Thursday, January 3, 2019

Final Decision Checklist

I had previously mentioned a checklist that I use as the last thing I look at before making an investment in a stock. As I'm thinking about spelling out my process and philosophy in regards to forming a potential Registered Investment Adviser, I thought I'd clean up the wording a bit, and paste it here if anyone else is interested. One important note though: I've come to believe that developing a full image in one's mind of how a business operates, competes, allocates capital, takes care of customers, etc. is much more important than checking off certain items on a list (i.e. Holograms > Checklists). Combined with developing that image is the necessity of only investing in those things that seem like obvious bargains. But the final checklist serves as a great way to help stay disciplined, and hopefully sidestep some avoidable errors. Everyone's will probably be different and evolve over time, but here is mine in its current state.


Final Decision Checklist (the final checklist to go through before putting any capital to work)

1. Are you tired?
  • "We didn’t know, when we started out, this modern psychological evidence to the effect that you shouldn’t make a lot of important decisions when you’re tired and that making a lot of difficult decisions is tiring.... I cannot remember an important decision that Warren has made when he was tired." –Charlie Munger
2. Did you make this investment decision while the market was closed, so that current price moves aren't impacting your judgment?
  • “Sleep on it” is good advice before buying/selling.
3. Have you done enough work, and are you sure this is within your circle of competence? 
  • "We will never buy anything we don’t think we understand. And our definition of understanding is thinking that we have a reasonable probability of being able to assess where the business will be in 10 years." –Warren Buffett
4. Is the balance sheet conservative to allow the company to endure—and hopefully take advantage of—even the most difficult of economic environments?

5. Is the management team comprised of the kind of people you want to partner with, and are their interests clearly aligned with your interests? It’s not worth being business partners with people you don’t like and admire, and as an owner of the business they are running, you are essentially their partner.

6. Is this a good business? 
  • It doesn't necessarily have to be a long-term "compounder" type of business, but it needs to provide real value for its customers, clients, etc…. i.e. a Win-Win with all six counterparties (customers, suppliers, employees, owners, the regulators, and the community).
    • “Win-win is as much safety as it is compassion. The sustainability of any organization ultimately rests on delivering a win-win partnership with counterparties. Any other relationship will eventually lead to a fatal flaw that will eventually be corrected. Be constant – Be Kind.” –Chris Begg
7. Do you have downside protection? This will largely come from:
  • Paying close to (adjusted) net asset value, encompassed within a business that has solid earning power (even if temporarily obscured) and some advantages protecting that earning power, even if it’s within a cyclical business and the size of the moat may be hard to estimate.
  • And/Or a moat that protects a minimum, and conservatively-estimated, level of earnings—and then paying a fair to good to great price for that level of earnings. The price paid will largely be a judgment call based on the size of the moat and the reinvestment prospects within that moat (i.e. ability to invest capital at high rates for a given duration of time).
  • The direction of the moat (shrinking or expanding) is more important than the size of the moat.
    • “We think in terms of that moat and the ability to keep its width and its impossibility of being crossed as the primary criterion of a great business. And we tell our managers we want the moat widened every year.” –Warren Buffett
    • “In my view, widening the moat is more important than the width of the moat. Everyone is attacking a company’s moat, so the question is not how wide it is, but whether it is widening at a faster pace than competitors are filling it up. Innovation is central to the idea of widening a moat.” –Rob Vinall
  • And while a judgment call on quality vs. price, remember that it should look obvious if you have a full picture of things: “Part of the reason that we have a decent record is [that] we pick things that are easy. Other people think they're so smart they can take on things that are really difficult. That proves to be more dangerous. You have to be shrewd, and you have to be very patient. You have to wait until something comes along which at the price you're paying is easy.” –Charlie Munger
8. When thinking about price vs. value: 
  • Is there at least three times more upside than downside? (e.g. If downside under a worst-case scenario is 50%, I need at least 150% [2.5x return] upside.) 
  • Do I think this investment is likely to double in 3-5 years? (~15-26% IRR)
  • And if I'm wrong, is there a high probability that my downside is waiting 10 years (because it’s a good business that is growing) for a double as opposed to losing money? (~7% IRR)
  • There may be some situations where your downside is so limited if you can hold longer-term that even if the expected IRR may be 15% over a 2-3 year period instead of longer, it could still be worthwhile (e.g. A bond you know with extremely high confidence will pay off at maturity, and you can hold until maturity; Or at times, buying Berkshire Hathaway at a low multiple of understated book value, and also a decent discount to fair value.).
  • One of the main advantages you can have as an investor is looking out 5-10 years when thinking about value—as opposed to thinking shorter-term—and comparing that value to the price today.
9. Is this business almost certain to be making more money 10 years from now, and can it increase its long-term value in a tough economic environment (e.g. by buying stock, taking business from weaker competitors, treating weaker customers and suppliers well in order to build long-term trust, etc.)? 
  • Downside via a current moat or asset value isn't enough…. The business must also be something that is almost certain to be making more money in 10 years. All six key investment traits should be present—to varying degrees and sometimes temporarily obscured (unless it’s a special situation investment with a given catalyst):
    • Downside 
    • Cash Flow (Sustainable Earning Power) 
    • Growth (Reinvestment Opportunities)
    • Antifragile (ability to take business advantage in tough environments—including high inflation—even though the stock may go down with a declining market)
    • People 
    • Price
10. Am I viewing this as a business and not just a stock? Am I taking the mindset of buying the business outright, and retaining management?  
  • "[Charlie and I] don’t consider ourselves richer or poorer based on what the stock does. We do feel richer or poorer based on what the business does." –Warren Buffett
11. Am I sizing the position appropriately? 
  • While you need to concentrate your portfolio in your best ideas, you also need to remember Howard Marks' story about the race with one horse, where what seemed like a sure thing wasn't, because the horse jumped the fence and didn't finish the race..... Unexpected things happen and you won't see them all coming. 
    • The Marks story, via Peter Bevelin's All I want to know... book: “It can always get worse than you think. I love this story from Howard Marks: ‘I tell my father’s story of the gambler who lost regularly. One day he heard about a race with only one horse in it, so he bet the rent money. Halfway around the track, the horse jumped over the fence and ran away. Invariably things can get worse than people expect. Maybe ‘worst-case’ means ‘the worst we’ve seen in the past.’ But that doesn’t mean things can’t be worse in the future.’”
  • And it may not be a bad idea to only buy 1/3 of a position at first, especially if you've been following the company for less than 6 months. 
12. No FOMO, No Sunk Costs, and No Acting Out of Boredom.
  • You have to be willing to watch plenty of things you thought were good but not good enough go on to perform well and be indifferent about it; that’s part of the game. 
  • You can’t let putting time and effort into something influence your willingness to invest in it—be ready to walk away and move on, with equanimity to the eventual outcome, as soon as you see something that you don’t like. 
  • And always do the work before investing, realizing that you’ll miss plenty of things that go up while you’re finishing the work that needs to be done before investing in anything.
  • So, have you done the work that needs to be done? And are you sure you’re not settling just because you’ve put in the work?
  • And remember, great investors have often made mistakes when they either had little to do (do-something syndrome) or had too much cash on hand. You must stay disciplined, and then remain patient for however long it takes.

Wednesday, January 2, 2019

Links

"Inflation is the one thing that, over a long period of time, can turn investors’ results, in aggregate, into a negative figure. And it’s the investors’ enemy." --Warren Buffett  [2003, in response to a question about inflation and his article "How Inflation Swindles the Equity Investor"]

Jimmy Pattison Is Serendated Into Canada’s Walk of Fame (video) [H/T Michael ] (LINK)
Paul Anka surprises inductee Jimmy Pattison with a new rendition of “My Way” with special guest singer, Warren Buffett.
Deal-Master Debbane: Meet The Secretive Lebanese Immigrant Behind Oprah’s Weight Watchers Windfall [H/T @NeckarValue] (LINK)

Dirty dealing in the $175 billion Amazon Marketplace (LINK)

Think Electric Vehicles Are Great Now? Just Wait... [H/T @AlexRubalcava] (LINK)

High Insulin Prices Drive Diabetics to Take Extreme Measures (video) (LINK)

Mutual Fund Observer, January 2019 (LINK)

Steve Romick talks with Meb Faber (podcast) (LINK)

IQ is largely a pseudoscientific swindle - by Nassim Nicholas Taleb (LINK)

How Not To Be Stupid (LINK)

Edge #524: Childhood's End by George Dyson - The 2019 Edge New Year's Essay (LINK)
The digital revolution isn’t over but has turned into something else
This weekend, China embarks on a historic mission to land on the far side of the Moon (LINK)

Scientists Have Been Studying Cancers in a Very Strange Way for Decades - by Ed Yong (LINK)

Books.... There are some great Kindle deals currently available for those interested:

Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car—And How It Will Reshape Our World ($2.99)

Barbarians at the Gate: The Fall of RJR Nabisco ($2.99)

Dear Chairman: Boardroom Battles and the Rise of Shareholder Activism ($2.99)

A Mind at Play: How Claude Shannon Invented the Information Age ($3.99)

Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman ($1.99)

The Evolution of Everything: How New Ideas Emerge ($2.99)

Distinguished Speaker Series: Joel Greenblatt

The shift to passive management is a powerful trend dominating the investment industry. The liquidity, lack of tracking error, and low costs associated with passive investing are clearly attractive.  However, active management is the only way to truly outperform the market as a whole over time. Gotham Asset Management founder and co-CIO Joel Greenblatt will share his thoughts on the debate and provide insights on ways to navigate the changing landscape.


Link to video


[H/T Linc]

Monday, December 31, 2018

Links

Thank you to everyone who read the blog in 2018, with special thanks to those of you who were kind enough to also donate during the year.

And thanks again to all of those who reached out after the September blog update with support. I'm still figuring out exactly what I'll be doing next, but will update all of you when the time comes.

***

"We love the idea of other people using mechanistic formulas to price things, because they may be right 99 times out of 100 but we don’t have to play those 99 times. We just play the one time when we have a differing view." --Warren Buffett (2003)

What I learned at work this year - by Bill Gates (LINK)

Working More Magic at Disney ($) (LINK)

The Hidden System That Explains How Your Doctor Makes Referrals (LINK)

John Stockman’s Medical Bills Topped $1 Million. What Happened? (LINK)

Taking Surprise Medical Bills to Court (LINK)

Related book to the above 3 articles: An American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back

Bold Predictions for the Travel Industry in 2019 (LINK)

The Atlantic Science Desk: 83 Things That Blew Our Minds in 2018 (LINK)

EconTalk Podcast: Sebastian Junger on Tribe (LINK)
Related book: Tribe
a16z Podcast: Talent, Tech Trends, and Culture (LINK)
This episode of the a16z Podcast features the rare combination of a16z co-founders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz in conversation, together, with economist Tyler Cowen.

Thursday, December 27, 2018

Links

"There are three words which are among the most important words in our business: I don't know. And if you don't know something...you should admit it—to yourself and to everybody around you. And I think personally that it's very freeing to say 'I don't know.' I think it's very, almost depressing, to feel that you have to have an opinion on every subject, even the ones where by definition you can't have superior knowledge." --Howard Marks (Hong Kong, October 26, 2018)

A good compilation of papers related to valuation [H/T @NeckarValue] (LINK)

Notes from Value Invest NYC - by Chris Mayer (LINK)

Reflections On Cash As An Option - by Frank K. Martin (LINK)

To Help Put Recent Economic & Market Moves in Perspective - by Ray Dalio (LINK)

Sen. Johnny Isakson Called FBI on Behalf of MiMedx Group - by Gretchen Morgenson and Charley Grant (LINK)

In Defense of Laziness - by Charles Chu [H/T @jposhaughnessy] (LINK)

What’s Changed Since My First Column for Scientific American - by David Pogue [H/T Linc] (LINK)

The Woolly Mammoth Lumbers Back into View (LINK)

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

Links

"While  it  is always tempting to try to time the market and wait for the bottom to be reached (as if  it  would  be  obvious  when  it  arrived), such a strategy has proven over the years to  be  deeply  flawed.  Historically,  little volume transacts at the bottom or on the way back up, and competition from other buyers  will  be  much  greater  when  the markets  settle  down  and  the  economy begins  to  recover.  Moreover,  the  price recovery from a bottom can be very swift. Therefore, an investor should put money to work amidst the throes of a bear market, appreciating that things will likely get worse before they get better." --Seth Klarman [2008 investor letter]

I Used to Write for Sports Illustrated. Now I Deliver Packages for Amazon. (LINK)

How Allbirds Became A $1.4 Billion Sneaker Start-Up (video) [H/T @ayushmitt] (LINK)

Citron Research report on Facebook [H/T @ivan_brussels] (LINK)

The Fast and the Furious - by John Hussman (LINK) [Published early this morning.]
While we don’t presently observe conditions to indicate a “buying opportunity” or a “bottom” from a full-cycle standpoint, we do observe conditions that are permissive of a scorching market rebound, even if it only turns out to be the “fast, furious, prone to failure” variety. I say “permissive” because there is no certainty about a rebound, and we wouldn’t dream of removing our safety nets against a market decline that I continue to expect to draw the S&P 500 toward the 1000 level by the completion of this cycle. Still, we’ve prepared for the possibility of unusual volatility here, most likely including one or more daily moves in the range of 4-6%, potentially to the upside. Yes, that means one or more daily moves on the order of 100-150 points on the S&P 500 and 900-1300 points on the Dow. You think I’m kidding.
EconTalk Podcast: Mariana Mazzucato on the Value of Everything (LINK)
Related book: The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy
a16z Podcast: How the Internet Happened (LINK)
Related book: How the Internet Happened: From Netscape to the iPhone
Adam Robinson chats with Shane Parrish on the The Knowledge Project Podcast (Part 2) (LINK)

Sam McBride: "Building RXBAR" | Talks at Google (LINK)

The Relentlessness of Modern Parenting (LINK)

99 Good News Stories You Probably Didn’t Hear About in 2018 [H/T @AlexRubalcava] (LINK)

How to Develop Better Habits in 2019 - by Ryan Holiday (LINK)

Tuesday, December 25, 2018

A good conscience is a continual Christmas...

“Let no pleasure tempt thee, no profit allure thee, no ambition corrupt thee, no example sway thee, no persuasion move thee, to do any thing which thou knowest to be evil; so shalt thou always live jollily; for a good conscience is a continual Christmas.” --Ben Franklin

Sunday, December 23, 2018

Links

Charlie Munger in 2002, in response to a question about the mistake Berkshire made acquiring Dexter Shoe: 
"That shows, which is important to show, that no matter how hard you work at having systems for avoiding error and practices of trying to stay within your circle of competency, et cetera, et cetera, you still make mistakes."
***

What You Can Learn From One of Warren Buffett’s Smartest Investors - by Jason Zweig (LINK)

Here’s What Warren Buffett Sends to a Select Group of People at Christmas - by Carol Loomis [H/T Linc] (LINK)

Ajit Jain buys $20 million of Berkshire Hathaway’s shares (LINK)
Berkshire Hathaway’s Ajit Jain bought about $20 million of stock on Dec. 18, according to a regulatory filing on Thursday. 
The move was in A shares, the ones that trade around $288,000 each. The filing said the purchases were done in multiple transactions at prices ranging from $295,750 to $297,000 a share. The move could be interpreted as a sign of confidence as the stock market continued its multi-day plunge to fresh lows for the year.
Howard Marks: UCLA Anderson Fink Center "Mastering the Market Cycle" (video) (LINK)
During a standing-room only interview at UCLA Anderson on October 11, 2018, living investment legend Howard Marks encouraged investors of all experience levels to develop a keen observation of cyclical indicators and historic market patterns to manifest opportunities. 
Howard Marks: CAIA / CFA / HKSFA Hong Kong (video) (LINK)
Howard Marks, Co-Chairman, speaks with Ms. Teresa Han at an event co-hosted by CAIA / CFA / HKSFA / Oaktree in Hong Kong. (Recorded on October 26, 2018)
‘Canada’s Warren Buffett’ Drives His Own Pickup Truck [H/T Linc] (LINK)
On the road with billionaire Jim Pattison.
Michael Shearn: Invest in Leadership [H/T @iancassel] (LINK)

Investing Lessons from Bill Browder [H/T @iancassel] (LINK)

David Tepper: Fed is done supporting stock prices, so cash is ‘not so bad’ as an investment now [From Thursday morning] (LINK)

It’s Not Time to Panic (Yet) - by Cullen Roche (LINK)

Demon Underneath: John DeLorean and the invention of the future [H/T @jtepper2] (LINK)
Long before Elon Musk, a visionary automaker showed how ugly the American Dream could be.
Weaving Magic Unravels in Woolrich, Pa. [H/T @timhanso] (LINK)
After nearly two centuries, a mill closes and a storied brand ceases to be ‘Made in the U.S.A.’
How Much Trust Can Facebook Afford to Lose? - by Evan Osnos (LINK)

How Worried Should Americans Be About Facebook and Cyber Warfare? (podcast) (LINK)
Evan Osnos joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss investigations into what Facebook knew about Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, and into the company’s misuse of users’ data.
A16z videos on What’s Next for Marketplace Startups, Extending Human Lifespan, Programming Medicine, and Nature as Technology.

Graham Allison: My North Korea Prediction for 2019 (LINK)

The Itsy-Bitsy, Teenie-Weenie, Very Litigious Kiini Bikini (LINK)

A Courting Peacock Can Shake Its Partner’s Head From Afar - by Ed Yong (LINK)

Apollo 8’s Earthrise: The Shot Seen Round the World (LINK)

Thursday, December 20, 2018

Antifragile investments

Given the volatility of the market lately, I've been thinking a lot about Nassim Taleb's book Antifragile. One of the major ways it impacted me is that it helped me think about the types of businesses I'd want to own when market valuations are high but some stocks start to look cheap. 

As Chris Cole of Artemis Capital Management has been talking about over the last few years, a large part of the market, value investing included, is implicitly a big short volatility trade. As Cole said in a 2017 interview with Real Vision:
There's nothing wrong with shorting vol if it's done intelligently.... I think the problem is that people don't always understand the risks that they're taking on. 
...I think the problem, at the end of the day, is we're all short volatility. Every institution in the world is. The question is: are you short convexity, or are you massively short convexity? And do you understand that you are because, you know, we have a finite amount of life. At the end of the day...if you have a portfolio of value stocks, in some ways you're implicitly shorting correlation and betting on mean reversion. 
That's a form of short vol. But the margin of safety can be attractive at the right points in time. The question is: do people really understand the risk they're taking on? I think when institutions are entering into a lot of these different strategies, and today this is just indexation to a certain extent, I don't think they...really have a pure conceptualization of all the risks that are going on. 
Now, value investing, if done correctly, is the intelligent way to implicitly be short volatility, but Taleb's book also made me think more about the types of businesses that can turn whatever volatility may come into existence into opportunity. Or in other words, what types of businesses actually create value in tough environments? So as an investor, as long as you have the endurance to hold through whatever Mr. Market may have in store on the downside, you can actually come out on the other side in better position because of the work you did buying right beforehand. Examples from the 2008-2010 time frame would be things like Berkshire Hathaway on the large cap side of things, and Cambria Automobiles on the micro cap side of things.

I'm thinking more about this lately because while markets have come down a bit, they are still at lofty valuations. But I'm seeing more interesting things to look at that seem like they could be very cheap than I have in a long time, which is a bit ironic given that I just exited from the investment business and am not currently managing outside capital. 

At any rate, while I was still at Boyles, we wrote the excerpt below in a 2014 investor letter after finishing Taleb's book, and I think it still reads fairly well, so I included it here for those that are interested. 

**********

Estimating intrinsic value based on cash flows, private market values, and liquidation values is something that should be familiar to those that follow a value philosophy; as is considering one’s downside in a worst-case scenario.  And because these are estimates—and small changes in certain variables can have large impacts on expected values—it’s important to be conservative in those estimates.  Or to use a phrase from Seth Klarman, it’s important to make those estimates “by compounding multiple conservative assumptions.”

Things start to get tricky when it comes to estimating probabilities, which one can’t really do with any degree of accuracy.  It is too hard and too close to guesswork, especially when we consider that, according to Sir John Templeton, “No security analyst is ever going to be right more than two-thirds of the time.”

So if we can’t accurately estimate our probability of winning and losing, what can we do?  What we believe an investor can do is determine whether or not the odds are likely to be in one’s favor.  There are certain things that can increase one’s chance of not losing money on an investment, and certain things that increase the chance of losing should something unexpected or disruptive occur.

In Nassim Taleb’s book, Antifragile, he separates things into three categories:
1) Fragile
2) Robust
3) Antifragile
The fragile is harmed by certain shocks, randomness, and stressors.  The robust is neither harmed nor helped by them.  And the antifragile grows and improves from them.  As Taleb says, “...the idea is to focus on fragility rather than predicting and calculating future probabilities…” 

So while we can’t accurately predict probabilities, what we can do is think about and identify traits that will increase our chances of winning and decrease our chances of losing under a range of scenarios.  And by trying to avoid fragile traits and invest in situations that are more robust or, preferably, antifragile, we decrease our chances of making mistakes due to estimation error.  Below are some examples of these traits among businesses and investments:


“...the fragile wants tranquility, the antifragile grows from disorder,
and the robust doesn’t care too much.” –Nassim Taleb

When the positive traits overwhelm the negative traits, we can be fairly confident that the odds are in our favor. But figuring out which traits are really present and which are illusory takes a lot of work; as does coming up with a proper and conservative estimate of intrinsic value and a worst-case scenario.  The math behind the Kelly Criterion gives a good framework for thinking about the questions: (1) Is my probability of winning greater than my probability of losing?; and (2) Is my upside greater than my downside?  But there is a lot of work that needs to be done in order to answer those questions with decent accuracy.

“It’s not supposed to be easy. Anyone who finds it easy is stupid.” –Charlie Munger

Using the Kelly framework to explain our current outlook on the investment climate, we can say that we see plenty of things with attractive upside ($W), but the main issue is that we also think there is plenty of downside ($L) in those investments.  To optimize one’s capital over time, one should consider more than just the upside if things go right.  One must be in the game long enough for the odds to work out favorably over time.  The main reason we have so much cash today is that we see a lot of downside coupled amongst the upside.

We look for situations where, if we ran through the Kelly Criterion using conservative assumptions, it would tell us to take large position sizes.  Our actual position sizes will, in practice, be much smaller than Kelly, as we manage risk and account for the uncertainties and errors that come with investing.  But the idea behind taking big positions in one’s best ideas—especially when one’s downside is well protected—is one in which we firmly believe. 

In the Ed Thorp article mentioned earlier, he also wrote that “Computing [F] without the context of the available alternative investments is one of the most common oversights I’ve seen in the use of the Kelly Criterion. Because it generally overestimates [F] it is a dangerous error.”  And as we contemplate our alternatives to cash, we think not just about the current opportunity set, but also about opportunities that may possibly develop over the next several months.  We’ve been and are still close to buying several things; and we continue to build our list of prospects.  While we can’t know when Mr. Market will give us the opportunity to put our cash to work, we are ready to move in quickly when we think the odds and payouts are overwhelmingly in our favor.

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

Links

"Study the past, if you would divine the future." --Confucius 

Berkshire Hathaway Reduces Home Capital Investment (LINK)

Investing Ideas That Changed My Life - by Morgan Housel (LINK)

The 2018 Stratechery Year in Review - by Ben Thompson (LINK)

A new way to look at Leonardo - by Bill Gates (LINK)

Chris Cole talks with Meb Faber (podcast) (LINK)

Daniel Kahneman talks with Tyler Cowen (podcast) (LINK)

Why Do These Dinosaurs Have Long, Twisted Tubes in Their Heads? - by Ed Yong (LINK)