저자: Neil Denize · 외국인
다듬은 글
so even warren buffett says uh the vast majority of people should index and i agree with him so are there any questions or do i have any time then again you know warren buffett doesn't index and neither do i so i thought i'd tell you why and then maybe you'll have some more information to decide for yourself what makes makes sense for you you know once a year in my class at columbia i at least for the last five six years somebody raises their hand and asked a question that goes something along the lines something like this hey joel congratulations you've been doing this for 35 years and you've had a nice record but now there are more computers there's more data there's more ability to crunch numbers and uh kind of isn't the party over for us isn't it just more hedge funds it's just a lot more competition isn't the party over for us so my students are generally second year mbas i'd say average age 27 or so uh so i just answer it this way i tell let's go back to when you learn how to read uh let's take a look at the most followed market in the world that would be the united states let's take a look at the most followed stocks within the most followed market in the world those would be the s p 500 stocks let's take a look at what's happened since you learned how to read so i tell them from 1997 uh when they were 9 or 10 to 2000 the s p 500 doubled from 2000 to 2002 it halved from 2002 to 2007 it doubled from 2007 to 2009 it halved and from 2009 to today it's roughly tripled which is my way of uh telling them that people are still crazy that was just the last 17 years uh and i'm way understating the case uh because the s p 500 is an average of 500 stocks if you lift up the covers and look underneath what's going on this huge dispersion of those 500 stocks between those at any particular time that are in favor and those that are out of favor and so there's a wild ride going underneath the covers if you look under the covers the wild ride of those 500 stocks at any particular time and that doubling in having doubling and having with the average of 500 stocks really smoothing the ride so there should be an opportunity and if you understand what stocks are and i uh guarantee my students first day of class i make a guarantee every year they walk in and i guarantee them this if they do good valuation work of a company i guarantee them the market will agree with them i just never tell them when could be a couple weeks could be two or three years but if they do good valuation work the market will agree with them stocks are not pieces of paper that uh bounce up and down and you put complicated ratios on like sharp ratios or certain ratios stocks are ownership shares of businesses that you are valuing and if so inclined tried to buy at a discount so if you believe what ben graham said that this horizontal line is fair value and this wavy line around that horizontal line are stock prices and you have a disciplined process to buy perhaps more than your fair share when they're below the line and if so inclined sell or short more than your fair share when they're above the line the market is throwing us pitches all of the time uh the reason people don't outperform the market they're a behavioral problem there are agency problems but it's not because we're not getting those uh opportunities let me tell you how we value stocks uh it's not very tough and i think most of you will understand it i think the best example that resonates seems to resonate with most people is thinking about buying a house and to keep the numbers simple let's say that someone is asking a million dollars for the house they want to sell and your job is to figure out whether that's a good deal or not so there's certain questions you would ask first one of the first questions i'd ask is well how much rents could i get for that thing okay so in other words if i rented out that million dollar house how much rent would i collect if i uh we're going to collect 70 80 90 000 a year seven eight nine percent yield on that house that's one way i might go about valuing it and what's the next question you would ask i'm pretty sure i know what it would be uh what are the other houses on the block going for in the block next door in the town next door how does this compare how relatively cheap is this relative to all my current choices so that's what we do we look at how relatively cheap is this business relative to other similar businesses relative to a whole universe of choices that i have we do that we also go back in history look at how this company or this house has traditionally been valued versus other ones in the neighborhood or versus uh other communities and how is it being valued now so measures of absolute relative value absolutely cheap you know on a rental basis absolutely cheap or relatively cheap on all different kinds of measures that that makes sense to you now you wouldn't use any of these measures all by themselves if you just use relative cheapness uh if some of you remember the internet bubble and you bought the cheapest internet stock that wasn't cheap it was just cheap relative to all the other crazy priced uh stocks at the time but we uses our we use our measures of absolute relative values checks and balances against each other try to zero in on fair value so when you do this uh this is actually a study we did of our evaluation methodology very very similar to the way i just said we value a house this is how we we looked at the 2000 largest companies in the us over a 20-year period this was 1992-2012 and we rank them on a daily basis from one to two thousand based on their discount to our assessment of value using these metrics the x-axis here you probably can't see it uh is just a valuation percentile all this means is if you're in the bottom left-hand corner and you're in the first percentile you're the 20 companies at any particular time out of those 2000 that measure cheapest according to our measures of absolute relative value uh go to the 99th percentile uh you would be the 20 companies that measure most expensive out of those 2 000.
the y-axis is the year forward return on average during those 20 years what this chart simply says is on average stocks that fell in our first percentile the cheapest 20 averaged a one year forward return during those 20 years of 38 percent stocks that ranked in our second percentile averaged a one-year forward return of about 37 percent and then we dropped down to this best fit line which we always say we don't mind missing when we're making extra money and then as we measure something more expensive the year forward return drops and if you were sitting in my class at columbia and i said hey does anyone see a long short strategy you might pursue if you could predict ahead of time which stocks would do best second best third best in order and you did not say i guess i'd buy these guys up here in the upper left hand corner and short these guys in the bottom right hand corner if you didn't say that i'd probably throw you out of class because it's very straightforward that's what you should do and by the way that's what we do the important thing to understand is that stocks are ownership shares of businesses okay now uh by the way that beautiful chart i showed you with the 90 percent fit you know why doesn't everyone do this uh well unfortunately it doesn't look like that when you're living through that that's an average over 20 years if i showed you a snippet of three or four years uh if it would be nice it might be 0.55 0.6 something like that but it's not going to be very cooperative right if what we did worked every day and every month and every year everyone would do it it would stop working but but it uh it it doesn't unfortunately uh but the reason that we stick to what we're doing even when it's not working is that chart meaning the way we value companies our measures of absolute and relative value or approximately how the market values them over time but if you view stocks as ownership shares of businesses that you value and try to buy at a discount and that doesn't work for a couple years i'm not going to change what i'm doing i'm not going to buy the bottom uh right hand corner you know by all the money losers and the companies uh that don't earn anything or trading it a hundred times free cash flow i'm not going to buy those even if it works in one particular year and then sell the ones that are cheap relative to everything get me high rents and everything else i'm not i'm not going to change my strategy uh and i believe that uh stocks will eventually not right now but eventually uh people get it right and i may have to be patient that's really what i have to do what that chart tells me is i'm on the right track meaning that's sort of our true north and we just have to be patient to get there uh the reason that these simple metrics don't get arbitraged away is the example i uh usually use for arbitrage is uh oh you see gold in new york at twelve hundred dollars and and it's selling at london simultaneously at 1201.
well an arbor jour sitting on a trading desk someplace we'll see that and buy up gold in new york at 1200 and push the price up a little bit he'll simultaneously sell gold in london at 1201 push the price down and they'll convert someone somewhere in the middle it'll happen so fast on a trading desk that you don't really even get to see that but what if i told you you could buy gold in new york today at 1200 sometime in the next two three years you're gonna make money but you could lose 20 of your money while you're waiting there's no guy sitting on a desk anywhere that really uh can do that and and frankly uh time horizons are getting shorter uh it used to be when i was younger i used to get quarterly statements and most people would throw them in the garbage now you can check your stock price 30 times a minute on the internet maybe some of you do uh and time horizons are shrinking and we're just playing time arbitrage we're being patient buying cheap good businesses and waiting for the market to recognize the value we see but it takes some work to value companies and let's say you don't want to do that you know you have a day job i guess everyone here has a day job so you don't want to do that so one thing you could do is try to find someone good to do it for you right showing you there's this opportunity maybe someone can do it for you and what you should probably look for when you're looking for that person is someone who has a good investment process okay that makes sense to you the problem is for most active managers uh if you think of their challenge when they're picking an individual stock they must think that they have a variant hypothesis as to why that stock is priced differently than the way it should be and i can tell you i've been doing this over 35 years and it's very rare almost never have i bottom ticked a stock bought bought it at the absolute bottom so 99.9 plus percent of the time a stock is down after i bought it and there are really only two reasons why one is i was wrong the other is i just need more time for my thesis to play out okay now as an outside allocator you don't really know what the thesis for the individual stock was even the allocator himself the manager i mean i'm sorry the manager himself sometimes doesn't know when things are going against you there are all kinds of agency problems you know you got people to answer to you have behavioral issues just naturally you start to doubt yourself it's very unclear sometimes even to them what their biases are and what they're doing so the allocator doesn't really understand the thesis behind each pick it's not clear that the manager uh is totally unbiased when he has a variant thesis that's going against him um and so since you don't need know the thesis as an allocator most people uh all they have are the returns and that's what they used i wrote a book uh i hold it up here it's called the big secret and i always say it's still a big secret because no one read it and in that book i talked about a few studies number one it talked about the best performing manager i wrote in 2011 so it talked about the decade 2000 to 2010.
looked at the best performing mutual fund a study of the best performing mutual fund for that decade uh that fund was up 18 per year 100 long the u.s equities market was flat during those 10 years so 18 up a year is pretty good unfortunately the average investor in that fund on a dollar weighted basis managed to lose 11 a year because every time the fund uh the market went up people piled in when the market went down they piled out when the fund outperformed they piled in when the fund underperformed they piled out and they took an 18 annual gain and turned it into an 11 annual dollar weighted loss why well to beat the market if you're beating by 18 points you're doing something different than the market you're going to zig zag differently you can't do the same as the market you have to do something different you're going to zig and zag differently uh institutional managers are no different here are the stats on the if you just took a look at the top institutional managers for that decade the ones who 2000 to 2010 the top quartile managers the ones who ended up with the best 10-year record here are the stats on them 97 of those who ended up with the best 10-year record top quartile spent at least three of the 10 years in the bottom half of performance not shocking but everyone right to beat the market you have to do something different you're going to zigzag differently 79 percent of those who ended up with the best 10-year record spent at least three of the 10 years in the bottom quartile performance and here's the stunner 47 roughly half of those who they ended up with the best record but they spent at least three of those 10 years in the bottom decile the bottom 10 percent of performers so you know no one stayed with them but they ended up with the best record so it's very hard uh very hard to pick an allocator because you don't know the thesis so you're using past returns but when you do that all you're doing is chasing your tail going in and out at all the wrong times uh so it's it's very hard uh what a good allocator usually an institutional allocator and there are a few of them should be looking at process and do you stay with your process so one thing you could do is do it yourself i wrote a book uh sarah mentioned called you can be a stock market genius world's worst title of all time in it it said sort of what warren buffett calls why don't we look for one foot hurdles okay and i opened the book with a story about my in-laws uh who's uh used to spend uh they they had a house in connecticut and they used to spend the weekends going to yard sales and country auctions uh looking for bargains okay paintings are sculptures they they were uh art collectors and they were not going to these yard sales and country auctions looking for you know seeing a painting that was discarded saying this guy's the next picasso that's not what they were doing what they were looking for are uh pieces of art or sculpture that they uh know uh the artist some of his similar work had just gone for auction for a lot more than they could buy it for right they can buy it for 30 or 40 cents on the dollar of what it just went to auction for that's a lot different question and so what you can be a stock market genius was was showing you these areas that are ignored these are the country auctions and the yard sales of the investment world and these were uh you know i talked about different areas spin-offs bankruptcies uh um you know uh small cap stocks uh you know companies going through recapitalizations anything weird complicated situations uh so that's another way but you guys have a full-time job that is a full-time job let me tell you that's a full-time job basically the best strategy for you which is how i'll end before i take questions is not only one that makes sense but one you can stick with okay so you have to understand what you're doing number one if you give it to someone else you have to understand what they're doing and you have to be able to stick with it so you have to understand it well enough to stick with it
Comments 0