BRK vs SPX

YRS	BRK	S&P
----------------------
1	**22%**	1%
3	**54%**	49%
5	**97%**	91%
10	**311%**	263%
15	**355%**	279%
----------------------

* S&P includes dividends

Buffett wins again or S&P will spring back after the dust settles ? 
Either way dollar cost average. Get rich slowly.
12 Likes

But you repeatedly told us this was not the case. Do you recall Buffett’s age? Lack of innovation? I’m confused.

Mea Culpa? or are we just to ignore your previous posts?

jk

P.S (someone most likely hijacked your username!)

2 Likes

Maybe, just maybe, divi took Keynes’ advice below. Appreciate the updated comparison.

“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”

4 Likes

But you repeatedly told us this was not the case. Do you recall Buffett’s age? Lack of innovation? I’m confused.

So jumpy. Give it a few years my friend.

2 Likes

“So jumpy. Give it a few years my friend.”

Wait a FEW YEARS? Then can you reconcile posting similar comparisons EVERY 7 to 14 DAYS and why waiting more YEARS wasn’t suggest at the time? And now, we are expected to wait longer? How many more years over 15 must one wait? LOL!

Do you not recall your own preaching to the masses here?

jk

6 Likes

How many more years over 15 must one wait?

Innovative high margin businesses that execute well and solve global problems will outperform.

My recommendation is to wait for 5 years. In the meanwhile, dollar cost average.
S&P is resilient and adaptable with a long track record.

“My recommendation is to wait for 5 years. In the meanwhile, dollar cost average.
S&P is resilient and adaptable with a long track record.”

My recommendation is you shouldn’t be recommending anything. Your previously recommendations, which you chose to ignore now, may have cost good people real money. But don’t fret I’m saving the best ones for down the road.

jk.

3 Likes

Your previously recommendations, which you chose to ignore now, may have cost good people real money.

My recommendation is still to dollar cost average in S&P 500. It will outperform BRK and other equities over the next 5, 10, 15 years.

1 Like

“My recommendation is still to dollar cost average in S&P 500. It will outperform BRK and other equities over the next 5, 10, 15 years.”

Then why hang out on the Berkshire board? Helping the unwashed?

1 Like

“My recommendation is still to dollar cost average in S&P 500. It will outperform BRK and other equities over the next 5, 10, 15 years.”

Then why hang out on the Berkshire board? Helping the unwashed?

I think it’s very very unlikely to be true, but hey, it’s a testable prediction.
It falls into the realm of of valid scientific inquiry.

However, a more interesting post would cover the underlying reasoning.
The S&P 500 has never grown in value more rapidly that Berkshire has.
So it’s a prediction of a big change in affairs on the business front, or a prediction of the S&P getting continually more and more expensive for decades at a pretty substantial pace.
The predictions might well be true, but it’s aggressive.

Jim

16 Likes

However, a more interesting post would cover the underlying reasoning.

WEB will not be here in 5,10,15 years. Neither will Munger.
BRK by design has operating companies that are capital intensive, low margin (but reliable)
BRK had many duds including permanent loss of capital, and low performers: Precision, Airlines, KHC, OXY, WFC
BRK’s recent outperformance has been due to PBV expansion and macro economic conditions, not its business performance.
BRK will likely be split up because it is a convoluted mess with no core competence, brand or culture.
Ted and Todd ?

On the other end, S&P is adaptable, resilient and is led by innovative companies.
FAANGT will spring back quickly.
Dollar cost average in S&P. Get rich slowly.

3 Likes

“On the other end, S&P is adaptable, resilient and is led by innovative companies.”

Again here is mention of “innovative” the magic pixie dust.

I guess this is this only true starting from TODAY? If what you say is true, how can it be that BRK has beaten the S&P for so long? For the last 60 years has there been 0 innovation in the S&P?

j

The S&P 500 has never grown in value more rapidly that Berkshire has.

Yeah mythical “value”… so we can confidently declare never. Can we use any other quantifiable measure?

BRK will likely be split up because it is a convoluted mess with no core competence, brand or culture

While I am not expecting a split up, I am expecting post Buffett many small businesses will be sold. Whether it is revenue or profit or margin, but some threshold will be used to cull the number of businesses.

Currently Jain seems to be very content to be an operator. What if tomorrow Insurance gets a difference boss? Remember many operating companies are under Insurance, and what if that person wants to be CEO? How will that play out viz-a-viz Abel?

I don’t know how ambitious the Allegheny CEO is.

Berkshire core competency is equity investing. That is not a platform, but one man operation. That competency will be gone with Buffett. There is no “brand or culture” totally agree.

You guys are like fish asking what water is!

Sorry, I think that last reply was too pithy. I’ll try again.

“Berkshire core competency is equity investing. That is not a platform, but one man operation. That competency will be gone with Buffett. There is no “brand or culture” totally agree.”

Cough. Choke. Spit my drink out. What’d he say?!

2 Likes

When you can gather yourself and have a cup of water, I would like to hear from you, what is Berkshire culture? What is Berkshire brand? Outside of investing world Berkshire name is not even used in any of their core business.

Well, Kingy, since you like to use the diminutive, but what’s in a name, right?

I’ll start with a very well-known name, Trump, or maybe you would call him Trumpy. He’s got a brand and a few buildings and some golf courses. Does his brand make them more valuable? Now, or in the future?

What about Koch? They have a few businesses with their names on it and a few business without, Georgia Pacific, Guardian Industries, Molex, Investa. When Koch dies, should they break up the conglomerate because nobody would know who owned the non-Koch businesses? Because they don’t have a “brand.”

I mean we only have Berkshire Hathaway Home Services, the second largest real estate broker in the U.S., or thereabouts, and several insurance companies with the name. So, what? Do Geico, BNSF, Mid-America and the others get spun off when Warren dies because they don’t have the Berkshire name?

As for culture, I’ll take a company that shows up every year, puts out a comprehensible and detailed annual report, takes questions from all comers at the annual meeting and has mostly beat the S&P for most of its 50 years. Does Berkshire and its principals sometimes make mistakes? Are they human? And in a human way, they have made it possible for their companies to thrive and for they stockholders from all over the world, to be happy enough to gather in Omaha once a year to pay homage to the partners, the company and people who make up Berkshire Hathaway, 40,000 strong. You think people don’t want to see that continue? Did the United States die just because come founders died?

So, Kingy, what is “culture” to you?

18 Likes

re-write!

And in a human way, they have made it possible for their companies to thrive, and for many of their stockholders, from all over the world, 40,000 strong, to be happy enough to gather in Omaha once a year and pay homage to the partners, the company and the people who make up Berkshire Hathaway. You think people don’t want to see that continue? Did the United States die just because some founders died?

2 Likes

Trump, or maybe you would call him Trumpy. He’s got a brand and a few buildings and some golf courses. Does his brand make them more valuable?

Certainly before becoming President, his name is a brand and for that name he charged royalties. I guess probably you didn’t care, rather wanted to inject politics in to this, I guess.

several insurance companies with the name
I thought they are subsidiaries to meet various state level regulations and not necessarily selling insurance in “Berkshire” name.

Those who have strong Brand, when they buy companies, they re-brand it. Berkshire knows they don’t have a brand. The problem is with “jealous” shareholders finding/ inventing virtues that doesn’t exist.

As for culture
Again that’s not the company culture. Watch, how many people show up post Buffett.

I think beggy… you don’t know what you are talking about. When you have something real, come back.