Why I invest the way I do!

*** Why I Invest the way I do! ***

I thought that with the disruption we had this weekend I owed it to you to review why I invest the way I do, anyhow well it works long term. Here we go!

First of all, please don’t attempt to follow my picks, or to invest in companies just because I have. I’m not a financial advisor. And you may have a completely different personal financial situation than I have, with different amounts of assets, different amounts of debts, different family responsibilities, the whole works, and a different temperment for investing as well. And also, I make mistakes all the time! And I may change any pick the next day and not announce it until the end of the month, and if I should be ill or whatever, I may not get around to doing an end of the month summary then. You MUST make your OWN decisions based on your OWN evaluation of the companies!

Second, let me emphasize that this method of investing isn’t for everyone. If you aren’t comfortable with it you probably shouldn’t do it. Some people are more conservative and prefer value investing. There are boards for that. Others are more adventurous and risk taking and like market-timing and jumping in and out of the market. There are market-timing boards too, as well as boards for almost anything you may like (options, turn-arounds, dividends and income, leverage, whatever). What I try to do, and what this board is for, is to pick the best high growth companies we can find with the best opportunities for future growth, to crowd source information about them, and evaluations of them, and then stick with those companies as long as the story stays intact. Simple as that.

Let me now give you an idea how that has worked. Here’s a 5 year summary of my portfolio results from the beginning of 2017 until the end of 2021. Others on the board have had similar results, some a little better, some a little worse.

2017 + 84.2%
2018 + 71.4%
2019 + 28.4%
2020 +233.3%
2021 + 39.6%

That compounds to 1,886% of what my portfolio had started with in five years!!! It’s not up 88%, or up 188%. Its 1,886% of where the portfolio started The power of compounding! It’s 19 times what I started with in just five years. A 19-bagger on my entire portfolio! Not a 19-bagger on one stock in a 50 stock portfolio. A 19-bagger on the whole thing! In five years! Those are really crazy numbers, and I might not believe them either if I hadn’t seen them happen!!!

During those five years the S&P was up 112%, even with 2021’s large gain (large for the S&P). That’s up 112% compared to up 1786%!!! You can add a few percent by adding in dividends, but that doesn’t change the comparison at all.

And since we had someone recently screaming about how we should be in Value Stocks, here is how the IJS did in those five years. The IJS is an ETF that tracks the S&P 600 of Small Cap Value stocks. I’ve been following it, it feels like almost forever, to give me some comparison to value stocks. It started 2017 at 140.0 and ended 2021 at 104.5. It LOST 25% of its value over those five incredible years when my portfolio was up 1,786%. So tell me, does Value Investing still look really risk free and tempting to you?

Now, let’s go into 2022. At today’s close, when I was down 39.1% this year, I was still at 1,149% of where I started 2017. An 11 bagger and a half! I’ll take it. I always expect that after rising there will be some valleys, and indeed there have been every year. (This is a big one though).

As of today’s close the S&P was only up 92% in the same five years plus (up 92% compared with up 1,049%).

And the IJS Value ETF was DOWN 29% in those five years plus (down 29% compared with up 1,049%)

Please remember back (or if you weren’t here, look back) to the October 2019 bottom, two and a half years ago, when all those trolls showed up on our board and were telling us that our “overpriced” stocks would “NEVER see the ridiculous highs of 2019 again”, and asking why didn’t we get smart and sell out and invest in S&P ETF’s. It was pretty scary back then, and even some of our regulars were thinking we might have to wait two years before our stocks would regain their highs. It seems pretty funny now, considering many of our portfolios were up by over 200% in 2020! It’s worth keeping that in mind when trolls show up trying to get you to sell out. Because there always WILL be corrections, and our companies WILL fall temporarily, and the trolls WILL show up, usually at the botttoms. Remember to pay attention to your companies, and how their businesses are doing, and what their prospects are, rather than the stock price when they are all falling in a “market rotation” or “correction.” Our companies will come back.

Now a new subject! Why don’t I get all excited about the valuation of my companies’ stocks? Well, I’ve posted this in the past, but I’ll post it again as it seems needed. It has to do with the fact that we invest in SaaS companies which have a different and extraordinary business model, and thus traditional measures of valuation simply don’t fit for them

Some who are new to the board seem almost personally offended that I don’t calculate EV/S on any of my stocks, and that I don’t pay much attention to it, or to the fact that all our stocks usually have EV/S ratios which are very high by traditional EV/S standards.

I don’t have the answer to what is “overvalued,” but I know that traditional EV/S ratios have almost NOTHING TO DO with our companies! Our companies are profoundly different than the companies that EV/S was traditionally used for. Why? Here are some reasons:

First of all, a company with 70% to 90% gross margins is worth a much higher EV/S ratio than a company with 30% or 40% gross margins because each million dollars of sales is worth so much more to the company in take home dollars.

Just think about this for a minute. If you have 85% gross margins, a million dollars in sales is worth $850,000 to you. If you have 42% gross margins (still quite acceptable), the same million dollars in sales only brings you $420,000. Now really think about that. How can you put the same million dollars in the denominator of EV/S and expect to get a sensible comparison? Our company with an 85% gross margin is naturally worth twice the EV/S of a normal company with a 42% gross margin, other things being equal.

And a company with a 28% gross margin (believe me, there are plenty of those too, in the real world) only keeps $280,000 out of that million in revenue. How can you put the same million dollars in revenue in the denominator of EV/S for all three of those companies??? Our company with 85% gross margin is naturally worth three times the EV/S sported by the 28% gross margin company, other things being equal… But… other things aren’t equal!!!

Second. For a company that is leasing software that becomes integrated into the core of the customer’s business and has a subscription model that brings in recurring revenue, each million dollars of sales today is not just for this year. It’s for next year too, and the year after, and the year after that, and…. pretty much forever. No one, simply no one, is going to tear out a system that is core and essential to the smooth running of their business, and that would disrupt their entire business to pull out, to save a few dollars. It ain’t gonna happen folks.

Okay now, you have a million dollars of sales this year that will, for all practical purposes, be there next year, and the year after too and new sales next year will be an extra bonus added on. When you put that million dollars into the denominator of the EV/S equation, what do you have to multiply that million dollars by to take into account all those future years of recurring revenue? By three? By four? By five? That sure brings down the real EV/S for our SaaS companies, doesn’t it?

Compare it to a clothing manufacturer (just for instance). It sells 100,000 coats this year, but it starts from scratch next year. It has no idea if it will sell 100,000 coats next year, or even 50,000 (maybe another brand will be in fashion). On the other hand, our companies start with last year’s revenue locked in, and this year they add revenue from there, while that traditional company has to start all over again from zero this year. Recurring revenue on a subscription sure beats the heck out of that, doesn’t it?

Really think about that! The clothing company’s million dollars in revenue comes in just once just once. Our company’s million dollars in revenue is really at least a billion as it will probably be coming in each year for at least ten years!

At first glance that clothing company example may seem irrelevant. But no, the EV/S of maybe 3 or 4 that it carries, has helped to shape the idea in your head of what a EV/S normally is. But if the clothing company’s EV/S is 3, if one of our companies has the same revenue this year (the same S in the denominator), what should its EV/S be? Four times that? Six times that? Ten times that?

Third. But wait! Our companies also have a dollar-based net retention rate maybe averaging 125% or so. That means that this year’s sale revenue isn’t just going to recur next year, but it will be 25% bigger next year, and bigger the year after that. Well of course a company with a 125% dollar-based net retention rate of recurring and growing revenue will have a higher EV/S ratio, than a normal company with the same revenue, the same S value, down there in the denominator, which may not even be there at all next year … (duh!)

Fourth. And then there is growth rate! The average growth rate of the companies in my portfolio is probably about 80%. Well, of course a company that is consistently growing revenue at 80% is going to have very high EV/S ratios, because in just three years a consistent 80% growth rate means they will have almost six times as much revenue as they have now. That’s in just three years! Now I know that they won’t keep that 80% rate for five years, but just to illustrate the effect of compounding, in 5 years they would have about 19 times as much revenue as they have now. Clearly that S in the denominator is going to grow very rapidly even if the growth slows some.

Fifth, think about capex. A traditional company that makes things, if it doubles sales it has to build new factories, buy new machinery, hire additional workers, line up new sources of supply, etc. Our companies do it almost all over the Cloud. No factories! Almost no Capex expense except offices.

Sixth, our companies almost all have no debt. They just have cash or equivalents on hand.

Seventh, and finally, of course a company that is leasing a software solution that every enterprise on the planet needs, and that the vast majority don’t have yet, and that all those companies will keep indefinitely once they install it, will have a higher EV/S ratio than a company selling a product that anyone can put off getting a new model of, or stop buying for the duration of a recession, etc.

Here’s the key to this!!! You can live another year with your old cell phone, or computer, or car, or raincoat, or refrigerator, or kindle, or ski jacket, or your old factory, or whatever, without buying a new one next year, but once you lease this software, you keep leasing it indefinitely, no stopping for a year. If you think about that and understand it, you’ve gotten the message!

And of course, of course, of course, companies that have ALL these features are just going to have very high EV/S rates. That’s just the way it is.

And I don’t know what is high, but I will NEVER sell out just because the price has gone up, and because some people think the EV/S is too high (although I may trim if a company has become too large a part of my total portfolio). I just don’t know where these companies will ultimately end up.

Thus my decision about my confidence in a company is based on gross margin, recurring revenue, growth rates, dollar-based net retention rates, necessity to their customers, dominance in their field, my confidence in management, and how all that looks to me for the future. Traditional EV/S simply doesn’t enter the equation.

It’s not that I don’t look at price. It’s that I don’t know when they will stop rising, and I’m not a guesser.

Here’s a powerful example: On March 16, 2020, with the onset of Covid, my portfolio fell to down 16% on the year, or 84% of what I started with. One month later, on April 17th, it was up 54% from that bottom at plus 29% year to date (129/84 = 1.54)

Up 54% in a month, in stocks that were already considered “overvalued” even when they were at that Mar 16 bottom! Should I sell out and take profits? That’s what the market timers would do.

Or another month later, on May 16, when they were at up 61%, up 92% from the bottom in just two months!!! Clearly time to lock in profits and sell out!

But amazingly, if I had sold out then, and locked in a 61% ytd profit, I would have missed the next 172 points of the 233% profit I finally made in 2020. My portfolio finished up almost four times that 61% ytd profit.

No, I don’t play those games. I pick winners and stay with them.

I hope that this helps,

Saul

177 Likes

Saul -

With points 1 to 4 of your post you actually describe a method of valuation (and therefore of value investing). Only that you do in that post your reasoning and valuation in words, not in a formula (like the traditional DCF calculation etc.). So in your head - of course - clearly there is a valuation process going on. Why not trying to put that in a formula (at least your points 1 to 4) to have a standardized tool for valueing SaaS companies with respect to those first 4 points (or more) you describe?

6 Likes

With points 1 to 4 of your post you actually describe a method of valuation (and therefore of value investing). Only that you do in that post your reasoning and valuation in words, not in a formula (like the traditional DCF calculation etc.). So in your head - of course - clearly there is a valuation process going on. Why not trying to put that in a formula (at least your points 1 to 4) to have a standardized tool for valuing SaaS companies with respect to those first 4 points (or more) you describe?

Hi Said, If I made such a formula I would never look at it because it would be useless. There are so many intangibles that you are not thinking about. For instance:

ABC just partnered with AWS.
BCD’s revenue growth rate is accelerating about 3% each quarter but it’s hard to tell for how long.
CDE’s growth rate is slowing. How low will it go?
DEF’s growth rate is slowing but free cash flow is growing enormously
EFG’s RPO is large and growing faster than growth rate
FGH just signed a large new customer.
GHI just announced two new modules it can sell to customers
HIJ just made a potentially very useful acquisition
IJK announced that the new product it introduced a year ago is growing by a CAGR of 30% QoQ
JKL just gave shockingly low guidance. How should we interpret that?
KLM is now integrated into LMN
MNO’s CEO sure seems to know what he’s talking about, and seems very positive
etc
etc
etc

In other words, all those lists comparing companies by some single formula are just junk, and are meaningless, no matter how well intentioned.

Best,

Saul

48 Likes

Saul, your answer seems to confirm a suspicion I had: That your valuation process is “intuition-based”. I do not not mean that in a negative way. And I do not mean it’s not rational.

But it’s rational on a deeper, not really accessible level. “Intuition” for me simply means thinking is going on - but at a lower level, subconsciously. That your subconscious mind is using all those inputs you get, the ones you mentioned and everything else, processes them and signals in your conscious mind the result, the “buy/sell this/that”.

Without doubt your brain is superior in how it processes those signals, as shown by your results, but should I be correct this very special skill of yours unfortunately can’t be teached. It’s like a neural network, a black box where all you see is the (correct) output, caused by a certain input, without seeing how that input is processed. It works - but nobody knows why it works, what exactly is going on inside the black box.

It’s something every programmer knows, trying for numerous hours to find a bug, finally falling totally exhausted to sleep - and waking up with “Heureka, that’s it!”, knowing the solution because while sleeping the subconscious mind did solve the problem.

And that means, as you said, no formula :slight_smile:
.
.
As I just realize what I wrote above actually is a pre-conceived opinion, a judgment, more a statement than a question: May I instead simply ask: Do you think I could be correct regarding “inputs subconsciously processed”? Or do you think all of those information you mentioned are really fully consciously processed by you to come up with a result? Please believe me, this is not a trick question. I really am curious how your brain works. Your longterm results speak for themselves and I really would like to know if all that apparently superior processing of information available to everybody really is all going on consciously (I am having big problems in believing that - therefore my above “subconscious processing” hypothesis).

Sorry for such a post/question which is completely OT regarding the focus of this board. But you started to explain your thinking - and it fascinates me.

18 Likes

Saul, thank you very much for your summary. Even if I “know” most of this - it helps to remember the essentials, stay focused and not getting stuck in overthinking.

Said, I think it’s not that complicated… it almost sounds like this is some mysterious superpower ;). I for example, play chess since very young age. What do you need to be very good at chess?

1. Talent (concentration/focus, good memory, creativity, analytical skills, confidence…)
→ your biological condition aka talent should score high in the key areas. And yes, confidence is
also partly biological predetermined and very important, since it strongly influences your decision-
making.

2. Training (playing, analyzing past games to learn from mistakes, reading books, studying positions,
trying new ideas, decision-making under pressure…)
→ This is even more important than talent, maybe around 70:30. Similar to investing, it’s
impossible to get better without years and years of playing, winning, losing, making mistakes,
analyzing them and improving your own strategy.

Now to the important part: After years of playing/training, you will develop something called pattern recognition. You see a position on the chess board, and you are able to evaluate and “feel” the chances, risks and possible outcomes. This entire process of pattern recognition and application happens at a subconscious level. Example: So at first, it is very difficult to spot a mate in one (or a top company) and a lot of conscious effort is required to find it. After years of training and analyzing, it becomes second nature to spot mates (or good businesses) and you are able to find them very quick. This inlcudes also informations about the opponent, the country you are in, facial expressions and so on. All this informations, some subconscious and some consciously processed, create a picture and allow to execute the most promising move. Hopefully. :wink:

So the formula is: biological talent + training = Saul

Of course, to be at the very TOP, many things have to be in the right place. The good thing is, to be way above average it only takes dedication.

15 Likes

Said, your post is highly insightful, and buried within it are the keys to becoming a successful investor.

Saul has a way of looking at the market that is built on his own personal strengths, and because of this he is unfazed when the market goes through a down-turn. When you read his post above, you see that it is based on a rationalisation of fundamentals that he has confidence in - most likely because Saul has a naturally analytical mind and his way of thinking/understanding will also be evident in other parts of his life. So he will be “intuition based”, but in a way that is specific to Saul himself, as intuition is a sub-conscious process that draws from a person’s entire life history - billions of lines of code.

Saul has confidence in his way of investing because it is based on those billions of lines of personal code that are specific to Saul, and only Saul.

And this is the key insight - successful investors have investment strategies that are built on the foundations of their own strengths.

Saul’s strategy for Saul works for Saul because it’s an extension of who he is and how he sees the world - which means it can only work for Saul.

For everyone else, Saul’s strategy can only be viewed one-dimensionally.

They can copy what he does, but they can’t truely comprehend why he does it, and because their investment strategy is then based on someone else’s strengths rather than their own, they will constantly be in a state of apprehension.

My own personal strengths are also analytical, but they are analytical in the world of human nature and emotion. My strengths allow me to look at companies, trends, global events, shifts in thinking etc… and then project how the market will react - not as an economic entity, but as an extension of human behaviour.

Because of my own personal strengths I’m also naturally comfortable as a trader, but not as a long term investor, simply because my strengths only allow me to gauge how the market will react in the short term. This doesn’t mean I disagree with Saul’s long term approach, it just means my own personal investment approach is different because it’s built on my own personal strengths which are different to his.

I feel at ease with my own investment strategy as it’s built on the billions of lines of code of my own strengths, life history and way of thinking, just as Saul is comfortable with his, but neither of us would be comfortable trying to copy each other’s strategy as neither of us could truely comprehend them.

Said, the questions you’ve asked in your post and the way you’ve phrased them give an indication of your own strengths and way of thinking. Your questions are all based in human psychology - what are the hidden things that cause/effect certain outcomes and how can these be analysed/harnessed. The intuition behind these questions will also be evident in other parts of your life, and I suspect will also form the foundations of your own successful investment strategy.

14 Likes

Even though I have been on this board for a short time, I have seen this question about evaluation formulas come up many times. I completely agree with Saul that it is more of an art than financial science. We know billion dollar hedge funds hire PhD data scientists to dig into the financial numbers and evaluations, and also use machine learning algorithms to play the market. They would have nailed it down by now if it was so easy to come up with an accurate evaluation formula. By the way, the majority of the hedge funds with all these resources still can’t even beat the S&P 500.

It is not that easy! If EV/S ratio cannot catch the evaluation correctly for a company then it is better to ignore it instead of using it in the formula where its error can have a negative exponential impact.

Some factors are hard to put in the evaluation formula. Personal experience I can share is of the Netflix, which I bought in 2011 and a few months later it went down by 80% as it was focusing on moving to internet streaming (just like present companies are moving to the cloud) and lost dvd subscribers. I stuck with it for the long term as it was going global, providing access to global content and had no streaming competition. None of the evaluation numbers could have captured their strategy, management execution and risk taking. I did sell Netflix last year (with ~1500% return) after I started following this board and got a better understanding of SaaS companies. Also it lost its moat with new competitors. Similar story goes with Jeff Bezos Amzn, the management’s day one startup company attitude and taking many moon shots - one of them AWS is a big success. How can we capture these in the evaluation formula? These kinds of companies who create new markets are unique.

Sometimes I feel the quarterly numbers we ?see are historical numbers of the past quarter and the quarterly outlook is also based on the next half a quarter already in the past. Market values the company based on the future. Yes, quarterly numbers and outlook carry a lot of weight in our evaluation but we don’t wanna go nit-picky, as in real life we know every project doesn’t execute in perfection. As long as there is no major deviation in numbers, strategy, management execution, TAM and moats, sticking long term with the company is a good evaluation formula. Our boards NET and SNOW stock picks in my opinion are similar kinds of companies, creating new TAM, management execution and risk taking by putting out new products at higher frequency and continuing with stable long term growth (with little up and down waves). Hard to put an evaluation formula to capture all these factors.

Best,
-Vin

18 Likes

Really think about that! The clothing company’s million dollars in revenue comes in just once. Our company’s million dollars in revenue is really at least a billion as it will probably be coming in each year for at least ten years!

Robear kindly pointed out this error for me off board. It should read:

“Really think about that! The clothing company’s million dollars in revenue comes in just once. Our company’s million dollars in revenue is really at least ten million as it will probably be coming in each year for at least ten years!”

And please, let’s not continue a thread analyzing how my mind works. Write to me off-board about it if you wish. Thanks.

Best,

Saul

27 Likes

The IJS is an ETF that tracks the S&P 600 of Small Cap Value stocks… It started 2017 at 140.0 and ended 2021 at 104.5. It LOST 25% of its value over those five incredible years when my portfolio was up 1,786%. So tell me, does Value Investing still look really risk free and tempting to you?

Silvio helpfully pointed out an error in my post there. I had looked back in my monthly summary to get the start of 2017 starting price, and the $140 was correct, but I had forgotten that there was a 2 for 1 split tucked in there somewhere during those five years, so the starting price should be marked back to $70. Amazingly, even with the starting price cut in half the results of value investing were still pitiful. The above thus should read:

The Value ETF gained 49% over those five incredible years when the S&P was up 112%, and my portfolio was up 1,786%. So tell me, does Value Investing still look really enticing to you?

And as of yesterdays close it was up 38% in the five years plus.

Best

Saul

20 Likes

So tell me, does Value Investing still look really enticing to you?

But of course there’s a huge difference between, on the one hand, investing in so-called “value stocks” and, on the other hand, asking about the valuation of any stock.

8 Likes

This is very helpful, thank you. Do you also have examples of your performance during the 2008 crash and how long your recovery took?

Do you also have examples of your performance during the 2008 crash and how long your recovery took?

Read the Knowledgebase. There’s a link to it on the right panel of every page on this board. It’s in three parts. And read the Rules of the Board published every Monday!
Saul

24 Likes

Warren Buffett is the most renowned value investor and his Berkshire Hathaway has been down 50% three times in the past. BRK-B is not fully invested in stocks, it owns many companies, such as Geico, Dairy Queen, etc. If it had only stocks it would have plunged more than 50% on these occasions. All his stocks except a few are paying dividends whereas many of Saul’s companies do not have positive earnings let alone dividends.

https://jonahw.medium.com/stock-down-50-percent-buffett-you-….

2 Likes

Warren Buffett is the most renowned value investor and his Berkshire Hathaway has been down 50% three times in the past. BRK-B is not fully invested in stocks, it owns many companies… All his stocks except a few are paying dividends whereas many of Saul’s companies do not have positive earnings let alone dividends.

Let’s see how the most renowned value investor has done in the last five years and four months.

BRK-B started 2017 at 162.98 and closed yesterday at 329.58. He was up 102% in those 5 plus years, just beating the S&P by a hair.

That was up 102% compared to my portfolio’s up 1,049%, one tenth of my gain. But truly, managing that much money he can’t ever get the kind of results we get any more.

Saul

58 Likes

But truly, managing that much money he can’t ever get the kind of results we get any more.

As Buffett himself said some years back:
“If I was running $1 million today, or $10 million for that matter, I’d be fully invested. Anyone who says that size does not hurt investment performance is selling. The highest rates of return I’ve ever achieved were in the 1950s. I killed the Dow. You ought to see the numbers. But I was investing peanuts then. It’s a huge structural advantage not to have a lot of money. I think I could make you 50% a year on $1 million. No, I know I could. I guarantee that.”

https://www.yahoo.com/now/think-could-50-warren-buffett-1800…

30 Likes

That was up 102% compared to my portfolio’s up 1,049%, one tenth of my gain.

Man, I am so envious of the margin of safety you have built up…

You could experience another 50% drop from today and still be up 500% from 5 years ago…

Amazing…and for you to have posted every single month in public forum how and what you were investing in…

31 Likes