Traders and Investors

Just like to share my own definition of traders and investors that I thought about recently...

First let's start with Ben Graham's definition of investors and speculators.

Graham first stated that an investment operation is one which, upon thorough analysis, promises safety of principal and an adequate return and operations not meeting these requirements are speculative.

So an investor focuses on analysis to look for capital safety and adequate return. This is usually interpreted as fundamental analysis of the company, its business model, its competitive advantage, margins, sales growth and of course, the financials: cash on hand, debt, bankruptcy risk, capex needs etc.

Anything less of such analysis means speculation. A speculator is simply one that doesn't do that kind of rigorous analysis.

Simple right?

For me I think it's about different focuses.

An investor focuses on value.
A trader focuses on price.

An investor is interested in the value of a stock (or any other thing he wants to buy), and he spends an awful lot of time and effort to figure out this value (or intrinsic value). This is analogous to Graham's analysis. Or more accurately rigorous fundamental analysis of business operations and financials. Price serves only to tell him how much he actually has to pay if he were to buy the stock. Needless to say, the lesser the better. Graham and most value investors advocate buying 30-40% (margin of safety) below the stock's intrinsic value.

To an investor, profit is made when the stock price subsequently rises to its value which usually take years.

A trader is interested in the price of a stock and he spends an awful lot of time and effort following how the price has moved. Actual value of a stock basically serves no purpose for the trader.

To a trader, profit is made when the stock rises above his buying price and he sells it to another person willing to buy at a higher price. Usually also known as the Greater Fool.

So, that's that! Just two different philosophies here to make money.

Balance and Reversion

Taoism talks about being in tune with the Universe and consequences of allowing a strong force to overwhelm others. Yes we are talking about the Yin and the Yang. Both forces should balance each other to achieve Balance. A stronger Yin over Yang or vice versa leads to unrest, discomfort and ultimately it calls for a reversion to the mean.

In Graham-speak, this becomes Bond versus Stock. Back in his days where there were only 2 asset classes: Bonds and Stocks, his strategy was to always maintain a portfolio with at least 25% in one asset class and a maximum of 75% in the other. And this is when one asset class in grossly overvalued versus the other. In most cases, it should be a 50:50 split between bonds and stocks.

So as with Taoism, the ideal situation is always an equal split between the bonds and stocks. Both asset classes will be in balance. Bonds give income, stocks give capital appreciation. Bonds counter deflation, stocks counter inflation. Bonds, downside protection, stocks provide upside. Totally in sync with the Universe!

However there are times when a stronger force overwhelms the other. With investment, well usually a stock bubble brings valuation so out of whack that it makes sense to disrupt the balance. In this case, overweight bonds and underweight equity. Ultimately, the Universe must return to its status quo, ie stocks will correct to its appropriate valuations and the investor benefits.

Value investing focuses a lot on the process up till buying the stock. But very little is said about selling. Buffett, the Oracle of Omaha, is famous for saying you never sell a good stock except when you want the money to buy a better one. Graham never specifically said anything about selling as well.

But I guess, by reading between the lines and drawing lessons from Taoism, we should sell when things are out of balance. In the case of stocks, when it’s grossly overvalued. The sad mistake we all make is to rationalize the overvalue-ness to justify why we still hold on to the stock. Like the company has this new product that will be a hit, or the company is going to do M&A, or the company is going to increase dividends etc.

So the next time we want to hold on to a stock that had gotten too expensive, think about the balance of the Universe and why reversion will always occur and it’s time to allow that to happen. Sell the damn stock.

Graham and Lao-Tzu

Not sure if it is just me. Reading some of Graham’s philosophy reminds me of Taoism and Lao-Tzu. Using no-change to combat ten thousand changes, cycles and repetitions, no rules etc. More than a handful of Tao philosophy is actually reflected in Value Investing. Well someone did come out with a book called Tao of Buffett.

Combating ten thousand changes

Graham thinks that it is futile to predict the future. Nobody has been able to do it. So what he does is to assume that what has occurred will continue, with relatively high probability. This has of course been well mastered by Buffett, his prodigy. Hence their preference for brick and mortar businesses that basically face little changes over the years (unlike technology or growth sectors).

This is also exemplified by his preference for 10 year valuations. Which I think is probably one of the most important concepts from the Intelligent Investor. You see, on Wall Street today, most people, when they talk about valuations: ie PER and PBR. They talk about Share Price today divided by the Earnings Per Share next year for the company.

Graham uses an average of 10 years’ worth of EPS in order to determine if the stock is cheap. Basically, he is saying that if the average annual EPS over the next 10 years is the same as the previous 10 years, and if the price is cheap (ie PER of less than 15x), then the stock should be a BUY.

This makes whole lot of sense for someone who really thinks about buying a business for REAL right? Think about it, if you are going to buy that coffeeshop down the road. The owner says the shop will earn $500k next year. So you will pay 15x of $500k for the shop (ie $7.5 mn)? Or would you be more willing to buy from the other owner who showed you his average earnings for the past 10 years, amounting to $300k per year?

For one, the average earnings would usually be lower than next year’s earnings forecast. Especially if the forecast is made by a 23-year-old analyst from the brokerage firm. Or in the coffeeshop case, the owner who wants to cash out.

In any case, nobody ever gets their forecast right? So Graham simply uses the past and assume that the future is going to be like that. Using no-change to combat ten thousand changes. Bu Bian Ying Wan Bian.

More Taoism to come.

Analysing ETFs

It came as a pleasant surprise how SGX had expanded its portfolio of ETFs to 30 from a pathetic 10 when I was looking at it a couple of years ago. Recently, the biggest distributor Lyxor (Soc Gen), announced a further 5 ETFs to be listed. Looking at this trend, one can expect the no. of ETFs to go to 50 in the next 1-2 years, providing retail investors an inexpensive way to diversify and invest globally.

http://www.sgx.com/wps/portal/marketplace/mp-en/products/securities_products/etfs
This link provides a lot of info on the ETFs listed on SGX

At this juncture, I thought it would be good to post something about this investment product which might be one of the most important factor to help one achieve a 8%pa long term rate of return. Here are a few things I thought one should look at.

1. Expense ratio
Needless to say, this is probably the first thing to check. SGX listed ETFs have expense ratios ranging from 0.4-0.9%, which is kind of expensive compared to those in the US (as low as 0.2%) but much cheaper than unit trusts at 1.5% sales charge and 1% management fee. Well Singaporeans always get short-changed, so just live with it.

2. Market maker
Some ETFs listed way back in 2001-2002 has zero trades for the past 8 years without market makers which I think resulted in their failure. Now it's impossible to buy or sell them as there are no buyers or sellers! Even though its a listed product. Then came Lyxor with its market maker (basically some execution party and ensures you can buy or sell the ETF even when there is no counterparty) and viola, ETFs took off and Lyxor now has 50% market share of all ETFs listed in Singapore.

3. Spread
Even though there is a market maker and trades get executed, some times we need to pay attention to the spread. My rule of thumb is that if the spread is more than 1%, then it's a huge transaction cost. It is not something that you can change though. My greatest concern would be that if I hold this ETF for 10 years or more when the whole world has lost interest in it, will the spread balloon? Meaning I can't sell it. I have no answer at this point. Enlightened parties, pls share!

4. Dividends
Some ETFs listed on SGX give dividends, some don't. Personally I prefer dividends, a bird in hand man! Yes academics argue it doesn't matter, it might even be better bcos the dividends get re-invested - you don't get taxed, you get higher compounded return! I don't care, I want income stream and I want it now! Well that's me though.

5. Market Cap
The size of the ETFs determine if its likely that this product will continue to be listed, and I would say go for stuff with like USD 50-100mn in size. If it's too small, there might be a chance that the distributor will delist it. Then it's trouble trouble.

6. Valuations
This would be the single most important factor determining what or when to buy. As with stocks having their PER, PBR etc. ETFs also have their PER and PBR. It is not easy to get those figures (without a Bloomberg) but I think you can try to call their hotline and ask around. My general rule of thumb would be buy at PER 12x and PBR 1.2x. Some ETFs were at this attractive level earlier this year, now they are closer to PER 15x and PBR 1.5x. So wait for them to come down.

7. Components
Ultimately, ETFs are made up of stocks. So it pays to look at what's inside and see if you are comfortable with it. As with most indices, the bulk is actually finance stocks. Like STI is 40% banks maybe 20% Real Estate stocks. Russia used to be the hottest thing in town bcos it was mostly just oil companies. Since what we want is diversification, I would suggest look for ETFs that are more balanced, or buy a few to balance it out yourself.

8. Prospectus
Lastly check out the ETF's prospectus, see if anything is amiss or if there is something bothering you? Give them a call if need be. Usually it's some salesperson that is trained to answer some standard questions but no harm trying and hope they managed to help.

I am also still learning about all these, so knowledable parties pls share what you have learnt. 2009 and 2010 would be a good time to finally put money to work and earn a decent rate of return!

What is Value Investing?

Interestingly, the internet doesn't have a good layman definition of value investing. Well, at least, not one that is easily understandable and can appeal to general people to adopt such an investment philosophy.

So we are back to basics in this post (Again!), to introduce more people to value investing. Yes a tall order given that people are wondering whether they will keep their jobs and have money to buy food next week. Much less to buy stocks!

Nevertheless, this blogger is undaunted. Here goes!

In simple layman terms,

Value investing simply means adopting an investment philosophy to buy something that's worth a dollar with a lot less, like 60c or less.

Here is a modification of the old formal definition that I posted some years back.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Value investing is a broad definition of a style of investment that follow two basic principles:
1) Buying investments that are undervalued
2) Buying investments with a margin of safety
----------------------------------------------------------------

If you think about it, this concept is so simple that it makes one wonder why investing can be made so complicated. Well, for most of the time, human emotions like greed and fear are playing tricks to blur our rational minds. And these emotions are very good (at blurring us) esp when there are prices, charts and patterns, newsflow bombarding us daily.

Over the years, the paradigm of value investing has expanded to encompass many things:

1. Fundamental analysis (FA) needs to be rigorously employed in order to determine the stock's intrinsic value. This plots value investing into the infamous FA vs TA argument. TA stands for technical analysis ie looking at charts and stuff.

2. Buying a stock is like owning a business. Hence long investment horizon becomes norm as business owners don't buy and sell their co.s like oranges. And also undervalued stocks usually take some time to revert to it's intrinsic value.

3. Stocks that have certain characteristics become known as value stocks
a. predictable business operations and stable earnings (easier to calculated its intrinsic value),
b. low PER, PBR, high dividend, high cashflow or other "value" quantitative factors

4. Based on the points raised in 3, value stocks typically come from mundane industries like food and staples, utilities and other old economy industries ie no high-tech, alternative energy or bio-venture stuff.

5. It is generally accepted that Benjamin Graham is the father of value investing. Other well-known value investing practitioners include: David Dodd, Irving Kahn, William Ruane, Martin Whitman, Charles de Vaulx, John Templeton, Charlie Munger and Warren Buffett.

Since the concept of buying something that is undervalued is so broad, value investing is sometimes used to refer to investing in special situations like merger arbitrage, discount bonds (e.g. some bonds trading at 50% below par value and pays 10% interest and has little risk of default). However, this blogger thinks that this is a stretch for value investing.

For most people, it should suffice to understand that value investing is about owning a partial stake in a good company by buying its stock at a reasonable price.