My thoughts re valuation of our companies

My thoughts about the valuation of our companies

I was curious about what your thoughts were to the maximum limits of your valuation stock price being irrelevant. Using SHOP at 19.9 p/s, many people say this is an extremely high valuation, including myself. Does this valuation give you any hesitation when building out a position? If not at what level would you begin to hesitate due to valuation of this type of growth company, or do you use different valuation metrics entirely?

Maraj asked a good question here. I know I’ve answered it before, but I’ll take another few swings at it.

First: A shameful admission. I don’t really look at P/S ratios and couldn’t tell you the P/S ratio’s of any of my companies. Why? Consider a supermarket company that has a maybe 3% margin and a software company that has a 95% margin. That means $100 million in sales is worth $3 million to the supermarket company and $95 million to the software company. How do you compare bare P/S ratios in any meaningful way?

Second: Growth matters. Our companies are growing VERY fast. A company compounding sales growth of 60% for just three years (hard to do, I grant), would have over four times current sales and cut that P/S by a factor of four. In other words that $100 million in revenue we were talking about would grow to $410 million in just three years at that pace.

While it’s hard to do it can be done. For example, Shopify compounded 100% growth for four years, and then this last year it “slowed down” to 73%. That was $24 million, $50 million, $105 million, $205 million, $389 million, $673 million. Take a good look at those numbers! Revenue has grown 28 times in five years. That’s not 28%, or 280%! It’s 28 TIMES, a 28-bagger (that’s the power of compounding), in just five years.

Third: Our new SaaS companies are a new breed, and the accounting and evaluation metrics haven’t caught up with them yet. Look, if your company manufactures cell phones, washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, railroad engines, or microchips, you sell one this year and next year you have go out and sell a new one, with no great guarantee that you will, or that your customer will need a new one. If you have $100 million in revenue this year, who knows what your revenue will be next year? On the other hand, when our SaaS company signs up a new customer, for all practical purposes, it’s forever! We only see one quarter’s revenue, but the customer is leasing a program that becomes so intertwined with their business that it becomes more and more difficult to extract it and switch to another provider.

Fourth: In fact, most customers will sign up for new services next year, so most of our SaaS companies have dollar based retention rates of 120% to 130%. That means that that $100 revenue becomes $120 or $130 million next year, just from existing clients, before they even sign up any new clients. That’s a 20% to 30% growth rate “guaranteed,” before the first new client signs up!

Fifth: Then there is deferred revenue. This is money paid for a year (or two years) in advance, but which can only be recognized quarter by quarter. It doesn’t mean any additional revenue in the long run, but having the money in the bank, and resultant positive cash flow, means the SaaS company won’t have to go out and raise more money unless it wants to. It also means that those customers really are signed up forever if they are willing to pay in advance to get a slightly reduced lease rate.

Sixth: Let’s look at sales and marketing expense. If you sell a refrigerator, a bicycle, a railroad car, an oil drilling rig, your sales and marketing expense, with its salaries and commissions, goes into more or less the same quarter where you recognize your sales revenue, and it makes total sense. That enables you to see how well your company is doing.

But you remember that I said, when talking about SaaS companies, that the accounting and evaluation metrics haven’t caught up with them yet. As I understand it, when a SaaS company makes a sale, the sales and marketing expense, with its salaries and commissions, goes into the quarter when the sale is made, but only one-fortieth of the revenue that will come from that sale over the next 10 years with very little further S&M expense, is recognized in that quarter. (One quarter’s worth out of forty quarters).

Probably a lot less than one-fortieth actually, as the customers usually spend more each year (see dollar based retention rates above), maybe one-one hundredth, but we can be conservative and think of it as one-fortieth.

Seven: So guess what? Duh…! The S&M expenses dwarf the revenue at first, and the SaaS companies show big “losses” according to current accounting. How could they not if all the sales expenses are counted, but only 1% to 2% of the total revenue from the sale is counted.

As opposed to the companies selling bicycles or oil rigs, current accounting does NOT give you an idea of how well your company is doing. As I’ve heard more than one SaaS company CEO say something like, “We’d be crazy not to spend every penny we can of S&M to sign up new customers now, before anyone else signs them up, because they will be our customers forever.”

So when people make snarky remarks about our “loss-making” companies, remember that they may not entirely understand what is going on.

I hope that this helps.

Saul

For Knowledgebase for this board,
please go to Post #17774, 17775 and 17776.
We had to post it in three parts this time.

A link to the Knowledgebase is also at the top of the Announcements column
that is on the right side of every page on this board

143 Likes

Fifth: Then there is deferred revenue. This is money paid for a year (or two years) in advance, but which can only be recognized quarter by quarter. It doesn’t mean any additional revenue in the long run, but having the money in the bank, and resultant positive cash flow, means the SaaS company won’t have to go out and raise more money unless it wants to. It also means that those customers really are signed up forever if they are willing to pay in advance to get a slightly reduced lease rate.

Warren Buffett figured this out a long time ago. When you sell insurance you accumulate a fund to pay for future losses, it’s called a “float.” This also is the case for any prepaid service like phone cards, supermarket coupons, security deposits and so on.

As opposed to the companies selling bicycles or oil rigs, current accounting does NOT give you an idea of how well your company is doing.

The GAAP straightjacket will give weird results but no one says you can’t do proper accounting for internal use.

What you are saying is that it is important to understand the business model, not just the dry GAAP numbers which can be very misleading. I most certainly agree!

Denny Schlesinger

12 Likes

Consider a supermarket company that has a maybe 3% margin and a software company that has a 95% margin. That means $100 million in sales is worth $3 million to the supermarket company and $95 million to the software company. How do you compare bare P/S ratios in any meaningful way? - Saul

This is horribly misleading. It confuses profits strictly on revenues versus profits gleaned from operations (operating margins) versus the net profit margin of a business as a whole.

Let’s examine these differences in a bit more detail:

https://www.accountingtools.com/articles/the-difference-betw…

The operating margin measures the percentage return generated by the core activities of a business, while the profit margin measures the percentage return on all of its activities. The key difference is the non-operating activities that are not included in the measurement of the operating margin; these activities typically include financing transactions, such as interest income and interest expense. They may also include the returns generated by discontinued operations.

When evaluating a business, the operating margin reveals whether the core operations are capable of generating a return, which is especially evident when tracked on a trend line. This information can also be compared to the operating margins of competitors, to see how well a business is performing within an industry without the effects of financing considerations.

The profit margin is of more use when evaluating an entity in its entirety, which includes both its operating results and financing activities. This result should also be tracked on a trend line, to evaluate performance over the long term. The profit margin tends to fluctuate more than the operating margin, since the profit margin also includes financing effects that can vary substantially as interest rates change.

Here’s where the rubber meets the road: SHOP’s gross profit on revenue in 2017 was $380M. But net income was a LOSS of $40M.

Over the course of 4 years, SHOP’s gross profit on revenue grew from $62M to $380M. Most impressive. That’s what everyone raves about.

But, net income FELL from a loss of $22M to to a LOSS of $40M. In other words, the net losses have been INCREASING. SHOP, as a business, has no profits. Currently, SHOP sports an operating margin of -7.93% and a profit margin of -5.94%.

26 Likes

This is horribly misleading. It confuses profits strictly on revenues versus profits gleaned from operations (operating margins) versus the net profit margin of a business as a whole.

It is only confusing as it is taken to the extremes. Very few companies are operating at 95% GM and supermarkets don’t carry just 3% GM. That is generally close to their net income.

But Saul’s point is certainly valid. Let’s use some maybe more realistic numbers. Gross Margins for a SaaS company of 80% and Gross Margins of a grocer of 25%. The grocer has no real way to cut costs year in and year out or not to the degree that it will be significant. It may have a point or two impact on net income.

But because SaaS companies have front loaded costs in R&D and S&M primarily, net income will be constrained in the short term with incredible potential growth for the future as those cost decrease as a percentage of revnue.

Saul’s point is there is incredible leverage in the SaaS model and almost none in the other case.
That’s why the companies are valued as richly as they are.

A.J.

26 Likes

Saul,

First I would like to say thank you for your long and thought out response. I know it takes a long time to write out such a response so thank you for taking them time.

First: A shameful admission. I don’t really look at P/S ratios and couldn’t tell you the P/S ratio’s of any of my companies. Why? Consider a supermarket company that has a maybe 3% margin and a software company that has a 95% margin. That means $100 million in sales is worth $3 million to the supermarket company and $95 million to the software company. How do you compare bare P/S ratios in any meaningful way?

Very good point. Gross margins are definitely an important consideration when using P/S valuations. It would be like comparing apples to oranges to compare two companies with drastically different gross margin numbers.
If you don’t mind me asking… Do you have another way you value unprofitable high growth SAAS companies? Maybe it is more of a gut type feeling? Without a valuation method wouldn’t it be a bit like flying blind?

I am about to go for a walk so my mind can absorb and process today’s learnings. I will need to read your post again a bit later so I can process.

Best,
Soth

1 Like

If you don’t mind me asking… Do you have another way you value unprofitable high growth SAAS companies? Maybe it is more of a gut type feeling? Without a valuation method wouldn’t it be a bit like flying blind?

Maraj, you are keeping me working! Your question is: How do I evaluate these high growth SaaS companies that are still showing accounting losses because of current methods of accounting for sales and marketing expenses and revenue. Let me think about that:

I look for rapidly growing revenue. In the KB I said that I was looking for at least 20% per year, but that’s actually pretty outdated for our SaaS companies as most of them are growing revenue at incredible rates of 40% to 70% per year.

By definition, all of our SaaS companies have recurring revenue, but I generally look for a dollar based net retention rate of 120% or more. That means to me that customers really like their product and buy more each year. One of the reasons I exited Hubspot was that the CFO said he “thought” they were “at 100%”. I thought that was weak.

I look for an accounting loss as a percentage of revenue that is at reasonable levels, and falling. I remember exiting HDP some time ago because their losses seemed so large. In checking now I see that for 2017, their GAAP losses were still 78% of revenue. That’s a bunch. And especially with slowing revenue growth.

I look for plenty of cash and no net debt.

I prefer low capex requirements. Most SaaS companies qualify.

I look for a leader in a new field, or a disrupter in an older field, not just an also-ran in a rapidly growing field.

I look for companies that are founder led, and most of these young SaaS companies meet that criteria, and have plenty of insider ownership.

I look for a company that has a long way to grow. A company that I can hope will at least triple or quadruple. I’d never buy a stock at $45 hoping it will get to $55. I wouldn’t buy a stock at $45 unless I though it could get to $150 (at least). So I’m looking for a long runway. What I mean is an addressable market that’s so big that my company’s share of it allows them to keep growing for the foreseeable future. (Most of our companies are only a couple of percent into their addressable markets, which are also growing).

Then there’s that gut issue that you referred to in your question. I need to feel comfortable owning the company. I’ve never managed to feel comfortable with Wix, for instance, with a model of giving away free websites to people and running them with the hope that a tiny percentage of them will sign up for paid services. I know they are doing well so far, but it’s just not my thing.

It’s not really a “company” criteria but I also look for companies that are easy for me to follow, and where I can read good discussions of issues. That usually means ones that are followed by the MF, by people on our board, or by Bert Hochfeld. I do sometimes buy stocks that don’t meet that criteria if I find them first through some other miscellaneous source. This criteria does partially rule out a lot of foreign companies though.

I hope this helps.

Saul

73 Likes

If you don’t mind me asking… Do you have another way you value unprofitable high growth SAAS companies? Maybe it is more of a gut type feeling? Without a valuation method wouldn’t it be a bit like flying blind?

Sauls’s objection was the diversity of gross margins, a more accurate objection is that you can’t compare across a diversity of business models but that objection goes away when you compare like businesses. Like most metrics, P/S comes from doing business. You try to figure out how much to pay for a business you’d like to buy. Often revenue was your only trusted metric and the only one the current owner is willing to disclose. If you are familiar with the business you know what the expected margins are. When I had my consulting firm I knew that 50% of revenue would go to paying the consultants, 20% to sales, 20% for SG&A and that would leave 10% for profits. From that you can figure out the minimum revenue necessary to make it a going business. Buying a business is an investment and the “true” measure is P/E. But lacking earnings you need a proxy. Used judiciously P/S can be that proxy because it lets you model a potential P/E ratio.

A bigger risk from relying on P/S is that you are buying a company that is not yet self sustaining, in Gorilla speak, it has not yet “Crossed the Chasm.” Crossing the chasm is one of the biggest hurdles and the one risk that kills most startups. A few years back I found a very interesting and promising knee replacement robot company. It looked like it was on its way to glory and the chasm ate it! I used P/S in my presentation:

September 6, 2011
The ‘Gorilla’ Case for MAKO Surgical (MAKO)

What I find an important comparative metric is Price to Sales: ISRG 9.63 vs. MAKO 20.55 (at the time this was written some time ago). This tells me that MAKO might be 30 to 50% overpriced but it is also growing much faster which might be the mitigating factor.

https://softwaretimes.com/files/the+gorilla+case+for+mako+.h…

Use P/S wisely, it’s not an accurate measuring tool.

Denny Schlesinger

4 Likes

How do you compare bare P/S ratios in any meaningful way?

While I agree that the P/S ratio will tell you little when comparing companies across industries, I find this metric to be very useful when comparing companies within the same industry. I also use as a rough proxy for value when attempting to value companies that have no profits/cash flow.

I think that Amazon is a good example.

Amazon sports a P/S ratio of 4.2. Comparing that number to Walmart (0.51) or Apple (3.5) is largely meaningless. However, if you compare it to a company that has a similar business model to Amazon like Wayfair (1.3) or JD.com (0.93) can show you that the market is paying 3x to 4x more for a dollar of Amazon’s sales when compared to Wayfair and JD.

That’s a pretty stunning fact when you consider that W and AMZN sport similar gross margins (21% and 23%, respectively). JD’s lower valuation makes more sense when you realize that its gross margin of 13% is much lower than AMZN’s. This tells me that W is the better value right now if you want to buy into an e-commerce company.

Moreover, take a look at this chart that shows Amazon’s P/S ratio over the last decade.

https://media.ycharts.com/charts/ff9bec3a5abe159fc47e43e78dd…

You can see that Amazon traded below 1x sales in 2008 (depths of the financial crisis), which represented a tremendous buying opportunity. It has regularly traded between 2.0x - 2.5x sales and when it has dipped below 2x sales it has generally been a good time to buy. The tremendous run over the last 2 years has pushed its valuation to a 10-year high of 4.2x sales (it traded as high as 38x sales during the bubble in the late 90s).

This tells me that Amazon is being very richly valued at the moment and it’s a probably a good time to trim your position instead of adding more (this is what I’ve been doing in my own portfolio recently).

Of course, there’s also the counter-argument that Amazon deserves a higher valuation now because Prime just crossed 100 million members and AWS is growing like crazy and highly profitable. There’s also the new optionality of entering healthcare/banking industries.

No metric will give you a perfect read on a business, but I do find the P/S ratio to be very useful. I think there is a place in an investors toolbox for this metric.

Brian

24 Likes

This tells me that W is the better value right now if you want to buy into an e-commerce company.

As you say further down, Walmart does not have a cloud offering like Amazon does which means that Amazon and Walmart are not entirely in the same business.

Denny Schlesinger

2 Likes

Use P/S wisely, it’s not an accurate measuring tool.

Denny Schlesinger

No measure as a standalone seems to be 100% accurate in the stock market.

But I still maintain that the inherent fallacy in what Saul has posted in this thread, is that he doesn’t give adequate consideration of stocks being overbought. It is simply a “who cares if the P/S is 24, the revenue is growing by 50% YoY”…that is not backed up by history…and it is NEVER different this time…never.

Let’s just look at you example with MAKO vs ISRG during the time frame from Sept 6, 2011 through when it was bought out by Stryker on Sept 25, 2013. You noted that the P/S was dramatically higher for MAKO than ISRG as in your usual excellent historical post.

Had Stryker NOT bought MAKO, the return during your 2 years of holding was -45%!

Since Stryker saved the day with the buy-out on Sept 25th, 2013, you got an amazing 80% premium to previous day shares such that your return over that same 2 year holding period was -20%!

Compare that to ISRG in that same period which returned -2%…and of course gone on to be a triple since then!

The better investment would have been ISRG without question…just in the time frame selected at MAKO buyout.

Take a look at that chart in this link:

https://www.historicalstockprice.com/mako-historical-stock-p…

Look at those radical moves in stock price…50% slices…that is what I have been saying about overbought stocks.

If we are holding very high P/S stocks in the setting of slowing revenue guidance…should that guidance materialize…you think it will be different this time???

I have provided this board with actual data…actual studies…ignore them if you wish. But I think Saul has a greater responsibility than most to be very clear on holding these high risk stocks (very high P/S), because many of his followers may not be aware that these particular stocks can act in very violent price swings.

First: A shameful admission. I don’t really look at P/S ratios and couldn’t tell you the P/S ratio’s of any of my companies. Why? Consider a supermarket company that has a maybe 3% margin and a software company that has a 95% margin. That means $100 million in sales is worth $3 million to the supermarket company and $95 million to the software company. How do you compare bare P/S ratios in any meaningful way?

Saul

Come on Saul…this simply cannot be the first time in history that P/S didn’t matter in stock valuations…I have already acknowledged that overbought stocks can stay overbought for quite some time…but eventually, the data is what the data is…especially if the numerous companies that have guided lower in 2019 gives us a clue of a more general slowdown however temporary it may be.

Stocks can be wildly overbought…it is an unassailable fact.

22 Likes

While I agree that the P/S ratio will tell you little when comparing companies across industries, I find this metric to be very useful when comparing companies within the same industry. I also use as a rough proxy for value when attempting to value companies that have no profits/cash flow.

Brian:

Yes I agree with you, the P/S comparison metric is most helpful within the same industry.

But I also use it as a same company yearly comparison, using that company’s historical P/S over previous years as detailed by Morningstar or whatever service one prefers.

Using ISRG as an example and clicking on the valuation tab, one can see the average P/S of all years in retrospect:

http://www.morningstar.com/stocks/xnas/isrg/quote.html

Its current P/S at 16…is its highest by far going back to 2008!

And as in Denny’s example in 2011, it was 11…again, at the highest range in that time frame…return over subsequent 2 years…-2%.

4 Likes

Since my knowledge of accounting seems to be outdated, I have to sit on the sidelines on this friendly disagreement. My questions are these:

  1. If SHOP isn’t allowed to record all their sales, where is that cash going in the financial statements?

  2. SHOP’s revenue growth, while outstanding, is almost identically matched by Operating costs. While this makes sense for a new company, at some point the two entries must diverge for the company to remain relevant (and solvent.) The exception seems to be AMZN, but they’re out to dominate the world. When will this divergence begin?

  3. When (not if, but WHEN) the economy does slow down, if SHOP is still matching revenue growth with growth in expenses and employee count, what’s the game plan then? To start laying off employees by the hundreds probably wouldn’t win any popularity contests.

  4. I ran a company with up to 27 employees for several years and did my own books. Do I have to go back to college and learn more accounting? Is there a ‘trick’ to understanding the revised requirements, or is this just another version 2.0 of the game Guess?


I suspect that the answer to my first question might be short-term investments; is this correct? I guess I need to dig in some new reading to understand the new requirements. It seems it would make more sense to recognize the sales as income offset by a liability for the remainder of the term for which the products need to be serviced, kind of like is common for warranty expense for manufacturers. Anyway, short-term investments have grown to 800m, assets doubled in 2017, as did book value and as did short-term investments. Meanwhile the price has risen 4x.

It seems to me that the “new” metrics require an extra focus on transparency on the part of management to investors. Otherwise, I sometimes feel like I’m investing in black boxes and I don’t do black boxes. Since our example happens to be SHOP, I might mention that Luke’s focus doesn’t seem to include transparency. Maybe he doesn’t “do” transparency like I don’t “do” black boxes.

Dan

4 Likes

1. If SHOP isn’t allowed to record all their sales, where is that cash going in the financial statements?

Wrong assumption! They do record ALL their sales. It’s just that some of it is “NOT yet earned” so it’s deferred. The cash goes on the Cash account as usual. It’s the per contra entry that changes from “Revenue” (earned) to a holding account “Deferred revenue” (not yet earned) which, in time, will be moved to “Revenue” (earned) or it’s reverted if the customer cancels.

Denny Schlesinger

8 Likes

Come on Saul…this simply cannot be the first time in history that P/S didn’t matter in stock valuations…I have already acknowledged that overbought stocks can stay overbought for quite some time…but eventually, the data is what the data is…especially if the numerous companies that have guided lower in 2019 gives us a clue of a more general slowdown however temporary it may be.

Stocks can be wildly overbought…it is an unassailable fact.


If i recall from either the KB (I believe) Saul did in fact bail on high-flyers in early 2000, escaping some of the pain many of us felt. He may not have used P/S, but whether it was a “gut feeling” or simply that he had an exit strategy, he got out.

I think the exit strategy is more important than P/S, only because I think P/S will be dictated by the market conditions a bit. Are you hoping to make 3x, 4x, 5x, 10x returns? What period of time?

If you have a stock position that quadruples in 8 weeks time, do you perhaps take some/all off the table as it was an extremely profitable move and there could likely be a pullback and/or you could reinvest the funds in new stocks you have been targeting?

I will say that I do think P/S matters to a point, when viewed with FCF, growth rate, client retention rate, and TAM. If the numbers in those categories aren’t strong, then the P/S can seem unsustainable to me. Biotech would be different as they are so non-linear with drug trials/breakthroughs.

Dreamer

4 Likes

you are keeping me working!

Saul,

Thanks again for your time and effort put in to answering my questions. You added some good bits of information that will be good for me to think on. We all over time develop our own investing methods and I recognize the importance of always challenging ones ways of thinking to become a better investor. I will give you a break from my questions for now and digest some of the answers you have provided.

Best,
Maraj

1 Like

Use P/S wisely, it’s not an accurate measuring tool.

Denny,

Well said. P/S is a great tool though like any tool must be used appropriately. One thing I like about P/S as a valuation metric is that it is much more difficult to manipulate aside from deferred revenue which makes me kind of nervous. If you become familiar with using P/S and learn to account for other factors such as margins it can be an amazingly powerful tool. Sometimes the earnings numbers are so manipulated between GAAP and NON-GAAP they can be hard to trust with some companies. One case in point is the share based compensation which really seem to do a good job of muddying the earnings numbers. Another metric I like that not many companies seem to use are bookings numbers. What is the actual dollar amount the company received in bookings that quarter vs revenues.

One company I follow and own a bit of which reports/uses bookings numbers quite regularly is a small company called Cambium Learning (ABCD). It is a very interesting SAAS like business for K-12 education software which is in the final legs of a turnaround generating nice cashflows.

Oh how I remember Mako. :smiley: That was so many years ago and I remember almost getting burned pretty bad on this company and was saved by an acquisition. I learned a lot of things from this company including always being comfortable with the business and its valuation BEFORE buying. I also learned to do your own research always and don’t just buy a good story.

Best,
Maraj

4 Likes

Hi Brian

re… Amazon sports a P/S ratio of 4.2. Comparing that number to Walmart (0.51) or Apple (3.5) is largely meaningless. However, if you compare it to a company that has a similar business model to Amazon like Wayfair (1.3) or JD.com (0.93) can show you that the market is paying 3x to 4x more for a dollar of Amazon’s sales when compared to Wayfair and JD.

That’s a pretty stunning fact when you consider that W and AMZN sport similar gross margins (21% and 23%, respectively). JD’s lower valuation makes more sense when you realize that its gross margin of 13% is much lower than AMZN’s. This tells me that W is the better value right now if you want to buy into an e-commerce company.

Whilst comparing P/S across industries is misleading, also even in the same industry it is misleading to compare different business models. Comparing P/S when different companies have different definitions of sales is dangerous e.g. comparing GMV of Ali Baba or any other ecommerce company vs actual revenues generated leads to very different values.

Ant

when talking about SaaS companies, that the accounting and evaluation metrics haven’t caught up with them yet. As I understand it, when a SaaS company makes a sale, the sales and marketing expense, with its salaries and commissions, goes into the quarter when the sale is made, but only one-fortieth of the revenue that will come from that sale over the next 10 years with very little further S&M expense, is recognized in that quarter.

Saul, I could be wrong, but companies can capitalize marketing expenses. I think the reason SaaS companies do not/ cannot capitalize SGA because most of the SGA expense doesn’t translate into sales.

If there are accounting/ tax experts out there, can you clarify?

Hi Saul,

I’m new to the boards but have taken some time to browse through the KB and definitely hope I ain’t breaking any rules here!

Appreciate your thoughts on this thread. You have explained very clearly your criteria in picking strong, high-growth businesses. I think good investments look at two things (i) fundamentals, and (ii) valuation. No matter how good a business and how fast it’s growing, if it’s over-valued then it may not be a sound investment.

You made a lot of sense in pointing out that the current methods (undertaken by analysts) of valuing a company have not caught up to new business models (your post was 3 years ago but to an extent that is still true today), especially in a ‘new field’. This leads to many hi-growth Saas companies posting results that are always surprising to the upside, perhaps because not many are able to comprehend the rate of growth for these strong Saas businesses.

However, it’d appear that increasingly, investors are starting to appreciate this. This is evident in the high multiples that some of these stocks are trading at, as well as the differential in multiples between a “decelerating growth” vs. “accelerating growth” company - CRWD and ZS comes to mind with the latter trading at almost twice the multiple of the former.

It’d then seem that the high growth expectations are priced in, and in order for the stock prices to grow, the companies would have to keep exceeding expectations, in more ways than one.

My question is therefore:

How then, do you take this into account? How do you choose not just good businesses to invest in, but those that can keep exceeding market expectations? In the past, it could be that these businesses were “misunderstood” and market was under valuing them. But to what extent do you think this still stands true today, and especially across the Saas stocks that this board discusses?

P/S: You wrote a post on a final factor which you missed out in the original post, which was ‘misunderstood stocks’. Yet how do we find such misunderstood stocks? Should we look at trading multiples or is it something more subtle?

And thank you once again for this valuable resource you’ve created. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

9 Likes

I don’t know why you think that Saul should be offering an opinion on this, especially considering what the KB says and what the rules of the board are.

The one question here that has a clear answer is:

“keep exceeding market expectations”

Well, yes, they ALL do. I suggest going through Jamin Ball’s database. Go back to 2020 to see the growth expectations for 2021. Hilarious! The entire SaaS cohort has been crushing it. Not just the few companies whose stocks did well in 2021.

One day, we will look back and figure the valuations out. While we are into it, it won’t happen. Nobody has a good hold for what SPY or Big Tech valuations should be nowadays let alone SaaS.

For example, TMF tells us that their internal research shows that long-term returns are capped by growth rate. This is very interesting when applied to MSFT over 30 years. It kinda works on a very big scale and if it is right then MSFT is more overvalued than many of the companies discussed here (except NET).

Most people are trying to make sense of ever-changing realities by finding a cheap parallel with a past situation. That will mostly prove futile: it is not history but a desperate attempt to find certainty when none exists by assuming ceteris paribus when the ceteris sure ain’t paribus.

If you ask me, this is the “secret sauce” of Saul’s approach: humans strive to order a chaotic world (make sense of it, find certainties). Saul, otoh, thrives within the chaos by focusing on the only thing he can control. The safety net is not in a valuation but in selling the moment the company under-performs or even just stops excelling at the highest level. This is my take anyway.

As for market melt ups and melt downs, if February was one, then it was certainly not the worst the market has seen. Time will tell.

35 Likes