Value Investing Strategies. PART 1

Value Investing.

By ADAM HAYES.

What Is Value Investing?
Value investing is an investment strategy that involves picking stocks that appear to be trading for less than their intrinsic or book value. Value investors actively ferret out stocks they think the stock market is underestimating. They believe the market overreacts to good and bad news, resulting in stock price movements that do not correspond to a company's long-term fundamentals. The overreaction offers an opportunity to profit by buying stocks at discounted prices—on sale.


Warren Buffett is probably the best-known value investor today, but there are many others, including Benjamin Graham (Buffet's professor and mentor), David Dodd, Charlie Munger, Christopher Browne (another Graham student), and billionaire hedge-fund manager, Seth Klarman.


KEY TAKEAWAYS.
Value investing is an investment strategy that involves picking stocks that appear to be trading for less than their intrinsic or book value.
Value investors actively ferret out stocks they think the stock market is underestimating.
Value investors use financial analysis, don't follow the herd, and are long-term investors of quality companies.
How Value Investing Works
The basic concept behind every-day value investing is straightforward: If you know the true value of something, you can save a lot of money when you buy it on sale. Most folks would agree that whether you buy a new TV on sale, or at full price, you’re getting the same TV with the same screen size and picture quality.


Stocks work in a similar manner, meaning the company’s stock price can change even when the company’s value or valuation has remained the same. Stocks, like TVs, go through periods of higher and lower demand leading to price fluctuations—but that doesn't change what you’re getting for your money.

Just like savvy shoppers would argue that it makes no sense to pay full price for a TV since TVs go on sale several times a year, savvy value investors believe stocks work the same way. Of course, unlike TVs, stocks won't go on sale at predictable times of the year such as Black Friday, and their sale prices won’t be advertised.

Value investing is the process of doing detective work to find these secret sales on stocks and buying them at a discount compared to how the market values them. In return for buying and holding these value stocks for the long-term, investors can be rewarded handsomely.


 Value investing developed from a concept by Columbia Business School professors Benjamin Graham and David Dodd in 1934 and was popularized in Graham's 1949 book, The Intelligent Investor.
Intrinsic Value and Value Investing
In the stock market, the equivalent of a stock being cheap or discounted is when its shares are undervalued. Value investors hope to profit from shares they perceive to be deeply discounted.


Investors use various metrics to attempt to find the valuation or intrinsic value of a stock. Intrinsic value is a combination of using financial analysis such as studying a company's financial performance, revenue, earnings, cash flow, and profit as well as fundamental factors, including the company's brand, business model, target market, and competitive advantage. Some metrics used to value a company's stock include:

Price-to-book (P/B) or book value or, which measures the value of a company's assets and compares them to the stock price. If the price is lower than the value of the assets, the stock is undervalued, assuming the company is not in financial hardship.

Price-to-earnings (P/E), which shows the company's track record for earnings to determine if the stock price is not reflecting all of the earnings or undervalued.

Free cash flow, which is the cash generated from a company's revenue or operations after the costs of expenditures have been subtracted. Free cash flow is the cash remaining after expenses have been paid, including operating expenses and large purchases called capital expenditures, which is the purchase of assets like equipment or upgrading a manufacturing plant. If a company is generating free cash flow, it'll have money left over to invest in the future of the business, pay off debt, pay dividends or rewards to shareholders, and issue share buybacks.

Of course, there are many other metrics used in the analysis, including analyzing debt, equity, sales, and revenue growth. After reviewing these metrics, the value investor can decide to purchase shares if the comparative value—the stock's current price vis-a-vis its company's intrinsic worth—is attractive enough.

Margin of Safety.
Value investors require some room for error in their estimation of value, and they often set their own "margin of safety," based on their particular risk tolerance. The margin of safety principle, one of the keys to successful value investing, is based on the premise that buying stocks at bargain prices gives you a better chance at earning a profit later when you sell them. The margin of safety also makes you less likely to lose money if the stock doesn’t perform as you had expected.

Value investors use the same sort of reasoning. If a stock is worth $100 and you buy it for $66, you’ll make a profit of $34 simply by waiting for the stock’s price to rise to the $100 true value. On top of that, the company might grow and become more valuable, giving you a chance to make even more money. If the stock’s price rises to $110, you’ll make $44 since you bought the stock on sale. If you had purchased it at its full price of $100, you would only make a $10 profit. Benjamin Graham, the father of value investing, only bought stocks when they were priced at two-thirds or less of their intrinsic value. This was the margin of safety he felt was necessary to earn the best returns while minimizing investment downside.

Markets are not Efficient.
Value investors don’t believe in the efficient-market hypothesis, which says that stock prices already take all information about a company into account, so their price always reflects their value. Instead, value investors believe that stocks may be over- or underpriced for a variety of reasons.

For example, a stock might be underpriced because the economy is performing poorly and investors are panicking and selling (as was the case during the Great Recession). Or a stock might be overpriced because investors have gotten too excited about an unproven new technology (as was the case of the dot-com bubble). Psychological biases can push a stock price up or down based on news, such as disappointing or unexpected earnings announcements, product recalls, or litigation. Stocks may also be undervalued because they trade under the radar, meaning they're inadequately covered by analysts and the media.

Don't Follow the Herd.
Value investors possess many characteristics of contrarians —they don’t follow the herd. Not only do they reject the efficient-market hypothesis, but when everyone else is buying, they’re often selling or standing back. When everyone else is selling, they’re buying or holding. Value investors don’t buy trendy stocks (because they’re typically overpriced). Instead, they invest in companies that aren’t household names if the financials check out. They also take a second look at stocks that are household names when those stocks’ prices have plummeted, believing such companies can recover from setbacks if their fundamentals remain strong and their products and services still have quality.

Value investors only care about a stock’s intrinsic value. They think about buying a stock for what it actually is: a percentage of ownership in a company. They want to own companies that they know have sound principles and sound financials, regardless of what everyone else is saying or doing.

Value Investing Requires Diligence & Patience.
Estimating the true intrinsic value of a stock involves some financial analysis but also involves a fair amount of subjectivity—meaning at times, it can be more of an art than a science. Two different investors can analyze the exact same valuation data on a company and arrive at different decisions.

Some investors, who look only at existing financials, don't put much faith in estimating future growth. Other value investors focus primarily on a company's future growth potential and estimated cash flows. And some do both: Noted value investment gurus Warren Buffett and Peter Lynch, who ran Fidelity Investment's Magellan Fund for several years are both known for analyzing financial statements and looking at valuation multiples, in order to identify cases where the market has mispriced stocks.

Despite different approaches, the underlying logic of value investing is to purchase assets for less than they are currently worth, hold them for the long-term, and profit when they return to the intrinsic value or above. It doesn't provide instant gratification. You can’t expect to buy a stock for $50 on Tuesday and sell it for $100 on Thursday. Instead, you may have to wait years before your stock investments pay off, and you will occasionally lose money. The good news is that, for most investors, long-term capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than short-term investment gains.

Like all investment strategies, you must have the patience and diligence to stick with your investment philosophy. Some stocks you might want to buy because the fundamentals are sound, but you’ll have to wait if it’s overpriced. You’ll want to buy the stock that is most attractively priced at that moment, and if no stocks meet your criteria, you'll have to sit and wait and let your cash sit idle until an opportunity arises.

One-Third.
Value investing guru Benjamin Graham argued that an undervalued stock is priced at least a third below its intrinsic value.

Why Stocks Become Undervalued.
If you don’t believe in the efficient market hypothesis, you can identify reasons why stocks might be trading below their intrinsic value. Here are a few factors that can drag a stock’s price down and make it undervalued.

Market Moves and Herd Mentality.
Sometimes people invest irrationally based on psychological biases rather than market fundamentals. When a specific stock’s price is rising or when the overall market is rising, they buy. They see that if they had invested 12 weeks ago, they could have earned 15% by now, and they develop a fear of missing out. Conversely, when a stock’s price is falling or when the overall market is declining, loss aversion compels people to sell their stocks. So instead of keeping their losses on paper and waiting for the market to change directions, they accept a certain loss by selling. Such investor behavior is so widespread that it affects the prices of individual stocks, exacerbating both upward and downward market movements creating excessive moves.

Market Crashes.
When the market reaches an unbelievable high, it usually results in a bubble. But because the levels are unsustainable, investors end up panicking, leading to a massive selloff. This results in a market crash. That's what happened in the early 2000s with the dotcom bubble, when the values of tech stocks shot up beyond what the companies were worth. We saw the same thing happened when the housing bubble burst and the market crashed in the mid-2000s.

Unnoticed and Unglamorous Stocks.
Look beyond what you're hearing in the news. You may find really great investment opportunities in undervalued stocks that may not be on people's radars like small caps or even foreign stocks. Most investors want in on the next big thing such as a technology startup instead of a boring, established consumer durables manufacturer. For example, stocks like Facebook, Apple, and Google are more likely to be affected by herd-mentality investing than conglomerates like Proctor & Gamble or Johnson & Johnson.

Bad News.
Even good companies face setbacks, such as litigation and recalls. However, just because a company experiences one negative event doesn’t mean that the company isn’t still fundamentally valuable or that its stock won’t bounce back. In other cases, there may be a segment or division that puts a dent in a company's profitability. But that can change if the company decides to dispose of or close that arm of the business.

Analysts do not have a great track record for predicting the future, and yet investors often panic and sell when a company announces earnings that are lower than analysts’ expectations. But value investors who can see beyond the downgrades and negative news can buy stock at deeper discounts because they are able to recognize a company's long-term value.

Cyclicality​.
Cyclicality is defined as the fluctuations that affect a business. Companies are not immune to ups and downs in the economic cycle, whether that's seasonality and the time of year, or consumer attitudes and moods. All of this can affect profit levels and the price of a company's stock, but it doesn't affect the company's value in the long term.

July 25, 2020

Value Investing Strategies PART 2

Value Investing Strategies.

By ADAM HAYES.
The key to buying an undervalued stock is to thoroughly research the company and make common-sense decisions. Value investor Christopher H. Browne recommends asking if a company is likely to increase its revenue via the following methods:

Raising prices on products.
Increasing sales figures.
Decreasing expenses.
Selling off or closing down unprofitable divisions.

Browne also suggests studying a company's competitors to evaluate its future growth prospects. But the answers to all of these questions tend to be speculative, without any real supportive numerical data. Simply put: There are no quantitative software programs yet available to help achieve these answers, which makes value stock investing somewhat of a grand guessing game. For this reason, Warren Buffett recommends investing only in industries you have personally worked in, or whose consumer goods you are familiar with, like cars, clothes, appliances, and food.

One thing investors can do is choose the stocks of companies that sell high-demand products and services. While it's difficult to predict when innovative new products will capture market share, it's easy to gauge how long a company has been in business and study how it has adapted to challenges over time.

Insider Buying and Selling.
For our purposes, insiders are the company’s senior managers and directors, plus any shareholders who own at least 10% of the company’s stock. A company’s managers and directors have unique knowledge about the companies they run, so if they are purchasing its stock, it’s reasonable to assume that the company’s prospects look favorable.

Likewise, investors who own at least 10% of a company’s stock wouldn’t have bought so much if they didn’t see profit potential. Conversely, a sale of stock by an insider doesn’t necessarily point to bad news about the company’s anticipated performance — the insider might simply need cash for any number of personal reasons. Nonetheless, if mass sell-offs are occurring by insiders, such a situation may warrant further in-depth analysis of the reason behind the sale.

Analyze Earnings Reports.
At some point, value investors have to look at a company's financials to see how its performing and compare it to industry peers.

Financial reports present a company’s annual and quarterly performance results. The annual report is SEC form 10-K, and the quarterly report is SEC form 10-Q. Companies are required to file these reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). You can find them at the SEC website or the company’s investor relations page on their website.

You can learn a lot from a company’s annual report. It will explain the products and services offered as well as where the company is heading.

Analyze Financial Statements.
A company’s balance sheet provides a big picture of the company’s financial condition. The balance sheet consists of two sections, one listing the company’s assets and another listing its liabilities and equity. The assets section is broken down into a company’s cash and cash equivalents; investments; accounts receivable or money owed from customers, inventories, and fixed assets such as plant and equipment.

The liabilities section lists the company’s accounts payable or money owed, accrued liabilities, short-term debt, and long-term debt. The shareholders’ equity section reflects how much money is invested in the company, how many shares outstanding, and how much the company has as retained earnings. Retained earnings is a type of savings account that holds the cumulative profits from the company. Retained earnings are used to pay dividends, for example, and is considered a sign of a healthy, profitable company.

The income statement tells you how much revenue is being generated, the company's expenses, and profits. Looking at the annual income statement rather than a quarterly statement will give you a better idea of the company’s overall position since many companies experience fluctuations in sales volume during the year.

 Studies have consistently found that value stocks outperform growth stocks and the market as a whole, over the long-term.
Couch Potato Value Investing
It is possible to become a value investor without ever reading a 10-K. Couch potato investing is a passive strategy of buying and holding a few investing vehicles for which someone else has already done the investment analysis—i.e., mutual funds or exchange-traded funds. In the case of value investing, those funds would be those that follow the value strategy and buy value stocks—or track the moves of high-profile value investors, like Warren Buffet. Investors can buy shares of his holding company, Berkshire Hathaway, which owns or has an interest in dozens of companies the Oracle of Omaha has researched and evaluated.

Risks with Value Investing.
As with any investment strategy, there's the risk of loss with value investing despite it being a low-to-medium-risk strategy. Below we highlight a few of those risks and why losses can occur.

The Figures are Important.
Many investors use financial statements when they make value investing decisions. So if you rely on your own analysis, make sure you have the most updated information and that your calculations are accurate. If not, you may end up making a poor investment or miss out on a great one. If you aren’t yet confident in your ability to read and analyze financial statements and reports, keep studying these subjects and don’t place any trades until you’re truly ready. (For more on this subject, learn more about financial statements.)

One strategy is to read the footnotes. These are the notes in a Form 10-K or Form 10-Q that explain a company’s financial statements in greater detail. The notes follow the statements and explain the company’s accounting methods and elaborate on reported results. If the footnotes are unintelligible or the information they present seems unreasonable, you’ll have a better idea of whether to pass on the stock.

Extraordinary Gains or Losses.
There are some incidents that may show up on a company's income statement that should be considered exceptions or extraordinary. These are generally beyond the company's control and are called extraordinary item—gain or extraordinary item—loss. Some examples include lawsuits, restructuring, or even a natural disaster. If you exclude these from your analysis, you can probably get a sense of the company's future performance.

However, think critically about these items, and use your judgment. If a company has a pattern of reporting the same extraordinary item year after year, it might not be too extraordinary. Also, if there are unexpected losses year after year, this can be a sign that the company is having financial problems. Extraordinary items are supposed to be unusual and nonrecurring. Also, beware of a pattern of write-offs.

Ignoring Ratio Analysis Flaws.
Earlier sections of this tutorial have discussed the calculation of various financial ratios that help investors diagnose a company’s financial health. There isn't just one way to determine financial ratios, which can be fairly problematic. The following can affect how the ratios can be interpreted:

Ratios can be determined using before-tax or after-tax numbers.
Some ratios don't give accurate results but lead to estimations.
Depending on how the term earnings are defined, a company's earnings per share (EPS) may differ.
Comparing different companies by their ratios—even if the ratios are the same—may be difficult since companies have different accounting practices. (Learn more about when a company recognizes profits in Understanding The Income Statement.)

Buying Overvalued Stock.
Overpaying for a stock is one of the main risks for value investors. You can risk losing part or all of your money if you overpay. The same goes if you buy a stock close to its fair market value. Buying a stock that's undervalued means your risk of losing money is reduced, even when the company doesn't do well.

Recall that one of the fundamental principles of value investing is to build a margin of safety into all your investments. This means purchasing stocks at a price of around two-thirds or less of their intrinsic value. Value investors want to risk as little capital as possible in potentially overvalued assets, so they try not to overpay for investments.

Not Diversifying.
Conventional investment wisdom says that investing in individual stocks can be a high-risk strategy. Instead, we are taught to invest in multiple stocks or stock indexes so that we have exposure to a wide variety of companies and economic sectors. However, some value investors believe that you can have a diversified portfolio even if you only own a small number of stocks, as long as you choose stocks that represent different industries and different sectors of the economy. Value investor and investment manager Christopher H. Browne recommends owning a minimum of 10 stocks in his “Little Book of Value Investing.” According to Benjamin Graham, a famous value investor, you should look at choosing 10 to 30 stocks if you want to diversify your holdings.

Another set of experts, though, say differently. If you want to get big returns, try choosing just a few stocks, according to the authors of the second edition of “Value Investing for Dummies.” They say having more stocks in your portfolio will probably lead to an average return. Of course, this advice assumes that you are great at choosing winners, which may not be the case, particularly if you are a value-investing novice.

Listening to Your Emotions.
It is difficult to ignore your emotions when making investment decisions. Even if you can take a detached, critical standpoint when evaluating numbers, fear and excitement may creep in when it comes time to actually use part of your hard-earned savings to purchase a stock. More importantly, once you have purchased the stock, you may be tempted to sell it if the price falls. Keep in mind that the point of value investing is to resist the temptation to panic and go with the herd. So don't fall into the trap of buying when share prices rise and selling when they drop. Such behavior will obliterate your returns. (Playing follow-the-leader in investing can quickly become a dangerous game.

Example of a Value Investment.
Value investors seek to profit from market overreactions that usually come from the release of a quarterly earnings report. As a historical real example, on May 4, 2016, Fitbit released its Q1 2016 earnings report and saw a sharp decline in after-hours trading. After the flurry was over, the company lost nearly 19% of its value. However, while large decreases in a company's share price are not uncommon after the release of an earnings report, Fitbit not only met analyst expectations for the quarter but even increased guidance for 2016.

The company earned $505.4 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2016, up more than 50% when compared to the same time period from one year ago. Further, Fitbit expects to generate between $565 million and $585 million in the second quarter of 2016, which is above the $531 million forecasted by analysts. The company looks to be strong and growing. However, since Fitbit invested heavily in research and development costs in the first quarter of the year, earnings per share (EPS) declined when compared to a year ago. This is all average investors needed to jump on Fitbit, selling off enough shares to cause the price to decline. However, a value investor looks at the fundamentals of Fitbit and understands it is an undervalued security, poised to potentially increase in the future.

The Bottom Line.
Value investing is a long-term strategy. Warren Buffett, for example, buys stocks with the intention of holding them almost indefinitely. He once said, “I never attempt to make money on the stock market. I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years.” You will probably want to sell your stocks when it comes time to make a major purchase or retire, but by holding a variety of stocks and maintaining a long-term outlook, you can sell your stocks only when their price exceeds their fair market value (and the price you paid for them).

July 25, 2020

How to Build a Stock Portfolio

How to Build a Stock Portfolio.

The stock market and its potential for risk intimidates many people. Nonetheless, a well-built stock portfolio is likely to outperform other investments over time. It is possible to build a stock portfolio alone, but a qualified financial planner can help. Knowing your goals and your willingness to take risks in advance, as well as understanding the nature of the market, can help you build a successful portfolio.

Part 1 Designing Your Portfolio.
1. Know what you're willing to invest. As you invest, you'll need to balance your potential risks against your potential rewards. A portfolio's assets are typically determined by the investor's goals, willingness to take risks, and the length of time the investor intends to hold his portfolio. Some of the most important factors to consider in making these decisions are:
The investor's age.
How much time the investor is willing to spend allowing his investments to grow.
Amount of capital the investor is willing to invest.
Projected capital needs for the future.
Other resources investor may have.
2. Decide what kind of investor you'll be. Portfolios usually fall somewhere in the spectrum between aggressive, or high-risk portfolios, and conservative, or low-risk portfolios. Conservative investors simply try to protect and maintain the value of a portfolio, while aggressive investors tend to take risks with the expectation that some of those risks will pay off. There are various online risk assessment tools you can utilize to help assess your risk tolerance.
Understand that your financial goals may change over time, and adjust your portfolio accordingly. Generally, the younger you are, the more risk you can afford or are willing to take. You may be better served with a growth-oriented portfolio. The older you become, the more you'll think about retirement income, and may be better served with an income-oriented portfolio.
Even during retirement, many still need some portion of their portfolio for growth, as many people are living 20, 30 or more years beyond their retirement date.
3. Divide your capital. Once you've decided what kind of investor you'd like to be and what type of portfolio you want to build, you'll need to determine how you intend to allocate (spread around) your capital. Most investors who are new to the market don't know how to pick stocks. Some important factors include:
Determining which sector(s) to invest in. A sector is the category a given industry is placed in.[8] Examples include telecommunications, financial, information technology, transportation and utilities.
Knowing the market capitalization (aka market cap), which is determined by multiplying a given company's outstanding shares by the current price of one share on the market (large-cap, mid-cap, small-cap, etc.).
It is important to diversify holdings across a variety of sectors and market capitalization to lower a portfolio's overall risk.

Part 2 Making Investments.
1. Understand the different kinds of stocks. Stocks represent an ownership stake in the company that issues them. The money generated from the sale of stock is used by the company for its capital projects, and the profits generated by the company's operation may be returned to investors in the form of dividends. Stocks come in two varieties: common and preferred. Preferred stocks are so called because holders of these stocks are paid dividends before owners of common stocks. Most stocks, however, are common stocks, which can be subdivided into the categories below:
Growth stocks are those projected to increase in value faster than the rest of the market, based on their prior performance record. They may entail more risk over time but offer greater potential rewards in the end.
Income stocks are those that do not fluctuate much but have a history of paying out better dividends than other stocks. This category can include both common and preferred stocks.
Value stocks are those that are "undervalued" by the market and can be purchased at a price lower than the underlying worth of the company would suggest. The theory is that when the market "comes to its senses," the owner of such a stock would stand to make a lot of money.
Blue-chip stocks are those that have performed well for a long enough period of time that they are considered fairly stable investments. They may not grow as rapidly as growth stocks or pay as well as income stocks, but they can be depended upon for steady growth or steady income. They are not, however, immune from the fortunes of the market.
Defensive stocks are shares in companies whose products and services people buy, no matter what the economy is doing. They include the stocks of food and beverage companies, pharmaceutical companies and utilities (among others).
Cyclical stocks, in contrast, rise and fall with the economy. They include stocks in such industries as airlines, chemicals, home building and steel manufacturers.
Speculative stocks include the offerings of young companies with new technologies and older companies with new executive talent. They draw investors looking for something new or a way to beat the market. The performance of these stocks is especially unpredictable, and they are sometimes considered to be a high-risk investment.
2. Analyze stock fundamentals. Fundamentals is the term given to the pool of qualitative and quantitative data that are used to determine whether or not a stock is a worthwhile investment in a long-term analysis of the market. Analyzing a company's fundamentals is usually the first step in determining whether or not an investor will buy shares in that company. It is imperative to analyze fundamentals in order to arrive at a company's intrinsic value - that is, the company's actual value as based on perception of all the tangible and intangible aspects of the business, beyond the current market value.
In analyzing the fundamentals of a company, the investor is trying to determine the future value of a company, with all of its projected profits and losses factored in.
3. Analyze qualitative factors. Qualitative factors, such as the expertise and experience of a company's management, various courses of industry cycles, the strength of a company's research and development incentives, and a company's relationship with its workers, are important to take into account when deciding whether or not to invest in a company's stock. It's also important to understand how the company generates its profits and what that company's business model look like in order to have a broad spectrum of qualitative information about that company's stock options.
Try researching companies online before you invest. You should be able to find information about the company's managers, CEO, and board of directors.
4. Look at the price-to-earnings ratio. The P/E ratio can be figured as either the stock's current price against its earnings per share for the last 12 months ("trailing P/E") or its projected earnings for the next 12 months ("anticipated P/E"). A stock selling for $10 per share that earns 10 cents per share has a P/E ratio of 10 divided by 0.1 or 100; a stock selling for $50 per share that earns $2 per share has a P/E ratio of 50 divided by 2 or 25. You want to buy stock with a relatively low P/E ratio.
When looking at P/E ratio, figure the ratio for the stock for several years and compare it to the P/E ratio for other companies in the same industry as well as for indexes representing the entire market, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average or the Standard and Poor's (S&P) 500.
Comparing the P/E of a stock in one sector to that of a stock in another sector is however, not informative since P/E's vary widely from industry to industry.
5. Look at the return on equity. Also called return on book value, this figure is the company's income after taxes as a percentage of its total book value. It represents how well shareholders are profiting from the company's success. As with P/E ratio, you need to look at several years' worth of returns on equity to get an accurate picture.
6. Look at total return. Total return includes earnings from dividends as well as changes in the value of the stock. This provides a means of comparing the stock with other types of investments.
7. Try investing in companies trading below their current worth. While a broad spectrum of stock investments is important, analysts often recommend buying stock in companies that are trading for lower than they are worth. This sort of value investing does not, however, mean buying "junk" stocks, or stocks that are steadily declining. Value investments are determined by comparing intrinsic market value against the company's current stock share price, without looking at the short-term market fluctuations.
8. Try investing in growth stocks. Growth stocks are investments in companies that exhibit or are predicted to grow significantly faster than other stocks in the market. This involves analyzing a given company's present performance against its past performance amid the industry's ever-fluctuating climate.

Part 3 Maintaining Your Portfolio.
1. Avoid dipping into investments. Once you've invested capital in a stock, it's important to let the stock grow for at least a year without selling your shares. Consider for all intents and purposes that this money cannot be withdrawn and spent elsewhere.
As part of investing for the long term, determine the amount of money you can afford to commit to the stock market for five years or longer, and set that aside for investing. Money you'll need in a shorter period of time should be invested in shorter-term investments such as money-market accounts, CDs or U.S. Treasury bonds, bills or notes.
2. Diversify your portfolio. No matter how well a stock might be doing at the moment, the price and value of stocks are bound to fluctuate. Diversifying your investment portfolio can help you avoid this pitfall by spreading around your money to a number of stocks.
A well-diversified portfolio is important because in the event that one or more sectors of the economy start to decline, it will remain strong over time and reduce the likelihood of taking a significant hit as the market fluctuates.
Don't just diversify across the spectrum of asset classes. Some experts recommend you should also diversify your stock picks within each asset class represented in your portfolio.
3. Review your portfolio (but not too often). Anticipate that the market will fluctuate. If you check your stocks every day, you might end up feeling anxious over the value of your investments as things go up or down. But by the same token, you should check on your investments periodically.
Checking your portfolio at least once or twice a year is a good idea but research has shown that making rebalancing changes (selling the gains from those holdings which have been profitable and buying shares of those which have lost value) more than twice per year does not offer any benefit.
Some experts recommend checking on the quarterly earnings reports of a given company to see if your predictions for that company are holding true. Make changes as necessary, but don't jump ship every time a share reports a minor decrease in value.
Also important to keep in mind is tax implications of selling: if this is an account into which you've invested after-tax dollars (non-IRA or similar type of brokerage account), then try not to sell anything at a gain for at least one year in order to receive long-term capital gains rather than ordinary income tax treatment on your profits. For most people, the capital gains rate is more favorable than their income tax rate.

FAQ

Question : How do I create an imaginary portfolio ?
Answer : Follow these same steps without investing any money. Follow the progress of the stocks you chose.
Question : Where do I go to invest in marijuana stocks?
Answer : Ask a stockbroker who does business in an area where marijuana is legal.
Question : What does a gain or loss mean in a portfolio chart?
Answer : It refers to an increase or a decrease in the value of an investment.
Question : Which sector does better for next 3 years? In this sector, what are the names of the top 2 companies?
Answer : Anyone who tells you s/he knows what a given economic sector is going to do in the next three years is delusional. Your best bet is to invest in most or all sectors and in various companies with strong reputations.
Question : How do I calculate my returns in my diversified portfolio? And will my returns be lesser if I diversify my investments versus investing a lump sum in a single investment?
Answer : The easiest way to calculate total return on a diversified portfolio is to compare the total current value with the total value at the beginning of whatever period of time you're examining. If the value has risen, you would subtract the original value from the current value, then divide the difference by the original value. You would then multiply the quotient by 100 to get a percentage of return. Divide that percentage by the number of years you're considering to arrive at an annual percentage (which is the most commonly used percentage for the sake of comparison). Diversified portfolios often deliver better results than do single investments over a long period of time.
Question : How do I purchase stocks in South Africa?
Answer : Make online contact with any South African stockbroker registered to trade on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. Ask if they do business with foreign investors.
Question : How do I open an account so that I can buy stocks?
Answer : Go to any local or online broker, fill out an application, and deposit some money.
Question : Will the initial money I deposit to open an account to buy or sell stocks be used toward buying or selling, or is it just the fee for opening the account?
Answer : Typically it is for buying stock. Brokers' terms may vary: some may remove part of your deposit to cover fees if you fail to pay them separately.

Tips.
Be aware of wash sale rules: if you decide to sell a stock or stock fund at a loss and buy into a stock or stock fund which is considered substantially similar within a 30-day period, you will not be able to claim that loss on your taxes.
Consult with a qualified financial planner if you're unsure of how to invest or what stocks are safe to invest in.
Be aware of tax consequences (see comments about long-term vs. short-term capital gains under "Maintaining your portfolio" above), and be aware that you will owe taxes on the dividends you earn on those stocks which pay them to you in the year they are earned, whether they were paid out to you or not.
Warnings.
Be aware that not all common stocks pay dividends. Whether a stock pays dividends should be only one factor in choosing it, not necessarily the only factor.

March 30, 2020

Ten Ways to Create Shareholder Value (part 3).

Ten Ways to Create Shareholder Value (part 3).

by Alfred Rappaport.

Principle 8.

Reward middle managers and frontline employees for delivering superior performance on the key value drivers that they influence directly.
Although sales growth, operating margins, and capital expenditures are useful financial indicators for tracking operating-unit SVA, they are too broad to provide much day-to-day guidance for middle managers and frontline employees, who need to know what specific actions they should take to increase SVA. For more specific measures, companies can develop leading indicators of value, which are quantifiable, easily communicated current accomplishments that frontline employees can influence directly and that significantly affect the long-term value of the business in a positive way. Examples might include time to market for new product launches, employee turnover rate, customer retention rate, and the timely opening of new stores or manufacturing facilities.

My own experience suggests that most businesses can focus on three to five leading indicators and capture an important part of their long-term value-creation potential. The process of identifying leading indicators can be challenging, but improving leading-indicator performance is the foundation for achieving superior SVA, which in turn serves to increase long-term shareholder returns.

Principle 9.

Require senior executives to bear the risks of ownership just as shareholders do.
For the most part, option grants have not successfully aligned the long-term interests of senior executives and shareholders because the former routinely cash out vested options. The ability to sell shares early may in fact motivate them to focus on near-term earnings results rather than on long-term value in order to boost the current stock price.

To better align these interests, many companies have adopted stock ownership guidelines for senior management. Minimum ownership is usually expressed as a multiple of base salary, which is then converted to a specified number of shares. For example, eBay’s guidelines require the CEO to own stock in the company equivalent to five times annual base salary. For other executives, the corresponding number is three times salary. Top managers are further required to retain a percentage of shares resulting from the exercise of stock options until they amass the stipulated number of shares.
But in most cases, stock ownership plans fail to expose executives to the same levels of risk that shareholders bear. One reason is that some companies forgive stock purchase loans when shares underperform, claiming that the arrangement no longer provides an incentive for top management. Such companies, just as those that reprice options, risk institutionalizing a pay delivery system that subverts the spirit and objectives of the incentive compensation program. Another reason is that outright grants of restricted stock, which are essentially options with an exercise price of $0, typically count as shares toward satisfaction of minimum ownership levels. Stock grants motivate key executives to stay with the company until the restrictions lapse, typically within three or four years, and they can cash in their shares. These grants create a strong incentive for CEOs and other top managers to play it safe, protect existing value, and avoid getting fired. Not surprisingly, restricted stock plans are commonly referred to as “pay for pulse,” rather than pay for performance.

In an effort to deflect the criticism that restricted stock plans are a giveaway, many companies offer performance shares that require not only that the executive remain on the payroll but also that the company achieve predetermined performance goals tied to EPS growth, revenue targets, or return-on-capital-employed thresholds. While performance shares do demand performance, it’s generally not the right kind of performance for delivering long-term value because the metrics are usually not closely linked to value.

Companies need to balance the benefits of requiring senior executives to hold continuing ownership stakes and the resulting restrictions on their liquidity and diversification.

Companies seeking to better align the interests of executives and shareholders need to find a proper balance between the benefits of requiring senior executives to have meaningful and continuing ownership stakes and the resulting restrictions on their liquidity and diversification. Without equity-based incentives, executives may become excessively risk averse to avoid failure and possible dismissal. If they own too much equity, however, they may also eschew risk to preserve the value of their largely undiversified portfolios. Extending the period before executives can unload shares from the exercise of options and not counting restricted stock grants as shares toward minimum ownership levels would certainly help equalize executives’ and shareholders’ risks.

Principle 10.

Provide investors with value-relevant information.
The final principle governs investor communications, such as a company’s financial reports. Better disclosure not only offers an antidote to short-term earnings obsession but also serves to lessen investor uncertainty and so potentially reduce the cost of capital and increase the share price.

One way to do this, as described in my article “The Economics of Short-Term Performance Obsession” in the May–June 2005 issue of Financial Analysts Journal, is to prepare a corporate performance statement. (See the exhibit “The Corporate Performance Statement” for a template.) This statement:

separates out cash flows and accruals, providing a historical baseline for estimating a company’s cash flow prospects and enabling analysts to evaluate how reasonable accrual estimates are;
classifies accruals with long cash-conversion cycles into medium and high levels of uncertainty;
provides a range and the most likely estimate for each accrual rather than traditional single-point estimates that ignore the wide variability of possible outcomes;
excludes arbitrary, value-irrelevant accruals, such as depreciation and amortization; and
details assumptions and risks for each line item while presenting key performance indicators that drive the company’s value.

Could such specific disclosure prove too costly? The reality is that executives in well-managed companies already use the type of information contained in a corporate performance statement. Indeed, the absence of such information should cause shareholders to question whether management has a comprehensive grasp of the business and whether the board is properly exercising its oversight responsibility. In the present unforgiving climate for accounting shenanigans, value-driven companies have an unprecedented opportunity to create value simply by improving the form and content of corporate reports.

The Rewards—and the Risks.
The crucial question, of course, is whether following these ten principles serves the long-term interests of shareholders. For most companies, the answer is a resounding yes. Just eliminating the practice of delaying or forgoing value-creating investments to meet quarterly earnings targets can make a significant difference. Further, exiting the earnings-management game of accelerating revenues into the current period and deferring expenses to future periods reduces the risk that, over time, a company will be unable to meet market expectations and trigger a meltdown in its stock. But the real payoff comes in the difference that a true shareholder-value orientation makes to a company’s long-term growth strategy.

For most organizations, value-creating growth is the strategic challenge, and to succeed, companies must be good at developing new, potentially disruptive businesses. Here’s why. The bulk of the typical company’s share price reflects expectations for the growth of current businesses. If companies meet those expectations, shareholders will earn only a normal return. But to deliver superior long-term returns—that is, to grow the share price faster than competitors’ share prices—management must either repeatedly exceed market expectations for its current businesses or develop new value-creating businesses. It’s almost impossible to repeatedly beat expectations for current businesses, because if you do, investors simply raise the bar. So the only reasonable way to deliver superior long-term returns is to focus on new business opportunities. (Of course, if a company’s stock price already reflects expectations with regard to new businesses—which it may do if management has a track record of delivering such value-creating growth—then the task of generating superior returns becomes daunting; it’s all managers can do to meet the expectations that exist.)

Value-creating growth is the strategic challenge, and to succeed, companies must be good at developing new, potentially disruptive businesses.

Companies focused on short-term performance measures are doomed to fail in delivering on a value-creating growth strategy because they are forced to concentrate on existing businesses rather than on developing new ones for the longer term. When managers spend too much time on core businesses, they end up with no new opportunities in the pipeline. And when they get into trouble—as they inevitably do—they have little choice but to try to pull a rabbit out of the hat. The dynamic of this failure has been very accurately described by Clay Christensen and Michael Raynor in their book The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth (Harvard Business School Press, 2003). With a little adaptation, it plays out like this:

Despite a slowdown in growth and margin erosion in the company’s maturing core business, management continues to focus on developing it at the expense of launching new growth businesses.
Eventually, investments in the core can no longer produce the growth that investors expect, and the stock price takes a hit.
To revitalize the stock price, management announces a targeted growth rate that is well beyond what the core can deliver, thus introducing a larger growth gap.
Confronted with this gap, the company limits funding to projects that promise very large, very fast growth. Accordingly, the company refuses to fund new growth businesses that could ultimately fuel the company’s expansion but couldn’t get big enough fast enough.
Managers then respond with overly optimistic projections to gain funding for initiatives in large existing markets that are potentially capable of generating sufficient revenue quickly enough to satisfy investor expectations.
To meet the planned timetable for rollout, the company puts a sizable cost structure in place before realizing any revenues.
As revenue increases fall short and losses persist, the market again hammers the stock price and a new CEO is brought in to shore it up.
Seeing that the new growth business pipeline is virtually empty, the incoming CEO tries to quickly stem losses by approving only expenditures that bolster the mature core.
The company has now come full circle and has lost substantial shareholder value.
Companies that take shareholder value seriously avoid this self-reinforcing pattern of behavior. Because they do not dwell on the market’s near-term expectations, they don’t wait for the core to deteriorate before they invest in new growth opportunities. They are, therefore, more likely to become first movers in a market and erect formidable barriers to entry through scale or learning economies, positive network effects, or reputational advantages. Their management teams are forward-looking and sensitive to strategic opportunities. Over time, they get better than their competitors at seizing opportunities to achieve competitive advantage.
Although applying the ten principles will improve long-term prospects for many companies, a few will still experience problems if investors remain fixated on near-term earnings, because in certain situations a weak stock price can actually affect operating performance. The risk is particularly acute for companies such as high-tech start-ups, which depend heavily on a healthy stock price to finance growth and send positive signals to employees, customers, and suppliers. When share prices are depressed, selling new shares either prohibitively dilutes current shareholders’ stakes or, in some cases, makes the company unattractive to prospective investors. As a consequence, management may have to defer or scrap its value-creating growth plans. Then, as investors become aware of the situation, the stock price continues to slide, possibly leading to a takeover at a fire-sale price or to bankruptcy.

Severely capital-constrained companies can also be vulnerable, especially if labor markets are tight, customers are few, or suppliers are particularly powerful. A low share price means that these organizations cannot offer credible prospects of large stock-option or restricted-stock gains, which makes it difficult to attract and retain the talent whose knowledge, ideas, and skills have increasingly become a dominant source of value. From the perspective of customers, a low valuation raises doubts about the company’s competitive and financial strength as well as its ability to continue producing high-quality, leading-edge products and reliable postsale support. Suppliers and distributors may also react by offering less favorable contractual terms, or, if they sense an unacceptable probability of financial distress, they may simply refuse to do business with the company. In all cases, the company’s woes are compounded when lenders consider the performance risks arising from a weak stock price and demand higher interest rates and more restrictive loan terms.

Clearly, if a company is vulnerable in these respects, then responsible managers cannot afford to ignore market pressures for short-term performance, and adoption of the ten principles needs to be somewhat tempered. But the reality is that these extreme conditions do not apply to most established, publicly traded companies. Few rely on equity issues to finance growth. Most generate enough cash to pay their top employees well without resorting to equity incentives. Most also have a large universe of customers and suppliers to deal with, and there are plenty of banks after their business.

It’s time, therefore, for boards and CEOs to step up and seize the moment. The sooner you make your firm a level 10 company, the more you and your shareholders stand to gain. And what better moment than now for institutional investors to act on behalf of the shareholders and beneficiaries they represent and insist that long-term shareholder value become the governing principle for all the companies in their portfolios?

July 25, 2020

How Bitcoin Disrupts the Finance Industry

How Bitcoin Disrupts the Finance Industry .

Cryptocurrencies and their underlying blockchain technology are being touted as the next-big-thing after the creation of the internet. One area where these technologies are likely to have a major impact is the financial sector. The blockchain, as a form of distributed ledger technology (DLT), has the potential to transform well-established financial institutions and bring lower costs, faster execution of transactions, improved transparency, auditability of operations, and other benefits. Cryptocurrencies hold the promise of a new native digital asset class without a central authority.

So what do these technological developments mean for the various players in the sector and end users? “Blockchains have the potential to displace any business activity built on transactions occurring on traditional corporate databases, which is what underlies nearly every financial service function. Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications. DLT is therefore both a great opportunity and also a disruptive threat,” according to Bruce Weber, dean of Lerner College and business administration professor, and Andrew Novocin, professor of electrical and computer engineering, both at the University of Delaware.

Earlier this year, Weber, Novocin, and graduate student Jonathan Wood conducted a literature review on cryptocurrencies and DLT for the SWIFT Institute. Based on this review, the SWIFT institute recently issued a grant to conduct new research on DLT and cryptocurrencies in the financial sector. Weber and Novocin noted that just as disruptors like Amazon, Google, Facebook and Uber built software platforms and thriving businesses thanks to the connectivity provided by internet standards, next-generation startups will build new services and businesses with blockchains. “Many pundits expect blockchain, as a distributed technology, to become the foundation for new services and applications that have completely different rules from those running on hierarchical and controlled databases. Cryptocurrencies are an early example but many others will follow,” they added.

Kartik Hosanagar, a Wharton professor of marketing and operations, information and decisions, pointed out that the financial services sector is full of intermediaries such as banks that help create trust among transacting parties like lenders and borrowers. Blockchain, he said, is a mechanism to create trust without centralized control. “The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies, Hosanagar pointed out that most of the value today is tied to speculative buying rather than actual use cases. But having a currency without a central authority offers “certain unique kinds of protections especially in countries with troubled central banks.” For example, Venezuela’s currency is rapidly losing value. For people who stored their savings in crypto, there was greater protection against such rapid currency devaluations. “Of course, cryptocurrencies have their own instabilities, but they aren’t tied to actions by central banks and that’s particularly relevant in countries and economies where citizens don’t trust their governments and central banks,” he said.

“Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications.”–Bruce Weber and Andrew Novocin

Hosanagar expects the first wave of applications to be rolled out in “private” blockchains where a central authority such as a financial institution and its partners are the only ones with the permission to participate (as opposed to public, permissionless blockchains where participants are anonymous and there is no central authority). Applications in the private blockchains, he said, will be more secure and will offer some of the benefits of decentralized ledgers but will not be radically different from the way things work at present. However, over time, he expects smart contracts (self-executing contracts when requirements are met) to be offered on public blockchain networks like Ethereum. “When securities are traded, intermediaries provide trust, and they charge commissions. Blockchains can help provide such trust in a low-cost manner. But trade of securities is governed by securities laws. Smart contracts offer a way to ensure compliance with the laws. They have great potential because of their ability to reduce costs while being compliant,” says Hosanagar.

According to Weber and Novocin, one area ripe for transformation is reaching consensus on important benchmark rates and prices. At present, they point out, different proprietary indexes are used to determine interest rates and the price of many mainstream assets. Blockchain can transform this. “Think of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the recent scandals involving manipulation of benchmark values when they are controlled by a single entity that may not be capable of detecting false or fraudulent data. Blockchain could provide greater transparency around the process of creating agreed upon reference prices, and allow more people to participate in the consensus process.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in some areas intermediaries will find their roles reduced as blockchain allows for automation through greater transparency and traceability. In other areas, intermediaries will find themselves well-placed to take advantage of changing needs of their clients, as firms will need help to manage the shift to new standards as well as the greater complexity of open and traceable blockchain infrastructure. Intermediaries in areas that could potentially be disrupted, they said, “should get involved with projects seeking to set the standards, so that they can stay informed and position themselves to profit from becoming the leaders in the operations of the new markets that will emerge.”

Kevin Werbach, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics, and author of a forthcoming book The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust,  said that it’s usually not helpful to focus on what aspects of a major existing market will be “transformed” or “disrupted” by new technologies. Important technologies, he said, are far more likely to be integrated into the system than replace it. According to Werbach, while some firms will fail to make the transition and some new ones will take hold, “over the long-run, virtually every historic innovation that eliminated some forms of intermediation also created new forms.”

Blockchain will reduce the massive duplication of information that creates delays, conflicts and confusion in many aspects of financial services, Werbach added. For example, when a syndicate of lenders participates in a loan, having one shared ledger means they don’t all need to keep track of it independently. International payments and corporate stock records are other examples where there are huge inefficiencies due to duplicate record-keeping and intermediaries. “End users won’t see the changes in the deep plumbing of financial services, but it will allow new service providers to emerge and new products to be offered,” said Werbach.

Bumps Along the Way

Angela Walch, professor of law at St. Mary’s University School of Law and a research fellow at the Centre for Blockchain Technologies at University College London, offered another perspective. She said there is a lot of excitement about blockchain as a distributed ledger technology for the financial sector because many believe that it offers a better, more efficient and more resilient form of recordkeeping. However, making use of the blockchain is not as simple as just buying new software and running it. “Blockchain technology is, at core, group recordkeeping. To reap its full benefits, one needs all the relevant members of the group to join the system. This requires collaboration with and across businesses, which is a potentially big hurdle, and may be the hurdle that most limits adoption.”

Governance is the biggest challenge in decentralized organizations, said Weber and Novocin. Members participating in a blockchain-supported financial function may have misaligned incentives, and can end up in gridlock, or with a chaotic outcome. They cite the example of the ‘DAO Hack,’ which was the first prominent smart contract project on the Ethereum network to suffer a large loss of funds. The Ethereum community voted to conduct a hard fork (a radical change to the protocol that makes previously invalid blocks/transactions valid or vice-versa) — reversing the transactions after the hack and essentially refunding the DAO investors. This was in effect a breach of Ethereum’s immutability and it left a sizeable minority of the community bitterly dissatisfied. This group viewed the Ethereum community as forsaking its commitment to immutable, permanent records. They refused to acknowledge the hard fork, and maintained the original Ethereum blockchain, now known as Ethereum Classic (whereas the forked version supported by the Ethereum Foundation is simply Ethereum).

“The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”–Kartik Hosanagar

“Distributed organizations serving an open community need to take care to design their governance systems, incentive structures and decision-making processes to create consensus without unduly slowing down the decision-making,” said Weber and Novocin. “Scenario planning or war gaming are worth exploring at the beginning of blockchain projects. Forward planning enables organizations to swiftly respond in a predictable way that is supportive of stakeholders. Publicizing these plans in advance can also build trust and user confidence.”

Cryptocurrency Risks.

Werbach listed a variety of risks and vulnerabilities related to cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin has shown that the fundamental security of its proof-of-work system is sound, but it has major limitations such as limited scalability, massive energy usage and concentration of mining pools. There has been massive theft of cryptocurrencies from the centralized intermediaries that most people use to hold it, and massive fraud by promoters of initial coin offerings and other schemes. Manipulation is widespread on lightly-regulated cryptocurrency exchanges.

For example, roughly half of Bitcoin transactions are with Tether, a “stablecoin” that claims to be backed by U.S. dollars but has never been audited and is involved in highly suspicious behavior. Money laundering and other criminal activity is a serious problem if transactions do not require some check of real-world identities. “There are major efforts to address all of these risks and vulnerabilities. Some are technical, some are business opportunities, and some are regulatory questions. There must be recognition among cryptocurrency proponents that maturation of the industry will require cooperation in many cases with incumbents and regulators,” added Werbach.

Hosanagar cautions that while decentralization offers significant value — and a significant number of miners/validators must verify the transaction for it to be validated — it is still susceptible to collusion. If one or a few companies running lots of miners/validators in a small network collude, they can affect the sanctity of the network. The big risk with cryptocurrencies, he added, is that most activity as of today is ultimately tied to speculation. It’s important for cryptocurrencies to discover a “killer app soon so there is some underlying value created beyond speculation of its future value,” Hosanagar concludes.

The Way Ahead?

Given all these challenges, what is the current mindset in the financial sector towards adopting these new technologies? And, importantly, should one push for wide acceptance and deployment, or is there need for them to stabilize first?

According to Werbach, “It’s not an either-or” choice. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology in general, he noted, are immature currently. However, there are some areas where they are already able to be deployed effectively. The best way to work through today’s problems, is “to build working systems and see where difficulties arise,” Werbach said. Looking ahead, integration with law, regulation and governance will be critical. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies represent a new form of trust, he added. They will only succeed if they become sufficiently trustworthy, beyond the basic security of the distributed ledgers. “Law, regulation and governance are three major mechanisms to produce trustworthy systems that scale up to society-wide adoption. We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables. I’m optimistic about that process over time.”

“We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables.”–Kevin Werbach

Walch noted that while there are claims that some consortia are putting ‘blockchain’ systems into production, in many cases it appears that what they are calling a blockchain bears little to no resemblance to the original blockchain technology behind Bitcoin. In many instances, she said, existing shared databases are being called ‘blockchain’ for marketing purposes. “If people do use something they call DLT or blockchain technology in important financial systems, my hope is that they make the decision based on actual capabilities of the tech rather than its widely hyped and generally overstated capabilities,” Walch said. “Permissioned blockchains, which are the variation most likely to be used for financial systems recordkeeping, are very different from public blockchains like Bitcoin or Ethereum. I hope that a more modest and accurate understanding of the actual characteristics of permissioned blockchains sinks in before they are widely adopted.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies or cryptoassets, Walch said that the financial sector’s interest is “less about recordkeeping and more about a new financial asset that it can make money off of.” She pointed out that at present there is no clarity on how power and accountability work in these systems. The ongoing operation of crypto systems and the value they embed and support is reliant on the competence of, and ethical behavior by, unaccountable software developers and validators. “The financial sector believes it understands and can manage the risks of cryptoassets, but I am less certain and worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class. This has been a bad mixture in the past,” says Walch. “I think it would be more responsible to let cryptosystems exist on their own for a while longer to let more of the kinks get worked out — if they can be; I’m not sure the governance ones can — rather than to rapidly integrate them into the financial system as we seem to be doing.”

“I … worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class.”–Angela Walch

Conversely, Weber and Novocin feel that the financial industry is cautious about the new DLT technology. According to them, to build confidence in new blockchain systems there needs to be transparency around how the processes work and what the benefits are, and in order to secure adoption, they need to be straightforward to use. “Pundits have drawn parallels to the open source Linux operating system. Although only a few individuals use Linux directly, it quietly runs the vast majority of servers and cloud processors across the world. Similarly, early adoption of blockchain will likely happen in the background of business processes. Companies should get involved now, even if it is just to experiment with the concepts. By gaining familiarity with these new tools, they will be ready as the space continues to develop.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in the next few years, many more businesses will implement private blockchains to improve the transparency and traceability of their financial operations, supply chains, inventory management systems and other internal business systems. Clearer standards will be adopted and a few high-profile projects will emerge. Meanwhile, they said, R&D will continue among the many decentralized blockchain projects to invent more scalable public ledgers whether it be blockchain, Tangle, Hashgraph or something new. “Work is needed on better and more efficient consensus models, whether it be a new form of proof-of-stake or proof-of-work, or something else. There are many established groups, startups, companies and research teams that organizations can join, partner with, or support in order to contribute to research and expand their capabilities.”




Bitcoin (Currency),Bitcoin,Finance (Industry),Industry (Organization Sector),Brad Templeton,Singularity University,Innovation,Internet,Web,Website,Google,Disruption,Technology,Technological,Money,Currency,Gold,Big Think,BigThink,BigThink.com,Education,Educational,Lifelong Learning,EDU

July 16, 2020

How the Blockchain Will Impact the Financial Sector

How the Blockchain Will Impact the Financial Sector.

Cryptocurrencies and their underlying blockchain technology are being touted as the next-big-thing after the creation of the internet. One area where these technologies are likely to have a major impact is the financial sector. The blockchain, as a form of distributed ledger technology (DLT), has the potential to transform well-established financial institutions and bring lower costs, faster execution of transactions, improved transparency, auditability of operations, and other benefits. Cryptocurrencies hold the promise of a new native digital asset class without a central authority.

So what do these technological developments mean for the various players in the sector and end users? “Blockchains have the potential to displace any business activity built on transactions occurring on traditional corporate databases, which is what underlies nearly every financial service function. Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications. DLT is therefore both a great opportunity and also a disruptive threat,” according to Bruce Weber, dean of Lerner College and business administration professor, and Andrew Novocin, professor of electrical and computer engineering, both at the University of Delaware.

Earlier this year, Weber, Novocin, and graduate student Jonathan Wood conducted a literature review on cryptocurrencies and DLT for the SWIFT Institute. Based on this review, the SWIFT institute recently issued a grant to conduct new research on DLT and cryptocurrencies in the financial sector. Weber and Novocin noted that just as disruptors like Amazon, Google, Facebook and Uber built software platforms and thriving businesses thanks to the connectivity provided by internet standards, next-generation startups will build new services and businesses with blockchains. “Many pundits expect blockchain, as a distributed technology, to become the foundation for new services and applications that have completely different rules from those running on hierarchical and controlled databases. Cryptocurrencies are an early example but many others will follow,” they added.

Kartik Hosanagar, a Wharton professor of marketing and operations, information and decisions, pointed out that the financial services sector is full of intermediaries such as banks that help create trust among transacting parties like lenders and borrowers. Blockchain, he said, is a mechanism to create trust without centralized control. “The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies, Hosanagar pointed out that most of the value today is tied to speculative buying rather than actual use cases. But having a currency without a central authority offers “certain unique kinds of protections especially in countries with troubled central banks.” For example, Venezuela’s currency is rapidly losing value. For people who stored their savings in crypto, there was greater protection against such rapid currency devaluations. “Of course, cryptocurrencies have their own instabilities, but they aren’t tied to actions by central banks and that’s particularly relevant in countries and economies where citizens don’t trust their governments and central banks,” he said.

“Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications.”–Bruce Weber and Andrew Novocin

Hosanagar expects the first wave of applications to be rolled out in “private” blockchains where a central authority such as a financial institution and its partners are the only ones with the permission to participate (as opposed to public, permissionless blockchains where participants are anonymous and there is no central authority). Applications in the private blockchains, he said, will be more secure and will offer some of the benefits of decentralized ledgers but will not be radically different from the way things work at present. However, over time, he expects smart contracts (self-executing contracts when requirements are met) to be offered on public blockchain networks like Ethereum. “When securities are traded, intermediaries provide trust, and they charge commissions. Blockchains can help provide such trust in a low-cost manner. But trade of securities is governed by securities laws. Smart contracts offer a way to ensure compliance with the laws. They have great potential because of their ability to reduce costs while being compliant,” says Hosanagar.

According to Weber and Novocin, one area ripe for transformation is reaching consensus on important benchmark rates and prices. At present, they point out, different proprietary indexes are used to determine interest rates and the price of many mainstream assets. Blockchain can transform this. “Think of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the recent scandals involving manipulation of benchmark values when they are controlled by a single entity that may not be capable of detecting false or fraudulent data. Blockchain could provide greater transparency around the process of creating agreed upon reference prices, and allow more people to participate in the consensus process.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in some areas intermediaries will find their roles reduced as blockchain allows for automation through greater transparency and traceability. In other areas, intermediaries will find themselves well-placed to take advantage of changing needs of their clients, as firms will need help to manage the shift to new standards as well as the greater complexity of open and traceable blockchain infrastructure. Intermediaries in areas that could potentially be disrupted, they said, “should get involved with projects seeking to set the standards, so that they can stay informed and position themselves to profit from becoming the leaders in the operations of the new markets that will emerge.”

Kevin Werbach, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics, and author of a forthcoming book The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust,  said that it’s usually not helpful to focus on what aspects of a major existing market will be “transformed” or “disrupted” by new technologies. Important technologies, he said, are far more likely to be integrated into the system than replace it. According to Werbach, while some firms will fail to make the transition and some new ones will take hold, “over the long-run, virtually every historic innovation that eliminated some forms of intermediation also created new forms.”


Blockchain will reduce the massive duplication of information that creates delays, conflicts and confusion in many aspects of financial services, Werbach added. For example, when a syndicate of lenders participates in a loan, having one shared ledger means they don’t all need to keep track of it independently. International payments and corporate stock records are other examples where there are huge inefficiencies due to duplicate record-keeping and intermediaries. “End users won’t see the changes in the deep plumbing of financial services, but it will allow new service providers to emerge and new products to be offered,” said Werbach.

Bumps Along the Way

Angela Walch, professor of law at St. Mary’s University School of Law and a research fellow at the Centre for Blockchain Technologies at University College London, offered another perspective. She said there is a lot of excitement about blockchain as a distributed ledger technology for the financial sector because many believe that it offers a better, more efficient and more resilient form of recordkeeping. However, making use of the blockchain is not as simple as just buying new software and running it. “Blockchain technology is, at core, group recordkeeping. To reap its full benefits, one needs all the relevant members of the group to join the system. This requires collaboration with and across businesses, which is a potentially big hurdle, and may be the hurdle that most limits adoption.”

Governance is the biggest challenge in decentralized organizations, said Weber and Novocin. Members participating in a blockchain-supported financial function may have misaligned incentives, and can end up in gridlock, or with a chaotic outcome. They cite the example of the ‘DAO Hack,’ which was the first prominent smart contract project on the Ethereum network to suffer a large loss of funds. The Ethereum community voted to conduct a hard fork (a radical change to the protocol that makes previously invalid blocks/transactions valid or vice-versa) — reversing the transactions after the hack and essentially refunding the DAO investors. This was in effect a breach of Ethereum’s immutability and it left a sizeable minority of the community bitterly dissatisfied. This group viewed the Ethereum community as forsaking its commitment to immutable, permanent records. They refused to acknowledge the hard fork, and maintained the original Ethereum blockchain, now known as Ethereum Classic (whereas the forked version supported by the Ethereum Foundation is simply Ethereum).

“The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”–Kartik Hosanagar

“Distributed organizations serving an open community need to take care to design their governance systems, incentive structures and decision-making processes to create consensus without unduly slowing down the decision-making,” said Weber and Novocin. “Scenario planning or war gaming are worth exploring at the beginning of blockchain projects. Forward planning enables organizations to swiftly respond in a predictable way that is supportive of stakeholders. Publicizing these plans in advance can also build trust and user confidence.”

Cryptocurrency Risks.

Werbach listed a variety of risks and vulnerabilities related to cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin has shown that the fundamental security of its proof-of-work system is sound, but it has major limitations such as limited scalability, massive energy usage and concentration of mining pools. There has been massive theft of cryptocurrencies from the centralized intermediaries that most people use to hold it, and massive fraud by promoters of initial coin offerings and other schemes. Manipulation is widespread on lightly-regulated cryptocurrency exchanges.

For example, roughly half of Bitcoin transactions are with Tether, a “stablecoin” that claims to be backed by U.S. dollars but has never been audited and is involved in highly suspicious behavior. Money laundering and other criminal activity is a serious problem if transactions do not require some check of real-world identities. “There are major efforts to address all of these risks and vulnerabilities. Some are technical, some are business opportunities, and some are regulatory questions. There must be recognition among cryptocurrency proponents that maturation of the industry will require cooperation in many cases with incumbents and regulators,” added Werbach.

Hosanagar cautions that while decentralization offers significant value — and a significant number of miners/validators must verify the transaction for it to be validated — it is still susceptible to collusion. If one or a few companies running lots of miners/validators in a small network collude, they can affect the sanctity of the network. The big risk with cryptocurrencies, he added, is that most activity as of today is ultimately tied to speculation. It’s important for cryptocurrencies to discover a “killer app soon so there is some underlying value created beyond speculation of its future value,” Hosanagar concludes.

The Way Ahead?

Given all these challenges, what is the current mindset in the financial sector towards adopting these new technologies? And, importantly, should one push for wide acceptance and deployment, or is there need for them to stabilize first?

According to Werbach, “It’s not an either-or” choice. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology in general, he noted, are immature currently. However, there are some areas where they are already able to be deployed effectively. The best way to work through today’s problems, is “to build working systems and see where difficulties arise,” Werbach said. Looking ahead, integration with law, regulation and governance will be critical. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies represent a new form of trust, he added. They will only succeed if they become sufficiently trustworthy, beyond the basic security of the distributed ledgers. “Law, regulation and governance are three major mechanisms to produce trustworthy systems that scale up to society-wide adoption. We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables. I’m optimistic about that process over time.”

“We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables.”–Kevin Werbach

Walch noted that while there are claims that some consortia are putting ‘blockchain’ systems into production, in many cases it appears that what they are calling a blockchain bears little to no resemblance to the original blockchain technology behind Bitcoin. In many instances, she said, existing shared databases are being called ‘blockchain’ for marketing purposes. “If people do use something they call DLT or blockchain technology in important financial systems, my hope is that they make the decision based on actual capabilities of the tech rather than its widely hyped and generally overstated capabilities,” Walch said. “Permissioned blockchains, which are the variation most likely to be used for financial systems recordkeeping, are very different from public blockchains like Bitcoin or Ethereum. I hope that a more modest and accurate understanding of the actual characteristics of permissioned blockchains sinks in before they are widely adopted.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies or cryptoassets, Walch said that the financial sector’s interest is “less about recordkeeping and more about a new financial asset that it can make money off of.” She pointed out that at present there is no clarity on how power and accountability work in these systems. The ongoing operation of crypto systems and the value they embed and support is reliant on the competence of, and ethical behavior by, unaccountable software developers and validators. “The financial sector believes it understands and can manage the risks of cryptoassets, but I am less certain and worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class. This has been a bad mixture in the past,” says Walch. “I think it would be more responsible to let cryptosystems exist on their own for a while longer to let more of the kinks get worked out — if they can be; I’m not sure the governance ones can — rather than to rapidly integrate them into the financial system as we seem to be doing.”

“I … worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class.”–Angela Walch

Conversely, Weber and Novocin feel that the financial industry is cautious about the new DLT technology. According to them, to build confidence in new blockchain systems there needs to be transparency around how the processes work and what the benefits are, and in order to secure adoption, they need to be straightforward to use. “Pundits have drawn parallels to the open source Linux operating system. Although only a few individuals use Linux directly, it quietly runs the vast majority of servers and cloud processors across the world. Similarly, early adoption of blockchain will likely happen in the background of business processes. Companies should get involved now, even if it is just to experiment with the concepts. By gaining familiarity with these new tools, they will be ready as the space continues to develop.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in the next few years, many more businesses will implement private blockchains to improve the transparency and traceability of their financial operations, supply chains, inventory management systems and other internal business systems. Clearer standards will be adopted and a few high-profile projects will emerge. Meanwhile, they said, R&D will continue among the many decentralized blockchain projects to invent more scalable public ledgers whether it be blockchain, Tangle, Hashgraph or something new. “Work is needed on better and more efficient consensus models, whether it be a new form of proof-of-stake or proof-of-work, or something else. There are many established groups, startups, companies and research teams that organizations can join, partner with, or support in order to contribute to research and expand their capabilities.”




Bitcoin (Currency),Bitcoin,Finance (Industry),Industry (Organization Sector),Brad Templeton,Singularity University,Innovation,Internet,Web,Website,Google,Disruption,Technology,Technological,Money,Currency,Gold,Big Think,BigThink,BigThink.com,Education,Educational,Lifelong Learning,EDU

July 16, 2020

Strategies of Legendary Value Investors

Strategies of Legendary Value Investors.

By ANDREW BEATTIE.

Value investing is a strategy where investors actively look to add stocks they believe have been undervalued by the market, and/or trade for less than their intrinsic values. Like any type of investing, value investing varies in execution with each person. There are, however, some general principles that are shared by all value investors.

These principles have been spelled out by famed investors like Peter Lynch, Kenneth Fisher, Warren Buffett, Bill Miller and others. By reading through financial statements, they seek out mispriced stocks and look to capitalize on a possible reversion to the mean.

In this article, we will look at some of the more well-known value investing principles.

Buy Businesses, Not Stocks.
If there is one thing that all value investors can agree on, it's that investors should buy businesses, not stocks. This means ignoring trends in stock prices and other market noise. Instead, investors should look at the fundamentals of the company that the stock represents. Investors can make money following trending stocks, but it involves a lot more activity than value investing. Searching for good businesses selling at a good price based on probable future performance requires a larger time commitment for research, but the payoffs include less time spent buying and selling, as well as fewer commission payments.

Love the Business You Buy Into.
You wouldn't pick a spouse based solely on his or her shoes, and you shouldn't pick a stock based on cursory research. You have to love the business you are buying, and that means being passionate about knowing everything about that company. You need to strip the attractive covering from a company's financials and get down to the naked truth. Many companies look far better when you judge them beyond the basic price to earnings (P/E), price to book (P/B) and earnings per share (EPS) ratios and look into the quality of the numbers that make up those figures.

If you keep your standards high and make sure the company's financials look as good naked as they do dressed up, you're much more likely to keep it in your portfolio for a long time. If things change, you'll notice it early. If you like the business you buy, paying attention to its ongoing trials and successes becomes more of a hobby than a chore.

Invest in Companies You Understand.
If you don't understand what a company does or how, then you probably shouldn't be buying shares. Critics of value investing like to focus on this main limitation. You are stuck looking for businesses that you can easily understand because you have to be able to make an educated guess about the future earnings of the business. The more complex a business is, the more uncertain your projections will likely be. This moves the emphasis from "educated" to "guess."

You can buy businesses you like but don't completely understand, but you have to factor in uncertainty as added risk. Any time a value investor has to factor in more risk, they have to look for a larger margin of safety – that is, more of a discount from the calculated true value of the company. There can be no margin of safety if the company is already trading at many multiples of its earnings, which is a strong sign that however exciting and new the idea is, the business is not a value play. Simple businesses also have an advantage, as it's harder for incompetent management to hurt the company.

Find Well-Managed Companies.
Management can make a huge difference in a company. Good management adds value beyond a company's hard assets. Bad management can destroy even the most solid financials. There have been investors who have based their entire investing strategies on finding managers that are honest and able.

Warren Buffett advises that investors should look for three qualities of good management: integrity, intelligence, and energy. He adds that "if they don't have the first, the other two will kill you." You can get a sense of management's honesty through reading several years' worth of financials. How well did they deliver on past promises? If they failed, did they take responsibility, or gloss it over?

Value investors want managers who act like owners. The best managers ignore the market value of the company and focus on growing the business, thus creating long-term shareholder value. Managers who act like employees often focus on short-term earnings in order to secure a bonus or other performance perk, sometimes to the long-term detriment of the company. Again, there are many ways to judge this, but the size and reporting of compensation is often a dead giveaway. If you're thinking like an owner, then you pay yourself a reasonable wage and depend on gains in your stock holdings for a bonus. At the very least, you want a company that expenses its stock options.

Don't Stress Over Diversification.
One of the areas where value investing runs contrary to commonly accepted investing principles is on diversification. There are long stretches where a value investor will be idle. This is because of the exacting standards of value investing as well as overall market forces. Towards the end of a bull market, everything gets expensive, even the dogs. So, a value investor may have to sit on the sidelines waiting for the inevitable correction.

Time — an important factor in compounding — is lost while waiting to invest. So, when you do find undervalued stocks, you should buy as much as you can. Be warned, this will lead to a portfolio that is high-risk according to traditional measures like beta. Investors are encouraged to avoid concentrating on only a few stocks, but value investors generally feel that they can only keep proper track of a few stocks at a time.

One obvious exception is Peter Lynch, who kept almost all of his funds in stocks at all times. Lynch broke stocks into categories and then cycled his funds through companies in each category. He also spent upwards of 12 hours every day checking and rechecking the many stocks held by his fund. However, as an individual value investor with a different day job, it's better to go with a few stocks for which you've done the homework and feel good about holding long term.

Your Best Investment Is Your Guide.
Anytime you have more investment capital, your aim for investing should not be diversity, but finding an investment that is better than the ones you already own. If the opportunities don't beat what you already have in your portfolio, you may as well buy more of the companies you know and love, or simply wait for better times.

During idle times, a value investor can identify the stocks he or she wants and the price at which they'll be worth buying. By keeping a wish list like this, you'll be able to make decisions quickly in a correction.

Ignore the Market 99% of the Time.
The market only matters when you enter or exit a position — the rest of the time, it should be ignored. If you approach buying stocks like buying a business, you'll want to hold onto them as long as the fundamentals are strong. During the time you hold an investment, there will be spots where you could sell for a large profit and others where you're holding an unrealized loss. This is the nature of market volatility.

The reasons for selling a stock are numerous, but a value investor should be as slow to sell as he or she is to buy. When you sell an investment, you expose your portfolio to capital gains and usually have to sell a loser to balance it out. Both of these sales come with transaction costs that make the loss deeper and the gain smaller. By holding investments with unrealized gains for a long time, you forestall capital gains on your portfolio. The longer you avoid capital gains and transaction costs, the more you benefit from compounding.

The Bottom Line.
Value investing is a strange mix of common sense and contrarian thinking. While most investors can agree that a detailed examination of a company is important, the idea of sitting out a bull market goes against the grain. It's undeniable that funds held constantly in the market have outperformed cash held outside the market that is waiting for a downturn to end. This is a fact, but a deceiving one. The data is derived from following the performance of market measures like the S&P 500 Index over a number of years. This is where passive investing and value investing get confused.

In both types of investing, the investor avoids unnecessary trading and has a long-term holding period. The difference is that passive investing relies on average returns from an index fund or other diversified instrument. A value investor seeks out above-average companies and invests in them. Therefore, the probable range of return for value investing is much higher.

In other words, if you want the average performance of the market, you're better off buying an index fund right now and piling money into it over time. If you want to outperform the market, however, you need a concentrated portfolio of outstanding companies. When you find them, the superior compounding will make up for the time you spent waiting in a cash position. Value investing demands a lot of discipline on the part of the investor, but in return offers a large potential payoff.

July 25, 2020