Latest stories

Fortune’s formula

F

I have been reading this book : Fortune’s Formula: The Untold Story of the Scientific Betting System That Beat the Casinos and Wall Street.

I have found this book quite good especially if one wants to learn about odds, betting etc.

I am just halfway through the book. The book discusses about the kelly’s formula.

F = edge/odds. I have written about this formulae earlier (see here).

I found the above formula intersting although I have yet to figure out, how to use it directly in investment management. The formulae works well for betting situations like blackjack, horse betting which have limited outcomes. Its diffcult to work out mathematically the value of edge and odds in a common stock situation.

I have also been doing some analysis on the NSE data and have the following data

The above is the distribution of PE ratio for the last 7 years. It clearly shows that the only for around 8% of the trading days has the PE ratio been higher than 22.

If we take the above numbers as proxy for probability of occurrence and multiply that with the gain/ loss ( current PE – PE of the particular day / current PE) for each day, the expected value is around –19%.

To cut a long story short, the market seems to be overvalued by historical measures (which may not mean that the market is overvalued if the future performance is better than expected). Overall, I am planning to be more cautious especially in investing in the index (via index funds or ETF)

update : 8-Jan : Found this interesting discussion thread on the Berkshire board on MSN on the same topic. For those interested in kelly formulae, i would recommend reading the thread

http://groups.msn.com/BerkshireHathawayShareholders/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=26958&LastModified=4675605385636001835

Classification of companies based on nature of competition

C

I was reading a book on economics and found the following basic types of competition

– Perfect monopoly
– Oligopoly or duopoly
– Monopolisitic competition
– Perfect competition

I find the above types instructive and a good way to analyse the long term economics of an industry. Let me define the specifics of each type and add a few more subtypes under each

Perfect monoply – As the name suggest, there is just one firm and can charge any price it wants. Obviously this is more in theory than practise, although we have had several monopolies in india till date. Overall monoplies are very profitable (if private) for the investor and bad for the consumer. Several examples come to mind – BSNL, MTNL, Indian airlines (in the past) and now Indian railways. These were (or could have been) extremely profitable (excluding railways) even after all the mismanagement and waste. In a nutshell a perfect monopoly or a close one is extremely profitable for an investor. I would also define a company a monopoly if it has a huge market share in its specific segment and can hold on to it due to some competitive advantage.

Oligopoly or duopoly – A limited number or just two firms in the market. Although not as profitable as a monopoly, I would say these companies are quite profitable and extremely good investments for the long run. Several companies come to mind in this group. For ex : Crisil and other rating agencies, asian paints and other paint companies. One specific point worth noting is that the barrier to entry in this industry are high and hence new entrants cannot enter easily into the industry. As a result the incumbents can earn good profits.

Monopolistic competition – A large number of companies with limited profitability. Barriers to entry are not too high and as a result new companies can enter the industry more easily. I would say most of the commodity companies fall under this group. For ex: cement, steel, Auto, Telecom etc. Few companies in this kind of industry enjoy high profits and generally the lowest cost provider has some kind of competitive advantage. As an investor I would look at companies which have some kind of low cost advantage, some other local or national competitive advantage and a good management. Bad management in such an industry can kill the company.

Perfect competition – A ideal or theorotical construct more than a practical scenario. In such an industry there is no competitive advantage at all, all companies are price takers and they earn only the cost of capital. I would say very few industries would fall in this group. Brokerage firms come close to perfect competition, but still this is more theory than reality.

The way to classify an industry in anyone of the above groups is to look at the following variables
– no of companies in the industry controlling 60-70% of the sales in the industry
– Avg profitability of the companies
– Relative Market share changes between companies over a period of time

By doing the above analysis, one can figure out the level of competition and as a result have a rough idea of the long term economics of the industry.

The above analysis is just a rough guideline or a starting point of a more detailed analysis of the industry and individual companies. However by doing the above assesment, I am able to understand the intensity of competition in an industry over a period of time

The mirage of holding companies

T

I found these two investment ideas on the blog ‘Indian equity guru’.

http://equityguru.blogspot.com/2006/12/stock-idea-srf-polymers.html
http://equityguru.blogspot.com/2006/11/stock-idea-maharastra-scooters.html

Both the ideas are of holding companies. For ex: SRF polmers has a substaintial holdings of SRF. As a result if you add the value of the business to the value of holdings, the company is selling at a substantial discount to intrinsic value.

One can make a similar case for Balmer lawrie limited and BMIL. Actually I would not be surprised if there are several such stocks available. I find such ideas interesting and cannot argue against the basic logic. What I cannot get my arms around is how will the value get unlocked? There seems to be no catalyst in sight as the holding company is a means for the promoter to exercise control. As a result the holdings may never get sold. What will unlock the value then in such cases?

Somehow these ideas seem to have a mirage like quality. You can see the value out there, but may never gain from it (unless there is an underlying catalyst to unlock the value)

Evaluating past performance

E

I have been doing an analysis of my past stock picks and comparing my notes with how the stock picks have turned out over time.

I have been able to divide my picks into broadly three groups

Group A – The multibaggers. These were picks like concor, marico , asian paints, blue star etc. I had no inkling that these companies would do so well and the stock price would appreciate multiple times over the last few years when I first analysed and purchased the stocks. However on deeper analysis I found that the key reason the pick turned out well was due to a double dip I received. First the gap between the intrinsic value and the stock price closed. At the same time, these companies have been able to increase their intrinsic value through some great perfromance in the last couple of years. As a result of these two happy occurences, I have been able to get good profits

Group B – Good return stocks. These were picks like kothari products, macmillan, KVB bank etc. In case of these picks there was a narrowing of the gap between stock price and intrinsic value. As a result I was able to get decent returns as a whole. However in some cases where I was late in selling the stock, the eventual returns were lower.

Group C – The dogs. These were picks like Larsen and tubro (ouch !! see here), SSI, arvind mills etc. Each pick had its own reason for going wrong from over paying for the stock, poor performance of the business, sloppy analysis etc.

The above analysis is definitely not earth shattering and I have known it vauguely for some time. But after almost 8-9 years of buying, selling and analysing stocks, I thought of doing some analysis so as to improve my future performance.

Ofcourse the logical conclusion would be to always buy stocks in group A. However most of the stocks in that group seem to be fairly or over priced. I am finding more picks in group B. Not too exicted about it, but beats overpaying for quality stocks or picking dogs. Key point for me to remember would be to sell these stocks in time if they do not show promise of improvement in intrinsic value

Subscription

Enter your email address if you would like to be notified when a new post is posted:

I agree to be emailed to confirm my subscription to this list

Recent Posts

Select category to filter posts

Archives