Showing posts with label American Express. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Express. Show all posts

Sunday, September 7, 2025

Bad Comparisons Can Lead To Faulty Conclusions - Weekly Blog # 905

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Bad Comparisons Can Lead

To Faulty Conclusions

 

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

 

 

 

Your Portfolio vs. Stock Indices

The biggest trap the media and sales community set for both institutions and individual investors is comparing portfolio performance with a stock index constructed by a publisher. The best US stock market index is probably the S&P 500 Composite (SWX is its symbol).

 

The index is published by Standard & Poor’s Global (*), whose components are selected by data analyst editors, not investment managers. In a performance year where a company splits into two or more publicly traded stocks; the index carries each component of the former stock for the performance year. That is why the SWX measures slightly more than 500 stocks at times. Additionally, almost every active investor’s portfolio contains some cash or similar instrument. In periods of large gains or losses, the performance of non-equities will affect the performance of an account, but not the index. Furthermore, it is extremely rare for an active portfolio to own anywhere close to 500 names.

(*) Owned in client and personal accounts

 

In measuring the performance of the SWX, the measurement compares the closing trade price of the prior trade date to the ending price of the current day. It is extremely common for the ending price to be higher or lower than what an investor receives, so the actual performance of an active account is likely to be different than an end price calculation.

 

The management committee of the Wall Street Journal and the Standard & Poor’s editors have decided that SWX will only contain stocks that are listed on US stock exchanges. They also do not limit the percentage size of holdings in the composite, while the SEC limits diversified mutual funds to holding no more than 5% weighting within the portfolio of any given stock at cost (not market). Non-diversified funds are not restricted this way.

 

In today’s world, managed accounts are almost certain to hold cash or fixed income instruments as redemption reserves. Additionally, opportunity reserves will in many cases include non-US listed securities.

 

Many years ago, for these reasons, we convinced a number of outside directors of mutual funds to compare the performance of their funds to similar portfolios of funds. I believe this is the way almost all investment accounts should be measured, whether they are funds or not.

 

Other Mis-labeling

Last week, three of the five leading large-cap stocks were labeled financials; JP Morgan Chase (*), Morgan Stanley(*), and American Express(*). None of the articles I read mentioned that Charles Schwab(*) was the fourth largest declining large stock on Friday. Clearly, Schwab has something else going on that the first three do not, despite sharing the same industry label.

(*) Client or personally owned

 

Also last week, there was no mention of various countries whose local market indices showed gains, Europe 6 and Asia 12.

 

Another example of incomplete labeling was a headline of Goldman predicting that “Gold will hit close to $5000, if Trump undermines the Fed”. Perhaps true, but other commodities and some foreign stocks may do just as well. (Coincidently, a strategic collaboration between Goldman and T. Rowe Price to create a range of public and private investments was also announced. As a part of this collaboration, Goldman will invest $1 billion in open market purchases of T. Rowe Price stock.  Perhaps the more important message, is that Goldman believes the market is not offing enough diversity.)

 

Question: What are your thoughts? 

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: What We Should Have Been Watching? - Weekly Blog # 903

Mike Lipper's Blog: The Week That Wasn't - Weekly Blog # 902

Mike Lipper's Blog: DIFFERENT IMPLICATIONS: DATA VS. TEXT - Weekly Blog # 901



 

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.

 


Sunday, May 25, 2025

“Straws in the Wind”: Predictions? - Weekly Blog # 890

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

“Straws in the Wind”: Predictions?

 

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

 

                   

 

Predictions

Ever since humans have thought about the future, they’ve looked for clues about what the future might hold. Since very few stocks can be purchased and converted back into cash immediately with a profit on the first transaction day, equity investors are essentially betting on one or more perceived futures. All we can do is guess what may happen.

 

Since regulators frown on future predictions, particularly those that guarantee future events, investors and analysts scan both the past and views of the future to guess what may happen. The following are brief thoughts which may help subscribers think about the future.

 

From the Past

In 1934, the US Congress passed the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act giving the President (FDR) the ability to negotiate reciprocal trade reductions. (FDR, with the help of his “Harvard Brain Trust”, was authorized to accomplish this mission. While they proposed tactics from the left, the current President may draw his approaches from the right. Both could be labeled “activists”.)

 

Today, the History Channel showed a two-hour program devoted to The Crash, The Depression, and FDR's actions. It was well produced, simplistic, and narrow, but the key facts seem to be accurate.

  1. FDR's 1932 Presidential election had surprising support from Republican leaders J.P. Morgan Jr. and DuPont, the leader of GM.
  2. FDR blamed the Crash and subsequent Depression on Wall Street and Banks.
  3. FDR turned on them, which changed the way the economy worked.
  4. The economy was not in condition to fight WWII at the beginning of the war.

 

As we have been told "History does not repeat itself, but rhymes." In general, there are two types of recessions, cyclical and structural. The latter takes longer.

 

2025

A year ago, very few analysts and perceptive investors would have guessed which four mutual fund peer groups would now be leading the year-to-date race. They are Precious Metals Funds +42.95%, Latin American Funds +24.50%, Commoditized Precious Metals Funds +22.60%, and European Region Funds +20.61%. The first and third are clearly based on gold, but the gap between the two appears to be unusually wide. Latin American and European funds having similar performance also seems unusual.  From an overall point of view these results suggest we have entered a new phase or cycle, with the probability that last year’s leaders won’t lead again for a while.

 

There now appears to be a need to fill manufacturing jobs on an overall basis. This is distressing for two reasons. The first is that hirers can’t find the right people who want to work in their plants. The second is that the new factories this administration is counting on will have difficulty reaching the productivity and profitability levels the optimistic people in DC expect.

 

The London Stock Exchange regularly publishes I/B/E/S estimates of S&P 500 quarterly earnings. For the quarter we are in, their earnings per share prediction is that we will gain +5.8%, while growing net income +4.3%. The +5.8% is disappointing, but the +4.3% shows how much the market needs buybacks. Moving to economic analysis from securities analysis, the low gains in net income will not generate sufficient cash to pay for capital expansion and the introduction of new products and services.

 

The weekly American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) sample survey has recently turned slightly bullish, quite a jump in three weeks. The latest week bullish/bearish readings are 37.7% and 36.7%, compared to 29.4% and 51.5% three weeks ago. Two comments are appropriate. First, this time-series has a good long-term record, although it has been wrong at turning points. Second, individual investors should not be traders who get caught up in short-term volatility.

 

2026

Venture Capital funds are having difficulty raising capital from investors and lenders. I suspect this is also true for the broader universe of private capital funds. Investors in small and mid-cap equity funds have become used to private capital funds buying their maturing holdings.

 

One commentator wrote that Warren Buffett’s Berkshire (*) sold bank stocks and has not sold any of its positions in Apple (*), Coke, and American Express (*) in its latest report. These stocks are price leaders and should therefore do relatively well in periods of stagflation.

(*) Positions held in client and personal accounts.

 

Question: What will make you transact this year?

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: After Relief Rally, 3rd Strike or Out? - Weekly Blog # 889

Mike Lipper's Blog: Slow Moving in a Fog - Weekly Blog # 888

Mike Lipper's Blog: Significant Messages: Warren Buffett to Step Down by End of Year, Other Berkshire Insights, and Tariffs won't deliver - Weekly Blog # 887



 

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.

 

Sunday, April 27, 2025

A Contrarian Starting to Worry - Weekly Blog # 886

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

A Contrarian Starting to Worry

 

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

 

                             

 

Misleading Financial Statements

First quarter earnings reports, led by financials, are generally positive. Good news if maintained often leads to rising stock prices, which is not what at least one contrarian is expecting. Nevertheless, comments and actions by decision makers at various levels highlighted those worries in April.

  • In the wealth management industry, one is seeing an increase in smart firms selling out at good prices. These firms are being paid by companies who believe they need to bulk up rather than do what they do best.
  • Some endowments and retirement plans are shifting to less aggressive investments or passive strategies, suggesting the intermediate future appears riskier.
  • Buyers of industrial goods or materials are paying less than they were a year ago. The ECRI price index is down 8.08% over the last year.
  • Active individual investors, or their managers, are predicting a worsening picture in the next six months. The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) sample survey’s latest reading shows the bulls at 21.9% compared to 25.4% a week earlier.
  • In April, 48% of businesses announced reduced profit expectations, compared with 33% in March. More concerning, 41% lowered their hiring expectations, versus 29% the month before.
  • Fewer Americans are planning to take vacations this year. Those planning to take one are using their credit cards less, said American Express and Capital One.

We may get some useful commentary next weekend from the new Berkshire Hathaway Saturday annual shareholders meeting format. The somewhat shorter Berkshire meeting with different speakers maybe cause a day’s delay in sending out the weekly blog.

Since the middle of the last century, we have seen a growing concentration of investment firms and banks. In the first quarter of this year, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and Citi were involved with 94% of global mergers & acquisitions (M&A). With more structural changes likely to be caused by modifications in trade, tariffs, taxes, and currencies, the odds favor continued concentration. This concentration may well lead to increased volatility and a reduced number of competent financial personnel throughout the global economy. This is unlikely to make investing easier for some of us.

 

Question: Can you show us a bullish point of view where we can invest for future generations?      

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Generally Good Holy Week + Future Clues - Weekly Blog # 885

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



 

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.


Sunday, October 20, 2024

Stress Unfelt by the “Bulls”, Yet !! - Weekly Blog # 859

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Stress Unfelt by the “Bulls”, Yet !!

 

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

 

 

 

One measure of future dangers is the length of time identified stress points are ignored. Often, the longer the period of being unaware of increased risk levels, the greater the damage. The reason for this is that more assets are committed, so more damage is sustained. Somewhat like a pain in the mouth or heart.

 

The following stress points are in plain sight and should be diagnosed, even though some may not lead to sustained account damage or damage to clients’ capital. However, the real damage of a meaningful decline is often the lack of confidence to take advantage of the recovery. The following concerns are not in any particular order.

  • Pet owners are trading down.
  • PPG is selling their original business.
  • As mentioned in the FT, “Corporate debts as credit funds allow borrowers to defer payments using higher cost payments in kind “PIK”.
  • McKinsey is cutting their workforce in China.
  • There is an assumption that the first Fed rate cut is the beginning of a rate cycle of lower rates.
  • After all the government spending (election-focused bribes), the civilian labor force is only up 0.48% year over year, while government payroll is up +2.26%.
  • Barron’s 10 high-grade bond yields declined -27 basis points compared to a gain of +8 points for medium-grade bonds. (Wider spread for added risk?)
  • Consumer confidence fell 5.37 % last month.
  • The percentage of losing stocks compared to all NYSE stocks was 1.7% vs 5.1% for NASDAQ stocks.
  • Jason Zweig in the WSJ quoting Ben Graham “Investing isn’t about mastering the market it is about mastering yourself.” I agree and I pay a lot of attention to what Jason and Ben say. (I was given the Ben Graham award as President of the New York Society of Securities Analysts (NYSSA)).
  • P&G noted that their customers in the US and China were switching to cheaper brands.
  • In the 3rd quarter, American Express* had revenue gains of +8% and earnings gains of +2%. (A classic example of the cost to produce a revenue dollar becoming more expensive. (*A small position is owned personally.)
  • Volkswagen is closing German factories for the first time since 1938.
  • In Europe, some are starting to watch for disinflation. (Disinflation is much rarer than inflation and is much worse, as people reduce or stop spending.) 

 

Most current global political leaders are ignorant of micro-economics and thus can’t grasp macro-economics. They are not wholly responsible for this condition because their teachers didn’t understand them either. We will all pay the price for this ignorance.

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Melt-Up, Leaks, & Echoes of 1907 - Weekly Blog # 858

Mike Lipper's Blog: Mis-Interpreting News - Weekly Blog # 857

Mike Lipper's Blog: Investors Not Traders Are Worried - Weekly Blog # 856



 

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.

Sunday, February 24, 2019

Lessons from Warren Buffett and an Italian Monk to 2nd Generations of Wealth - Weekly Blog # 565



Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings


Lessons from Warren Buffett and an Italian Monk to 2nd Generations of Wealth


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



One of the consistent career risks for long-term successful investment managers is dealing with the inheritors of sizeable accounts portfolios at the instant of perceived under-expected performance. Throughout their lives the inheritors have heard about the investment successes of their seniors’ advisors and investment vehicles. They take for granted it will mechanically continue for them. They do not understand that all investments, like all of life, involves risks. There are no absolute guarantees under any condition. Investments are packages of risks and rewards over numerous cyclical time periods and need to be understood.

Lessons from Warren:
We regularly write about Warren Buffett and the incomparable Charlie Munger concerning their investment vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway. We do this not because it has been a successful investment for myself personally and the holders of our financial services portfolio, but because of the valuable lessons that can be gleaned from these two remarkable investors in both words and actions.

Let me put their record into perspective. According to the latest issue of the Financial Analysts Journal, if Berkshire Hathaway had been a mutual fund over the last 40 years it would have beaten 100% of the competition. Even for the last ten years, a more difficult period in view of their size, they would have finished 11th, beating 99.7% of their perceived peers. That is the good news, now the bad news. On Saturday they issued their results for the fourth quarter of 2018, reporting a net loss on investments of $25 billion.

This is not the first time they have reported a loss. The original source of their name could not be turned around and was liquidated. Additionally, there were losses in a Baltimore department store and losses in airline common stocks, among others. Why do we own the stock today when on Monday it is quite likely there will be many commentators bewailing the loss of investment skills of Buffett and Munger. Those critics do not appreciate the evolution of the company and what has been built for future investors.

The first vehicle was the very successful Buffet Partnership, a hedge fund. At the time, when too many publicly traded stocks were trading above their private market value, they began to buy control and at times  a 100% ownership interest in the operating companies. This was in addition to their stock and bond portfolio and led to the acquisition of various insurance companies. For Berkshire, the attraction of these casualty insurers was their sizeable “float”, the difference between the premiums received and the claims paid. Today this is the largest source of leverage for the firm. (A few companies do this, but not as successfully as Berkshire.) Further, the use of the float is not taxed until the claims are paid, which may take many years and creates another form of leverage.

Frequently, during periods of financial distress, good companies with too much debt have been forced to seek additional capital to protect their reputation and credit rating. In the past these companies were willing to pay above market interest rates, pay preferred dividends, and issue options to Berkshire in order to benefit not only from their cash but also from their perceived endorsement. I call this reputational leverage. Finally, it is important to recognize that due to the large tax credits earned by its railroad and energy ownership, Berkshire can shield the operating earnings of any tax paying private companies it acquires. Berkshire also benefits when their publicly traded investments buy back stock and raise cash dividends. For example, over time they have purchased 12.6% of American Express, but currently own 17.9% of the company due to stock repurchases.

In the classic sense Berkshire is not a large user of stock margin loans. From a credit perspective it is not overly exposed to changes in the level of interest rates. In this light its 3rd largest public stock holding is an almost $19 Billion position in Coca-Cola, which is unlikely to move much if interest rates take a sudden jump.

What are they creating? Recognize that much of the stock is owned by people senior in age that have not benefited from cash dividends all these years. I believe to an important degree the 88 and 95-year-old owners are building something for their heirs. When they are no longer leading the company, they will have completed the transition from a capital appreciation vehicle to more of a capital preservation vehicle producing a regular stream of dividends and buybacks. This is not to say, despite Mr. Buffett’s expressed political views, that he is any less than optimistic as to the growth of the US and much of the rest of the world. (This contrasts with a report that the wealthy Chinese have become increasingly pessimistic, with some moving their wealth overseas and some thinking about physically moving as well.)

A Missing Nobel Prize
Getting back to helping the second generation of wealth, there was something missing from their schooling which could have led to their real education. What I am suggesting is that in their study of either history or philosophy there was no mention of an Italian Monk. Luca Pacioli, a Franciscan friar, published the first book describing double entry accounting 1494. Earlier examples occurred in Korea and Egypt centuries before. What they recognized was that every entry created an equal and opposite entry on a proper set of financials. Thus, the original size of an asset would need to be offset by debt or changes in equity. In modern language, it is like saying that there is no such thing as a free lunch. This recognition deserves a Nobel Prize, for it would make us think through all relationships and flows of money. I believe it was Sir Isaac Newton or some other ancient scientist who stated that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. An understanding of this dual nature of human and physical reality could help all those who believe in one-way streets.

What is Happening Now?
Using my familiar lens of looking at the markets through mutual fund performance averages. For the year-to-date through last Thursday night Small-Cap funds were the leader, with an average gain of +13.08%. The best of the best were the Small-Cap Growth funds +17.62%. Part of the gain was due to global science & tech funds, but an equally important part were the gains resulting from the recovery after the fourth quarter decline. I believe the decline was the result of a liquidity squeeze on traders and dealers, rather than the consequence of fundamental concerns. In the weekly WSJ list of 72 price changes for indices of stocks, bonds, ETFs, currencies, and commodities, only 9 fell, an unusually low number.

With many funds and stocks displaying double digit gains, the idea of a mid-single digit gain for the year could be wrong. Being wrong does not bother me much unless it is very wrong. Let me suggest a warning level for the much expected overly enthusiastic top. If the rest of 2019 produces a return, that when averaged with 2017 and 2018 is substantially above the corporate return on equity, watch out.


  
Did you miss my past few blogs? Click one of the links below to read.

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/02/could-biggest-risk-be-confirmation-bias.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/02/some-retire-while-others-sense.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2019/02/should-reputations-have-sell-date.html



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 - 2018
A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.


Sunday, November 8, 2015

The Many Lessons from Berkshire Hathaway



 Introduction

Earlier this week I felt like I was accused. In a message from an investment committee colleague who is a retiring senior officer of an institution I was thanked for being a teacher to him. This upset me because I always wanted to be with the “good guys,” the students. For I believe I am a lifelong student of human behavior, particularly in terms of investments. In that search I am always looking for sources of knowledge and wisdom. One of the lessons I learned from my otherwise much too liberal education was that the Bible is more than an inspirational document about morality. Selective chapters and verses can provide lasting insights into economics, agriculture, military tactics and strategy, training, law, sociology, psychology, management development, and leadership among other lessons.

In a similar fashion, a continuing study of the ever changing Berkshire Hathaway can be very instructive as to how one should lead his or her investment life. As a long-term owner of the stock both in a private financial services as well as personal accounts, I attempt to read almost all that is published on the company. I am not totally successful as the amount published by the company is voluminous, including various commentaries by its twin leaders Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger. It is popular with some “arm chair” critics to cast doubt as to the current wisdom of various moves that the company is making on numerous multi-tiered chess boards.

The purpose of this post is to share with our community what I learned in reading just one document. Almost all of my comments come from reading and thinking about the 45 page 10-Q document filed with the US SEC addressing the third quarter of 2015. Please do not interpret this as a recommendation to buy the stock which would only be appropriate after a thorough understanding of one’s current portfolio, time horizons, and views. However, it is a recommendation to various colleges and graduate schools to use a study of certain aspects of the company including accounting, contracts, global economics, management approaches, personnel and personal development, insurance risk management, financial and economic history and developing a long-term, loyal shareholder base. 

Financial Services

While it is much more, Berkshire Hathaway is essentially a financial services holding and portfolio management company. For the quarter 80% of the revenues came from insurance and other related sources. This simple title covers many different activities. It is somewhat like celebrating a winning horse without recognizing the contribution made by the jockey, trainer, breeding and ownership elements including many whose names we do not know. Some may downplay its contribution, for in the quarter as insurance underwriting contributed only 9% of operating earnings. What they are missing is the generation of insurance float which at the end of the quarter stood at $86.2 Billion up $2.2 Billion from year-end. In many ways this is the single most important figure in the financial statement. The float was essentially the source along with operating cash flow that led to a $133 Billion investment portfolio housed within the insurance complexes. For those of us who grew up within the brokerage community, float represents margin debt without interest cost. If one applied all of the float to the total net assets of the company one could take a somewhat exaggerated position that the company is 33% leveraged. However, the key value of the float is as excess capital that can be applied in a matter of hours as part of, in essence, rescue missions for sound, high quality companies that need cash and Berkshire’s imprimatur and are willing to pay preferred dividends or interest way above markets rates plus equity “kickers.” These companies have included GE, Goldman Sachs*, Bank of America*, Dow Chemical, Mars, among others.

Insurance is not the only source of financial earnings for Berkshire Hathaway. If one looks through the activities of its railroad, utilities, and energy, the objective is to convert its own and others capital through operations into financial gains that are soundly leveraged. In the third quarter these activities produced 18% of total revenues. Finance and financial products represented the rest of the revenues even after a $764 million believed to temporary loss in derivatives

Messrs. Buffett and Munger clearly believe in the long-term attractiveness of financial services investing, which reinforces my personal biases. (Friday saw bank stocks rise sharply, with JP Morgan Chase* up 2 points on almost double the volume of Thursday, perhaps its timing is right) Berkshire has devoted some $ 48.9 Billion to financial services stocks with 74% in Wells Fargo and American Express. It believes in well chosen concentration; including the two mentioned above, some 58% of its equity investments are in just four stocks. The only one of which is showing a loss against purchase price is IBM which is down some $2 Billion from a cost base of $11.7 Billion.  Not being a registered investment company it is treating the decline as temporary and not writing down its value. (This option is available to private investors and not registered participants and could be a useful approach as long as the investor is highly confident of recovery to purchase price. While I might like to do this personally, I am afraid my clients’ financial people are more interested in immediate liquidating values to meet their funding obligations with money to spare.)

*Held personally and/or by the financial services fund I manage

In a somewhat different situation in terms of Tesco, Berkshire took a write down of $ 678 million, but did not sell the stock which shows that it lost faith in the ability to get back to purchase price but thought that this summer’s prices were unnecessarily depressed. Looking at fourth quarter UK prices Berkshire may be able to salvage some of its admitted loss.

Viewing Berkshire as a Source of Investment Inputs

I found the following nuggets useful to aid my broader investment thinking. I will be happy to expand upon any of these with our regular subscribers.

After a super-heated second quarter, I was not totally surprised that the summer proved to be slow for many of the operating activities. What did disappoint me is that in many of the financial activities sales slowed materially more than seasonally. This slow-down hit our financial services stocks particularly in the asset management business.

Luckily for Berkshire the big bet on Kraft Heinz paid off with the carrying value of this common stock, including additional investments, jumping to $15.8 Billion from $3.95 Billion at year-end. The characteristic boldness of the management is a hallmark of the way it understands the importance of moving decisively when opportunity knocks looking for massive capital deployment.

As predicted by Mr. Buffett, the reinsurance business has fundamentally become less attractive due to excess capital being deployed by new entrants into the business who are lowering premiums. For the nine months Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group saw its underwriting gain drop to $247 million from $617 million for the prior nine month period. Once rates move back to attractive levels they are likely to return to the leadership of the big ticket business. The General Re subsidiary has analogous experience, dropping to $ 58 from $322 million operating gains in the same periods. The ability to tolerate these cyclical swings shows the benefit of the overall financial strength even with GEICO suffering a sharp increase in accident claims in the first half of the year ($213million vs. $746 million) before level results occurred in the summer driving quarter. One of the acknowledged skills of the company’s activities is risk management. In the long run it seems to know which risks the company should take. For example, it will undoubtedly turn the $130 million insurance property loss in China this year to higher revenues next year with substantial rate increases.

As part of its large diverse holdings of operating companies, managers are responsive to problems as shown below:

1. In response to a 37% decline in NetJets, it paid penalty fees for canceling aircraft purchase orders.
2. Sale of unprofitable operations within Fruit of the Loom.
3. One of the transportation companies is in the business of leasing cranes, the decline in the US business was being offset by gains in Australian infrastructure gains.

One of the reasons I believe that a study of Berkshire is appropriate for many MBAs is what they can learn from studying both the company’s mired accounting policies and capital development. In the first case the company made two $1.7 Billion acquisitions this year. In the first the Van Tuyl Group, now known as Berkshire Hathaway Automotive, will amortize the purchase goodwill. (The timing to participate in both the shrinking of the dealer community and getting close to peak annual auto sales seems good.) At the very same time it bought AltaLink a Canadian distributor of electricity which Berkshire will not amortize the purchased goodwill. By definition these two acquisitions will produce significantly different booked returns even though economically they perhaps should be similar.

The final revealed tool in Berkshire’s tool kit (which most investors are not aware of) is the ability of Berkshire to swap some of its security holdings which have appreciated in price, for some very specific operating subsidiaries of that company. This is a classic example of swapping investment assets for operating assets. I suspect that not only are these transactions tax free, but the new operating assets will be carried at the original costs of the transferred investments. This is another example that the stated book value of $151,083 for each “A” share is vastly understated under any reasonable liquidation program. To my mind the 20% premium that Mr. Buffett has suggested for buybacks would be a real bargain.

Bottom Line

I opened this post with an initial view of the Bible as a good teaching device for many subjects. However, in the end to be completely accepted it requires a good bit of faith. Because of the creativity and brilliance of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger and the complexity of their structure and accounting, a somewhat similar level of faith may be required.


Question of the week: Will you share what lessons can be learned from a study of Berkshire Hathaway?  
_________   
Did you miss my blog last week?  Click here to read.

Comment or email me a question to MikeLipper@Gmail.com.

Did someone forward you this Blog?  To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday, please subscribe using the email or RSS feed buttons in the left column of MikeLipper.Blogspot.com

Copyright © 2008 - 2015
A. Michael Lipper, C.F.A.,
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, March 31, 2013

Leadership Change Late in the Game



Regular readers of these posts already know that I have been prematurely speculating about the risks of a top of the market. Most securities analysts date the last important bottom as of March 9th, 2009. Almost exactly four years later, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (S&P500) reached a new high on the last trading day in March, 2013. Market cycles vary in length from bottom to peak, but generally they are in the 40 month range. (One of the sounder investment management organizations uses a rolling four year period as the shortest benchmark for its internal incentive compensation.)  Each market cycle is a bit different than those of the past, but they have many of the same characteristics. Most often on the rise up, the sectors that lead make sense as they come from deeply discounted price levels. In this particular case the second best performing group from the market cycle bottom was the financials, a group that is of particular interest to me. (I believe that a market boom needs to excite the owners of financial shares. With that thought in mind, I manage a private financial services fund that has been enjoying this rise because among the financial leaders within the S&P500 were Discover Financial, McGraw Hill, American Express and AIG. All of these, I have owned for many years.) 


Buyers need a quantity of sellers before they can push stock prices higher. The coming week or weeks will likely supply some sellers and some will say the doubling off the bottom is enough. Others may feel that after low double digit gains in the first quarter, the time would be right to lighten up on their positions. They would be urged to do so by those who insist that there should be a tight correlation between the prices in the market and their generalized view on the domestic and global economy. (As long as there are numerous economic pundits that are somewhere between wary to negative on the market, I can take a relatively relaxed view of the future for long-term investment accounts similar to what we manage.) 

The drivers so far

Arranged by the leading central banks, the best thing driving the stock market higher is the impact of the banks’ experimental policies to force interest rates to confiscatory levels. These efforts have done much to the maligned credit ratings which have proven on balance to be correct in the long run. Recognizing that it is almost impossible for a credit rater to speculatively lower credit ratings, they do provide a useful purpose of confirming current opinions as to the chances of timely payment of principal and interest. At the top of the credit rating pyramid is the Nine-AAA league composed of the sovereign debts rated AAA by S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch. According to the Financial Times the size of this pool has shrunk by 60% from $11 trillion to $4 trillion since the beginning of 2007. (US, UK, and France are no longer AAA rated.) The size of the drop is first a measure of the scale of the combined fiscal and monetary overreach by governments and the sharp reduction of the size of the pool of so called totally risk-free assets from a credit standpoint. The message delivered to investors is that there is relatively little in risk-free assets available, so if you want to earn a somewhat reasonable rate of return you must assume other risks in the bond and stock markets. 

As many of you probably already know, I spend a great amount of time analyzing mutual fund data. I do not pay much attention to the net flow data that combines the dollar totals of sales and redemptions, since I believe that the motivations behind each stem from very different needs. I do pay attention to gross redemptions. According to the Investment Company Institute (ICI), gross redemptions of equity funds in the first two months of 2013 declined $12.7 billion to $224 billion whereas gross redemptions of fixed income funds rose $21.6 billion to $ 141.9 billion. Strategic Income funds rose $12.8 billion in redemptions for the year to $65.7 billion, followed by increased redemptions in high yield and government funds. The Strategic Income fund bucket includes those fixed-income funds that can move from one type of fixed-income market to others. I believe that the shareholders are concerned that they were not exiting governments and high yield fast enough. My guess is that these figures are just showing a bit of nervousness on the part of some mutual fund holders; the largest single category of redeemer was institutional investors who redeemed $158 billion up $29 billion from the first two months of 2012. These numbers do not support the much-heralded great rotation out of bonds into stocks. I believe that thus far the biggest single contributor to the increased gross sales of equity funds is coming from a $121.8 billion increase in money market redemptions to a total of $2.4 trillion. Thus there is a reasonable chance that when individuals and their managers recognize that for the moment they shouldn’t fight the Federal Reserve, they could commit their assets that may well drive the stock market higher. Or they could decide that the risks are too high already in stocks. 

Need for new leadership

On the rise from the 2009 bottom, the leading large portfolio funds have been managed by value-oriented managers. They have bought and owned stocks of companies that were statistically cheap using the company’s financial statements as a guide. This is one of the reasons that the financials appealed to these portfolio managers globally. Many of these stocks were yielding an above stipulated inflation rate or would if permitted by the central banks. Other stocks that were found in these portfolios had rising operating and before tax margins. This was mostly achieved by capital and labor efficiencies in spite of limited sales growth. Without a global pickup in sales many of these companies will not be able to show earnings growth. This is exactly the problem facing those who need the stock market to move higher between now and the next Congressional elections. 

Possible new leadership

With fewer and fewer high quality bargains available the value-oriented investor is finding it is difficult to identify new large names. At the same time a growth-focused investor is being limited by the expected lack of volume growth. One possible area for future strength is broadening the concept of value beyond statistical value based largely on reported financial statements. I am suggesting an old merger & acquisition gambit of searching for strategic value.  Strategic value rests on a well-researched view of significant change. In an oversimplification, one could look at these opportunities through the eyes on the cash flow statements or a materially different earnings structure.

One of the key questions is: are there significant opportunities for the company and its peers to materially reduce their capital expenditures? As a relatively young analyst I spent time with an older leading analyst of aluminum producers. He became bullish on these stocks when the companies were shutting down the hot lines and factories. His bullishness was based on the idea that with less available competitive capacity, demand would force prices up until the next wave of expansion would take place a few years in the future. Airlines have followed a similar strategy through their mergers to reduce excess capacity. In a minor way we have seen a similar thought pattern in the financials, with the waves of expanding and contracting fixed-income trading and branch building. The final objective of these strategies is to use cash flow to pay off debt, pay dividends and shrink the number of shares outstanding. Some practitioners of these art forms have produced brilliant results. To some degree the asset allocation skills of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger at Berkshire Hathaway* and those of Leucadia* fit into this model.  

Currently on offer are two very different investments with dramatic change elements. The first, alphabetically, is Dell. The question here is whether a change to a more patient capital structure and/or change in management can produce good long-term results. While it is possible, I personally have my doubts, as the original driver of these discussions was an embarrassed (or should have been embarrassed) shareholder. Those involved are more financial engineers than sustainable company builders. I could be wrong and this type of shareholder action could become a model for the new leadership. There are lots of candidates for this kind of operation, but not without risk.

The other stock on offer and somewhat a competitor to the first is Hewlett Packard which likewise has been gravely wounded by the computer wars and unfortunate acquisitions. The difference is that the current CEO is in an announced five year turnaround plan. She has solid marketing and management experience. I believe that it is clear that the future company will not be producing the same products if at all or in the same way.   

While less attractive to me is what I have called “the three M” Strategy. The three “M”s stand for McKinsey, (a consultant with a dubious track record of success; e.g., Enron), Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley*. The two financials have used the consultant to provide cover for what their managements wanted to do and have hired former McKinsey partners. Both of the two operating companies are trying to improve their balance sheet by selling off elements of their empires to improve their balance sheet ratios. They are doing this rather than materially improving their products and delivery systems. Nevertheless, they may well succeed; I hope so, as they have a number of talented people on board.

Each of the three alternatives to build increased strategic value could be part of a new market leadership which I think is needed to go from the newly established highs to materially higher stock prices. 
*Owned in both my financial services fund and personal portfolios

What Do You Think?
________________________________
Did you miss Mike Lipper’s Blog last week?  Click here to read.

Did someone forward you this Blog?  To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday, please subscribe using the email or RSS feed buttons in the left column of MikeLipper.Blogspot.com .