Tip Sheet
Tip Sheet Archive
Overview
High Dividend Yield
High Yield DJIA30
High Yield TSX60
Dividends at Risk
Dividend Risk DJIA30
Dividend Risk TSX60
Value Ratio Approach
Value Ratio DJIA30
Value Ratio TSX60
Graham's Approach
Graham DJIA30
Graham TSX60
Other Screens
Low P/E DJIA
Low P/E TSX60
Low P/B DJIA
Low P/B TSX60
Low P/S DJIA
|
Stingy Investor Tip Sheet
|
|
| Value's Downside Risk |
I stumbled across an OID
interview with Richard Pzena and his graph "Declines of 20% or
more in a value strategy 1968 - 2007" (on page 2 of the linked
PDF) stuck with me.
Here's a bit of what he said...
"if you had
invested in a very simple strategy of buying low price-to-book
stocks over the last 40 years [based on the cheapest
quintile of the largest 1000 stocks], you'd have made about
200 times your money versus about 60 times your money if
you'd invested in the S&P 500. So it's a pretty successful
strategy.
[...]
Now, what I want to focus on are the eight
times in the last 40 years that you would have lost 20% in
a naive value strategy. When you look at chart 1, those
circles are little blips in the scheme of going up 200-fold.
And from a purely analytical perspective, you'd just look at
it and say, 'Who cares if I'm down 20% eight times? I'm up
200-fold over this 40-year period.' And I think that's
actually quite a logical conclusion.
The problem with that conclusion, though, is that
while you're losing that 20%, it doesn't feel very good. And
not only doesn't it feel good, you start to question whether
you're doing the right thing. And when you have clients
who are entrusting you with their money, they for sure will
question if you know what you're talking about. They'll say,
'Wasn't it obvious that whatever was going to happen was
going to happen? Everybody in the world seems to know it
except you.'
[...]
So given that, what do you do? Well, my
solution - because I haven't yet figured out how to avoid
those -20% periods in my career - is to promise them to
my clients. I tell them, 'This is going to happen. And if you
don't like it, we're not the right people for you.'" |
Pzena's speech is quite clever in two ways. First he took a hard look
at value investing's down periods. Second, he also highlighted the
track record to his clients to prepare them for the inevitable hard times.
I thought that it'd be interesting to create a similar graph
using Kenneth French's data which is available from mid-1926 and
through to the end of 2008.
I use French's data for three B/P value-weighted portfolios which are
rebalanced each June. The 'low 30%' portfolio contains 30% of stocks
with the lowest B/P ratios (or highest Price-to-Book-Value ratios).
The 'med 40%' portfolio tracks the medium 40% of stocks based on B/P.
The 'high 30%' portfolio tracks the 30% of stocks with the highest B/P
ratios (or lowest P/B ratios). I call the low 30% portfolio the
glamour portfolio and the high 30% portfolio the value portfolio. The
small assortment of stocks with negative book values are not included.
Growth of B/P portfolios
The first graph simply displays the growth of a $1 investment in each
portfolio (not including commissions/trading costs) since July 1926.
Due to the significant gains, it's hard to see what
happened in the early years.
Overall, the glamour group turned the $1 initial investment into
$1,074. The medium B/P group climbed to $2,415. But the value (or
high B/P) group vaulted to $14,508 over the entire period.
If you ignore the latest market downturn, the low B/P group peaked at
$1,816, the medium group at $4,877, and the high B/P group
topped out at $30,289.
(click for larger version)
To better see the ups and downs of the entire period, the next
graph uses a log scale on the portfolio-value axis.
(click for larger version)
You'll note that the 1930s period was very hard on value stocks which
is a little unsettling for value investors.
Declines From Prior Peak
The next five graphs highlight the downside risk of the various B/P
portfolios more dramatically. They plot each portfolio's decline
from its prior peak.
The first graph highlights all three portfolios. But it can be hard
to follow them all at once. That's why I show each group's experience
in the following three graphs. Finally, I provide a graph with only
the value and glamour groups in an effort to better highlight the
periods when one outperformed the other.
(click for larger version)
(click for larger version)
(click for larger version)
(click for larger version)
(click for larger version)
As is plainly demonstrated, the value group (high B/P) has suffered
numerous down periods. However, apart from the 1930s,
these periods have tended to be shorter and less extreme than the downside
experience of the glamour (low B/P) group.
Regrettably, the last few months have been harder on value stocks
than on glamour stocks. But go back a little further and the value
group climbed nicely in the early 2000s whereas the glamour group is
still below its summer 2000 peak. Indeed, value stocks are a bit
above their summer 2000 levels whereas glamour stocks are down
about 40% over the same period.
| 
| | 05/27/2009 7:30 PM EST Permlink save & share | P/B |
|
|
| | |
|
