Searching for Future Long-Term Picks: Gathering Assets, Reasons to Search - Weekly Blog # 948

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Searching for Future Long-Term Picks:

Gathering Assets, Reasons to Search

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

          

 

 

Inputs from This Week

1. The Consumer Confidence Index was 91.4 vs the 94.4 expected. The index was however up from last month’s 90.6.
2. The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) sample survey projections for next six months are Bullish 31.4% vs the prior week’s 42.3%, Bearish 42.3% vs the prior week’s 36.3%.
3. Workforce participation of 61.4% is the lowest since the covid readings. (We have made working on payroll unattractive for some.)
4. In some European countries the number of air conditioners is small, and some are even being removed. (The founder of modern Singapore stated that the installation of “AC” led to the economic growth, enabling it to become the fifth richest economy in the world.)

 

Future Investment Problems

1. Americans misreading foreign data. The foreign performance of indices and positions is converted into US dollars from the local currency. As the US dollar is currently stronger than most other currencies, it makes foreign investments look more attractive. We tend to forget that most US investors temporarily rent foreign securities. When we sell in declining markets local buyers are often the only buyers and they are not generous.
2. When looking at the statics of a company, investors look at where the fiscal headquarters of the company is located, not where the product or service is sold. Consequently, many investors currently think they are investing in the UK, Taiwan, or South Korea. The Financial Times 100 largest companies, which dominate the local British stock market, makes almost none of its operating earnings are earned in the UK. It is my guess that a good many US investors think their rapidly expanding earnings are coming from South Korea and Taiwan, not by what is happening in the US.
3. Investors are often attracted to various securities indices due to a handful of the leading performing issues within the index. These companies, at least for a while, perform better than the indices. However, history tells us that it is only a matter of time before the leaders become laggards and detract from the performance of the index.
4. One recent concern of mine is that a senior American General in Europe is resigning. He is a four-star general with a very good battle record. I don’t believe it is an appropriate time to reduce our military leadership anywhere, particularly in Europe.
5. As a portfolio manager for long-term beneficiaries, I am very conscious of the variability of performance records. Looking at the recent five-year period, only six mutual fund sectors had average performance better than the S&P 500 Index Funds average. For the ten-year period, only Large-Cap Growth Funds and Domestic and Global Science and Technology Funds beat the S&P 500 Index Funds average. Considering the CEOs of many companies don’t last beyond five years, with even fewer lasting ten years, I am particularly nervous about those whose stock prices depend on “AI” products and services. (I wonder how many repeat orders there are for their present products and services.) Many of last year’s leaders are selling below last year’s performance ranks.

 

Possible Buys

The one major stock group selling below its 2000 price is Healthcare. I do not know these stocks well and tend to use specialty funds to invest in the sector. I will probably reach sell decisions without much help from the industry, but that may be a long time from now. Without a lot of knowledge, I am starting my learning efforts with Johnson & Johnson and CVS Health. I like their strategies but don’t know their tactics, managements, and their outlooks for their critical present and future drugs. Furthermore, I don’t know the outlook for government regulation. I need any help subscribers can provide.  

                                         

US Gifts to Others

Those in the US are incredibly lucky, or if you prefer God Given, considering the benefits/gifts we have received. However, it is wise to note that some of what we have given to the rest of the world is not always beneficial, as shown below:

1. A constitution that enshrines the rights of minorities.
2. An education process that attracts students from all over the world, who return to their homelands and contribute to them.
3. A military power that has critically helped defend other countries.
4. Innovation, which has produced great things for the world. 

 

Hope you had a good July 4th and life gets better.

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: What is Pending and When - Weekly Blog # 947

Mike Lipper's Blog: Too Many Short-Term Worries To Pick Long-Term Winners - Weekly Blog # 946

Mike Lipper's Blog: Is This the Last Hurrah? - Weekly Blog # 945

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please

subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2026

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

 

What is Pending and When - Weekly Blog # 947

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

What is Pending and When

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

          

 

Who is Foreseeing?

We are entering a new phase at the Federal Reserve Bank where the new chairman wants to look to the unknown future rather than recorded history. He is searching to find a different set of indicators than government collected survey data. I always thought that the lunch discussions presidents of the local reserve banks had with “captains” of local industry were an attempt to gather this data. I believe what he is looking for is the kind of inputs many companies gather daily or weekly. (I knew the number of subscribers for each of our fund data products plus the number of new subscribers each week. Additionally, I knew the number of special individual reports generated, and the amounts of commissions earned each week.) I hope he gets what he wants, it will probably improve the efficiency of what the Fed decides.

 

My big complaint to the members of my securities analysis profession is that most of their reports focus on relatively short-term investment performance: the quarter, the rest of the calendar year, or one year. While that has some value for the media or gatekeepers, it has very little analytical value.

 

In viewing the work produced under the rubric of Securities Analysis, it is important to remember that the original text on the subject was written by Ben Graham, an investment manager and adjunct professor who favored “cheap” stocks. He was assisted by David Dodd, a full professor at Columbia University who taught accounting courses. Their original text was written in the middle of the depression. The key to their writing and financial survival was to avoid losses. Little attention was paid to making money, which came later. This bearish bent was echoed in the SEC’s Investment Company Act of 1940, which was not written by members of the SEC or their staff, but by a bunch of trust lawyers with heavy input from lawyers in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. For them, the key issue was avoiding large losses and being sued. I took Securities Analysis under Professor Dodd at Columbia.

 

The More Modern Era

One could selectively make money by venturing into the market with new listings trading at a discount. An approach highlighted after WWII when war industries recommitted to the commercial world with new high energy leaders. However, far too many of the new ventures of the late 1940s produced large losses for their investors. By the late 1950s more pragmatic leaders emerged, with the “bull market” of the 60s bringing new generations into the market. The fear of losses ebbed in the late 60s, resulting in  the idea of some leading stocks being held forever. This led to economic decline and a downturn in market enthusiasm which lasted into the mid-1980s. Since then and up to this calendar year the emphasis has been on making money, not avoiding losses.

 

We Have Possibly Entered a New Era

In last week’s blog I suggested that the critical market indicator has shifted from the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), from the late 1940s through the mid-1980s, to the institutional Standard & Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) from the mid-1980s to until very recently, and in the current period to the NASDAQ Composite. This week the DJIA was up 3 days and the S&P 500 was down 5 days. The NASDAQ was also down 5 days, but by a larger amount each day than the S&P 500 institutional measure. This seems appropriate as it rose more, driven by “AI” and the technology craze. I believe it is sensible to label this a technical correction.

 

More concerning is the market sensing a change in our future. Much of the current leadership comes from the retail side, whose increased numbers were driven by the conversion of retail brokers becoming wealth managers to earn a fee rather than a commission. The significance of this shift is that for the first time investment performance will be measured on the retail side. These new “managers” may panic and be quicker to sell than the institutionally oriented mutual fund portfolio managers. We may already be seeing this in redemption rates and attempts to redeem closed-end target date funds. Institutions have long experience with the cyclical results of below investment grade debt. Is it possible retail investors will lead the whole market in worries about declines?

 

Are There Reasons to be Worried?

I believe it is too early to be categorical about the next major decline, though I do believe it could happen. The following are potential signs of one or more major declines. (Going back to my course with Professor Dodd, I believe we should be prepared for the following pending triggers to generate meaningful declines.)

• The biggest potential trigger is that we have not experienced a depression since the election of FDR in 1933, which did not end until 1942 because of his mismanagement. Skipping several cyclical recessions, the prior depression globally was in 1873. Thus, it has been 93 years since the beginning of the last depression or 84 years since it ended. (Depressions are caused by mismanagement and too much debt in the financial system.) The present administration, by personality, not policies, is very similar to FDR’s.
• The surprise to the leaderships of attacks on Bahrain’s US Naval Base and Ukraine’s attack on Crimea. The nations hurt were thought by their people to be prepared for these attacks. Both nations have people worried about their country’s intelligence and governance.
• Changes in Federal Reserve governance may be destabilizing.
• ACA Insurance healthcare payments showed unexpected reductions.
• Lack of progress on addressing Social Security solvency
• Focus on innovation, but only on the mechanical side. In the US innovation typically has a bigger impact on sales size and structure.
• Quality of schooling and home life vs. education retards growth and military preparedness. Probably negatively impacting marriage and childbearing.
• Legal immigration

 

For the last 10 years only the average Large Cap Growth and domestic global Science and tech funds have beaten the S&P 500 Index fund average. For the current year-to-date period, 57 sector averages did better out of 104 equity sectors. The game has changed.  

  

What are Your Thoughts About?

• A possible Depression?
• What are we not prepared for?
• Will the 2026 election decide anything?
• What will the 2028 election decide?
• Any other thoughts or comments?

                                         

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Too Many Short-Term Worries To Pick Long-Term Winners - Weekly Blog # 946

Mike Lipper's Blog: Is This the Last Hurrah? - Weekly Blog # 945

Mike Lipper's Blog: New Era? - Weekly Blog # 944

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please

subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2026

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

 

Too Many Short-Term Worries To Pick Long-Term Winners - Weekly Blog # 946

 

  

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Too Many Short-Term Worries

To Pick Long-Term Winners

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

          

 

Current Concerns

Both the management of our international and domestic actions increasingly seem to be personality driven, and for the moment have at best a one-year focus. The level of smart intelligence applied is from a smaller and smaller number of people. The level of wisdom applied to Iran, Israel, and the greater middle east does not appear to be working. Observers believe it will take a considerable time to totally clear the Straits, while pictures of shopping areas in Iran show them to be well stocked.

 

On the domestic side, there does not appear to be recognition that large portions of the workforce are not working, at least regularly for taxable pay. Part of the problem is people in government believing in test scores and mandated promotions. Homes are stressed and less and less people have the education desired by companies and governments to find qualified people.

 

The new Chair of the Federal Reserve appears to recognize these problems and finds government-generated statistics to be moderately helpful at best. He believes the private economy can supply better numbers. One of the time series I look at each Saturday morning is the list of weekly prices in The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), covering 72 commodities, currencies, ETFs, and securities prices. For many weeks the two largest weekly changes at the top and bottom of the list may have been deceptive. In the current week the two top performers were the KOPSI (South Korean stock prices) +11.43% and the Nikkei (Japanese stock prices) +7.92%. The two biggest decliners were NYMEX Crude -9.75% and NYMEX Crude (US listed) -8.14%. The third numbers in array were +3.64% and -6.57%. Thus, four out of seventy-two were extreme and perhaps only of use to specific traders.

 

Turning to the securities markets which have also been shifting in terms of importance. When our Grandparents followed the market, they looked at the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), which was carried in most newspapers and on most radio stations. As financial intuitions became larger, they were followed too, as well as the brokers servicing them. Additionally, larger individuals that somewhat competed with them followed the Standard & Poor’s 500 (S&P 500), which was on most wire (electric) services.

 

I am suggesting that the growth of relatively new Technology companies, particularly those involved with “AI” captured in the NASDAQ Composite, is more of a speculative market as many of these companies have only been publicly traded for a few years. One way to see the difference between those stocks tracked by the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ is to look at the percent of new lows vs the percent of new highs. For this week new lows on the NASDAQ were 65% of new highs vs. 47% on the SWX. Another way to look at this picture is to use the percentage of stocks on the new low list, which was 46% for the NASDAQ and 53% for the NYSE. This would indicate that older and larger companies on the “Big Board” are portraying more problems on the NASDAQ. I suspect that a relatively higher portion of “AI” related companies trade on the NASDAQ. If this is true, it should help their outlook.

 

This weekend’s development changes everything. You don’t have to accept my views, but you should understand them and I will be happy to communicate with you.

 

Many of us are impacted by what our family passes on to us, long before we realize how the world really works. Fred Trump, a real estate operator sitting in Queens, New York passed on to his two sons the fears generated by President Hoover’s economic recession. The recession created encampments of unemployed workers, which were then labeled after the President. The current President grew up hearing these deep concerns without a fully understanding the 1929 Wall Street crash. The crash bottomed before the next President, FDR and his “Harvard Brain Trust”, took over in 1933. They turned the Hoover recession, caused by lose-money and the Smoot Hawley tariff, into a depression. FDR was the third of four structuralist presidents, after Andrew Jackson and FDR’s distant cousin Teddy Roosevelt. It was his various actions that took a serious recession into a much deeper and longer depression and was one of the causes of the rise in military governance in Italy. Germany and Japan were the alliance that created WW II. But the current restructures’ President Trump, who by personality and political skills, not policies, is much closer to FDR than he recognizes, panicked this weekend. He very likely saw a depression coming and looked at his battle with Iran as a costly distraction. He is now anxious to end his war with Iran to prevent the 1930s type depression he fears.

 

Longer-Term View

At times I feel that I am the only one focused on investing for my grandchildren and now great grandchildren. With them in mind I look at past “bull markets”, which indicate that it is rare for leading investments may repeat in the next “bull market” and increasingly that is where I choose to devote my time.

 

Any suggestions are most desired, as few people seem to think that way.

                                         

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Is This the Last Hurrah? - Weekly Blog # 945

Mike Lipper's Blog: New Era? - Weekly Blog # 944

Mike Lipper's Blog: Warnings Increasing - Weekly Blog # 943

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please

subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2026

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

 

Watch Out for the Four - Weekly Blog # 938

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Watch Out for the Four

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

          

 

Preface

As subscribers have been told, I am shifting my focus to investing for long-term gains, hopefully for multiple generations. This is the time to begin searching for future winners, although it’s not the time to begin serious buying. If you are like me, at times it can be difficult to only follow an investment intellectually. I need to own a small amount so that I go through all the relevant info while awaiting the time to begin a meaningful buy program.

 

Timing May Not Begin Until:

The beginning of the buy program will not start until people and the data change. In terms of people, there are four structural leaders. These are the men who wish to change the future and are governing to do that. They lead and largely dictate activities in the US, China, Russia, and North Korea. Only the last one, North Korea, is preparing to eventually pass the torch of control to a very young daughter. In each case the eventual leader will be different than the present leader and will have to exert power to stay in place. Any of these replacements could have input into future global investments. Because of the similar ages of the first three, investors will be faced with cross currents that will make choosing investment policy difficult.

 

Before these leadership transitions occur, the global economy is likely to change multiple times. I expect we will be dealing with the terrible “4s”* at least some of the time. The data series likely to experience major swings are inflation, currencies, and taxes, among others. Changes to these data series may not be dictated from on high, but in the marketplace. Additionally, secular changes in demographics and technology will have an impact on how people act and feel.

*Terrible 4s are 4% for inflation, unemployment, and dollar decline, leading to an S&P 500 price that starts with a “4”. A high 4 signals a recession and a low 4 a depression.

 

What Can We Do Now?

First, we can pay attention to what people are doing, not saying. Actions speak louder than words. While the media is full of pundits talking about market indices at new highs, 58% of the stocks on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) fell in the latest week. Perhaps more meaningful, 56% of the stocks fell on the NASDAQ. A survey of investment advisers and their clients found advisers twice as bullish as their customers.

 

Second, be aware of financial and economic history. We know that historic patterns don’t exactly repeat, but directionally they are pretty accurate. Economic cycles are based in part on the level of debt being created throughout the system. (Government deficits need to be considered as well as business debt, personal debt, and accidental debt.)

 

When debt repayment becomes too burdensome it won’t be promptly repaid and will cause purchasing power to drop and fixed income/equity markets to decline. Depending on the severity of the decline it will be called a recession or a depression. The frequency of recessions is normally five to ten years, suggesting one is due. A depression is much more serious and infrequent, usually every fifty to one hundred years. Depressions are often caused by mismanagement of an economy in a recession. We have not had a depression for ninety years and some believe the last one brought on WWII. The key for us is knowing that these occurrences are possible and being aware and ready to change behavior.

 

While Waiting

The present should be devoted to looking for stocks to buy for the next expansion. A study of the past suggests the leaders of the next cycle will be quite different than the present. Bearing in mind that many children born today will need retirement money 100 years from now, the odds of most large companies surviving is not good.

 

There are lots of ways to choose stocks to research. None of them are perfect and they will change over time, so investors should always be learning what will cause change. From time to time, I’ll pick one approach to explore briefly, so keep tuned to find an approach that helps you.

 

Acquisitions

No solution is perfect, and conditions change unpredictably. It is normal to change our choices after looking at the cards we are given. The easiest approach is to add a new holding and temporarily retire a present holding. Additionally, no one plays the investment game without making periodic acquisitions. Unfortunately, many investors fail to discard some part of what is not working. This habit of adding without discarding leads to an ever-increasing number of acquisitions, which in most cases leads to average and eventually below average results.

 

I have never seen an acquirer who couldn’t benefit from getting more talent, often with different characteristics than their existing talent. I have often found it better to buy a company for management and tax purposes, even if it’s for a single individual. It has worked for me, even when it was a bad choice. It is easier for me to make a bad choice than to fire an individual or a small group who I like as people, but not as workers and co-venturers. I am comfortable with the way Apple often buys tiny companies, compared to others who acquire much larger companies with all sorts of personnel problems.

 

I was speaking with the manager of a small unit in a very large company who wanted the unit to grow by hiring more people doing the same thing his present employees do. That may be efficient in terms of output, but it just adds to existing problems. I would not view this situation as growth but view it as adding new machines. If on the other hand the new people brought new talents, they could serve a different group of clients who had different needs, which is real growth.

 

There are some companies who try to grow by buying distant operations, adding resources outside their prime geographical area. I do not view this as growth of talent either, but as getting more copies of existing machines. They would be adding to present capacity but not getting new talents that could open new markets. For me they are not growth engines but merely machine acquirers, which will not be valuable talents as the business changes. Investors can see which type of stock I would acquire, even at somewhat of a premium price.

 

Question: What do you think about my approach?  

                                        

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Investors’ Interlude - Weekly Blog # 937

Mike Lipper's Blog: Not Yet Ready for a long-term Solution - Weekly Blog # 936

Mike Lipper's Blog: We Have a Management Problem - Weekly Blog # 935

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please

subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2023

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Investors’ Interlude - Weekly Blog # 937

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Investors’ Interlude

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

Take Some Gains Before Taxes Do

The common denominator for most big investment gains are changes. Usually changes in investor perceptions and economic structural changes. The Standard & Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) and NASDAQ Composite are at record highs, due largely to enthusiasm for announcements related to the suspension of fighting in the Middle East. (This is not true for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the average stock.  Unfortunately, since WWII the US has had a history of winning wars but losing the peace.)

 

We do not know the total cost of the war and other spending, including election-oriented payments. I suspect the President’s desire for a lower valued dollar will be achieved. There is also a strong push from urban legislators for “fair taxes”, also known as “tax the rich”. Thus, I believe capital gains rates and estate tax rates will rise.

 

Due to these expected changes long-term investors should review their portfolios to see how much of their wealth should be realized before their estates are taxed. If this generates significant amounts of cash, I suggest maintaining the cash or short-term treasury holdings for reinvestment.

 

I believe there will be positive changes in the foreseeable future. These changes may be driven by technology, demographics, immigration, and global factors. These changes are likely to be net larger than politically motivated changes and you want to be in position to take advantage of them.

 

Investment Impacts of Past Changes

The Founding Fathers were afraid of the powers of government, so they placed our Capitol in the humid swamp of Washington DC, thinking our legislators would desert the “swamp” during the humid months. That worked reasonably well until the development of air conditioning. The end of the government’s year is now September 30th, after the summer political conventions, which reduces the time for debating many of the critical issues of the day. DC is now a year-round city for government workers and legislators. Many work or live in large buildings constructed and possibly owned by real estate families who are probably wealthier than the US Senate members. Thus, the advent of air conditioning changed how our government works.

 

Another unexpected change was the railroad growth of the late nineteenth century. The highly regulated railroads only made profits on freight travel and lost so much money on human passengers that the federal government became the principal owner of passenger travel. The freight lines are governed by both the Department of the Interior and Anti-Trust laws. This has led to other countries having better and cheaper train service than we do, paid for by charges on the goods we consume. It is interesting to note that the Dow Jones Transportation Index, which covers the rails, was the best performing market index this past week. The rails are still important.

 

Future Changes

We live in an environment of an increasing rate of change. I leave to others to identify the changes which most investors would not be surprised by.

 

Geographic Changes

1. Western Hemisphere countries have become more partners than adversaries in terms of trade, health practice, external and internal defense, probably led by Canada.
2. Russia, after Putin, will experience major political and economic changes.
3. Asian countries that border both Russia and China will come into their own in terms of trade and be more open to development.
4. African countries will welcome joint development from Western countries.
5. Indonesia and India will become less autocratic, with foreign companies able to generate substantial sales and earnings.
6. Each country will make their own rules.

 

Retirement Issues

1. Over time, US Social Security will be allowed to exclude US government paper and possibly approach being a foreign wealth fund.
2. It is reasonable to expect that those born recently will live to at least one hundred, so we will need to provide for longer periods of investment and spending.
3. For the same reason, private retirement vehicles will need to change.

 

Market Regulation

1. Using the last trade may no longer be appropriate if it is too small and unrepresentative of the size of the seller.
2. As more stocks and possibly bonds trade in size in after-hours, having a closing price on the exchange market may be unrealistic.
3. From a technology perspective, there should be a body that can approve of their use for retirement accounts.
4. Should issuers of a certain size be required to have assets or insurance on the life of the CEO that can be used in retirement accounts.

 

As usual, I would love our subscribers to share their views with me. 

                                        

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Not Yet Ready for a long-term Solution - Weekly Blog # 936

Mike Lipper's Blog: We Have a Management Problem - Weekly Blog # 935

Mike Lipper's Blog: Is History Rhyming Again? - Weekly Blog # 934

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please

subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2023

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Diversification - Weekly Blog # 929

 

         

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Diversification

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

                                                                        

 

Preface

On a recent trip to London, Ruth and I attended a private fund and friend raising concert for the Academy of St. Martin’s in the Fields (ASMF), where Ruth is the first American trustee. The wonderful music was performed by Joshua Bell, the artistic director, and five other top-notch string musicians from the ASMF. Between the six talented musicians they played three different types of string instruments, alternating between lead and ensemble roles. The result was a successful combination of each of their talents.

 

Even when listening to a magnificent concert performance, I cannot forget my investment responsibilities. As individual musicians alternated from leading to supporting roles, it reminded me of what individual securities should do in a diversified long-term investment portfolio.

 

Application to Portfolio Management

In 1940 the SEC completed their depression-oriented reform rules. Among the last of these was the Investment Company Act of 1940, which unlike the other six regulations was not formed at their SEC headquarters. It was produced at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington by lawyers for the fund industry from Boston, New York (where the industry’s trade association was headquartered), Philadelphia, and Washington. Considering their recent experience of the market falling during the Depression, the mood of the meeting was to try reduce the chance of big future declines. The best model for that were state laws governing trust accounts, using generations of work by Boston and Philadelphia lawyers. (Even as late as the early 1960s a few Boston law firms had professional securities analysts on staff to assist in managing trust accounts.) Note, the main concern of the creators of fund regulation was the avoidance of losses. No word was spoken of making money on investments.

 

They thought the best way to reduce the chance of major losses was to limit an account’s exposure to any single investment. This led to limiting the percentage amount that funds could invest in any one stock, which usually meant no more than 5% of the voting stock at cost (not market). To this very day, most equity funds are labeled as diversified if they adhere to this principal.

 

The Problem with Voting Stock Limits

The biggest penalty paid by investors is not losses, but the absence of profits. Mutual Funds with long histories often make ten, twenty, or even more times as much on some of their holdings, which more than covers a small number of losses. Furthermore, great fortunes have been made, particularly over successive generations, in single stock portfolios or portfolios having a small number of investments.

 

For Professional Investors

The concept of risk management is critical but doing it by name or percentage of voting shares does not reduce risk, it may increase if all investments are exposed to a single concept. In the late nineteenth century professional investors considered concentration to be the best and safest way to invest. My college degree is from Columbia University, which had an endowment fully invested in railroad bonds and stocks, every single one file for bankruptcy. Today there is a risk that some participants in the “AI” surge could produce similar results by investing in too much in a good thing.

 

For publicly traded securities I suggest the biggest risks is with the stock owner and not the issuer, as they will be sellers of the stock before you do. Other risks include countries, technology, politics, and management. These can be identified as short-term and long-term factors. A possible short-term indicator is slightly more participants being bearish than bullish in the latest American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) survey of expectations for the next six months. Interestingly, the long-term indicator was Friday’s announcement by the Supreme Court, which ruled against the President’s authority to set tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which had very little to any impact on the market.

 

Bottom line, watch the musicians play and how well they work together, both with other musicians and staff, but also watch the reaction of the audience.

 

Understanding Going Global

In a recent conversation with a London-based fund manager, who in the past was almost completely invested in the US but now has a growing position in European stocks. While he has the biggest portion of his portfolio in US securities, he is very risk aware and expresses this by augmenting his portfolio with European stocks. Normally, he expects his US positions to outperform his European positions, but not in a declining market. In terms of P/E, Free Cash Flow, Dividend Yield, and other value measures, European stocks are less risky than US holdings.

 

 Another careful investor was Charlie Munger, who listed six principles to be avoided: High Financial Leverage, High Operating Leverage, Negative Cashflow, Poor Governance, High Risk of Obsolescence, No Competitive Advantage vs. a Strong Competitor.

 

Share your thoughts

                

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: To Win Long-Term, Learn From Great Presidents - Weekly Blog # 928

Mike Lipper's Blog: Strategically, Time to Think Differently - Weekly Blog # 927

Mike Lipper's Blog: Do Current Prices Lead Future Markets? - Weekly Blog # 926

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2023

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Biggest Investment Hurdle: Complexity - Weekly Blog # 913

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Biggest Investment Hurdle: Complexity

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

 

First Priority

An investment priority should be logging changes to your investment policies, although most investors do not maintain such records. To paraphrase the late and great Charlie Munger said that Warren Buffett was a learning machine. His point was, Warren benefited from the losses he sustained. He had an investment history of making very few repeated mistakes.

 

Most profitable investors also make relatively few mistakes, in part due to most mistakes forfeiting more opportunities than money. To avoid future mistakes, it would be helpful to have an insightful roster of mistakes. The real painful mistakes are repeaters.

 

Tools of Repeating Errors

Many repeating errors of judgement rely on an automatic mathematical response. For example, if “x” happens then do “y”. This is a non-thinking action. It does not adjust for changes in critical conditions that might impact the current situation.

 

On a very basic level, buying is different than selling. Investment buying is often based on market prices being wrong but are likely to change soon. The seller on the other hand believes in the relative attractiveness of a security that will shortly decline in price. In both cases the investor believes that he/she is ahead of the bulk of the investment market. These are the actions of someone who wants to be among the leaders.  This is in direct conflict with successful investors who prefer to be lonely and contrary to the crowd.

 

Understanding Complexity

Berkshire Hathaway (*) developed a system of categorizing new investment information into three buckets, “yes, no, too hard”. Berkshire’s advantage was structured on the combined experience of the late Mr. Munger and Mr. Buffett. This experience included knowledge of over 60 different companies they owned and the knowledge of various securities they previously owned or looked at for more than 100 years combined. Where most others saw complexity, they saw investment opportunity.

(* Berkshire Hathaway shares are owned in client and personal accounts.)

 

Can’t Avoid Complexity

In the modern global world, one cannot avoid complexity. However, with some hard work and experience you can reorder many elements into positives, negatives, and judgements to be determined. With this structure one can put odds on each critical item, leading to a preponderance of positives or negatives worthy of action.

 

An example of factors that surfaced this week in the media are shown below:

• Wall Street Journal Headline “Foreign Stocks outperform S&P…”. This could cause many US accounts to add foreign stocks and funds. However, the largest collection of stocks that Americans buy are multinational stocks listed overseas. In many cases the largest portion of these portfolios are invested in US operations, which is a negative if your purpose is to participate in European and Asian growth. (The same could be said about US listed multinationals with significant sales abroad. This includes Coca Cola, a large holding of Berkshire. The same could be said about Apple.)
• The Federal Reserve is concerned about a bifurcated economy consisting of technology and older companies. Both sides have significant foreign sales.
• This may be the wrong time for the proposed cut in bank supervision. Both banks and non-bank financials are increasing loans to lower-quality companies.
• While some believe oil is being priced attractively, natural gas prices are even more attractive. Also, Copper has historically performed better than gold.
• The “Buffett Premium” is disappearing just as insurance driven earnings are very strong.
• Cash in portfolios should be used in the short term, either as a basket to buy favored stocks or to reduce exposure to over-capitalized companies and increase return on equity.
• In latest week there were more declining stocks than rising stocks.

 

Each of the mentioned items could be attractive buy or sell opportunities, depending on one’s view.

 

What do you think?

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

 

Mike Lipper's Blog: Signals of Change in Historic Patterns - Weekly Blog # 912

Mike Lipper's Blog: Where Are US Stock Prices Going? - Weekly Blog # 911

Mike Lipper's Blog: A Good Time to Sell? - Weekly Blog # 910

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

A Good Time to Sell? - Weekly Blog # 910

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

A Good Time to Sell?

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 Selling is More Important

When an investor, distinct from a trader, asks me if they should sell some portion or all of their holdings, I first try to determine the critical time period in judging the results of the action. If one is persuaded by media voices the answer will usually be tomorrow or at the end of the calendar year. For me, it is when the money is expected to be needed. For example, for my newborn great grandchildren's retirement or the replacement of the new university dorm, it could be a 100-years. Another matrix could be the future low price point needed to protect future funding of a desired goal.

 

Regarding a future low price point, it is important to recognize that prices move in cycles. The important cycles can be labeled as seasonal, cyclical, secular, and structural. It is how I think of the latter part of last week’s drop in prices, where what I follow fell -15% to gains of +7%. To conserve your time and the blog's space I will comment on the year-to-date period for those impressed with media voices and include some other screens as well.

 

The first thing that hit me was the largest average gain of +15.94% in non-leveraged, diversified large growth mutual funds. These gains were driven by the biggest positions in technology stocks. However, they missed out by focusing on securities registered with the Securities Exchange Commission. After many years of SEC registered stocks performing very well, there were some foreign markets that generated much better performance multiples. The leading countries were Ghana +130.25%, Cyprus +94.75%, Luxembourg +74.8%, Greece +71.45%, Columbia +70.05%, Nigeria +65.1%, Korea +61.1%, South Africa +48.02%, China +32.85% and Chile +31.02%. Weekly Barron's performance charts showing 14 European and 7 Asian countries had 7 Asian and 4 European indices gaining. (As an analyst that has followed non-US stocks and invested in some, I believe this is a good time to examine these opportunities.)

 

Most Analysts Focus on Rising Stocks

I glanced at those stock prices not doing so well. For example, the Dow Jones Industrials (DJIA) and Dow Jones Transportation (DJTA) stocks fell -2.739 and -4.88% respectively for the week. Perhaps more importantly, their year-to-date performance results were +6.90% and -5.21% respectively. (This suggests the US goods economy is not doing well. Tariffs could be a problem. Freight movement is down for both the rail and truck business and may forecast Halloween and Christmas sales being behind earlier expectations.)

 

Down Prices = Opportunities

Three industry sectors are showing small declines on a year-to-date basis: Banks -4.26%, Insurance -1.64% and small companies -1.1%. Restrictions on all companies are the same, but small companies may be impacted more due to their staff size. To the extent the current administration reduces some of the regulatory overhead, it cou1d restore a competitive advantage to smaller companies. However, many restrictions on smaller financial and insurance companies appear to make it easier for new entrants.

 

AI, An Unrecognized National Problem

Some are beginning to comment on the absence of large profits from Artificial Intelligence companies due to lack of public discovery of relevant financial disclosure, so I will not. At a recent meeting hosted by the London Stock Exchange Group, one of their headline speakers noted that the challenge for the AI industry was to produce "more with less". It is well recognized that AI is taking over an unidentified number of job functions, reducing the need for human labor. Great! Where are these laid off people going to get jobs anywhere near similar wages? This could be a concern for future Administrations. 

 

The 4th Activist President

Just like Andrew Jackson and the two Roosevelts, President Trump is trying to solve various national problems by changing how they are handled. Some of these attempts will survive the Courts. What I am not seeing is how the restructuring of the economy will work. Looking at the aftereffects of prior activist Presidents, I suspect it will materially change the outlook for investments, something people are not currently focusing on.

 

I would like to know if anyone has any thoughts on what restructuring will mean to their investment orientation.

  

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Tactical Headlines Show Strategic Clues - Weekly Blog # 908

Mike Lipper's Blog: Anticipation Pays; Deliveries May Not - Weekly Blog # 907

Mike Lipper's Blog: Selected and Casual Road Notes - Weekly Blog # 906

 

 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

 

Generally Good Holy Week + Future Clues - Weekly Blog # 885

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Generally Good Holy Week + Future Clues

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

                             

 

Holy Week

The driving celebration of the week ended Sunday was the three dominant religions being able to conduct their Services peacefully. The US stock market contributed four days of generally rising prices, although there were clues related to critical concerns.

 

First, a slightly smaller percentage of NASDAQ stocks rose in price (59%), vs. 69% on the "big board". NASDAQ prices are generally more volatile and have a more professional audience than those on the followers of only New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). NASDAQ stocks have outperformed NYSE stocks for some time and one could conclude that their participants are more clued in than NYSE followers.

 

In considering our domestic markets, we should not forget our present and future are influenced by global actions. For example, last week the older western European stocks on average did better than our domestic stocks, even though they will be impacted by various tariffs and recessions. The twin concerns, tariffs and recessions, were the main worries during the four-day market week. As a contrarian thinker I believe both concerns are not properly focused.

 

I believe President Trump is using the threats of tariffs primarily as a force to begin a much larger, more powerful, and more difficult conversations. These conversations can be lumped under the label of non-tariff trade barriers. No single law or regulation will cover all these topics. They can only be addressed by the heads of the various countries, which Trump hopes will be brought to the negotiating table or private discussion by the threats of large tariffs.

 

Trump believes there are two main areas where the US is being disadvantaged, local trade restrictions and manipulated foreign exchange rates. Additionally, he believes only the most senior people can reach an effective compromise and he is willing to adjust US tariffs and other factors to reach his objectives. If I am close to being correct there is no telling what the ultimate results will be, as all negotiations will need to be reviewed in light of competition with other countries. Thus, we need to pay attention to the various twists and turns that will take place, to the extent they are revealed, and not to jump to any conclusions.

 

The second conundrum facing us as both citizens and investors is recognizing that periodic economic declines are inevitable. The world has not repealed personality traits, the impact of technology, nor climate conditions, which will all impact our financial condition.  

 

Goldman Sachs Studies

Goldman believes the odds of a US recession are getting higher. They studied the history of recessions and were able to divide the past into cyclical and structural recessions. On average, cyclical recessions end within a year and structural recessions average twenty-seven months.

 

My Most Fearsome Concern

We have all learned that history does not repeat itself, but rhymes. Thus, as an analyst my first exercise is to look at the worst decline the US has ever experienced, the Depression. As there is almost never a single individual who causes a major economic change, it is a mistake to label the cause of the Depression under a single name.

 

The 1920s was a period of rapid expansion of debt and even looser morals. By the end of the decade, both farmers and smaller banks were heavily in debt. To bail them out congress came up with the Smoot­-Hawley tariffs. (Similar to today, politicians were counting votes, while the financial side of government was concerned about the debts of dealers who had farmers as clients, as well as local small banks. The latter was such a concern that when FDR campaigned, he promised to keep the banks open then immediately close them after coming into power. To some degree, this experience may be like today's tariffs.)

 

When FDR came in with his "brain trust" of Harvard professors, they sought to change much of how the country was to be governed. (Somewhat similar to how edicts from the Supreme Court and other judges have been used to force change.)  

 

Much of what President Trump and Elon Musk are trying to accomplish is structural. Even if they can find effective people to carry it out, it will take a while to deliver the new ways of doing things to the marketplace. On the basis of the above thinking I fear the next recession will be structural, lasting a few years. I hope I am wrong.

 

Question: What do you think?

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: An Uneasy Week with Long Concerns - Weekly Blog # 884

Mike Lipper's Blog: Short Term Rally Expected + Long Term Odds - Weekly Blog # 883

Mike Lipper's Blog: Increase in Bearish News is Long-Term Bullish - Weekly Blog # 882

 

Did someone forward this blog to you?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.