had been using accounting loopholes to hide billions of dollars of bad debt, while inflating earnings. Within a year, Enron lost US$74 billion in market capitalisation. Its auditor was again Arthur Anderson, which by then had lost so much of its reputation that it was forced to dissolve.

Recent scandals 

You would thought that the demise of Arthur Anderson would have brought a swift change to the industry. And yet, more than two decades later, we still hear of major scandals rocking the financial world.

Earlier this year, the China-based but US-listed coffee chain, Luckin Coffee, admitted that at least US$310 million of its sales over the previous three quarters were fabricated.

Today, Luckin Coffee’s shares have been delisted from the NASDAQ exchange where they were previously listed, and the company’s survival is in serious doubt. One of the company’s major shareholders is none other than GIC, one of the Singapore government’s investment arms, owned 5.37% of the Chinese company as recently as March 2020.

The other big-name scandal this year was Wirecard, a high flying payment solutions company that is headquartered and listed in Germany. It was considered one of Germany’s tech success stories and was briefly included in the country’s main stock market bellwether, the DAX index.

However, on 25 June this year, Wirecard filed for insolvency after revealing that €1.9 billion in cash was missing from its coffers. One of the company’s largest investors is Softbank, which injected €900  million cash in 2019. Softbank has since joined efforts with Wirecard’s other investors to pursue legal action against the company’s auditor, EY.

Worrying for investors

Although the vast majority of companies are free from accounting fraud and investors can fully trust whatever they see on the financial statements, these recent accounting scandals cast a shadow of doubt for investors.

Both Wirecard and Luckin Coffee were audited by reputable auditors and yet both managed to distort their financial statements. Even professional investors such as GIC and Softbank were badly burnt.

Most worryingly, Wirecard reportedly managed to hide the missing cash from auditors for years. As investors, we often look at the cash statement as the most reliable piece of information because cash is traditionally the hardest to manipulate. And yet, Wirecard was able to mislead investors that they had more than US$2 billion in cash, which they didn’t.

What other steps can we take

As investors, we usually look to the auditor’s report as the source of truth. They are supposed to be our neutral insiders. Yet, the past few scandals have shown that sometimes an auditor’s stamp of approval is simply not enough.

So what more can we as investors do?

I think as investors, it is difficult to sniff out whether a company’s financial statements are legitimate. Even big-name investors may end up betting on the wrong horse. The best we can do is to look at trends and market data. For instance, investors should look at the past track record of the company, the background of the managers, and where the company is audited and listed.

If anything seems amiss or too good to be true, our danger-radar should be up.

Portfolio sizing is also important to try to reduce the risk of accounting scandals. Having a sufficiently diversified portfolio and sizing down a position that you think has a greater risk of fraud ensures that if you are unfortunate enough to bet on a fraudulent company, your portfolio as a whole will still not be severely impacted. 

A call for change

Based on recent scandals, we can see the clear conflicts of interest for auditors. Auditing firms are paid by the company that they are auditing, and these contracts may be worth millions of dollars. 

To protect their nest egg, auditors could be under pressure to turn a blind eye on accounting malpractice, as was the case in the Enron scandal.

Changes, therefore, need to be made in the way companies are audited. The conflicts of interest create an unnecessary incentive and can be the reason why accounting fraud may take such a long time to be detected.

Regulatory bodies need to find a way to reduce these conflicts of interest to prevent accounting scandals that not only hurt investors but the integrity of the financial markets as a whole.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

What We’re Reading (Week Ending 06 September 2020)

The best articles we’ve read in recent times on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

We’ve constantly been sharing a list of our recent reads in our weekly emails for The Good Investors.

Do subscribe for our weekly updates through the orange box in the blog (it’s on the side if you’re using a computer, and all the way at the bottom if you’re using mobile) – it’s free!

But since our readership-audience for The Good Investors is wider than our subscriber base, we think sharing the reading list regularly on the blog itself can benefit even more people. The articles we share touch on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

Here are the articles for the week ending 06 September 2020:

1. Modern Monetary Theory Finds an Embrace in an Unexpected Place: Wall Street – Patricia Cohen

Besides the risk of government deficits, M.M.T. throws out a drawerful of other venerable assumptions with Marie Kondo-esque ruthlessness. To start, it instructs you to erase that textbook drawing of a white-haired Uncle Sam collecting tax dollars from the public and then using them to pay for military weapons, highway repairs, federal workers’ wages and more.

Tax revenues are not what finance the government’s expenditures, argues Stephanie Kelton, an economist at Stony Brook University and one of the most influential modern monetary theorists. What actually happens in a country that controls its own currency, she says, is that the government first decides what it’s going to spend. In the United States, Congress agrees on a budget. Then government agencies start handing out dollars to the public to pay for those tanks, earth movers and salaries. Afterward, it takes a portion back in the form of taxes. If the government takes back less than it gave out, there will be a deficit.

“The national debt is nothing more than a historical record of all of the dollars that were spent into the economy and not taxed back, and are currently being saved in the form of Treasury securities,” Ms. Kelton said.

Ms. Kelton, a frequent speaker at business and financial conferences and the chief economic adviser to Mr. Sanders during his 2016 presidential campaign, points out that every dollar the government spends translates into a dollar of income for someone else. So a deficit in the public sector simultaneously produces a surplus outside the government.

The reverse is also true, Ms. Kelton maintains, and that can lead to trouble. The seven biggest American depressions or downturns going back 200 years, she said, were all preceded by government surpluses.

2. Save Like A Pessimist, Invest Like An Optimist – Morgan Housel

A 100-year event doesn’t mean it happens every 100 years. It means there’s about a 1% chance of it occurring in any given year. That seems low. But when there are hundreds of different independent 100-year events, what are the odds that any one of them will occur in a given year?

Pretty good, in fact.

If next year there’s a 1% chance of a new disastrous pandemic, a 1% chance of a crippling depression, a 1% chance of a catastrophic flood, a 1% chance of political collapse, and on and on, then the odds that something bad will happen next year – or any year – are … uncomfortably high.

Littlewood’s Law tells us to expect a miracle every month. The flip side is to expect a disaster roughly as often.

Which is what history tells us, isn’t it?

3. No, Robinhood Traders Aren’t Affecting the Stock Market – Nick Maggiulli

When combining the holdings data with pricing data from Yahoo Finance, I was able to look at the one-day change in number of Robinhood users holding a stock and see how well it correlated with the one-day price return of that stock.

I did this because I wanted to test whether an increase (or decrease) in Robinhood users holding a stock was met with a similar increase (or decrease) in that stock’s price. I understand that the number of Robinhood users holding a stock is not the same as the total dollar impact that Robinhood users have on a stock (that is, not all Robinhood traders have the same bankroll), but let’s assume that they are similar in size for now. Additionally, I created a subset of the data to start on February 19 (the day before the Covid-19-inspired sell-off began) to only capture the correlation from when Robinhood users started becoming more active on the platform.

After doing this exercise for the top 200 most popular stocks on Robintrack, I found that for most of these stocks, there was little to no correlation between the one-day change in stock price and the one-day change in the number of Robinhood users holding them:

4. The 2 Variables That Drive Stock Prices Ben Carlson

If investing was a cocktail, it would essentially boil down to one part fundamentals and one part emotions. Fundamentals are easier than ever to capture because we now have access to more data in a single day than our ancestors would see in a lifetime.

The emotional component of investing will never be quantifiable because it’s impossible to predict how people will feel in the future.

The late Jack Bogle introduced this concept in his book Don’t Count On It by breaking down expected annual returns of the U.S. stock market into the following components:

Market Returns = Dividend Yield + Earnings Growth +/- Changes in the P/E Ratio

Dividends and earnings are the fundamental portion of stock market returns while the change in the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is the speculative portion of returns. The change in P/E represents how much people are willing to pay for corporate fundamentals and the reason it’s considered speculative is because it can vary widely over time.

5. Warren Buffett’s Japan Bet, Warren Buffett’s Gold Bet, etc – Joshua Brown

Warren Buffett is an investor who looks to buy future growth at reasonable valuations today. He prioritizes long-term cashflow generation, management quality, competitive position and return on capital when he buys a stock. He’s got two well-known investment lieutenants helping him make decisions, and they are also empowered with enough autonomy to make decisions of their own.

One thing you will not find throughout the annals of Berkshire Hathaway’s history is a lot of “thematic” investing. Buffett doesn’t do “themes.” He would not have been a big user of Motif Investments. He doesn’t use his stock purchases to tell a story about his macro forecasts. He may discuss his stock purchases in a broader sense (Buy American, I Am) to convey an opinion about the present market situation and where he’s finding value, but he doesn’t make an investment in order to express himself or signal something.

He makes investments in order to earn a profit. Not in order to tell you a story and put you to bed.

6. ‘I Can’t Believe I’m Saying This, But I’m Passing on Seth Klarman’ Leanna Orr

Klarman’s firm runs one wide-open strategy, or product, via ten Baupost Value funds operating in parallel but raised at different times. When the firm invested in insurance claims against bankrupt utility Pacific Gas and Electric, for example, investors got equitable exposure across the various vehicles. The vintage-year structure resembles private equity funds; the deal sharing does not. Hedge funds typically divide their funds by strategy: one long-short equity, another long-only, one focused on China, etc.

Baupost prefers carte blanche.

Investing with the firm means allowing Klarman’s team to do mostly whatever it wants with the money. Since the financial crisis, that’s often meant buying private assets, such as real estate, that linger for a long time in portfolio. “I’m not a fan of people in the hedge fund world taking what would be a five- to seven year real estate strategy,” the head of an elite institution gripes. “That’s not what a hedge fund is.” Klarman, observers say, has been doing more and more of these types of deals — and returning less and less. Baupost has delivered double-digit gains just once since 2010, II previously reported. “The return-on-equity numbers don’t stand up to top-tier private equity,” according to the allocator who opted out. “I would prefer to just be in private equity that says what it is. At least then it’s a defined approach.”

The most controversial thing that Baupost does with its wide-open investment mandate is nothing at all. Cash amounts to about one third of the portfolio on average, or about $10 billion. “The last thing you want to do is pay a manager to hold a lot of cash,” says one hedge fund specialist. Baupost charges clients 1.25 percent in management fees, regardless of performance or what the money is invested in. Charities, schools, and other clients pay Baupost upwards of $120 million for one year of cash management, given an average holding. Allocators really don’t like that — or at least they really like to complain about it.

7. The Potentially Revolutionary Celera 500L Aircraft Officially Breaks Cover – Joseph Trevithick & Tyler Rogoway

Otto Aviation says the Celera 500L had a maximum cruising speed of at least 450 miles per hour and a range of over 4,500 miles. It also has impressive fuel economy, achieving 18 and 25 miles per gallon, according to Otto Aviation. A traditional business jet with similar capabilities to the Celera 500L, including its six-passenger capacity, typically burn a gallon of fuel for every two to three miles of flight, making Otto’s design dramatically more economical, as well as more environmentally friendly. The company says that the Celera 500L will have an unbelievably low per-hour flight cost of just $328.

This and aircraft’s other notable performance characteristics are made possible in large part due to its highly aerodynamic overall laminar flow shape, which produces approximately 59 percent less drag than existing similar-sized, more conventionally-shaped aircraft. Its high-efficiency Raikhlin Aircraft Engine Developments (RED) A03 V12 piston engine is another important part of the equation. The A03 has a multi-stage turbocharger and can run on Jet A1 fuel, as well as kerosene or biodiesel.

Germany-based RED touts the engine as a very high-efficiency design with low fuel consumption and very good reliability over existing piston engine designs with equivalent horsepower ratings. “The Celera 500L’s aerodynamic airframe requires significantly less horsepower to achieve take-off and cruise speeds, allowing for a more fuel-efficient power plant [the A03] to be utilized,” Otto’s website says.


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. 

Happy 90th Birthday, Mr Buffett!

30 August 1930 is the birthday of Warren Buffett. To celebrate the 90th year of his extraordinary life, here are some of my favourite stories about him.

Warren Buffett is one of my heroes, not just in investing, but also in life. On 30 August 2020, he turned an amazing 90 years old. But as his dear friend Bill Gates notes, Buffett still “has the mental sharpness of a 30-year-old, the mischievous laugh of a 10-year-old, and the diet of a 6-year-old.”

To celebrate Buffett’s extraordinary life, I want to share a few of my favourite stories about him.

Story 1: Philanthropy and the meaning of wealth

In August 2014, Buffett, together with his friends Bill and Melinda Gates, created The Giving Pledge, a movement that encourages society’s wealthiest individuals to pledge the majority of their immense wealth to philanthropic causes. The Giving Pledge started with 40 of America’s wealthiest people and today includes more than 200 families from 23 countries. The Giving Pledge has its roots in Buffett’s decision in 2006 to gradually give all of his wealth to philanthropic foundations. As part of The Giving Pledge, Buffett has committed to giving more than 99% of his wealth to philanthropy during his lifetime or at his death. According to a July 2020 New York Times article, Buffett has donated at least US$37 billion to philanthropic causes since his 2006 pledge. 

For me, the admirable actions of Buffett and the Gateses are a reminder to myself that the accumulation of wealth gains meaning only if it’s used to better the lives of others and not for purely hedonistic personal enjoyment. 

Story 2: Trust

In 1983, Buffett acquired 90% of The Nebraska Furniture Mart from the then-89 year-old Rose Blumkin (popularly known as Mrs B) for US$55 million. When he made the acquisition, he did not request for an audit of Nebraska Furniture Mart’s business, take an inventory, verify the receivables, nor check the company’s property titles. The contract was just over one page long. 

Buffett had full trust in Blumkin’s character. It’s easy to see why. In 1950, Blumkin was sued by competitors who complained that she was engaging in unfair trading by offering low prices for furniture to consumers. This is how she responded: 

“I went to Marshall Field in Chicago. I tell them I need 3,000 yards of carpet for an apartment building — I got, actually, an apartment building. I buy it from Marshall Field for $3 a yard, I sell it for $3.95 a yard. Three lawyers from Mohawk take me into court, suing me for unfair trade — they’re selling for $7.95. Three lawyers and me with my English. I go to the judge and say, ‘Judge, I sell everything 10 percent above cost, what’s wrong? I don’t rob my customers?’ He throws out the case. The next day, he comes in and buys $1,400 worth. I take out an ad with the whole case and put it in the Omaha World-Herald: ‘Here’s proof how I sell my customers.” 

I have a firm belief that it’s hard to make a bad deal with a good person no matter how poorly-written the contract is. I also believe it’s equally hard to make a good deal with a bad person, no matter how strong the contract is. Buffett’s experience with Mrs B taught me so.

Story 3: Patience   

In July 2020, I published the article, The Fascinating Facts Behind Warren Buffett’s Best Investment. It discusses Buffett’s investment in The Washington Post Company (WPC), now known as Graham Holdings Company, in the 1970s. 

It’s one of my favourite Buffettt stories for two reasons. First, Buffett’s WPC shares gained over 10,000% from the 1970s to 2007, making it one of the best – if not the best – investments he has ever made. Second, WPC’s share price actually fell by more than 20% shortly after Buffett invested, and then stayed there for three years.

To achieve great returns in stock market investing, patience is almost always a necessity. Buffett’s investing results show exactly why.  

This article will never be seen by Warren Buffett, but I hope my birthday wishes for him can still be received by him in some way or another. Happy 90th birthday, Mr Buffett! Stay healthy and strong, always!


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. 

What We’re Reading (Week Ending 30 August 2020)

The best articles we’ve read in recent times on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

We’ve constantly been sharing a list of our recent reads in our weekly emails for The Good Investors.

Do subscribe for our weekly updates through the orange box in the blog (it’s on the side if you’re using a computer, and all the way at the bottom if you’re using mobile) – it’s free!

But since our readership-audience for The Good Investors is wider than our subscriber base, we think sharing the reading list regularly on the blog itself can benefit even more people. The articles we share touch on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

Here are the articles for the week ending 30 August 2020:

1. Matt Ball – The Future of Media: Movies, the Metaverse, and More – Patrick O’Shaughnessy and Matthew Ball

Certainly I think under COVID, this topic of the metaverse has certainly accelerated and there were a lot of conflations. I think a lot of people think of the metaverse as virtual worlds, those certainly have existed for decades. They think of it as UGC content creation platform, such as Minecraft, that’s basically an interactive or immersive version of a YouTube. Others think about this from an avatar perspective. You have a virtual version of you that exists somewhere else that you have control of.

All of those are interesting elements, even AR glasses come into the conversation about the metaverse. But if you’re talking about the metaverse, that’s basically like saying Google is the internet, or iPhone is the internet, or the Yahoo directory was the internet. It’s not entirely wrong. It’s certainly an important element of the consumer experience of it or what they might describe it, but it completely misses the idea that the internet itself is a series of tubes in the ground, standards, protocols, technology, and ideas that were formalized into infrastructure

2. Risk Is Never as Simple as It Seems – Ben Carlson

There are plenty of examples like this where safety measures can offer a false sense of security, thus introducing additional risks to the equation.

A study in Norway found new cars, despite having better safety measures and more advanced technology, get into more crashes than old cars. And this takes into account the fact that there are more new cars on the road. The probability of damage and injury is higher when driving a new car because people feel safer driving them and also use them more often.

Safety measures in the world of finance are sure to have unintended consequences as well.

The financial models many banks used gave them a false sense of security leading up to the Great Financial Crisis. Garbage-in, garbage out is the same for financial models as it is for your sink.

The measures enacted during the current crisis, as necessary as they may have been, are sure to change the way investors view risk in the years ahead.

3. A Robot Tried to Fix Value Investing and Ended Up Buying Amazon – Justina Lee

The strategy of buying stocks that appear cheap relative to their fundamentals has been struggling for more than a decade, but a South Korean money manager reckons its AI-augmented exchange-traded fund is the answer.

Qraft Technologies filed on Friday to create the Qraft AI-Enhanced U.S. Next Value ETF, ticker NVQ. It says this strategy can revive the factor by estimating a firm’s intangible assets based on financial statements and patent databases…

… The top three holdings of the machine-guided fund in July were Amazon.com Inc., Alphabet Inc. and Facebook Inc. Those are far from the kind of undervalued stocks typically favored by a value strategy. But to Qraft, it’s just value 2.0.

“Intangible assets have become a more important factor in the actual value of the company due to the development of information technology,” founder Hyungsik Kim wrote in an email. “It is easy to tell which of the following is more important in measuring the value of Amazon: warehouses (tangibles) or automated logistics systems (intangibles).”

It’s the rallying cry for many remaining proponents of value: The factor isn’t dead, it’s simply plagued by outdated accounting rules that treat intangible investments such as research as expenses rather than capital.

As a result, knowledge-intensive firms end up with much lower book values and higher costs, which make them look more expensive than they actually are.

4. Tweetstorm on how an onion farmer in the USA managed to corner the market for onions Sahil Bloom

1/ Vince Kosuga fancied himself as more than just your average onion farmer. He had a productive 5,000-acre onion farm in Pine Island, NY. But it was his side hustle, trading in futures markets, that would make him (in)famous.

2/ Futures markets offered a way for farmers to hedge their risk. They could execute a contract to sell their crop at a fixed price at a later date, removing the risk of price fluctuations. But Vince was more interested in using futures for speculation. He wanted to get rich!

3/ After some unsuccessful episodes trading in wheat futures, Vince Kosuga had a (seemingly obvious) revelation. He knew all there was to know about onions, so he should be trading in onions! He would pull off the greatest onion trade of all time.

4/ The idea was simple. He would corner the entire US market for onions. Executing against it was not. To pull it off, he would need to own the vast majority of all harvested or in-ground onions in the country. But Vince thought big. He and his partners began buying onions.

5/ They built secret warehouses across the country, buying and storing millions of onions. But this only covered harvested onions, which was just one piece of the market. So they began buying up futures contracts, essentially taking ownership of all future US onion harvests.

6/ By the fall of 1955, Vince Kosuga had a stranglehold on the entire market for onions in the United States. Most importantly, no one knew it. With this control, Vince Kosuga could move onion prices as he pleased. Now, it was time to get rich.

5. Alternative Forms of Wealth – Morgan Housel

You have a level of independence that goes beyond money. You can cook for yourself, do your own laundry, change a flat tire, and be alone without getting bored…

… You have emotional stability, accepting reality without it driving you crazy.

You can lead a productive conversation with a stranger from any background.

You don’t have to pretend to look busy to justify your salary.

You have enough time to prioritize eight hours of sleep with stress levels low enough to allow sleep.

You can say, “I have no idea” when you have no idea.

6. Test results in hand, Thrive raises $257M to push liquid biopsy toward approval Jason Mast

Thrive started raising for the Series B immediately after the study results were published in Science at the end of April. That study, run across 10,000 women at the Geisinger Health System, showed for the first time that a blood test could help doctors diagnose certain types of cancer in patients who did not yet show symptoms, more than doubling the percentage of cancers that were detected.

“We wanted that data in hand as a big catalyst to drive the process,” Thrive CFO Isaac Ro told Endpoints.

7. Could Roger Federer be as successful playing badminton? – Martin Hirt

In late January, Roger Federer won his sixth Australian Open title. His tally of Grand Slam championships now numbers 20—an incredible feat. As tennis’s biggest star, he is well compensated for his efforts: Forbes magazine estimates that he took home $64 million last year.

Why does Federer make so much money? The answer, most would say, is clear: talent, hard work, good looks, business acumen.

But what if Federer played badminton? He would face Lin Dan, the champion in that sport. Each man may be the best ever in his respective game, and both are extremely marketable, with competitive instincts and personal charm. But Dan doesn’t make anywhere near what Federer does—and he never will. That’s because Dan has an “industry” disadvantage. A Top 10 tennis player makes 10 to 20 times what a Top 10 player in any other racket sport earns…

… The role of industry in a company’s position is so substantial that you’d rather be an average company in a great industry than a great company in an average industry. The median pharmaceutical company (India-based Sun Pharmaceuticals), the median software company (Adobe Systems), and the median semiconductor company (Marvell Technology Group) all would be in the top quintile of chemicals companies and the top 10% of food products companies.

In some cases, you’d rather be in your supplier’s industry than in your own. For example, the average economic profit of airlines is a loss of $99 million, while suppliers in the aerospace and defense category average a profit of $453 million. In fact, the 20th percentile aerospace and defense supplier, Saab AB, earns more economic profit than the 80th percentile airline, Air New Zealand. That is not to say that all airlines have poor economic performance (witness Japan Airlines), nor that all is rosy in aerospace and defense. But it is a fact of life that there are more and less attractive playing fields.


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. We have a vested interest in the shares of Amazon.com, Alphabet, Facebook, and Adobe.

How Should We Measure The Dilutive Impact Of Stock-Based Compensation

How do we measure the impact of stock-based compensation? It may not result in a cash expense but it certainly has an impact on shareholder returns.

Many tech companies nowadays use stock-based compensation to reward managers and employees. Some even pay as much as 80% of executive pay in stocks or options. I’m personally a fan of stock-based compensation for a few reasons.

A fan

For one, stock-based compensation is not a cash expense. Cash is the lifeblood of a company and is vital for a fast-growing business.

Second, stock-based compensation aligns management’s interests with shareholders. Executives and employees become shareholders themselves who are incentivised to see the stock perform well.

In addition, companies may pay executives through stock options or restricted stock units that vest over a few years. With a multi-year vesting period, executives are incentivised to see the stock do well over a multi-year period, which aligns their interests with long-term shareholders.

All these being said, stock-based compensation does create a headache for analysts: It leads to a mismatch between the company’s profit/loss and its cash flow.

Stock-based compensation is recorded as an expense in the income statement but is not a cash expense. As such, companies who use stock-based compensation end up with higher cash flow than profits.

Why adjusted earnings is not good enough

To account for the difference, some companies may decide to provide adjusted earnings. This is a non-GAAP accounting method that adjusts earnings to add back the stock-based compensation and other selected expenses.

The adjusted earnings figure is closer to the company’s actual cash flow. But I don’t think this is the best method to measure the impact of stock-based compensation.

Adjusted earnings do not take into account the dilutive impact from stock-based compensation.

Free cash flow per share may be the best metric to use

So how do we best measure the impact of stock-based compensation? Amazon.com’s founder, Jeff Bezos once said,

Percentage margins are not one of the things we are seeking to optimize. It’s the absolute dollar free cash flow per share that you want to maximize.”

I completely agree. With the growing use of stock-based compensation, earnings per share is no longer the most important factor. Free cash flow per share has become the more important determinant of what drives long term shareholder value.

This takes into account both non-cash expenses and the dilutive impact of share-based compensation. By comparing a company’s free cash flow per share over a multi-year period, we are able to derive how much the company has grown its free cash flow on a per-share basis, which is ultimately what shareholders are interested in.

Ideally, we want to see free cash flow growing much faster than the number of shares outstanding. This would lead to a higher free cash flow per share.

Conclusion

To sum up, stock-based compensation is a good way to incentivise managers to act on the interests of shareholders.

However, it creates a challenge for analysts who need to analyse the performance of the company on a per-share basis.

In the past, earnings used to be the best measure of a company’s growth. But today, with the growing use of stock-based compensation, free cash flow per share is probably a more useful metric to measure a company’s per-share growth.

By measuring the year-on-year growth in free cash flow per share, we can derive the actual growth of a company for shareholders after accounting for dilution and any other non-cash expenses.


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. We have a vested interest in Amazon.com shares.

What We’re Reading (Week Ending 23 August 2020)

The best articles we’ve read in recent times on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

We’ve constantly been sharing a list of our recent reads in our weekly emails for The Good Investors.

Do subscribe for our weekly updates through the orange box in the blog (it’s on the side if you’re using a computer, and all the way at the bottom if you’re using mobile) – it’s free!

But since our readership-audience for The Good Investors is wider than our subscriber base, we think sharing the reading list regularly on the blog itself can benefit even more people. The articles we share touch on a wide range of topics, including investing, business, and the world in general.

Here are the articles for the week ending 23 August 2020:

1. 10 years ago – Joshua Brown

And 10 years ago this August I had a new career. A fresh start. I had a couple of million dollars in assets under management from the small handful of clients I brought with me. I had a spot working at an RIA in midtown Manhattan. I had my Series 65. I had a decade of experience doing retail brokerage, selling stock trades and mutual funds. I had nothing saved in the bank and barely anything in retirement accounts to my name. I had no idea where my next client was going to come from. I had a wife and two children under the age of five to feed and support. I was terrified.

But I knew it was the only way to give financial advice the way I wanted to. Working at brokerage firms for a decade I had learned most of the important stuff about investing, securities, markets, risk and return. And when I say “the important stuff,” I’m referring to behavior. This is the one thing I had figured out. If I could help investors avoid the endless mistakes, conflicts and dangers I had witnessed on the sell side, then I could be delivering the most valuable service in the world to them. I would save one person at a time from all of the horrible things I’d seen and experienced. The bet was that someday, telling the truth and rescuing families from bad decisions would pay off.

I made the bet.

[Ser Jing here: Josh Brown’s piece really resonates with me, because Jeremy and I both recently took the plunge to set up our own investment fund to – borrowing Brown’s words – “help investors avoid the endless mistakes, conflicts and dangers” we had noticed in the financial markets.]

2. When The Magic Happens – Morgan Housel

The 1930s were a disaster.

Almost a quarter of Americans were out of work in 1932. The stock market fell 89%.

Those two economic stories dominate the decade’s attention, and they should.

But there’s another story about the 1930s that rarely gets mentioned: It was, by far, the most productive and technologically progressive decade in history.

The number of problems people solved, and the ways they discovered how to build stuff more efficiently, is a forgotten story of the ‘30s that helps explain a lot of why the rest of the 20th century was so prosperous…

…  A couple of things happened during this period that are worth paying attention to, because they explain why this happened when it did.

The New Deal’s goal was to keep people employed at any cost. But it did a few things that, perhaps unforeseen, become long-term economic fuels.

Take cars. The 1920s were the era of the automobile. The number of cars on the road in America jumped from one million in 1912 to 29 million by 1929.

But roads were a different story. Cars were sold in the 1920s faster than roads were built. A new car’s novelty was amazing, but its usefulness was limited.

That changed in the 1930s when road construction, driven by the New Deal’s Public Works Administration, took off.

3. Earthquake detection and early alerts, now on your Android phone – Marc Stogaitis

Starting today, your Android phone can be part of the Android Earthquake Alerts System, wherever you live in the world. This means your Android phone can be a mini seismometer, joining millions of other Android phones out there to form the world’s largest earthquake detection network.

All smartphones come with tiny accelerometers that can sense signals that indicate an earthquake might be happening. If the phone detects something that it thinks may be an earthquake, it sends a signal to our earthquake detection server, along with a coarse location of where the shaking occurred. The server then combines information from many phones to figure out if an earthquake is happening. We’re essentially racing the speed of light (which is roughly the speed at which signals from a phone travel) against the speed of an earthquake. And lucky for us, the speed of light is much faster! 

To start, we’ll use this technology to share a fast, accurate view of the impacted area on Google Search. When you look up “earthquake” or “earthquake near me,” you’ll find relevant results for your area, along with helpful resources on what to do after an earthquake.

4. Fintech Scales Vertical SaaS – Kristina Shen, Kimberly Tan, Seema Amble, and Angela Strange

Let’s assume the average vertical SMB customer spends about $1,000/month on software and services. Of that, $200 per month will typically be on traditional software (e.g., ERP, CRM, accounting, marketing), and the rest on other financial services (e.g., payments, payroll, background checks, benefits). In a traditional vertical SaaS business, the only way to capture more revenue from the customer was to upsell software. This left the $800 per month potential revenue from financial services to other vendors.

But with SaaS + fintech, a vertical SaaS company can capture a customer’s traditional software spend as well as the spend on employee and financial services.

1. Traditional SaaS expansion – Upsell software products or add software modules
2. Fintech opportunity – Add financial services, such as payments, cards, lending, bank accounts, compliance, benefits and payroll

In our hypothetical above, a vertical SaaS company that adds, or even embeds, financial products, can potentially 5x the revenue per customer from the $200/month software spend to the full $1000/month for software and services.

5. Tweetstorm on why India will be a hotbed for innovative, world-class enterprise startups – Hemant Mohapatra

3/n Internet penetration has benefited B2C but has 2nd order impact on B2B. For every Dropbox or Facetime, there’s also a Box or Zoom using digital tools to build, test, & launch at breakneck speeds & then in “consumerish ways” brands, sell, & monetize enterprises.

4/n “Developer is the new buyer” — think fewer site-wide MSDN or RHEL licenses, more personal/team-wide Github/Slack/digitalOcean accounts. Corporate IT spend will disaggregate and many top-down decisions will turn bottoms-up where individual “consumer” needs to be influenced. 

5/n Founders w/ dev-first mindset will win big globally & Indian founders have a unique advantage here: our developer ecosystem is one of the most vibrant in the world. We are curious, engaged, & hungry to learn. Being a techie in India isn’t “geeky/nerdy”, it’s cool, fashionable…

… 10/n By itself, India is now the 2nd largest public cloud buyer in APAC, ~50% of China & growing faster. Vs China, the Indian buyer is hungrier & doesn’t care for brand or roadmap (so, ideal for startups), is more top-line focused & trying to get more process-driven to scale…

… 13/n While India-to-US has been tried before successfully, India now has the potential to be the Enterprise / SaaS hub for local and SEA markets. Why?

14/n China enterprise cos are either h/w focused or serve local markets. Meanwhile, rest of SEA has strong cultural, language AND use-case alignment w/ India given history & development stage (gig-based, migrant population, etc). Works in India? Can work there.

15/n and to support all this value creation, the key pieces are coming together nicely. Vast majority of founders now have prior startup experience — this is where many of the smartest people are headed — not banking, consulting, or Google/FB.

6. Tencent: The Ultimate Outsider – Packy McCormick

With monetization booming, Tencent IPO’d in 2004  at a valuation of 6.22 billion HKD, or $790 million USD. Cue Motley Fool headline: if you had invested $10,000 in Tencent at its IPO in 2004, you would have $7.9 million today.

Oh, you didn’t invest in Tencent at its IPO? Damn. To be fair, it’s a very different company today than it was then, thanks to two 2005 hires: Martin Lau and Allen Zhang.

After completing its IPO, Tencent hired the Goldman Sachs investment banker who took it public, Martin Lau. Lau had the pedigree – Chinese-born, undergrad at Michigan, engineering masters at Stanford, and MBA at Kellogg – and a skillset that was complementary to Ma’s. Lau became the English-speaking face of the business, taking on a role that the shy Ma hated, and the master capital allocator. In the beginning of his tenure, Lau focused on acquiring studios to grow its scorching games business as the Chief Strategy Officer. By the next year, Ma promoted him to President.

Tencent also turned its attention to competitive threats to the portal business, including Microsoft’s increasing presence in China via MSN. To combat the threat, it acquired competitor Foxmail in 2005 to build QQ Mail. The product was successful, but more importantly, Tencent acquired the developer behind Foxmail, Allen Zhang.

With Lau and Zhang on board, Tencent grew rapidly via desktop games and the QQ platform. Its revenue jumped 15x from $200 million in 2005 to $2.9 billion in 2010. But 2011 was the year when Zhang and Lau really made their mark.

7. Are Emerging Markets Turning Into the S&P 500? – Ben Carlson

Emerging markets are cheaper on every metric. Many investors say this makes sense considering emerging markets are full of energy, materials, and financials while the U.S. is more driven by technology and consumer stocks.

And this was a good argument in 2007 or even 2015 but not so in 2020.

The make-up of emerging market equities has changed dramatically in recent years. Blackrock sent me the sector changes in their iShares Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) since 2007:

… Here are some notable changes since the start of 2007:

  • Energy has gone from more than 15% to less than 6%
  • Materials were closer to 16% and now sit at 7%
  • Financials have gone from more than 20% to 18% (and are down from a high of 27% in 2015)
  • Consumer discretionary stocks have gone from roughly 3% to 18%
  • Technology is now the biggest sector, having risen from 13% in 2007 to more than 18% now

Financials still have a large weighting but it’s a dwindling market share compared to the past. Energy and materials companies combined are now less than either of those categories were individually in 2007. And technology stocks now make up the largest sector in the fund.


Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. We have a vested interest in the shares of Alphabet (parent of Google), Facebook, and Tencent.