Showing posts with label value investing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label value investing. Show all posts

February 15, 2009

Buffett's Biggest Mistake

This article originally appeared on The Div-Net Feb8 2009
Much has been written about the success of Warren Buffett, but little on his failures. I think a great deal can be learned by analyzing the failures of successful people. By studying these failures hopefully we can avoid them ourselves.

The Deal

Buffett purchased preferred shares in US Airways in the early 1990's, and later remarked that this was one of his biggest mistakes. Now before getting to far into this it is worthwhile to comment that Buffett did in fact end up making a profit on his holdings of US Airways but Buffett certainly cannot claim credit for this. In his own words:

“Two changes at the company coincided with its remarkable rebound: 1) Charlie and I left the board of directors and 2) Stephen Wolf became CEO. Fortunately for our egos, the second event was the key...” Warren Buffett, Bershire Hathaway Letter 1997.

A few years after purchasing Buffett had pretty much written off the investment and had tried to sell out of the stock numerous times at a substantial discount. The investment had essentially become out of control and Buffett wanted out. Luckily he wasn't able to sell until sometime later when the company had started to rise again.

What Went Wrong?

So what did Buffett do so wrong? Lets look at the principals that Buffett uses for analyzing an investment:

“Charlie and I look for companies that have a) a business we understand; b)favorable long term economics c)able and trust worthy management d) a sensible price tag.” Berkshire Letter to Shareholders 2007

Understandable Business

Looking from the outside the airline business is fairly easy to understand. Money is made by moving customers and packages from one location to another. But behind the scenes the airline business is a huge gamble with 183 airlines having gone bankrupt since 1978. So much of the business is frozen in the assets in the business that any turn in the economy can destroy it over night.

Sustainable Competitive Advantage

Part of the reason that so many airlines have gone out of business is that consumer's are essentially unable to determine the difference between one airline and another. The planes are all the same make and model, you leave from the same airports, the pilots are all trained by the same schools and military, the food is very similar and they show the same movies. For the consumer in most cases it comes down to a question of price- who can get me there cheaper. Did US Airways have a way to keep their costs under any better control than their competition? No, unfortunately they shared several of the same unions as other airlines and were being charged the same airport fees as others also. It is difficult then to see the sustainable competitive advantage that US Airways had.

Able & Trustworthy Managers

Within a year of purchasing the preferred shares in United Airways the CEO Ed Colodny had been replaced and the stock price had gone into a deep dive. While Buffett still remarks that he has the utmost respect for Colodny he obviously could not get the job done and was on his way out as Buffett was coming in. In terms of Able then US Airways appears to fail this criteria.

Bargain Price

A bargain is only a bargain if you get something of value. While the preferred divided Buffett was to receive was an appealing 9.25% he was unable to collect that for 2 years. Several other ratios were also appealing; if the market teaches value investors anything its that sometimes things appear cheap because they, in fact, garbage.

Analysis Conclusion

Buffett failed to enforce his own rules of selection and got wrapped up in a bad decision. As he put it:

“I liked and admired Ed Colodny, the company's then-CEO, and I still do. But my analysis of USAir's business was both superficial and wrong. I was so beguiled by the company's long history of profitable operations, and by the protection that ownership of a senior security seemingly offered me, that I overlooked the crucial point: USAir's revenues would increasingly feel the effects of an unregulated, fiercely-competitive market whereas its cost structure was a holdover from the days when regulation protected profits. These costs, if left unchecked, portended disaster, however reassuring the airline's past record might be.” 1996 Letter to Shareholders, Warren Buffett

What Can We All Learn From This?

Buffett has a good system, when he settles on an investment choice he writes down the reasons that he feels it is a good investment. If he can't persuade himself to buy based entirely on what he writes down on the paper then he walks. This would have been one of those times he should have looked more carefully at the paper.

We can all learn from this mistake; do your homework and, most importantly, stick to your principals. If you have rules for investments make sure you are sticking to them. What went wrong here then is that Buffett stopped using his rules and veered off the track- don't make the same mistake in your investing.

January 18, 2009

Stock Analysis Methanex

Originally published on: Div-Net
After much searching I found a stock screener for Canadian stocks (more on this in another post). I was able to assemble a Graham style screener with the following criteria:



  • Exchange TSX
  • P/E less than 15
  • Dividend Yield > 3.5
  • Average EPS > 33%
  • Revenue > $550M
  • Current Ratio > 2
  • Price/Book Ratio less than 1.5
Up popped two companies one of which is Methanex (MX-T). Showing up on the screener is not sufficient to merit my investment. So here is the abridged version of my analysis. Before diving in though I am compelled to say that I never analyze a company with the intent of buying and selling it within a few months. Also please, please this is my analysis any investment you make should supplement what I present here and possibly involve consulting your own investment consultant.

Company Intro

Methanex is in the business of extracting and shipping methane (surprise). Methane is the central component in natural gas (about 87% by volume). Its principal use therefore is in heating and energy production in addition to a number of industrial uses.

Company Fundamentals

  • P/E ratio 3.12
  • Yield 5.69%
  • Average EPS Growth Rate 650%- only 6 yrs available here are the exact numbers:
  • EPS 3.63 (2007), 4.4(2006), 1.39(2005), 1.95(2004), 0.06(2003), 0.18(2002)
  • Growth Rate -17.5%(2007), 216.55%(2006), -28.72%(2005), 3150%(2004), -66.67%(2003)
  • Avg EPS 5yr growth rate 86.3%
  • Revenue $2250.99M (2007)
  • Current Ratio 2.79 ($988.59M / $354.42M) See here for how this was calculated.
  • Price/Book =.76
  • Return on assets 12.92
  • Return on Capital 2007 1.47 ($2266521 /($2869899 - $1335354))

Revenue Looks solid and continues to grow.

Interesting pattern here.

Analysis of General Market

As Methanex essentially trades in a commodity it is worthwhile to look at the overall health of the industry:


Data collected from: http://www.methanex.com/products/documents/MxAvgPrice_Dec232008.pdf

We see then that generally last year was a good year for the sales of methane with an average strike price of $1.65 compared to the year before of $1.42. There is some cause for concern though with the January prices receding back to $.70, a price not seen since December 2003.

Understanding How the Company Came to be Cheap

  • Working with Argentina: Reading the company's financial statements one can see that a large part of the business in based in Chile. Chile has, in the past, been refining Argentinian gas. Argentina though has for the past few years blocked the export of gas due to concerns over a possible shortage within its own borders. As a result Methanex claims that its plants in Chile ran at around 60% of max production. Reading some more on this it appears Chile has made great efforts to make itself fully independent of Argentinian resources over the last few years and should continue to do so in the future. One news story quoted a senior Chilean government representative as saying they would be gas independent of Argentina by the end of 2008. As such we should expect that this 60% should grow steadily in the future closer to the company average of 87.1% it has been running over the last 10 yrs.
  • Refinery in New Zealand: Methanex has a refinery in New Zealand after having fired it up earlier this year they appear to have shut it down again this quarter. This news appear to have scared off some investors but in my opinion this appears to be just a prudent business decision based on market conditions. In reviewing Methanex's financial statements starting and stopping facilities appears to be a regular activity with a plant in Canada currently offline.
  • Softening in the Price: As we can see from the chart above the price of methanol has dropped off substantially for January of 2009.
  • Global Downturn: Every area has seen a downturn over the last few months.
  • Possible End of Year Capital Gains Losses: As we are at the end of the tax year investors tend to sell more than they buy so as to assume the necessary tax losses.

Other Opinions on Methanex

President Lincoln believed in surrounding himself with people who did not necessarily agree with his opinion. I believe this is one of the best ways to test your research. I would encourage you to read the following, please keep in mind that some of these links refer to the American stock, not the Canadian so prices targets will differ:

Summary Comments

Negative

  • Methanex was incorporated in 1992- traditionally I like to see a company with a longer history.
  • Methanex started paying a dividend in 2003 so the history of a long consistent dividend is not there.
  • The Methane market has gone soft-like everything else.
  • Methanex is likely to report negative results for the year.

Positive

  • Methanex has never decreased or canceled a dividend it has also raised its dividend each year since inception by an average of 21.2% (usually in the second quarter of the year).
  • Methanex has been buying back its own stock since 2004.
  • The issues in Argentina appear to be coming to a conclusion with the Chilean government stating it would not be dependent upon Argentinian gas by the end of 2008.
  • While industry is the largest consumer of electricity and a global downturn will decrease residential energy needs will most certainly be a constant.

Disclosure

At the time of writing the author is in the process of purchasing MX.

Have an opinion on this stock, please leave a comment would love to hear from you.

December 23, 2008

The Right Investment Tools For the Job

Value Investor Toolbox“Give us the tools and we will finish the job.”
Winston Churchill
The evaluation of companies was once a very laborious exercise. Information about historic earnings and historic pricing information involved significant research and compilation. Today that effort is significantly reduced, thankfully there are numerous sources one can access to retrieve sets of desired information. Choosing just one source in all these options is often difficult though. Today we are going to have a look at some of the tools I use in analyzing companies I would love to hear so of your feedback and suggestions on other tools you use.

Tool 1: SEC Data

The Security and Exchange Department regulates that members of companies submit filings on buying and selling that they do in their own company within a few days of the transaction. There is a wealth of information here if you believe in the adage "people sell stock for all sorts of reasons but only buy it for one".

The SEC after much fighting made this information available via a website. http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml The usability of this website is, well, poor. There are alternatives if you happen to have $30K lying around to buy the "public" data. Or you can build your own data feed like I did.

Baring both of these alternatives I think the best source to get updates on SEC filings comes from J3SG they have a free daily email that comes out that shows some of the major trades from the day, they also have some interesting charts you can browse and it is all free.

Tool 2: Historical Data

Being a value investor the next place I go to is looking at fundamental analysis data such as balance sheets and income statements. Data is data so the key factor that sells me on a source is the number of years of available data. The winner in this category is Morningstar once you have an account setup with them you can access ten years of data.

Value Investor Google Finance
Great site with 4-5 year data package and it is free!
The Morningstar website is a bit clunky though so if four to five years of data is acceptable Google Finance has a fabulous free site where info can be tracked down much more quickly.

Tool 3: Ratios

It is impossible to compare companies of different sizes and revenue streams without the use of some ratios.
Wow that P/E is high compared to the industry, but wait, the dividends are very different.

I personally like the ratios that are presented on Reuters they provide a number of the core ratios that I look at and also provide comparisons between the company, the sector, industry and market which helps greatly as a P/E of 10 may look good in one sector but absolutely dismal in another sector.

Tool 4: Charts

I am a not a huge fan of technical analysis but understanding a few things about a stock's moving pattern certainly does not hurt when you are getting ready to pull the trigger. I look at two sets of charts.
Looks like the market wasn't too excited about PSD purchasing another energy source.

I look at Google Finance to get a sense of any news stories I may have missed during my research of the company, and then I look at Yahoo Finance to review the insider trading patterns and stock volumes.

That is basically it my tools, the rest is just hard work. So what tools do you use?

* The author of this article was in no way paid or compensated for promotion of any website or service mentioned in this article.

December 22, 2008

Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 5) Bringing it all Together


We made it to the final installment of our Graham vs. Greenblatt series. Throughout the series we examined each of the ratios that Greenblatt recommended in his book The Little Book that Beats the Market. The final posting will look at how Greenblatt draws the ratios together and bring this all back around, so lets get into it.

What is it?


Greenblatt says:
“It then assigns a rank to those companies, from 1 to 3,500, based on their return on capital. The company whose business had the highest return on capital would be assigned a rank of 1, and the company with the lowest return on capital (probably a company actually losing money) would receive a rank of 3,500...

Next, the formula follows the same procedure, but this time, the ranking is done using earnings yield...

Finally, the formula just combines the rankings.”

What does it tell us?


Greenblatt creates a simple formula, he takes a value component (Return on Capital) and a Investing component (Earnings Yield) he ranks all companies best to worst on both these criteria and then sums the two rankings. What this does essentially is value both components equally, ROC and Earnings.

So What Would Graham Think about these Rules?


  • The Graham we see in The Intelligent Investor was all about buying value. When the value doesn't exist don't buy, sit on the sidelines. If one follows Greenblatt though you would buy in all conditions. Please note I am not making a comment about timing markets- merely that in an overpriced market Greenblatt would buy the cheapest of the expensive stocks while Graham would take the day off.
  • Return on equity treated with equal significance as value measurements? Graham would not have thought too highly of this. Nothing should be as important as finding value.

Summary:

We have spent a considerable amount of time looking at Greenblatt from Graham's perspective. To conclude the series it is worthwhile to highlight some of the major points we raised in the series:
  1. Graham believed in finding the true value of companies. Where Greenblatt uses Market Capitalization in his key ratios Graham would have cringed. Market Capitalization puts a value on the company based on what the market thinks; not what the company is intrinsically worth.
  2. Graham wanted to look at companies over the long haul. His ratios pulled 5yr and 20yr data to get a picture of the company. Greenblatt on the other hand looked at the company today.
  3. Graham was happy to sit on his wallet if the time wasn't right. If the value didn't exist walk away. Greenblatt on the other hand was prepared to buy on any given day.

Final Thoughts:

Greenblatt has a creative investment system with proven results. There can be no doubt it is a value based system, but he is far less strict than Graham's. Personally I think there is merit in the way that Greenblatt looks at investment opportunities. Bringing in an understanding of Return on Capital is a welcome addition to the value perspective, to hold it in the same high regard as Greenblatt though may be a mistake.


If you missed any of the earlier series please have a look at the earlier parts to the series:
Part 1 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 1)
Part 2 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 2) Buy America Buy Big
Part 3 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 3) Return on Capital
Part 4 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 4) Buy some cheap earnings

December 18, 2008

Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 4) Buy some cheap earnings


In our last post we looked at Greenblatt's use of Return on Capital as a means of identifying quality companies that know how to turn a small investment into a substantial return. In this posting we will look at his next criteria earnings yield.

What is it?

EBIT
enterprise value

What does it tell us?

EBIT is defined as Earning before Interest and Tax, as we discussed in the last posting that works out to the raw income flowing into the company.

Enterprise Value is defined as market capitalization - cash and cash equivalents + preferred stock + debt

Market Capitalization is defined as the current number of outstanding stock multiplied by the current stock price.

So on the denominator what you have is the total of what it would cost to buy the company. To elaborate, if you bought the company outright you would have to buy all of the outstanding stocks + preferred stock + pay off all the current debt and only then could you access the cash reserves in the business.

Taking that into account what the ratio gives us then is an equation where you look at what percentage of the earnings you are buying if you paid for the company outright.

An example: the company has 1M stock outstanding at a current price of $4, they have no cash on hand (or units easily converted to cash) they do not have any preferred stock, and they have $1M in debt. This gives you a market capitalization of:

$4 *1M (stock) - $0 (Cash) + $0 (Preferred stock) + $1M (Debt) = $5M
So to buy the company outright would cost you approximately $5M

If the company in question raises $.5M per year in outright earnings you have an earnings yield of .5/5 or .1 or 10%. To put it another way if you took the $5M out of our pocket and bought the company it would take you 10 years to get the $5M back in your pocket again- assuming you are able to take the raw earnings directly.

What Greenblatt has done then is selected an alternative to Price Earnings Ratio to find companies with value.

So What Would Graham Think about these Rules?

As we stated in a previous post I can't imagine Graham would have been wild about using equations with Market Capitalization. Market Capitalization is a measure of how the investing community values the stock, it is an emotional assessment and is not a valuation of the actual bricks and mortar company itself.
Same as the last posting he might also be frustrated by the fact that this is one period- a company can always leap up and have one great period and then plunge back- it is called regression back to mean and it happens.

Be sure to check the previous parts in this series:

Part 1 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 1)
Part 2 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 2) Buy America Buy Big
Part 3 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 3) Buy Some Cheap Earnings

December 17, 2008

Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 3) Return on Capital

Greenblatt in his book The Little Book that Beats the Market advocated a simple method for attaining substantial stock returns. In this series we are looking at the particulars of this investing theory to both understand why he advocated the elements of this theory and what Benjamin Graham would have thought of the approach that Greenblatt was advocating. The next part in this series looks at Return on Capital or ROC.


What is it?


Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT)
Net Working Capital + Net Fixed Assets


EBIT is a raw calculation of the regular company income excluding the income from irregular or non-reoccurring activities.

In the denominator Greenblatt doesn't use the traditional element of Enterprise Value. (Should he have we could have jumped all over him for using another equation that leverages Market Capitalization otherwise known as shareholder sentiment) Instead he uses:

Net Working Capital = Total Assets - Total Liabilities
Net Fixed Assets = Purchase Price of All fixed assets (Land, buildings, equipment, machinery, vehicles, leasehold improvements) - Accumulated Depreciation

What Does it Tell Us?

By taking EBIT and putting it over Capital + Fixed Assets you have an earnings formula. You are saying what does it cost to run this money making machine? Let me explain.

Consider any company to be a money making factories- as essentially that is what we, as investors, hope it will be. If the company bought one machine that costs $100M (Net Fixed Asset), they own the machine outright and require no other assets (Net Working Capital) and the machine creates 10 $1M bills per year (EBIT) then you have:
$10M/ ($100M-$0) or return on capital of 10%. Or it put it another way for every dollar invested into the core of the company $.10 are generated in raw earnings.

The higher the number the better the return the company gets from buying the money making machine. A company therefore that has the same machine but is only capable of producing 1 $1M bill is therefore a less appealing investment.

So What Would Graham Think about this Rule?

Graham would have seen the value of understanding the return on capital. One can imagine though that the most recent return on capital would not suffice for Graham. He wanted a company with a past. There are always flash in the pan companies that have a phenomenal return on capital for one year. Just look at the company that makes croks if you need an example, for the year they were popular they had a fabulous ROC but the year before and the year after showed dismal results. One can imagine Graham would have thought that a year was simply not long enough. True, Graham believed in P/E ratio which can be accused of the same shortcomings, but he complimented that with an insistence that the company also possess
“Some earnings for the common stock in each of the past ten years.”

P348 The Intelligent Investor
This would mitigate some of the flash in the pan potential.

Be sure to check the previous parts in this series:

Part 1 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 1)
Part 2 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 2) Buy America Buy Big

December 16, 2008

Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 2) Buy America & Buy Big

Joel Greenblatt is a modern value investor, his approach as we outlined in our previous post was to find value companies like Graham, but he also wanted a company that has potential for the future. The first set of criteria looks very similar to Graham.

What is it?

  1. Establish a minimum market capitalization (greater than $50 million is recommended).
  2. Exclude utility and financial stocks and any foreign companies (Non US).

What does it tell us?

Market capitalization = Number of outstanding stock * Current Price of stock

Greenblatt wants this for the same reason that Graham wanted a company with Revenue over $100M- Big companies fail less frequently than smaller ones. Greenblatt also has a few other points to make in this respect:
“small capitalization stocks did not appreciably outperform large caps”
P.149 The Little Book that Beats the Market

“for larger stocks (market caps over $1 billion) the results for the magic formula remain incredibly robust”
P.150 The Little Book that Beats the Market
So basically go big because it works.

Greenblatt excluded Non US companies. The conclusion is based around the fact that some countries have loose regulations around investing. Greenblatt also seems to argue that there is no need to take on the additional risk if there are a sufficient number of American companies to invest in.

The final rule of excluding financial and utility companies is a bit confusing and is only addressed in a footnote:

“Utilities, financial stocks and companies where we could not be certain that the information in the database was timely or complete were eliminated.”
P.138 The Little Book that Beats the Market

So What Would Graham Think about these Rules?

  • Graham would have scratched his head a bit about the market capitalization. Market Capitalization is large as a result of investor consensus and is not tied to any true financial element of the company. Terrible companies can have a huge market capitalization, just look at the dot com bubble companies if you need examples. The way Greenblatt seems to say he used it because it works for his system would probably also cause some concern to Graham. If a consistent element for success was that the company had a 'G' in its name would Greenblatt have used this? I think we can temper this point though due to the manner that the book is presented- it is not intended to be a financial study it is intended for the junior investor.

  • Excluding foreign companies would not have been a point too difficult for Graham to understand. He recommends against some foreign endeavors:
    “But we do know that, if and when trouble should come, the owner of foreign obligations has no legal or other means of enforcing his claim.”
    P. 138 The Intelligent Investor.
    The avoidance of utility and financial companies based on the reasoning presented would be a bit surprising for Graham though as he often recommended such endeavors.
Hope you enjoyed part two of the series. Drop me a line with your thoughts or questions and stay tuned for the next session where we will look further at some of the other criteria that Greenblatt put forward.

Be sure to check the previous parts in this series:

Part 1 Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 1)

December 15, 2008

Graham vs. Greenblatt (Session 1)

Graham passed away in September 21, 1976 well before Joel Greenblatt graduated from Wharton in 1979 but a linkage between the two men's investment theories is not difficult to find. Greenblatt during his time at Wharton went to great lengths to study the value approach that Graham had devised (there are stories that Greenblatt entered vast amounts of stock data by hand into a mainframe and then ran tests on it using Graham's system). He saw the benefit that could be returned from purchasing companies that were inexpensive.

Greenblatt struggled with Graham's rules- like so many professional investors do. If you stick to Graham's rules you make no estimation on the future and deal only with the past, you want strong companies with strong histories that are currently cheap. But if you do this you have two problems as a broker or hedge fund manager:
  1. You don't buy much as there are few opportunities.
  2. Besides the research you are doing on the companies what value do you create for your investors? Brokers and Hedge Managers are forced by investors to be crystal ball readers- they have to see tomorrow, not yesterday.
To be successful Greenblatt devised an alternative system. Find companies that are inexpensive like Graham, but also have a great rate of return meaning they can turn around sizable profits with little investment. This high return on investment (ROC) would intuitively seem to indicate that the company will have a good future: as investment increases the return should logically jump higher. Should the ROC decrease then it was already pretty high to begin with so there is still safety in the position.

What Greenblatt ultimately settled on is what is put forward in his The Little Book that Beats the Market:
  1. Establish a minimum market capitalization (greater than $50 million is recommended).
  2. Exclude utility and financial stocks and any foreign companies (Non US).
  3. Determine company's earnings yield = EBIT / enterprise value.
  4. Determine company's return on capital = EBIT / (Net fixed assets + working capital)
  5. Rank all companies above chosen market capitalization by highest earnings yield and highest return on capital.
  6. Invest in 20-30 highest ranked companies, accumulating 2-3 positions per month over a 12-month period.
In the coming short series we will break down each of these criteria and compare it back to Graham's technique to see how they are similar and how they differ.

December 11, 2008

Building a Simplified Graham Value Stock Screener


I did a search and could not for the life of me find a link to a prebuilt Google screener for Graham's value investing system. So lets quickly build one:



Through the Graham series we said we would only consider companies that:
  1. Had a P/E of less than or equal to 15.
  2. A book value of greater than or equal to 0.01.
  3. A price to book value of less than or equal to 1.5.
  4. A current ratio of more than or equal to 2.
  5. Earnings Per Share Growth rate on average of greater than or equal to 33% over 10 years.
  6. Revenue of greater than $100M ($555M)
  7. A history of consistent dividend payment.
  8. A dividend yield of greater than or equal to 3.5%.
  9. Some earnings for the common stock in each of the past ten years.
Putting that all together 1, 3,4,5,8 are a piece of cake.

2. Google doesn't provide a book value option, but if we recall Book Value is (Total Assets – Intangible Assets (Goodwill) – Total Liabilities) So if a company has a Current Ratio of 2 that means they have 2 times as many assets as they have liabilities so therefore they have a book value greater than 0. Also having a P/E ratio over 0 indicates there are some earnings.

6. Google doesn't have a revenue option, you could go with Market Cap but that does not really express what we are after here.

7. Google doesn't have dividend history so more research would be necessary based on the candidates.

9. Google doesn't have a 10 year P/E ratio yet- hopefully they will add it in soon so we can set to 0.

So that leaves us with this:
Graham Google Stock Screener

As you will see it chops the list of viable candidates down a fair bit though. Remember showing up on the scanner does not indicate you should buy, it means you should look at it :)

Happy hunting!

December 10, 2008

Buy with a solid Dividend (Session 7)


The final page in our series on Graham's investment theory is dedicated to dividends. I saved the best, and most contentious for last. Investors love to split themselves into groups- technical analysts, fundamental analysts, value investors, growth investors. In the same vein there are dividend investors and growth investors. Without further adieu let's get into it.

What is it?

At the end of every financial quarter a well run business will have funds left in its budget. The business can choose to invest that money into the business in order to hopefully make more money in subsequent periods- buy machinery, pay off debt, buy another smaller business, open another store etc. Or the business can give the excess money and give it back to its investors as a reward for investing in the business- this is a dividend. Dividends can be paid on any schedule, quarterly, yearly or any combination of the above.

What does it tell us?

A company chooses a direction when it decides to pay a dividend. They have decided to be a type of a business, the type of business that traditionally has somewhat slower growth because it is returning the investment to the shareholder. These businesses get a pass on lacking big bang growth- but it comes at a cost. The business must be consistent about the dividend. Buying a company that pays a dividend for one quarter then cancels it for a year and then reinstates it again is giving mixed messages on what type of business it is.

A dividend is like a snooze button for a long term investor. If I buy a stock I expect returns. If the stock is consistently going up I can see those returns as I know I can sell that stock off in an instant for a healthy reward. But what if it does nothing or even goes down- then what? Well then I either have to liquidate and take my loses or grit my teeth and hope for a return to profitability on my position.

Here is an alternative story for you though. Imagine my stock goes down or stays the same could I entice you to be more patient with the stock if I give you 3% of your money back now and make you believe I will give you a further 3% back in another few months? Graham liked dividend stocks, they rewarded this type of patience. We have talked all the way through this series about different measures of Graham's theory being used as insurance techniques- this is the biggest of them all: even if I am wrong about the potential of a selected company I know I can receive a return from my investment so long as the company continues its dividend.

Incidentally dividends also have another interesting feature about them- they cause more consistency in the price of a stock. Every time a dividend period is coming close no one wants to sell their stock as they know it won't be long until a free payday arrives. Even if there is bad news in this period more people will hold the stock and think about the move instead of the knee jerk reaction that traditionally happens in the market.

What does Graham use?

Graham liked dividend paying stocks as we mentioned above consistency is important. If the company has a long track record of having paid a dividend then there is a very good chance it will continue to do so in the future. Graham liked a company with an:
"Uninterrupted payments for at least the past 20 years."
P. 348 The Intelligent Investor
While this is challenging to find the sentiment is clear- if they are consistent about the dividend they will probably be consistent in the future.

"the defensive investor should be able to count on the current 3.5%"
P.25 The Intelligent Investor
Graham also looked at stock investments as an alternative to bond investments. So if a stock investment can't beat a comparable low risk bond's rate of return why would I buy the stock? To put it another way, if you could get 5% in a savings account why on earth would you risk the money in the market unless you knew you could be fairly sure you could beat that 5%.

Hope you have enjoyed the series on Graham investing please vote on the poll to the right to guide what series we will look at next and please be sure to see the other parts of this series if you missed any:

Intro
Buy on the Cheap: Price/ Earnings
Buy a Company with a Future: Book Value
Buy on the Cheap: Price/ Book Ratio
Buy a Company with a Future: Current Ratio
Buy a Company with a Future: Based on its Past