Berkshire has a moment

https://www.ft.com/content/c4b5f29e-545d-4f24-8025-0350de06c…

.?.?.?asked if his expectation of “modest” outperformance against the market has changed [since he first stated it 20 years ago] he adjusts his forecast by a single word: “very modest”. “I think this: if you want to join something that may have a tiny expectation of better [performance] than the S&P, I think we may be about the safest.” Surely, greater safety, over the cycle, will translate to higher returns? He doesn’t bite: “If we got lucky,” he says…

…If Berkshire can, over the long run, give you an extra percentage point of performance a year, then it’s a nice thing to own…

…With a market cap of three-quarters of a trillion dollars, it just doesn’t make sense to me that Berkshire can do better than a diversified large-cap index over time. But there could be multiyear periods in which Berkshire beats the index, if conditions favour its chosen exposures. There is some reason to think we might be entering such a period now…

asked if his expectation of “modest” outperformance against the market has changed

Who said this and when? Article is behind a paywall.

1 Like

from the FT Article:

And indeed, Buffett himself shares the view that it is unlikely that, over any sufficiently long period, Berkshire can beat the S&P. Here’s an excerpt from an interview that I did with him a few years ago, along with my colleagues Eric Platt and Oliver Ralph:

At the outset [of the interview] he was asked which would be the better investment to put in a child’s account — a share in Berkshire, or a share in the S&P? He did not hesitate: “I think the financial result would be very close to the same.”
. . . asked if his expectation of “modest” outperformance against the market has changed [since he first stated it 20 years ago] he adjusts his forecast by a single word: “very modest”. “I think this: if you want to join something that may have a tiny expectation of better [performance] than the S&P, I think we may be about the safest.” Surely, greater safety, over the cycle, will translate to higher returns? He doesn’t bite: “If we got lucky,” he says.
Certainly the past 20 years bear out the idea that there are structural reasons Berkshire cannot outperform.

6 Likes

“an excerpt from an interview that I did with him a few years ago, along with my colleagues Eric Platt and Oliver Ralph”:

Sorry, cannot copy more. However, I believe that if your register on the FT website, you’re entitled to a (low) number of free articles.

Astore

That Berkshire is having its moment has been discussed here a few times recently as the most likely outcome of this point of the cycle. Jim is simply pefect as to “if you need to…now is likely a good time” and such. I have nothing to gain or lose with this, so I don’t have incentives; I don’t sell. But it is most likely a good time to raise cash if needed.

On a different topic: For the record, if history prevails, the SAAS stocks will not recover as a whole their market peak for 20 years or maybe even more. Won’t be long that what is chased will be a new game and a new bunch of assets.

As mentioned before, old dealraker thinks we are in an energy super-cycle era, and that globalization is going to be far less for a while. While we in the US obsess over authoritarian rule elsewhere, there’s a bunch right here who desperately want the same type leadership in their country if it is their man at the top.

I do probability thinking, we have some here who are absolute absolutes. I think the US has a 30% chance of over-throwing elections for a while. I call it our possible Oliver Cromwell moment. In that time back then in England those that were quite sure they’d come out ahead/on top if such a coup occurred quickly realized it was hell-on-earth for them like they never imagined. Same old story thru history.

18 Likes