저자: HowardMarks · 외국인
요약 보기
성장주 대 가치주 논쟁에 대한 하워드 막스의 결론은 둘을 명확히 구분할 필요가 없다는 것이다. 가치투자의 핵심 기준(기업 실질가치 분석, 가격과 가치의 괴리 포착, 감정 통제)은 성장주에도 적용 가능하며, 높은 PER 자체가 고평가를 뜻하지 않는다. 최근 10년간 러셀1000 성장지수는 10만 달러를 약 50만 달러로 불린 반면, 가치지수는 30만 달러 미만에 그쳐 성장주 우위가 뚜렷했다. 에릭 케인 등은 버블 가능성을 제기했으나, 막스는 버블 여부를 확신하지 않는다고 답했다. 연준의 제로금리 정책이 현금 보유 대신 위험자산 투자를 강요하는 압력으로 작용해 주식 상승을 뒷받침한다고 분석했다. 테슬라처럼 1년간 크게 오른 종목은 자산 비중이 과도하다면 일부 이익 실현이 바람직하며, 감당 가능한 위험 범위 안에서 장기 보유를 고려할 수 있다고 조언했다. 의회 폭동 당일에도 다우지수가 상승한 점을 언급하며, 단기적으로 시장이 비합리적일 수 있다고 덧붙였다.
다듬은 글
you and i usually talk about credit but today we're going to be talking mainly about stocks there are a few harder debates in the stock market than that of growth versus value and everybody who's been reading your memos and books howard for the past 30 years knows you as a value investor but your latest memo is an embrace of growth are you giving up on value no eric the theme of the memo is that there needn't be a uh firm uh schism or dividing line between value investing and growth investing as you know uh i my son has and his family have lived with us for a lot of the last year due to the pandemic and he's a he's a very thoughtful investor we've had a lot of discussions on lots of subjects including this one and he laid out criteria for value investing based on the understanding of securities at stakes in actual businesses focus on their true worth as opposed to their price the use of fundamentals to calculate intrinsic value the recognition that attractive investments come when price diverges from value and the emotional discipline to act when such an opportunity is presented and not otherwise and it seems to me that number one there's no reason that you can't do so-called investing in growth companies on that on that basis and number two there's nothing in there about low p e ratios or or anything like that so it should be the point is that the investors mentality should be eclectic and you shouldn't decline to invest in companies just because they're fast growing and and and and carry high p e ratios well part of the problem that investors confront is price i went back howard and reread the section on bubbles and crashes in your book mastering the market cycle and i should remind everybody who hasn't read it it's a warning right it serves as a warning to investors not to be seduced by the idea that price doesn't matter and here's my question what if we are in a bubble and prices of even the greatest growth companies we can talk about them amazon tesla microsoft are excessive what what if well that's a great question eric but but the andrews point which makes a lot of sense to me is that you have to really know a company well before you know it's overvalued if you say if you say well let's screen for on the market for attractive investments and uh we'll say that any pe over 25 is is uh is is uh discarded well there are companies that are worth pes over 25.
and you know true they they the true true we can both agree and i think we would agree howard that using a value investor's approach to say tesla for example or amazon wouldn't have worked at least up until now but but i'm going to posit the following to be the devil's advocate here one it's not possible in a bubble to tell what is and isn't appropriately priced that it's not possible in a bubble to distinguish between carefully considered growth investing and irresponsible risk-taking and that it's not possible in a bubble to know which great companies will survive and which ones won't you know eric uh i would i would have only respond that the things you say are not possible i would say it's not easy fair and it's not something everybody can do but i don't think it's something nobody can do there are people who have great records and those records include investing in so-called growth companies and you know i i mentioned in the memo that i had there was a very famous value investor who made good money in some of the tech leaders and i said well how could you how could a value guy invest in high growth tech companies he says well they look like value to me and you know this is a this is an avowed value investor with a long record a great long record and the point is that he was open-minded and you shouldn't dismiss the point that one of the points that's important is just because something has a high p e ratio doesn't mean it's overvalued and just because something has a low p e ratio doesn't mean it's cheap that's undeniably true and i'm not sure the market has ever rewarded investors who behaved too rigidly toward opportunity howard i cannot help but think back to last wednesday the capitol building in washington was being overrun by a mob and the dow jones industrial average was up 400 points is the market behaving rationally well first of all of course in the short term the market certainly can uh uh depart from irrationality secondly i think you're implying that we're in a bubble and no i'm merely i'm merely floating that as a possibility i don't have an opinion either way well there's no reason you shouldn't float it as a possibility uh and and certainly uh you know the greater question is well why is the market making new highs every day if we have this these problems the the the political division in the country is a terrific one but the greatest one of course is the pandemic that's an excellent question yeah but but i think i really think that it in large part and this doesn't apply uh account for any one day's action i think that the the uh the fed and treasury actions and specifically the reduction of the fed funds rate to zero has had a very coercive effect on the market uh it it has required people to invest because they don't want to sit around with their with cash money market fund bank deposits all earnings zero they don't want treasuries at less than one or uh higher grade bonds at two and so they've had to push out into risk assets stocks uh non-guilt-edge bonds these are uh private equity and and so forth these are and venture capital these are risk assets but not all stocks are performing equally we've all seen the charts and and i'd like to put one up if if we have it available uh showing what happened or what happened over the past 10 years if you invested in the russell 1000 growth instead of the russell 100 excuse me one thousand value if you invested a hundred thousand dollars in the one russell 100 growth you'd have almost five hundred thousand dollars today on a total return basis and if you invested in the russell 1000 value you'd have less than three hundred thousand it was an enormous enormous pardon me what was the starting point a hundred thousand so no five times ten years ago so you'd have five times your money over ten years in growth stocks and you'd have something less than three times your money in value stocks and that forms part of the evidence that another legendary value investor jeremy grantham points to to say that we're heading for one of the mother of all crashes well look first of all there's no disputing the fact that growth stocks have outperformed value stocks on the other hand on the other hand i think there's no disputing the fact that what our cold growth stocks have a better future than what are called value stocks well some of them certainly do but not all of them do well no but on balance they probably do and and of course the the the ones that where the value is questionable have not been heavily represented in the s p uh the ones that are that have been in the s p for the last 10 years are uh the great tech leaders uh that have been in the s p for the last 10 years have probably been the acknowledged winners uh but look there's no there's when when one group outperforms another group for a long period of time and to the extent you describe there's no question that it's possible that they're overvalued however the argument the argument in the memo is it doesn't prove it's overvalued because these are companies that are that have gotten better and better that that improve as they get larger and get stronger as they get larger not bureaucratic and slow moving but larger and and and uh uh so if i may ask yes the question is what should an investor do not an investor necessarily like you you've reached a point howard where you can afford to take some risk but let's say it's me for example and i own some shares of tesla which i do not own i should add we can both agree that tesla is a great company revolutionizing automobiles and energy storage but it has gained almost 700 in the space of a year if the fundamentals alone can't tell us whether tesla is or isn't worth 830 dollars a share after a run-up like that is it prudent for somebody like me somebody of limited resources to take money off the table or to do what andrew your son in your conversations argues which is not to sell well tesla is an extreme case there's an argument to be made that it's too high the people who are buying it you know you can't say that they're all nuts uh they may have there there may be people who have a view that it's attractive by the way people said it was too high two years ago true and and so it has all the has all the uh uh appreciations in the last two years been uh fallacious uh you know who are we to say uh you can make judgments and and certainly if if if you describe an individual not of great means uh he should take some take some profits he probably has he if he put if he bought tesla two years ago he probably has a huge gain it's probably a very disproportionate amount of his financial net worth yes he should absolutely cut back unless you know unless he really wants to try to hit the long ball howard to do that to do that he should have a high growth uh a high pain i i'm sorry to have to interrupt but you and i have run out of time it happens to us every time i apologize i look forward to our next conversation lisa that's howard marks
Comments 0