Building Your Future Winning Portfolio - Weekly Blog # 724

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

Building Your Future Winning Portfolio

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

Personality Shapes Portfolio Architecture 

One hurdle we give little thought is the modern mass production of clothes, foods, jobs, schools, and financial instruments (portfolios). Staunton Military Academy and the US Marine Corps were contributors to what I am today, but like everyone else I want to be unique. In that search to find myself, both my wife and I have turned to history to learn how others developed their identities. 

Focusing on how others have navigated their successes and failures, I am particularly interested in learning how to minimize losses. Large failures are typical of those who have achieved measurable success. Psychologists who measure the impact of winning and losing believe we feel at least twice as bad from losing. (I believe some of us feel even worse about losses. Losses delay our commitments to successful actions and use up some of our precious time.) People experience both successes and failures and some learn from their defeats, using that knowledge to build subsequent victories. For example, both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln suffered multiple losses before their victories. 

We Alone Are the Senior Architect of Our Investments 

While we may consult with various professionals, family, and friends, we are ultimately responsible for creating our investment portfolio and our lives. I have prepared an a la carte menu for you to choose from that is specific to meeting your investment personality needs. Instead of each alternative having prices or calories as a guide, I list a very rough risk/return identifier. (Through your own experience you can modify my judgements.) 

A la Carte Menu of Portfolio Vehicles 

Type             Risk Orientation

All on a single bet      Favored by entrepreneurs (Henry Ford 

                         was twice bankrupt before success) 

Concentrated holdings    Limited number of large bets with 

                         common risk characteristics 

 

Actively managed fund    Account/fund of less than 50 names 

Passive Index Fund       Fully invested + low turnover 

Combined Approaches      Risk avoidance limits upside 

Personally, I plead guilty to the last choice. Our big positions are centered on domestic and international financial services companies and funds. I use actively managed funds and fund management companies when I do not have confidence in particular companies, but believe their focus is correct. In doing so I use a fund or fund like vehicle as a common denominator play. 

Types of Declines and Expected Influence Structures 

The US stock market has been in decline for some time. In some respect you could go back to 2019 or earlier. The expansion of the NASDAQ Composite since the financial crisis may have ended in November 2021. Using that as a measure we have entered a bear market for at least two days, but it is not yet convincing. Both the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 have entered a correction phase, falling more than 10%. (The media called both the bear market and correction phase but cannot tie it to an economic or market measure.) Nevertheless, this may be a good time to assess the types of market declines and appropriate tactics and strategies: 

Correction Phase - According to S&P, the market is up +9% one year later. 

Bear Market - One year later the market is up +13%. (To the extent that the market indices represent one’s holdings and the account is eventually taxable, it doesn’t make sense to liquidate unless there is a specific problem that questions the future of the company. Most, but not all recessions lead to bear markets, so it is not a specific call for portfolio action. 

The real risk is an activist top-down government taking a normal cyclical decline and turning it into an active depression lasting a couple of years or more. If this is expected, the proper strategy is to cut expenditures as much as possible and shrink the portfolio in terms of capital commitment, but not names. In The Wall Street Journal, Jason Zweig recounts the incidence of Sir John Templeton buying 104 stocks trading for under $1.00, including 34 that were in bankruptcy. This was in 1939 before the US entered WWII. After the war he made a profit on 100 of the positions. (I do not expect a similar experience for the country, the market, or an investor, but the lesson shows the value of long-term investing, staring with low prices on the NYSE.) 

Which is Best Now? 

History does not offer a direct parallel. The closest that I have seen is the 6 months prior to the declaration of WWI. The immediate causes were the weak, isolationist, attitudes of the US government, plus the assignation of the Archduke, which was part of the unrest in Eastern Europe. Our fear is China supplying military goods to Russia as requested. This conceivably could bring a third world war.  

In deciding what to do, I suggest putting both the stock tables and the annual reports down. Evaluate your holdings as companies. Would you like to own all the company and never sell it? Warren Buffett views companies based on whether your children would be buyers of their products or services. 

After many successful years of investment, you may have an oversized highly profitable position and may have large loss positions to “harvest”, if you don’t think they will recover. These losses could be used to bring balance to your portfolio by recognizing the losses and simultaneously reducing some of the overweight positions in your winners. The freeing up of cash from both losers and slightly reduced winners creates a fund for reinvestment at a time when prices are reduced. 

Final thoughts: Understanding that making a series of correct investment turning point decisions is very rare, allow yourself to make mistakes, learn from them, and generally stay the course.

  

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

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/03/does-decline-influence-recovery-weekly.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/02/successful-investing-expects-unexpected.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/02/we-are-progressing-weekly-blog-721.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 - 2020

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved.

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

"Smart Money" vs. the Weight of Money

Introduction

One can divide people into two groups: the insecure and those that attempt to manage their insecurities. As we get older we all make physical, psychological, political, and financial mistakes among others. Almost all veteran investors are insecure to some extent about their investments. Because of our insecurities we look for guidelines to avoid making bad mistakes. Unfortunately we often ignore guidelines and signs with which we disagree. Instead, we search for guidelines and signs which we agree.

Smart Money

Due to our investment insecurities we search for and want to follow "Smart Money." Those people that are recognized as being successful as investors have so-called Smart Money in their investments.  One of the reasons in my prior life as a provider of mutual fund performance information that I was frequently quoted in the press was that the media and other pundits wanted to identify winning funds in order to focus on what those funds were doing at the time. Rarely was the discussion about how they were smart. 

As part of my investment management responsibilities for clients, when I interviewed various "winning " portfolio managers and some of their key analysts about both their thought processes and their selections, I was disappointed. All too often their research was shallow and focused only on incremental changes of significance. In many cases their current success was due to market rotation and relative value compared to then-popular securities. Some analysts and portfolio managers were truly perceptive and were deep thinkers. In my search for enlightenment I found a number of very smart investors who were not in the public eye. Often these and some of the portfolio managers of publicly traded funds did mostly their own research and were not reliant on brokerage research. On the other hand, I was unimpressed with those that followed the portfolio changes made by Warren Buffett, Peter Lynch, John Templeton, and John Neff. Their reported activity was sufficiently delayed from the time of transactions and at different than current prices. Further, their purchases typically fit their specific portfolios needs.

One approach to finding smart money is the basis for a good bit of technical market analysis. In a flat or down market a stock price (along with an increase in its volume) goes up, which can be recognized in charts, there is a belief that someone or a group knows something that the rest of the market does not. Therefore, they may be smart money. We will only know when the surge in its stock price ends.

Weight of Money

I was introduced to the importance that some professionals place on "The Weight of Money" many years ago as the leader of a group of analysts on a global trip largely focused on mining investments. When we were in Australia, one evening I got a call from a client of our firm from Tokyo who intently interviewed me as to the reactions of the analysts to various companies. After we talked for quite awhile I asked him why he was so interested about the analysts’ reaction rather than what I learned about the companies. He had a very good global internal research department and probably was the best single client of most institutional brokerage firms. Further, both he and I recognized that while my analyst companions on the trip were more than competent, they were not for the most part "the lead" analyst in the stock.

Our Tokyo-based client explained to me that the change in the amount of buying or selling in a stock could have a disproportionate impact short-term on the price. The weight of money rather than fundamentals could have more impact. As he was a manager with traditionally very high turnover in international markets, his focus on the aggregate views on a stock made sense to me.

The Weight of Money Can Mislead

Often what could properly be described as the weight of money is mistakenly labeled smart money. There were three instances in the last week when the weight of money might have given investors the wrong signal. The first two operate out of the best single investment laboratory that I know in terms of practical analytical skills. Early in the week it was reported that the British bookmakers had an 85% belief that the Prime Minister would get the mandate she wanted. This was foolishly taken as an analytical conclusion. Bookmakers have no particular forecasting skills. What the 85% represented was that 85% of the money wagered on the election saw a significant Tory victory. I suspect that the majority of the money bet came from in or around London and was not geographically dispersed. Bookies made a similar miscall in terms of the BREXIT referendum.

The second misread was the betting on The Belmont, the longest race for three year horses in the US. The beaten favorite came in second with final odds of 5/2. (Which means if the horse wins, the bettor wins $5.00 for every $ 2.00 bet.) The winner paid $5.00 for every $1.00 bet or twice the amount on the favorite and was the second favorite. At the racetrack, the pari-mutuel payoff is similar to the old bookmaker’s calculation of the different level of moneys bet less taxes and track compensation. This is a dollar weighted input. With only a cursory look at the local newspaper’s pre-race article, my intellectual choice was the eventual winner in part because he was more rested than the favorite and there was enough early speed in the race that the favorite and a number of other horses would be slowing down in the home stretch when the leading jockey in New York was giving a brilliant ride on the winner. Favorites don't win often enough to pay for their losses.

The final misread from those who rely on the weight of money argument occurred on Friday which may be an echo of a substantial decline of many years ago. Up to Friday the five following stocks: Facebook, Amazon, Apple*, Microsoft, and Alphabet (Google) represented 41% of all the gains earned by the stocks in the Standard & Poor’s 500 through the end of May. Thus 59% of the gain came a net basis from some 495 other stocks. While these five were not the most heavily owned stocks in the index, they were substantially owned. One study indicated that among large mutual funds, over 80% of them owned at least one of the five. Many probably owned Apple as it is the stock with the largest market capitalization. On Friday these five as well as many tech companies fell more than many other stocks, even though the Dow Jones Industrial Average was up a little bit. It is possible for awhile that the five may give up their performance leadership as part of normal rotation.

*   I have been a long-term holder of Apple shares in a personal account.

Perhaps the five are the modern equivalent of "The Nifty Fifty" which was a group of approximately fifty stocks that out-performed the general stock market from the late 1960s into the peak in 1973. As with the current five, The Nifty Fifty started their ascension coming out of a bottom. Most stocks reached their peak in 1968 but the averages did not top out until 1973-74 period. While there is some disagreement as to which stocks were in the fifty, the criterion was either a JP Morgan list of one decision stocks (only buy, never to sell) or the highest price/earnings ratios. There was a great overlap between the two lists. A number of the companies had very bad investment performances after the peak. Some were merged out and a few filed for bankruptcy. However most survived and a some prospered; e.g., Walmart.

  

I do not know what the future holds for this year's five leaders. I do know that if a portfolio has only a partial interest in the five, below the commitment in the various indices, it is the equivalent of being short that particular name if the name rises in price relative to the index. Historically, the stocks with the highest price/earnings ratios can fall the most. On an immediate basis Friday's decline closed the remaining price gap which made the best performing index, NASDAQ, vulnerable.

An Important Caution

S&P Global has lowered the credit rating of Massachusetts because it has not been building reserves that were required by the state legislature. This should be viewed as a general warning that eventually there will be a need for these reserves. It may be a number of years away from a significant economic recession with a market decline. I am sure that it will happen, as it always has as a correction from too much leverage in the system. I am not worried about the aforementioned five stocks, as most appear to have large cash reserves. I am concerned about others who often have an increased demand for their services when the general public are having difficulties.  In some cases this could cause partial or total liquidation of their investment portfolios. The time to add to one's fortress is when the sun is shining.

Questions of the Week:

1.  What Smart Money signals are you finding?

2.   Is the weight of money important to you?

3.   Are you building your reserve?

__________

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

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

Copyright ©  2008 - 2017

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Five Speculative Selling Solutions

Introduction

A long-term reader of this blog suggested that I write about selling rather than buying investments. In everything I do I want to measure how close I get to my goals. Out of this measurement need, I require a time period. While it is of future betting interest to have the fastest moving horse or other investment at the end  of a race, the payoff is the best performer for the fixed length of the race. The genesis of the TIMESPAN L Portfolios^® was to focus on achieving the ability to meet disbursement goals on a timely basis. 

This requirement is in some conflict with my instinctive ways to invest. Warren Buffett's favorite investment time period to invest is "forever." Mine may be even longer! (Over time some of my long-term investments have tripled to quintupled or more, beyond my exaggerated dreams.) Nevertheless, in focusing on most investors' needs to occasionally sell, I am commenting on five such events. But once again to judge whether selling is propitious or not, some measure of time is needed. Yes, to some extent the seller can celebrate the freeing of cash from investments in other assets. However, in the aftermath of a sale one is often asked whether the timing of the transaction was good. Thus to some extent a successful sale is measured as to how well the exit price compares with future prices. In this light the success of a sale is speculative in terms of comparisons.

The purpose of producing this post is to focus on the various thought processes that lead to successfully evolving solutions for five events when selling occurs.

1.  The Avoid Switch

Rarely people, their companies, their politics, and their investments  behave exactly as we conceived when we entered the transaction. It is difficult to find an investment that does not in some way disappoint, either by its own actions or factors beyond its control. There are times when the results are so good in the eyes of the market that the current price is way ahead of a reasonable long-term projection. Thus, at current prices there is considerable price risk. At times the risk appears to be too large and while an investor has not lost faith in the company, the investor may believe that the current price won't be repeated for an extended length of time. Most of the time the simple solution is to dispose of the holding. At times instead of selling out completely, reducing the size of the position makes more sense if there is not a screaming bargain available.

There are other occasions that selling may make sense. Several times I have been a holder of a security that I thought that I reasonably understood when either the company or the market did something that I did not understand. For example years ago a major conglomerate that I followed as an analyst switched from an under-reporting of earnings to including dealing earnings within operating earnings. Thus from my analyst's perspective, the company went from having a hidden kitty available to cover operating earnings shortfalls in some of its cyclical businesses to reporting every possible element of earnings. In other cases some companies made what I considered to be vanity acquisitions or questionable product pricing policies.  In these cases I felt I did not properly understand  these investments and exited them from my long-term holdings. 

In most cases if an investor is not comfortable in his or her understanding of an investment they would be wise to avoid owning it.

2.  The Bargain Switch

Sir John Templeton, my former data and consulting client, often phrased his sales in terms of purchasing better bargains. While occasionally what is better is only a lower valuation. To me these can prove to be "value traps." Normally things are cheaper because they should be - in terms of quality of product or management. However, we may have entered a period when bargain hunting can be productive.   

The rise of exchange traded funds and other passive devices based on industry sector codes (technology) or market capitalization (Large Cap growth) has led to an unusual level of correlation of stock prices within these data sets. With expected changes in currencies, taxes, import/export mixes, etc., I suspect that there will be greater dispersion in stock prices within many data sets. If I am correct, the number of active mutual funds outperforming the various indices should rise which will attract some of the trading money out of passive/ETF vehicles into either selected individual securities or smartly active mutual funds. As the differences in valuations becomes greater I would expect that there will be opportunities to be long or short individual securities that could favor more bargain switching.

3.  To Trim or Not?

As much as we would like to, we don't control the markets or the spending needs for our money. Thus over time we will have our investment wealth at a different balance than our beginning level. In many ways it is much easier to deal with a smaller amount of money than the beginning portfolio. In that case one should definitely trim the cash. The odds are that the decline in general market prices of stocks will eventually be reversed.

Many of those who have seen their income and wealth rise have already found that their gains do not lessen their problems but rather change them as well as their outlook. Once one has a portfolio, even if is limited to the number of holdings, it is an important part as to how one views the future.  For most individual and institutional investors who have not consciously or subconsciously adapted the timespan philosophy,  they will be dealing with a single portfolio that is probably focused on too short a time frame; e.g., one quarter, one year, or a single market cycle. Under these conditions the fear of near term losses becomes paramount. Thus, in a perceived expensive market the natural tendency is to reduce risk exposure. Perhaps the first technique should be to reduce or eliminate small positions on the basis that if they are still small they are not likely to be favored in the short-term.

Those who take a longer than current period view have history on their side for US equities and quite possibly for equities in general. The other historical trend worth recognizing is that great wealth comes from extreme concentration of effort, intelligence, and investment which suggests that concentrated portfolios in knowledgeable investors’ or managers’ accounts can produce great results.

After due consideration, trimming or completely eliminating positions could be the correct decision even if investments under other managers are doing well.  It might be helpful to not let the tax man become the portfolio manager.

The shorter term oriented accounts will tend to be much more market price sensitive than the longer term accounts who are more focused on building absolute capital. I suspect the shorter term accounts have higher portfolio turnover and on average pay more in taxes over time than the longer term accounts.

4.  The Familiarization Trade 

Most of those who read this blog have a substantial portion of their wealth in tradeable securities. Some do not and receive the major portion of their wealth in a concrete package of stock options, private company interests, convertible securities, and various types of trusts. For many, these instruments are difficult to understand even with professional help that may not be specifically knowledgeable on these particulars. As these managers are unfamiliar to the new recipient, there is some substantial fear of making a mistake in the process of converting their new illiquid wealth to easily tradeable securities and/or cash. My suggestion (regardless as to the perceived value of the new investment) is to take the smallest portion of the investment and convert through the many steps to cash. This will equip the new owner with an understanding of how the process of unwinding the concentrated wealth package can be converted, which should help with some understanding of the benefits of not doing anything more than evaluating the next and future steps. As is often the case, selling something can be a valuable learning experience.

5.  Quitting 

Recently those who have robust national or global political views in light of the strong to very strong stock markets are pondering whether they should quit the game and sell all their exposed equity positions. In terms of recorded history there have been a very limited number of times this has been a correct decision. Those instances have been very rare. But no one can be certain that at any given point stock price declines of more than half are not possible.

My own views are based on the beliefs that we have entered a different market phase. For at least the last ten years and perhaps longer we have been a world of single digits in terms of almost all main statistics of market prices, earnings, revenues, demographics, etc. I believe that starting with last summer we are accelerating into a double digit world, both up and down. In this new world sound investment principles will continue to work, but for some time the numerical bands won't. May this lead to an eventual market, if not economic collapse? Yes, it might, but not necessarily so. Rather than focusing on only the historic ratios, like Liz Ann Sonders of Charles Schwab, I am focusing on sentiment and currently the general lack of wild enthusiasm which is positive in my judgment that there is more time in this expansion.

As a contrarian and as a manager of portfolios owning mutual funds, I am often premature in my market judgments and actions. I am not yet ready to hit the quit button and retreat to cash, which is losing value regularly. Perhaps this time I will accept the downside volatility as the sign to exit.

Even if we do have a top and a subsequent fall, I hope I will not forget my responsibilities to future generations and totally "go to ground" in a foxhole. 

Conclusion

There are times and conditions when selling is wise. However, these decisions should be made carefully without too much attention to the current and a reasonable review of the longer term future. The sellers historically have the burden of history against them, but they can win.

Question for all time:

Have you successfully sold an important part of your wealth and re-entered the market? Was it at a lower or higher price?   

__________

Did you miss my 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 

Copyright © 2008 - 2017

A. Michael Lipper, C.F.A.,
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Improve Your Returns: Watch Short-Term and Learn Long-Term

Introduction

With the passing last week of Andy Grove it seems appropriate for me to consider the breadth of thinking in his book Only the Paranoid Survive. While some can be comfortable following Warren Buffett’s words (not his actions) to buy and hold forever, along with most professional investors, my insecurity does not permit me to buy and forget. We worry all the time and particularly when trends turn and accelerate in our favor. This is one of the reasons why I came up with the four increments in the Timespan L Portfolios^® . These require me to focus on both the short-term to make tactical decisions and to learn what are critical lessons for successful long-term investing.

The Short-Term Operational Portfolio Worries

The timespan model for this portfolio was designed for an endowment that has to feed an operating activity over a two year duration, (in practice we will modify the timespans to meet client needs). While we think of this as a short-term portfolio, a number of individuals and institutions perceive their preferred measurement period for the entire portfolio is one year, thus for some, this is a long-term portfolio.

As longer term readers of these blogs have learned, I find a need for excessive enthusiasm to be in place before I start to prepare for a major decline, possibly of 50%.  I am beginning to see some growing enthusiasm. After all of a five week improved US stock market, and rising Chinese stocks and oil prices, I see shopping at the nearby high end mall getting crowded. Parking spaces are hard to come by, shoppers (mostly women) are carrying three or so shopping bags. Stores were reasonably crowded and both the Apple and the Verizon Communications stores have customers waiting.

As an analyst I search for negative indicators as much as positive ones. As long as there is sufficient uncommitted money to equities I know that there is spare buying power that can push prices higher. This is particularly true if the money is being guided by so-called professional, conservative money managers. In a recent asset allocation study of forty large wealth managers' recommendations, I looked at the five most aggressive wealth managers who were recommending that their clients put 60-70% in equities compared to the average of 51% for the forty. Only one manager would put 10% in Emerging Market equities and another sole manager would put 16% in High Yield debt. In both cases the average for the group was about 4%. This was the same level of group aggressiveness in terms of private equity where the five most aggressive had between 10-14%. The commitment to hedge funds on average was 9% where the leaders had 18-25% in these vehicles. Thus the wealth managers in general haven’t been swept up yet by enthusiasm.

Some of the money in hedge funds and other trading vehicles is finding its way into ETFs either on the long side or short side. For the week ending March 23^rd there was a net inflow into equity ETFs of $2.8 Billion which included $1.1 Billion into Balanced ETFs. (It is important to remember that the institutional community has learned that Index ETFs are a cheaper entry vehicle than futures for their hedging and other trading purposes. I will be discussing the impacts of ETFs on the structure of the market places in early April at a meeting of the International Stock Exchange Executives Emeriti.)

I would not pay a great deal of attention to the net redemptions from conventional mutual funds in terms of future direction of the market. In the latest recorded week $1.5 Billion were redeemed, all of it from Domestic funds, almost all that from Large Cap funds. It is my contention that the bulk of these redemptions are in effect “completions” of long-term investment plans prior to funding other needs. This is an old phenomenon which in the past was offset by new purchases of funds that are not happening because it is more profitable for the distribution systems, including registered investment advisors to deal in other products including hedge funds, private equity funds, and to some extent ETFs.

There are some signs of significant enthusiasm which need to be tracked. In the last week $3 Billion went into Emerging Market equities. Some could be short covering. In a recent survey the second most crowded trade was being short Emerging Market stocks which are less liquid than our domestic stocks.

Other examples of rising enthusiasm are the quarterly hockey stick-like estimates of earnings for the S&P 500: 1^St Quarter ‑6.9%, 2^nd quarter ‑1.9%, 3^rd quarter +5.0%, and 4^th quarter +10.6%%. Certainly part of the gains is earnings from the Energy sector going from a ‑98.9% decline to a gain of +10.6. While these estimates suggest a trailing price/earnings ratio of 17.2x and a forward one of 17.0x, the real action is more towards the large and midsize companies found in the Russell 2000 with a trailing p/e of 24.9x and a forward p/e of 22.5x.

Bottom Line For Short Term Portfolios

With the above list of inputs, I still believe that the short-term portfolios should set up a price grid to begin to reduce their risks as the market moves higher. For longer term portfolios they should continue to invest for the long-term and occasionally buy into some opportunities that the market will serve up, but not attempt to market time.

Longer Term Lessons

As much as I question the perceived wisdom from academic sources, like many analysts I am always a student of our environment. As a practical matter it is more difficult to learn from successes than mistakes. Almost every aspect of a success could be the critical element, if you will, the secret sauce that made the success. Most mistakes come from slavishly following the perceived wisdom of reported successes without looking deeper as to why they worked when they did. Probably the toughest part to learn of the art of investing is timing. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with balanced accounts, all equity accounts, private equity funds, and hedge funds. The keys are when to use each of these, in what mix, and what level of patience should be applied. Generally one should use these tool sets when others are not. Most of the time it is a mistake to follow the crowd.

This week I read about an endowment that fired its poorer performing managers after the first seven months of its fiscal year which occurred through the horrible January performance. The group couldn’t take that it was down ‑8.5% and the S&P 500 was off ‑6.6%. The endowment fired their hedge funds and moved into private equity funds. We don’t know what the future will bring but I have serious reservations on the basis of the little bit that we do know. The endowment:

• Probably picked its managers largely on the basis of past performance
• Accepted a popular asset allocation
• Did not understand the cyclical nature of performance
• Did not have sufficient patience
• Elected to do a dramatic change all at once 
  
• Chose to go into the currently most popular asset class with the proceeds of transactions.

I will attempt to follow the organization's future progress because I am always looking for decision makers who have a high percentage of mistakes. These rare negative indicators hopefully will help me and my accounts from making similar mistakes.

Secret Sauces

Far too many investors follow successful other investors and try to mimic what “the experts” do. They don’t focus on the tools the experts applied to their art.  Classic examples are Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger at Berkshire Hathaway, who we will visit this spring. In many ways the tools, not the judgments that they bring to investing is in their annual report. The report contains 67 pages of notes and supplements to their financial statements. I do not claim to fully understand all the nuances that could be found in these pages. To fully grasp the tools that they have used, one would need individual courses in accounting, corporate finance, tax accounting/management, insurance accounting, treaties, various state/federal/foreign legal codes, and various forms of investing. Unless you have a firm understanding of these arts, don’t attempt to play their game. I benefit from both their skills and tools as a long-term share holder.

Other users of secret sauces were the late Sir John Templeton ably assisted by the late Tom Hansberger, both of who were my long-term data and consulting clients. In many respects Sir John was the leading expert on tax code differentials which he applied brilliantly to his personal and company benefit. Tom acted as symphony conductor skillfully managing different personalities as portfolio managers and analysts with global offices and people always on the move. Both understood the sales process and more importantly the sales people as well as how to motivate and control them.

Both of these pairs of artists were much more than stock pickers. Each brought much more to the process of building wealth for themselves and their companies.

Question of the Week: What are the secret sauces that you have seen?
________   

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 - 2016

A. Michael Lipper, C.F.A.,
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

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 - 2016

A. Michael Lipper, C.F.A.,
All Rights Reserved.
Contact author for limited redistribution permission.