저자: 미상 · 한국인
요약 보기
투자의 핵심은 좋은 기업을 사는 것이 아니라 '잘' 사는 것, 즉 가격을 중시하는 것이다. 워런 버핏의 '합리적 가격의 훌륭한 기업' 조언은 좋지만, '훌륭함'의 기준이 모호하고 '합리적 가격'이 느슨한 핑계로 쓰여 고가에 사게 만들 수 있다고 지적한다. 초보 시절에는 사업모델이 좋은 기업만 고르려 했으나 찾기 어렵고, 주가가 낮게 머무는 저평가 기업을 불신했던 자신의 경험을 공유한다. 선배가 '모든 주식은 거래 대상'이라고 말한 것이 당시엔 와닿지 않았다고 회고한다. 홍콩 헤지펀드 매니저와의 대화에서 얻은 '가격이 투자 결과를 결정한다'는 원칙을 소개한다. 싸면 보유하고 비싸면 매도하며, 모든 자산도 이 원칙에서 벗어나지 않는다고 본다. 기업의 필수성·사업모델을 보되, 가치가 적정 수준 아래로 떨어지면 훌륭한 기업이라도 패스해야 한다는 입장이다. 좋은 기업을 합리적 가격에 사는 것도 좋지만, 그 '훌륭함'의 정의는 생각보다 엄격해야 하고 싼 가격 자체가 중요하다고 강조한다. 사업모델이 나쁘더라도 파산하지 않고 주주가치를 크게 훼손하지 않는 저등급 기업을 싸게 사는 것이 더 나은 투자일 수 있다고 주장한다. 등급 높은 한우와 낮은 한우도 가격이 다르게 거래되는 것에 비유한다. 결론적으로 사업의 질 분석보다 가격을 보는 연습이 필요하며, 많은 종목을 비교하며 가격을 판단하는 습관이 투자 수준을 높인다는 메시지다. 가치 대비 가격(price relative to value)이 중요하며, 기업가치 자체보다 얼마나 싼지가 핵심이라고 정리한다. 영상에서 특정 종목에 대한 가격 방향 예측이나 매수·매도 권유는 없다.
다듬은 글
Today, I’d like to talk about investment maxims for the first time in a while. There is someone I admire named Howard Marks, and among the things he said recently, there is this: the core of investing is not buying good things, but buying well. I think he expressed this in English as "9 o'clock," and there is a part of that video that was recently made into a viral video on a channel, which really resonated with me.
Yes, this part really struck a chord with me. I’d like to summarize and talk about what made this resonate with me and my experiences so far. When you first start investing, there is something you hear first. Since Warren Buffett is so famous, one of the things he says is that it is better to buy a great company at a reasonable price.
It is a really cool piece of advice. The opinion is that this is better than buying something that has value at a low price. However, the problem with this is that regarding "a great company at a reasonable price," what does " great" mean? It is something that is truly rare. It is not something that is truly rare.
It is not something where, after searching through thousands of companies, you find one that has a really better business model and the major shareholder's tendencies are excellent... Well, it’s good in terms of being a partner across various industries, and it seems like it will grow steadily in the future.
There is also talk about it, and the price is good. With various situations where everyone has become a "whale" and says, "I compared thousands of stocks and this is truly excellent," the idea is to hold onto it rather than buy at a reasonable price because it fits my assets, expecting my stock price to rise as the company's value increases.
However, this " reasonable price" seems to be used as a term to be lenient regarding price; it implies that if something isn't "appropriate"—that is, not excellent—and is continuously offered at a reasonable price, it allows one to easily buy at a higher price. When I invest, Warren Buffett is such a huge figure that I also had a position in the business model zone when I was blocked.
I was like that too. So, how was it back then? I tried to buy only companies with good business models. No matter how much I searched in Korea, I think it is really difficult to prioritize and easily find a company with a good business model. So, I have encountered difficulties regarding how to manage a portfolio with this stock, and before that, regarding the top 10 stocks with poor business models...
I’ve seen a lot of companies where the stock price doesn't rise as much as it went up, so it stays neatly low. The selling price and regular price are low, and the stock is swayed by the cost price. Looking at those companies, I even went so far as to think, "Don't you think these companies aren't worth investing in?" That was back when I was very immature.
Then, an older guy—one of my investment colleagues—said something like this to me. He said, "Is n't stocks just about buying anything? All stocks are objects of trading, so why do you think that way?" It didn't really resonate with me at the time. And actually, even now, I don't think every stock is an object of trading.
For example, there are stocks that fall outside the scope of the market, and on top of that, I don't consider companies with major shareholders' tendencies or those that undermine shareholder value to be investment targets. Of course, the second person probably excluded that when they spoke, too. I feel like I need to address that shrewdly.
While not all stocks are like that, most of them—that is, stocks that fall under the category of the market and where the major shareholder doesn't significantly damage shareholder value—are stocks that you can always buy at a certain price. I wanted to say that you need to have a perspective on stocks where you are always ready to sell at a certain price.
Actually, Howard Box also talked about this, but there is a person you all know very famously named Cesc Yaman, who wrote the book *You of Safety*. He also talked about machines in the second minute. Regarding this, back in early 2021, I met a Hong Kong hatch fund manager at a very famous clubhouse.
I got to know him somehow, and we were talking very often. He had written something on his profile, and that post really resonated with me, so I clipped it and looked it up. It turned out to be something from *Sense Club*. So I added this to my investment advice listing. You can look up the detailed English text to see what it means, but the gist of it is that the stock price is the most important factor in investment decisions.
If the price is really cheap, you hold because the price determines the outcome, and if the price is really high, you sell. So, the key point here is the app's V Square keyword. He said this. So, this statement is very important. All securities or assets to some extent... You must keep in mind that you must not deviate from the rule of knowing when the price is right and closing the position, and closing even a 1-hold position.
Therefore, you must consider that all investment assets do not deviate from this rule. You can think about this in two ways: first, by looking for companies with a necessary business model, and second, by looking for companies with a business model that is essential. Just because something is necessary does not mean you should exclude it from your investment targets.
No matter how excellent a company is, if its value drops below that level, you must give it a pass. And no matter how superior a company is, if its corporate value drops beyond that level, you must give it a pass. You must accept this. So, the advice to focus on the companies you will initially study and to look for companies with good business models is very good.
I have approached it that way as well. That is how you know what is good and what is bad, whether to exclude a place or not. Furthermore, because there were many people who viewed stocks as mere scraps of paper, to break that perspective, the idea was to focus on the company itself— looking at companies with good business models.
Expanding on that, the discussion reached the point of looking for excellent companies at reasonable prices. This is something that can be done later by buying and buying. The point is that if there is nothing else to buy, it is also good to purchase a truly excellent company at a reasonable price. The trend is very high.
I believe the definition of "excellent" is higher than we typically think. You shouldn't buy just any company at a reasonable price. If you buy at a reasonable price, there is a tendency to get trapped in what is commonly called a "value trap" for 1 to 4 years, thinking of it as your own loss. Therefore, you need to consider price very important, but the current trend is to only think about what makes a company excellent or what assets are good.
That is very important. Since that is possible during the beginner stage, it is a crucial factor. You need to analyze whether the company is good, but price ultimately matters. In investing, just as you always consider cost-effectiveness when buying something, everything is about price-to-performance.
To reiterate the concept of company value relative to price, the current trend is to simply accumulate companies that are in the " good" or "other" category—companies that people consider to be in the "bad" category— regardless of price. We saw many such scenarios during the period from 2015 to 2020 when the US stock market was rising, and there are stocks that have skyrocketed since then.
As I looked at these things, I developed the mindset that I should just hold onto them no matter what. However, similar thinking has occurred in the past. I have mentioned the Knicks and TPT several times before, and Howard Mazda also talks about this. At the time, many people asked why this was brought up.
The important thing is why living well is important. Howard Mazda said that after experiencing this, most people who bought and sold ended up losing everything. So, even if you held that mindset in the past, you need to reconsider it in this current phase. All assets are always subject to "sell by buy and hold." If the price is extremely low, you can buy unconditionally.
That is why I advise comparing many stocks. No matter how favorably you view a particular stock, or even if it has a business model that is far more necessary than that stock, if the price is relatively too low, it can be a highly attractive investment. You must analyze that. For instance, let's say you see a company with a bad business model—for instance, a company being swayed by government regulations, unable to set prices, and constantly running at a loss.
But the company hasn't gone bankrupt... If we define a company as one that won't go bankrupt, then even in this situation—and I am a reader—there are such cases. In that case, you need to consider how exactly to view such a company. Therefore, you shouldn't focus too much on looking at the business model; you need to practice looking at the price.
You need to consider whether the price is cheap or expensive. Just like with meat, companies don't fully understand things like Grade 1 Hanwoo. There are grades like Goose Plus, right? There is a price for Grade 1 Plus, Grade 1 Plus, Grade 2, and so on. These grades are traded, and even if the price is very low, you still eat it, don't you?
It's the same thing. In investment, even if a company is ranked Grade 4, as long as it does n't damage shareholder value and is n't on the verge of collapse due to continuous losses, and if it seems like the company will hold out, buying it at a low price is a much better investment. So, to summarize: Price is important.
In French investment, what is important is the price relative to value; value is not what matters. Corporate value is important. That is why people think that because they don't do basic analysis, value is important. Since the tool focus is on that, everything is concentrated here, so naturally, price is important.
How cheap it is is crucial. You have to compare this extensively to know where your stocks stand, right? That is why I tell you to look closely at the connections; you need to practice looking at prices while examining many stocks. I believe that by doing so, you will be able to invest in a way that takes your investments to the next level, which is why I have this maxim. Uh uh uh Uh
Comments 0