Skip to main content

Accentuating the Negative

A number of years ago I participated in the management of over $500 million dollars in equity and fixed income for one of the largest companies in the world. Much of it 401k money and the rest was pension assets. The equity portion of my responsibility required me to read volumes of research and the result overall was often the same. Nearly every analysis I got my hands on was a buy, not stinker in the pot. It was at that time I decided to rely on my own research and analysis of every investment that I'd make going forward, and my position was simple, find the companies I admire and try to convince myself why I shouldn't buy them.
The practice started with my looking at companies from their fundamental perspective, however over the years I've followed the practices and methods of numerous analysts eventually arriving at my favorites, corporate governance, behavioral finance and technical analysis, that latter a research methodology thought by many as similar to voodoo. Why study the external theories in addition to those directly related to traditional balance sheet analysis (referred to as bottom-up research)? In balance sheet research the analysts will look for the handful of fundamental details offering a clue to a distressed or special situation such as a stock split , a spate of bad press or simply the strength implied by the balance sheet, such as strong cash inflows or low debt outstanding.  

I find the use of this means of analysis rich in value, however in the past few years accompanied by a constant stream of emotion laden news aimed at discrediting certain industries, more cynicism than attention is showered on company guidance, the statement that the management of a company provides occasionally offering an "estimate" of how they expect the company to perform in the future. I believe this leaves the investor stranded for accurate information. And while some resources attempt to avoid that conflict, they encourage another dilemma in the investment community, which is indecisive rhetoric. Consider the snap headline, or dazzling media lecture that goes something like this.

Moderator: "It rained today and some people are speculating that the world is coming to an end. Today were going to ask Thomas, an analyst from "X" company, who thinks we should run for cover, And Sarah, an analyst from "Y" Company, who sees plenty of sunshine on the horizon. You decide."

Thanks a lot!

There you have it, in my entire career I have rarely known guidance to propel or clobber a stock with such unruly volatility. And while the spoken word frequently fuels the drive to rely on the outlets that court public opinion it's because there is also much profit to be gained from presenting a company negatively and trumping existing positive fundamentals irrespective of some available information. Trouble is, it rarely works. In fact, the more I see this happening the more value I see in my study of the fluid rules of behavior. That of course, with a pinch of voodoo mixed in.

Popular posts from this blog

I B!#*$ For A Living

Not really, but I’d like to. The problem is I don’t search, or that is to say I don’t search for this blog. I do search, regularly so, with the same vigor that I flip though a newspaper. I have my pet subjects, finance, art, and sports, politics (not necessarily in that order) I never look at real estate and I rarely look at style articles. One of the reasons I don’t search for this blog is because there is a fine relationship between the price (the value of an asset) and time (the freshness of the analysis) that serve to form my views. That’s the only way I can assure that my posts are mine, grammatical blemishes and all. It also affords me the privilege of some license whereby I’m open to write about almost anything that strikes me as useful in the aim to inform. That’s one of the main reasons I choose to inhabit the space, which brings light to financial news, because it’s so reliant on nearly every other market, across all cultural and political spectrums and best of all it always…

Please Don't Believe Everything You Read

“I have news for you” said Andre
And as I peered through his bad hair weave, and “coke bottle”” glasses I realized he was right.

Nowhere in our collective memories do we ever fully understand the workings of our mind. Driven not by the collective accumulation of information but rather defined by the processes eternally influenced by the random cocktail of chemicals in our heads and poisoned by the principles we carry around in our back pockets with all smug confidence.