"When you go into the stock market
you're competing with professionals.'" [1]
"[T]he obfuscatory verbiage of people who speak Wall Street [] treat
finance as a kind of secret, clubby code.... [They] deride dabbling
investors." [2]
In order to succeed, an investor needs to understand the language of business.
"Accounting is said to be the language
of business. Great investors are skilled at financial statement analysis. It
allows them to look at the past and project the future. … Numbers tell a
story. Financial statements are the report cards of the companies." [3]
"Even after disclosure, the numbers that some companies report are
based on accounting methodologies so complex, involving such a high degree of
guesswork, that it can't easily be determined precisely how they were arrived
at. Hard to understand doesn't necessarily mean inaccurate or illegal, of
course. But, some companies take advantage of often-loose accounting rules to
massage their numbers to make their results look better. … [T]he [] problem is
for investors to figure out how accurately the numbers reflect a company's
business. … Hence, companies have an incentive to use aggressive -- but, under
the rules, acceptable -- accounting to boost their reported earnings and prop up
their stock price. In the worst-case scenario, that means some companies put out
misleading financial accounts." [4]
"Experience is the best teacher, but the tuition is high." [5] Our Excel-based spreadsheet—Historical
Analysis v2.3 (HAv2.3)—might be able to
short cut the learning process for you and your wallet. HAv2.3
provides you with an organized and credible means to work through the somewhat
indecipherable information in financial statements.
Instead of depending on others to oversee your stock investments, it is essential to cultivate self-reliance for achieving success. Financial advisors often find it easier to persuade individuals that they possess knowledge, rather than actually having profound knowledge themselves.
"Consultancies choose new employees in
part based on their ability to project answers with confidence. … '[A]nswering
a case perfectly but nervously will get you rejected.'" [6] "New research from
Shanghai Advanced Institute of Finance similarly finds that comely managers of
mutual funds lure more investments and enjoy more promotions than
their homelier counterparts, even though their funds don't perform as well. The researchers suggest this performance gap may be
because handsome managers approach risk with hubristic levels of
confidence. … Basically, we tend to assume that good looks are a
sign of intelligence, trustworthiness and good character…." [7]
"Who should you trust for investment advice? ... Surely they'd be
investing their own money in their ideas ... and ideally their wealth would
derive more from their own personal investing returns [rather] than from selling
their ideas to people like you." [8] "Most people on Wall Street don't make money by
investing—they make money by helping others invest, charging a hefty fee for
their service. Warren Buffett called these people the 'helpers,' and warned
investors to avoid them at all costs. The reason: very few people have the skill
to beat the market. … The helpers, of
course, are well aware of this. So, in order to try to be one of the chosen few who beat the market, they take
more risk, swinging for more home runs instead of more reliable singles and doubles.
That's what can lead to big losses…. The lesson: Stay away from money managers
who charge hefty fees for complex strategies." [9] "[W]hile many people believe that the essential skill of being
a hedge fund manager is picking good investments, in fact the essential skill is
continuing to run a large hedge fund that pays them a lot of money. ... Building
a robust institution with high fees, loyal investors and long lockups is a
deeper and more fundamental skill than picking the right stocks." [10] "[A]s funds get
bigger, their income from management fees, which is based on the amount of
assets they have, grows. That gives managers fewer incentives to improve
performance." [11]
"Fund
investors… [have a] chronic compulsion to chase hot performance and flee when
it goes cold. Such buy-high-and-sell-low behavior tends to flood fund managers
with cash at times when stocks have already risen in price—and to force the
funds to sell stocks after a decline. The managers can perform only as well as
their worst investors allow them to. … If fund managers could stick to only
their best ideas, they might do better. But owning just a handful of stocks
could create tax and regulatory headaches—and would expose the managers to
massive withdrawals (and loss of fees) if returns faltered. So most portfolio
managers own too many stocks to focus on their best ideas…. " [12]
Self-reliance may be the answer.
Our investment strategy is rooted in analyzing financial statements and has been thoroughly tested,
backtested and validated. With HAv2.3, you have the ability to identify value stocks for investment and also prevent investing in companies that are facing financial difficulties. This allows you to make informed decisions before the stock market prices adjust to reflect the true state of these companies.
Please review our Sample
Analyses. "By
backtesting —applying hindsight to past data and pretending that a
hypothetical portfolio had been run that way all along—financial marketers can
make outperformance look ridiculously easy. … Of course, you can't completely
ignore the past when you project the future. To protect yourself against
backtests that foretell nothing, ask questions like these: If this idea is so
great, why weren't these guys using it at the beginning of the period instead of
only at the end? Why wasn't everybody using it? How long has the strategy
actually been used, and with how much money? Has it been tracked over even
longer periods than reported in the backtested data? How many other strategies
were backtested but abandoned? D
HAv2.3's quality of earnings analyses comprise several numerical formulations of the fundamental principle that
"distorting one section of the
financial statements throws the numbers out of whack in some other
section." [15]
On the investment side, it can be beneficial to consider slowly accumulating or purchasing stocks at lower market prices, as long as those stocks are still financially stable and not at risk of bankruptcy. However, it is crucial to have the necessary emotional resilience, patience, and financial resources to endure potential market fluctuations. "[S]uccessful
investing depends, at most, 10% on knowing what to do and at least 90% on
knowing what not to do." [16]
"The market wisdom that sounds the easiest can be the hardest to follow.
Take 'buy low, sell high.' Buying low and selling high is logically sound but
emotionally harrowing. That's because it requires buying something that feels
risky because it just went down, while selling something that feels safer
because it has just gone up. … Whenever markets move sharply up or down, it's
human nature to want to take action. … Taking calm, contrarian action in a
crazy world is a great way to restore balance not only to your portfolio but to
your frame of mind." [18]
HAv2.3 helps to
recognize stock-investment entry points and exists.
If you have any inquiries, feedback, or suggestions, please feel free to reach out to us at: FSA@ConcernedShareholders.com.
[1]
Investors Chronicle, 3/28/19,
"Spotting Red Flags"
[2]
New York Times [NYT], 9/14/23,
"'Dumb Money' Review: Revenge of the Amateur Stock Traders"
[3]
Manila Times, 1/10/22, "Skills
and habits you need in investing"
[4]
Wall Street Journal [WSJ], 1/25/02,
"Deciphering the Black Box—Many
Accounting Practices, Not Just Enron's, Are Hard to Penetrate"
[5]
WSJ, 8/13/20, "This Investment
Burned Almost Everyone...."
[6]
WSJ, 3/17/23, "'The Big Con'
Review: The Conquering Consultants; Why are corporate executives and
government officials so often bamboozled by the expensive consultants they
hire?"
[7]
WSJ, 6/10/23, "The Moral
Hazards of Being Beautiful; Research shows that attractive people tend to
receive unearned esteem from others and cultivate self-serving beliefs"
[8]
Bloomberg - Money Stuff, 5/22/19,
"Who should you trust for investment
advice?"
[9]
NextBigIdeaClub,
6/12/23, "Chaos Kings: How Wall Street Traders Make Billions in the New
Age of Crisis"
[10]
Bloomberg - Money Stuff, 7/2/20,
"Farewell John Paulson"
[11]
WSJ, 12/8/20, "Some Small Hedge
Funds Reap Big Gains in Tough Times...."
[12]
WSJ, 4/14/23, "Want to Beat the Stock Market? … Professional fund managers labor under
handicaps that individual
investors don't face. …"
[13]
WSJ, 1/27/21, "Intelligent
Investor: Bulls, Bears and Starlings"
[14]
WSJ, 10/23/23,
"Who You Calling Dumb Money? Everyday Investors Do Just Fine"
[15]
Financial Statement Analysis —
A Practitioner's Guide by Martin S. Fridson
[16]
WSJ, 8/25/20, "Liquidity That
Quenches No One's Thirst"
[17]
Substack.com, 7/18/23, "Red
Flag Alert"
[18]
WSJ, 5/1/20, "Finding Your Balance in a Topsy-Turvy Market…."
INTRODUCTION
- Financial Statement Analysis Applied to Stock-Market Investing
The Investment Process
Investor Psychological Traits
The Market Cycle: Up
The Market Cycle: Down
The Opportunity
Value Investing
II.
Financial
Statement Analysis can "do" complex
A. Background
III. Recommended
Readings
IV. Learn
By Negative Examples
V.
An Approach to Stock Investing
VI.
Financial Statements in the News
VII. Sample Analyses
Financial Statement Analysis Applied to
Stock-Market Investing
Successful stock market investing necessitates a strong foundation in financial knowledge, a comprehension of collective behavior, and a positive mindset.
"[T]he
penalties for financial ignorance have never been so stiff." [1] "If we truly ...
can't make heads or tails of a complicated set of [financial] statements, we pass and
move on." [2]
"[I]f you invest blindly you stand an excellent chance of
being blind-sided." [3]
In order to achieve success in investing, it is crucial to possess a strong sense of mental discipline.
"'Patience is one
of the most important things in our business,' [CFA Howard] Marks said. 'And
what I like to point out is that sometimes we have a sense for what's going to
happen. We never know when. Most of the important things that happen in our
business ... are primarily attributable to changes in psychology, not
fundamentals.... And psychology cannot be predicted and certainly cannot be
timed.'" [4]
HAv2.3 helps achieve disciplined investing and financial success.
The Investment Process
"In 1970, [Peter L. Bernstein] ... counseled investors to take big risks
with small amounts of money rather than small risks with big amounts of
money." [5]
"Investing
isn't about mastering the markets; it's about mastering yourself. … To be an
intelligent investor doesn't require a stratospheric IQ. It does require
discipline and the ability to think for yourself. …[I]ndividual investors are
'scarcely ever' forced to sell stocks or funds and—unlike professional
portfolio managers who are continually measured against the market—are never
compelled to care what other investors are doing. That independence is your
single most valuable asset, a luxury most professional investors can only dream
of possessing. … [I]t has never been harder to be a disciplined and
independent investor. … After all, it often makes sense—and just feels
right—to join the herd. … [B]ucking the consensus engages circuits in the
brain that generate pain and disgust. Experiments have shown that when you find
out your peers disagree with you, your choices become up to three times more
likely to match theirs, although you have no conscious awareness of being
influenced. … Instead of seeking to fulfill their own financial goals, they
will strive to beat everybody else, becoming up to twice as likely to buy a
risky stock. … Because
you may never realize how much a group is influencing your decisions, it's vital
to protect yourself before you join the crowd. … Instead of investing based on
the whims of the crowd, follow policies and procedures. … Use
a checklist to focus on the stability of the underlying business rather than
share-price movements. Have I read the company's financial reports? Do its
executives ... use conservative accounting ... ? … After thoroughly filtering
companies, put your favorites on a watchlist. Set limit orders in your brokerage
account to buy them automatically if they drop, say, 25% in price. That way, you
lock yourself into doing the opposite of the crowd." (WSJ, 11/17/24,
"You're Not Paranoid. The Market Is Out to Get You.") Now that you are
in, what about getting out with a profit and a smile?
"It all starts with a well-defined process that is executed with a high
degree of discipline. ... There are a lot of smart people in the investment
business, but not very many of them are consistently successful. ... We think
the reason is that not many of them have a truly well-defined process and are
truly disciplined in executing it." [6]
"In this world, data can be used to make sense of mind-bogglingly complex
situations. Data can help compensate for our overconfidence in our own
intuitions and can help reduce the extent to which our desires distort our
perceptions." [7] "[B]iases
are hard-wired into our brains and personalities: Some of us are overconfident,
taking excessive risks; others too meek, seeking to avoid losses at the first
sign of trouble. … Some mistakes [] arise from the tendency to feel pain from
a loss more acutely than pleasure from a gain. Investors sell too quickly when
holdings take a few hits, and hesitate to build big positions in stocks they
like. … It's one thing to be aware of behavioral biases; it's another to keep
them in check."
[8]
"[R]esearch
shows that ... focusing first on the positives of a purchase or decision makes
it harder to come up with the negatives—and vice versa. ... When you're
weighing an offer or decision, always start with your list of 'cons' before
considering the 'pros.' It may save you a bundle." [9]
"Companies, if granted the leeway, will surely present their financial
results in the best possible light. And of course they will try to persuade
investors that the calculations they prefer, in which certain costs are
excluded, best represent the reality in their operations. … But these
are actual costs, notes Jack
T. Ciesielski, publisher of The
Analyst's Accounting Observer. 'Selectively ignoring facts can lead to
investor carelessness in evaluating a company's performance and lead to sloppy
investment decisions,' he wrote. … It puzzles some
accounting experts that the Securities and Exchange Commission has not been more
aggressive about reining in this practice. … The bottom line for investors,
according to Mr. Ciesielski … is to ignore the allure of the make-believe.
Real-world numbers may be less heartening, but they are also less likely to
generate those ugly surprises that can come from accentuating the
positive." [10]
"Mr. [Howard M.] Schilit's firm, the Center for Financial Research
and Analysis, scours corporations' books.... He says his sleuthing cannot
pinpoint fraud. Rather, examining public documents often turns up gimmicks or
aggressive accounting aimed at camouflaging problems. 'You never have a smoking
gun,' he said. 'So you have to be careful about alleging wrongdoing. My job is
to find an early sign of problems.'" [11]
"[M]ost value investors are being put out of business….
[M]ost market participants these days are not trained or experienced in
value investing…. Fewer players means there's no one to notice what’s
happening to these companies and 'nobody knows what anything is worth,' [David]
Einhorn said. 'So there's an enormous number of companies that are dramatically
mis-valued in ways that we haven't seen
before.'"[12] Mis-valued on the low
side means buying opportunities for those who do financial statement analysis!
Investor Psychological Traits
"Happiness from wealth comes from gains of wealth more than it comes
from levels of wealth. While gains of wealth brings happiness, losses of wealth
brings misery." [13]
"'What's the personality of the most successful investors?' asked
William Bernstein, a neurologist.... 'They aren't affected by other people's
feelings. In fact, the most empathetic people I know are the worst
investors.'" [14]
"As the late economist Charles Kindleberger put it: 'There
is nothing as disturbing to one's well-being and judgment as to see a friend get
rich. Unless it is to see a non-friend get rich.'" [15] "Just
look at financial markets now. An activity that people have historically pursued
in isolation—buying and selling stocks and other assets—has become the
hottest way to socialize. … But what investors need most at a time like this
isn't affirmation from hordes of strangers who think alike." [16]
"When investors have different goals and time horizons—and they do in
every asset class—prices that look ridiculous for one person make sense to
another, because the factors worth paying attention to are totally different.
… Bubbles form when the momentum of short-term returns attracts enough money
that the makeup of investors shifts from mostly long term to mostly short term.
… Bubbles aren't so much about people irrationally participating in long-term
investing. They're about people somewhat rationally moving toward short-term
trading to capture momentum that had been feeding on itself. What do you expect
people to do when momentum creates a big short-term return potential? Sit and
watch patiently? Never. … And the short-term traders that flood in operate in
an area where the rules governing long-term investing—particularly around
valuation—are ignored, because they're irrelevant to the game being played.
… Few things matter more in investing than
understanding your own time horizon and not being persuaded by the price actions
caused by people with different time horizons." [17]
"What will financial marketers sell….? The same thing they always sell:
whatever did the best last year. … [Y]ou'll hear a lot about what was hot. …
Those who were up the most always brag the loudest. … Extreme performance can
last for a while, but it can't persist indefinitely. … It takes determination
to resist the easy temptation of chasing whatever has been hot…. If you're
tempted to play catch-up out of fear of missing out, at least limit the amount
you put at risk. … If you don't
think you can stay that course, then … declar[e], up front, that you have no
interest in chasing whatever has been hot. … That silences the hype. That
opens your mind to the kinds of neglected opportunities that often do best when
last year's market darlings fall from grace. And that keeps you from expecting
the coming year to repeat the past year. They seldom do." [18]
"Great investors … practice trying to disprove their investing assumptions to determine whether they are correct. … [I]nvestors often wall themselves off from new information that could threaten their views. … The common culprits in all this are two quirks of the human mind that psychologists call confirmation bias and hindsight bias. The first drives us to seek and favor evidence that confirms our pre-existing beliefs while ignoring warning signs that we might be wrong. The second compels us, after everyone knows the outcome, to believe we saw it coming all along. … A few techniques can help combat these cognitive biases. Shun peer pressure from social media or the internet. … Listen for signals that you might be off base. … To be a good investor, you have to be right much of the time. To be a great investor, you have to recognize how often you may be wrong." [19] "So, don't ask, 'What should I do?' Instead ask, 'How can I keep myself from doing anything?' ... [E]xperts in behavioral finance say the pain we suffer from losses is far greater than the pleasure we get from gains. Results? Investors who follow their stocks closely can be miserable, no matter what the market's general direction. After all, even in good years, stocks—on a daily basis—are likely to be down as often as they go up. What to do? Stick your head in the sand. ... [D]on't read the newspaper stock tables." [20] One way to potentially alleviate this negative outcome is by utilizing stop-buy/sell orders and market-price alerts.
"In
the summer of 1720, shares in the South Sea Co. and other leading stocks roared
to all-time highs as speculators chased instant profits. … They all were
sucked in by a perfect magnetic storm: the rapid advent of newspapers, ready
loans at low interest rates, and exciting narratives about technological
innovation. Above all was the eternal human desire to be part of the in crowd,
or what we today would call FOMO, fear of missing out. … As word spreads that
'everybody' is doing something, it can be hard for anybody to resist joining.
Humans have a profound need to belong to a group. Investing in something popular
makes us feel popular. … The South Sea bubble did have many critics at the
time. But conformity is a powerful force that can counteract gravity for longer
than skeptics often expect." [21]
"[W]hen markets seem to be breaking records every day, your emotions
naturally prompt you to buy high, not to sell. Even the world's greatest
investors find selling harder than buying. Peter Lynch, former manager of
the Fidelity Magellan fund, has said his 'greatest mistakes' were selling at the
wrong time. That's largely because of the unbearable feeling of FOMO, fear of
missing out. Sell a winner too soon, and you have to watch from the sidelines as
it continues to soar. The most you could have lost from keeping it is 100%, but
the gains you can miss out on by selling too soon are unlimited. It hurts not to
buy an asset that goes on to become a huge winner. But it stings far worse to
sell one. That's an active decision, easier to imagine undoing. That focuses
your attention on the mistake, making you feel you should have made a different
decision and filling you with regret. … Yes, missing out on future gains could
be painful. Missing out on future losses won't be. In the long run, adding or keeping
hot assets only because they are hot, not because you think they are
undervalued, is the surest way to get burned." [22](WSJ,
4/23/21, "How to Keep Your Cool When Markets Are Sizzling")
"People buy things
that are going up, especially when they're feeling rich. It's called the
'momentum' strategy, and it generally works very well, until it doesn't." [24] "I
once defined a bull market as 'a period of rising prices that leads many
investors to believe that their IQ has risen at least as much as the market
value of their portfolios. After the inevitable fall in prices, they will learn
that both increases were temporary.' ... [S]tay humble!" [25]
"Financial adviser and historian William Bernstein, in his new book The Delusions
Of Crowds: Why People Go Mad in Groups, calls this 'vehemence,
verging on raw anger, directed at doubters,' and says it is often the final
phase of financial bubbles. … Perhaps anger tends to foreshadow the end of
financial manias because it makes skepticism almost impossible." [26]
"It's
a bubble, according to a survey of retail stock investors. And they don't want
to miss it. … Stocks have been on a tear for more than a year, and bubble
warnings have rung out during most of that time." [27]
"The
businesses have little in common, but all rely for high valuations on buyers
willing to bet on a story—and have benefited from the surge in individuals
trading stocks. … [Those] assets [] look more like gambling tokens than
ownership rights[.] … [S]peculative stocks and crypto depend for their value
on stories, not on reported earnings."
[28]
"Cryptocurrency ... [is] backed by no
government, is all but impossible to use and serves no legal need."
[29]
"The stocks of E.V. companies have already
risen to shockingly high levels. And some have yet to make any cars, let alone
profits. … [T]he mania also reflects the general bullishness that has swept up
many assets, which can be hard to link to traditional financial fundamentals.
The run up in share prices illustrates investors' enthusiasm…. Take
Lucid Motors, which started delivering sedans…. Lucid's shares, which have
more than doubled in the past month, give the company a market value of nearly
$90 billion, or $10 billion more than Ford, which sold nearly 4.2 million cars
last year. Rivian, an electric pickup maker that has yet to start selling
vehicles, went public last week and is now worth $127 billion, or more than G.M.
And then there is Tesla, of course, worth over $1 trillion, or as much as nearly
every major carmaker combined. …
Aswath Damodaran, a New York University professor who is considered an authority
on valuing companies, isn't so sure about all of this. 'Let's be quite honest,'
Damodaran told DealBook. 'Wall Street analysts are not valuing Rivian or Lucid.
They are chasing the price, and finding ways to rationalize it.'" [30]
"[Y]ou got to know—When to hold 'em—Know when to fold 'em—Know when
to walk away—Know when to run…." [31]
"[T]he investor commandment [is] get out in time." [32]
"[I]nstitutional investors … mostly pay
attention to buying, not selling…. [T]hey
just sell whatever has gone up a lot, or whatever has gone down a lot. … The
basic folksy rule-of-thumb wisdom for buying is about fundamentals, but
for selling it's usually about price action. Not always: One classic maxim is
that you should dispassionately re-analyze each position each day, and if you
wouldn'nt buy it now you should sell it. But just typing it like that makes me
suspect that it is an ideal that no one really lives up to. It sounds like a lot
of work!"
"When looking at success, the first step is understanding why you
succeeded. Was it luck? Hard work? Innate talent? ... When we only focus on
outcomes, we miss important information about what went right (and wrong) and
why. ... Analyzing successes ... should be mandatory. The military holds
'after-action reviews' ... irrespective of outcome. ... [D]iscuss four key
questions: What did we set out to do? What actually happened? Why did it happen?
What are we going to do next time?" [35]
"We use outcomes as a simple indicator and then weave narratives around
these views. We take a difficult problem, simplify it (are the results good or
bad?) and then create a story to justify the outcome. ... There are no easy
solutions here but being beholden to outcomes alone is by no means a panacea.
... [U]sing outcomes as a proxy for sound decision making in investment is
anything but." [36]
"[I]f we learned anything in this crisis, it is that most of the
sophisticated financial professionals in the world were no better at predicting
the market than some amateur investors. [37]
"To become a market-destroying 'it' group on Wall Street, you need some
arrogance, enough brains to justify making huge financial bets, utter
cluelessness about lessons from finance's booms and busts, and a sincere belief
that your unique contributions to Wall Street will mean, ahem, that this time it
really is different, so old truths can be ignored. ... Everybody knows, though,
that to really be part of Wall Street's elite, you've got to have contempt for
the little people." [38]
"'Investing is more than something
utilitarian,' says Meir Statman, a finance professor at Santa Clara University
and an expert in behavioral finance. 'People get pleasure from it. It's
thrill-seeking behavior. It occupies time. People use investing the way other
people go to concerts or go to parties.' … But these days, when indexers sin,
often they sin by loading up on value stocks, those companies that are cheap
compared with current earnings or corporate assets. Recent academic studies --
most notably a June 1992 Journal of Finance article by professors Eugene Fama
and Kenneth French -- suggest that you can earn market-beating returns by buying
value stocks. … But activity is so much more fun than inactivity, so we end up
trading more than we should. … I would cap the 'fun money' portion of your
portfolio at 5%." [39]
"Technology can make investing easy and fun. It
can also downplay risk in ways that may lead novices astray. …
Robinhood has become so popular largely because it helps get new investors
started by making the stock market feel fun and engaging. … [R]obinhood …
makes me wonder whether it has created a game in which many of the most
vulnerable players may end up being played." [40]
"For some people, it seems, nothing has become too stupid to speculate
on, as long as you can be reasonably confident that somebody even stupider will
buy it from you at a higher price. … In that case, why not buy something
that's a total joke? The answer, of course, is the same as it's always been:
Sooner or later, after every marginal fool has piled in, you will end up looking
to your right and looking to your left and then realizing, with a sudden chill
running down your spine, that only one greater fool is left, and it's you."
[41]
"Behavioral mistakes are particularly rife in the small-cap stock pool,
where investors make bigger errors because they tend to have less information
and companies generally receive less scrutiny than your Alphabets and Apples….
If the company's fundamentals are sound and investors are fleeing while insiders
are buying … the crowd is making an emotionally fueled mistake. … [T]he
babies [are] being thrown out with the bath water." [42]
"'Investors
hate uncertainty.' Well, that's just tough. Uncertainty is all investors ever
have gotten, or ever will get, from the moment barley and sesame first began
trading in ancient Mesopotamia to the last trade that will ever take place on
Planet Earth. ... The only true certainty is surprise." [43]
"Part of what makes bear markets so unbearable is that
nobody—and I mean nobody—knows when or how they will end. … Bear markets
sometimes end in a selling frenzy, but they often end in an indifferent
stupor." [44]
"Knowing he owns good businesses, Mr. Buffett wants prices to go down, not
up, so he can buy even more shares more cheaply before the bounce back. ... [A]
bear market is a gift from the financial gods--and the longer it lasts, the
better off you will be. Instead of running from the bear, you should embrace
him. ... The real secret to being, or becoming, an intelligent investor is
bolstering your self-control. ... [T]hose who can take the pain of a bear market
... will ultimately triumph, by patiently amassing greater and greater equity
positions at better and better prices." [45]
"[I]f you have plenty of
cash and courage to withstand further declines, other people's fear could be
your cue to act. … 'It is sometimes said that to be an intelligent investor,
you must be unemotional. That isn't true; instead, you should be inversely
emotional.' That means market declines don't have to be a cause of
consternation. They can be an opportunity." [46]
"The
next time the stock market crashes, we all will step forward and buy stocks
boldly--at least in our imaginations. But buying stocks when the market
collapses is far harder to do than to imagine. … [F]ocus[] on a small number
of stocks trading at low multiples of their value as businesses… [B]uy when
blood was running in the streets…. [B]ear markets are so unpredictable that
reliably sidestepping them is nearly impossible—and that the pain of losing
money is nearly unbearable. … Since, over the long run, stocks tend to go up
more than they go down, one of the greatest advantages an investor can have is
the gumption to buy stocks aggressively in falling markets. That requires both
cash and courage. … [S]teel your courage. Write a binding contract with
yourself, witnessed by a friend or family member, committing you to buy more
stocks when they fall 25%, 50% or more. Years from now, you will be glad you
did." [47]
Now, with all this positive feedback, one only needs to understand the methods for evaluating the value of businesses. Consider utilizing the HAv2.3 framework.
[1]
The Ascent of
Money (2008)
by Niall Ferguson.
[2]
WSJ, 8/6/02, "We Need Better Stock
Analysis, Not More Info"
[3]
Savannah Morning News, 3/10/02,
"Maneuvering Around 'Earnings' First Step in Making Solid
Investments"
[4]
Enterprising Investor, 2/19/19,
"Howard Marks, CFA: Getting the Odds on Your Side"
[5]
WSJ, 6/13/09, "Risk-Management
Pioneer and Best-Selling Author Never Stopped Insisting Future Is
Unknowable"
[6]
WSJ, 11/7/05, "He Recruits
Managers with Passion and Focus for Stocking-Picking Teams"
[7]
NYT, 2/18/13, "What Data Can't
Do"
[8]
Barron's, 11/2/18,
"How to Take Fear Out of Your Investing Decisions"
[9]
WSJ, 8/12/09, "Fraud Doesn't
Always Happen to Someone Else"
[10]
NYT, 4/22/16, "Fantasy
Math Is Helping Companies Spin Losses Into Profits"
[11]
NYT, 1/4/04, "Once a Cassandra,
Now a Sage"
[12]
Bloomberg, 10/11/22, "David
Einhorn Says Value Investing Might Never Come Back"
[13]
WSJ, 8/24/09, "The Mistakes We
Make—and Why We Make Them....")
[14]
WSJ, 4/3/10, "Time to Take
Stock of the Recent Market Rallies"
[15]
WSJ, 1/28/21,
"GameStop Is a Bubble in Its Purest Form…."
[16]
WSJ, 1/22/21, "[O]nline
trading buddies can lift you up when you're feeling down. But real-world
friends tell you when you're wrong."
[17]
Collaborative Fund, 2017, "The
Reasonable Formation of Unreasonable Things"
[18]
WSJ, 1/8/21, "What We Already
Know About Investing … ; It may be tempting to keep riding the wave of hot
assets from last year. Do that long enough, and you'll eventually get
burned."
[19]
WSJ, 12/31/16, "To
Be a Great Investor, Worry More About Being Wrong Than Right"
[20]
WSJ, 4/1/97, "Advice for
Jittery Investors: Sit Tight"
[21]
WSJ, 7/18/20, "From 1720 to
Tesla, FOMO Never Sleeps; The South Sea bubble is the classic story of an
investing mania. Are investors today any wiser?"
[22]
WSJ, 4/23/21, "How to Keep Your
Cool When Markets Are Sizzling"
[23]
On the Street, 6/11/23,
"Welcome to Fantasyland"
[24]
Axios Markets, 1/7/21, "Battle of the bubbles"
[25]
WSJ, 12/1/20, "Plenty to Be
Thankful for"
[26]
WSJ, 3/9/21, "Investing
While Angry"
[27]
Bloomberg, 4/12/21, "Day
Traders Know a Bubble When They See One, and They Want In"
[28]
WSJ, 12/21/21, "Is
the Fed Deflating Prospects for Speculative Stocks?...."
[29]
Washington Post,
2/27/23, "Opinion: This all-but-forgotten con man sold American on
'fake it till you make it'"
[30]
Bloomberg Deal Book, 11/18/21,
"Racing Ahead"
[31]
Kenny Rogers - The Gambler Lyrics
[32]
Bloomberg, 10/12/18, "Hedge
Fund Billionaire Rode the Worst Trade of His Life All the Way Down."
[33]
Bloomberg Opinion – Money Stuff,
1/10/19, "What do professional investors do?"
[34]
Bloomberg, 1/16/19,
"Stock-Pickers Don't Know How to Sell"
[35]
WSJ, 5/10/19, "Don't Just Learn
From Failure; Learn From Your Successes; When things go right in business,
it's crucial to figure out why"
[36]
Behavioral Investment, 2/19/19,
"Is an Obsession with Outcomes the Most Damaging Investor Bias?"
[37]
NYT, 1/14/10, "Wall St. Ethos
Under Scrutiny at Hearing"
[38]
Bloomberg, 2/3/10, "Quants'
can't-lose ideas sink market"
[39]
WSJ, 7/15/97,
"Getting going: Market exuberance isn't too rational? Sometimes,
investors just do it for fun"
[40]
WSJ, 12/11/20,
"When the Stock Market Is Too Much Fun; Robinhood sure is entertaining.
But it's also steering investors toward risky behaviors that could go
wrong."
[41]
WSJ, 4/20/21, "If
the Market's a Joke, Don't Be the Punch Line"
[42]
Barron's, 12/31/17, "Profiting
From Investors' Mistakes"
[43]
WSJ, 9/30/08, "The Depression
of 2008? Don't Count on It"
[44]
WSJ, 7/7/22,
"What Smart Investors Do in Bear Markets; Since you can't predict the
unpredictable, you should control the controllable"
[45]
WSJ, 7/12/08, "The Intelligent
Investor: Stop Worrying, and Learn to Love the Bear...."
[46]
WSJ, 1/25/22, "Why You Should Sit Out the Mayhem; What matters isn't
what the market does—but what you do in response"
[47]
WSJ, 10/14/16, "John
Maynard Keynes: Courage Is the Key to Investing Keynes…."
The Market Cycle: Up
"[T]he fact that so many people seem to be making big profits on the
investment and telling others about their good fortune, makes the investment
seem safe and too good to pass up." [1]
"Addicts often have to take heavier doses to get the same
thrill as time passes. The same is true in aging bull markets. Companies need to
report bigger and bigger earnings to get the same rise out of investors. …
[I]nvestors are offering skimpier rewards than they did in the past to companies
that beat expectations. … That could turn dangerous if companies are tempted
to dig ever deeper to show the next penny of profit. … [A]nalysts and
companies dance expectations downward in tandem. Analysts … deliberately
lowball their earnings estimates, helping companies to beat them and, over time,
boosting the stock price. … To call such predictably engineered numbers
'surprises' is almost absurd. … [E]ven though the game is obviously rigged,
investors are still playing along. … The companies aren't doing better than
expected, the expectations are artificially low. That makes surprises close to
meaningless indicator. … [S]omething may well be fundamentally off at a
company that comes up short of expectations. In today's market, that red flag is
redder than ever. … [B]ear in mind that late bull markets are breeding grounds
for temptation, when companies … often can't beat the habit of trying to beat
expectations. In 1999 and 2000, some allegedly cheated to keep doing it." [2]
"Trustify [Inc.]'s case puts a spotlight on a culture of Silicon
Valley in which ultra competitive investors might not ask for hard evidence such
as official bank statements from startups when they are rushing to invest in a
hot funding round that only allows days or hours to commit to an investment. 'If
you feel like you need verification of something and are afraid of asking for it
because it will throw you out of the deal or someone will really be offended,
maybe it's not the right deal for you,' said Stephen Palley, partner at law firm
Anderson Kill, who advises startups and investors. … Most seed-stage startups,
as well as many Series A startups, don't have audited financial statements or a
chief financial officer given the cost of such measures in the earliest stages
of a company, according to several venture investors. Two Trustify investors
said that they hadn't seen audited financial statements from Trustify. The
investors said they didn't know if the company ever had audited financial
statements. This due diligence problem is only exacerbated during a heated
venture market that had been setting records for valuations and funding levels
before the coronavirus pandemic. 'In an overheated environment everyone wants to
get in and people can get sloppy,' Mr. Palley said." [3]
"[T]here's
often a reverse incentive for investors to do too much digging before writing a
check. Ask too many tough questions and they risk losing money on their
investments or getting shut out of a current or future funding round." [4]
"Until recently, many investors believed central banks and other policy
makers had repealed the business cycle and that making money in the stock market
was something you could take for granted…. Maybe investors a century ago and
more had a wiser view. They believed … that financial panics were a form of
divine retribution for the sinful excesses of prosperity. … [B]elieving that
panics have become obsolete is a precondition for their recurrence. The modern
history of financial markets is a chronicle of attempts to control risk—if not
eliminate it. One after another, they have all failed. … But risk can't be
removed; it can only be moved. The techniques … may have caused [] financial
crisis … by making bankers and investors so complacent that they never
sufficiently tested whether their assumptions might be wrong. … The early U.S.
suffered severe financial panics roughly once every 13 years on average, in
1792, 1819, 1826, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1884, 1893 and 1907. … [O]ptimism leads to
a 'flood tide of prosperity,' which washes away caution, creating euphoria that
culminates in a crash—which, in turn, clears the way for recovery. … The
longer the good times roll, the more remote the chance of a decline will seem,
the more overconfident investors will feel and the more risk they will take. …
[I]t isn't investments that make or lose money; it is investors, with our own
excesses of greed and fear. … Blind faith in tools for controlling financial
risk has never made sense. If risk could ever be eliminated, investors would
immediately turn so euphoric that they would drive the prices of financial
assets sky-high—thereby creating an enormous new risk out of the absence of
all the old ones. Investors should never stop trying to manage their risks. But
they should never believe that they, or anyone else, can eliminate them." [5]
"'This
time is different' are said to be the four most expensive words in the English
language...." [6]
"[M]emories can be short, especially in the financial markets. ... People
are considering deals they wouldn't have touched 12 or 18 months ago.... In a
market that is hot ... they might not do as much due diligence.... That's the
risk...." [7]
"Investors usually dismiss worries about aggressive accounting when they
involve a fast-growing company in an exploding sector. Instead, they should
wonder why such a company would resort to aggressive accounting in the first
place." [8] "Around the start
of the millennium, high-flying dot-coms said their companies were worth hundreds
of millions based on unusual yardsticks like how many viewers were
looking at their websites. … [A]s investors learned in the dot-com bubble,
equity valuations can plunge fast. … The alternative valuation metrics of that
era, like 'eyeballs,' 'monthly unique visitors' and 'stickiness' looked idiotic
by late 2000. …'When the downturn happens, some of those creative
interpretations of valuations fall away,' [Mike Terwilliger, portfolio manager
at ResourceAlts] said. 'That can get pretty ugly.'" [9]
"As long as investors were willing to believe that profits were coming, it
all worked—until it didn't. ... [M]ost things that are economically
unsustainable, from money-losing dot-coms to subprime mortgages, eventually come
to a bitter end." [10]
What did P. T. Barnum say? "Whenever
greed meets reality and giddy markets collapse, Wall Street pros usually admit
that they sensed the end was coming. The warning signs were so familiar, they
belatedly confess, that it was difficult to believe anyone could miss them. The
chain of fools was running out. …
Privately, and increasingly publicly, financial
professionals warn this will end badly for the investing public. To cynics, the
only questions are when, and how badly. … [A] matrix of hedge funders,
private-equity dealmakers, bankers, lawyers and assorted promoters [] see the
excesses building. They point to you've got-to-be-joking valuations,
questionable disclosures and, most worrisome, a growing misalignment of
interests. … The bad omens are all around. … SPACs, also known as
blank-check companies … have a lot of wiggle room in valuing the businesses
they buy. Unlike traditional IPOs, where financial results are in focus, SPACs
can base entire deals on projections." [11]
"[A]t
a 2021 investment committee meeting of the California Public Employees'
Retirement System ... [a]n external advisor warned board members that the boom
in blank-check companies was a sign of froth in financial markets." [12]
"The SPAC boom cost investors billions. Insiders in the companies that went
public were on the other side of the trade. Executives and early investors in
companies that went public via special-purpose acquisition companies sold shares
… profiting before share prices collapsed. …
Companies that went public this way have lost more than $100 billion in
market value. At least 12 have filed for bankruptcy and more than 100 are
running low on cash…. Many executives claimed during the boom that SPAC
mergers were a better way for companies to go public than traditional initial
public offerings." [13]
"What made SPACs so special was the
'investor presentation' included in the merger filings after the SPAC found a
company to combine with....
Usually toward the tail end there would
be a financial projection – often going out years. As
it turns out, many (or most) of these companies' grand projections were
nothing but fantasy. … [I]f that's the only way a company can go public, you
have to wonder why." [14]
"If you come to crypto because (1) you are very
self-confident and (2) you don't know anything about traditional finance
and don't want to find out, then you will have a lot of fun repeating and
magnifying the historical errors of traditional finance." [15] "[W]e were experiencing a peak in
investment absurdity. The examples then were bitcoin, dogecoin and nonfungible
tokens (NFTs), as well as meme stocks, the prices of which were not tied to
sober reflections about their issuers' business prospects but to internet-fueled
speculation. Assets like these, which are priced in accordance with the 'greater
fool' theory…. The old saw applies about how if you're looking around the
poker table and can't identify the mark, it's you." [16]
"The low bids come as the NFT market has slowed in recent months." [17] "Any time there is a boom cycle
like this, otherwise smart investors do dumb things because they see their pals
and peers piling in and worry they will be left out. Envy is a pernicious
quality — and one that is all too human." [18]
Take a look at what else emerges towards the peak of a bubble.
"Over the past two years
… financial firms are pile-driving their clients into assets that have no
market. … Many of these other corporate offerings instead come directly from
tiny issuers or through dodgy brokers and financial advisers. … The
investments sometimes end up worthless, and egregious conflicts of interest are
rife among those selling them. … The fatal flaw: … often you can't sell at
all. … The risk of default or bankruptcy is high. Commissions and other fees
can easily exceed 10%." [19] "Alternative
investments—assets such as stocks and funds that don't regularly trade in
public markets—are one of the biggest fads on Wall Street. Investors being
pitched on them should take note: The market for Reg D investments isn't the
Wild West, where some rules don't apply. It's closer to anarchy, where rules
barely exist and disclosures can be utterly untrustworthy…." [20]
"Boom times are always accompanied by fraud. As the Victorian journalist
Walter Bagehot put it: 'All people are most credulous when they are most happy;
and when money has been made . . . there is a happy opportunity for ingenious
mendacity.' ... Bagehot observed, loose business practices will always
prevail during boom times. During such periods, the gatekeepers of the financial
system—whether bankers, professional investors, accountants, rating agencies
or regulators—should be extra vigilant. They are often just the
opposite." [21] "It is [] about how people
[m]ake decisions. … [C]ognitive shortcuts helped propel [Theranos] to a
valuation of more than $9bn, before … it spirall[ed] towards oblivion. One
shortcut concerned Ms. [Elizabeth] Holmes herself. … [P]eople too easily
equate confidence with competence. …Seasoned executives at large companies
lauded Ms. Holmes for 'owning the room', but ignored warning signs that the
firm's product did not work. That may have been because of a second
decision-making shortcut: many investors and executives relied heavily on the
judgments of others rather than their own eyes. … But at some point due
diligence has to extend to seeing a technology in action." [22] "The company's glittery board of
directors and self-assured pitch by its founder encouraged investors to ignore
the multiple red flags waving over Theranos. Trial evidence pointed to numerous
investors who put money into Theranos despite being warned away by experts. …
How many of the factors that enabled Theranos to raise hundreds of millions of
dollars without a workable technology have changed? None. Investors are still
looking for the next big thing, still looking for places to park their millions,
still susceptible to superficially persuasive pitches by self-assured confidence
schemers, still fearful of being left by the wayside as others pile in. That's
human nature. The only difference is that the numbers next to the dollar signs
are bigger." [23] "[N]one
of the Theranos investors, who invested
more than $700 million with Holmes between late 2013 and 2015, had ever
requested audited financial statements or asked whether the company even
used an outside accountant to verify the financial information that was
distributed. … Such boldface-name
investors ... lost their entire investments." [24]
John Mills wrote in 1867: "Panics do not destroy capital; they merely
reveal the extent to which it has been previously destroyed by its betrayal into
hopelessly unproductive works."
"'Prestigious companies, those that are household names, were actually more
prone to engage in financial fraud, which was very surprising,' says lead author
Jennifer Schwartz, a sociologist at Washington State University. 'We thought it
would be companies that were struggling financially, that were nearing
bankruptcy, but it was quite the opposite. It was the companies that thought
they should be doing better than they were, the ones with strong growth imperatives—those
were the firms that were most likely to cheat.'" [25]
"Recklessness with the financial truth is often a sign of an economic
bubble about to deflate—see the dot-bombs and Enron in late 2000 and the banks
amid the 2007 subprime mortgage crisis. Scandals don't cause recessions, but
they can help trigger one." [26]
"Regulators are scrutinizing whether companies are manipulating financial
results to meet Wall Street targets, as a profit-squeeze amps up pressure on
executives to 'make the numbers.' … Tough economic times have historically
been fertile ground for earnings management. Executives use flexibility in the
accounting treatment of items such as reserves for losses, or revenue
recognition, to boost reported earnings per share." [27]
"[W]hen a company plays sneaky with one number, there's pretty good odds
that they're being sneaky about other numbers too." [28]
"Get ready for what will feel like an inescapable wave of corporate fraud.
With financial conditions tightening, the market is primed to put pressure on
corporate balance sheets, tempting executives to cheat to meet Wall Street's
expectations. …. [E]xecutives [] think that by committing acts of fraud, they
can obfuscate their dire financial situation. … [W]orldCom's bottom line took
a hit. To make it look like it was still growing at a healthy rate, executives
started pulling accounting tricks — recording expenses as investments and
manipulating cash reserves…. [C]orporations commit[ting] securities fraud …
may appear to experience a sudden liquidity crisis that is not really so
sudden." [29] HAv2.3 recognizes the
games.
"Manipulation of earnings from Corporate America is on the rise, an ominous
omen for the U.S. economy. … Unless you study accounting, you have likely
never come across the M-Score…. The 'M' is for manipulation, and uses a
company's financial statements to determine whether it is engaging in
manipulation. Since the 1990s, the metric has been used to identify red flags
at individual companies. … The probability of manipulation usually rises
rapidly in the quarters before the economy tips into recession. … The new
aggregate measure … shows that the collective probability of fraud across
major companies is the highest in over 40 years. The M-Score is calculated from
eight ratios on a company's balance sheet, all
numbers that public companies report…. The theory is that their index might be
catching distress in the stages when some companies are taking steps to try to cover it
up. That is when conditions on the ground are beginning to deteriorate, but
firms are continuing to report strong earnings. The stock market might behave
like the corporate sector is still humming along when in reality, its earnings
are increasingly buoyed by tricks." [30]
"History confirms … that burst bubbles and accounting controversies tend to go hand in hand.
… Consider past experience.
Corporate bankruptcies and unraveling frauds were among the hallmarks of the
1930s, following the crash of 1929. … The root of the accounting
problem … is that stock-market bubbles reward aggressive
accounting, since it inflates earnings and helps push up companies' stock
prices. As bubbles develop and the continued inflation of stock prices becomes
paramount, conservative accountants and executives become discredited, and
bending the rules becomes standard." [31]
HAv2.3 calculates M-Scores and other similar indicators of financial
shenanigans.
"Investors rely on auditors to serve as watchdogs against corporate fraud.
But auditors have little to gain—and much to lose—from doing a lot of
barking. Although failing to detect fraud can be disastrous, auditors know that
identifying genuine wrongdoing usually means considerable trouble and
expense--and perhaps questions about why it wasn't spotted sooner. Conversely, a
false alarm about fraud antagonizes clients, dismays supervisors and produces
its own stresses. Auditors thus learn to be reluctant skeptics." [32]
"Wall
Street's top watchdog is warning that the market selloff and fears of a
recession could encourage more companies to cook their books, and it is
pressuring auditors to catch them. … After coming under fire for its role in
Wirecard and other corporate failures, [Ernst & Young] two years ago told
clients it was taking a number of steps to more actively look for big frauds …
The firm is using artificial intelligence to parse ledgers for suspicious
transactions, mining social-media posts and using forensic-accounting
specialists earlier to look for potential accounting
violations at high-risk companies…. … Such measures by EY and other accounting
firms don't overcome the basic conflict of interest in the industry: Accounting firms are paid by the companies they audit, making it
less likely they will confront bad behavior. Worries that auditors can buckle
under client pressure to sign off on suspicious financial statements go back
decades. In the run-up to the 2001 collapse of Enron Corp., a partner at its
now-defunct auditor Arthur Andersen complained that his advice against certain accounting
practices was being ignored. The partner was later removed from the Enron
audit team, following complaints by an executive of the Houston-based energy
company." [33]
"The [internal auditors] had run
into an inexplicable $2 billion that the company said in public disclosures had
been spend on capital expenditures…. Capital costs, such as equipment,
property and other major purchases, can be depreciated over long periods of
time. In many cases, companies spread those costs over years. Operating costs
such as salaries, benefits and rent are subtracted from income on a quarterly
basis, and so they have an immediate impact on profits.
… By 2000, WorldCom had started to rely on aggressive accounting to
blur the true picture of its badly sagging business. … But by 2001 it wasn't
enough to keep the company afloat. … [Mr. David Myers, Worldcom's controller]
admitted that he knew the accounting treatment was wrong…. He said that the
entries should not have been made, but that once it had started, it was hard to
stop. … [W]orldCom stunned Wall Street with an announcement that it had
inflated profits by $3.8 billion…." [34]
"[W]e are living in 'a post-truth environment.' That translates,
[Jim Chanos founder of hedge fund Kynikos Associates] argues, into a mood in
which investors are also willing to suspend disbelief. … 'There's a very clear
link between great episodes of fraud and the financial cycle. When we've had
great frauds, they’ve always been at the tail end of great financial cycles,'
says Chanos…. [I]t's then easier for fraudsters to raise money, and generally
they're not exposed until the cycle turns down because then people stop funding
them and want their money back,' he explains. … 'People end up getting more enthralled with
the story than they are with the numbers,' [Dan David, the co-founder of
GeoInvesting] says. 'That's a mistake.'" [35]
"The financial use of 'bubble' originated centuries ago to describe
massive speculation that inflates market prices to the bursting point. …
[T]hey are diabolically difficult to identify without the benefit of hindsight.
…Financial markets, however, can easily heat up fivefold or even 10-fold and
then collapse at least 50% in a flash, burning millions of speculators and
sometimes charring entire economies. … When prices go up, more people buy,
inflaming prices even more and attracting another rush of speculators. That
lures in naive buyers who think making money is easy. But hedge funds and other
institutions also chase those hot returns, fanning the flames even higher. …
Marketability, credit and speculation are necessary, but not sufficient,
to start and maintain a market fire. A fourth component … call[ed] a 'spark,'
is also needed. That can come from new technology, government intervention or
both. … [M]ost bubbles tend to be confined to a few stocks or
industries." [36]
A "spark" assures some that
"this time, it's different."
"The only way to argue that stocks aren't wildly expensive is to say
that something fundamental has changed about the market environment. …
[I]nvestors could pay a heavy price if they turn out to be wrong. …
[S]tandard measures show valuations are at rarely-seen levels that have
typically ended in tears. … [E]mbracing new paradigms can get investors into
trouble." [37]
"Bubbles are perhaps unavoidable; some people will extrapolate too
far." [38] "[T]he most
enthusiastic buyers in market bubbles often believe they'll stick around to
capture even bigger payoffs in the distant future. Bubbles form when catchy
stories and the human need for imitation and conformity turn investing into a
social imperative." [39]
"Spotting asset bubbles is hard because
there is almost always a good underlying reason for what's going on. Canals,
railways and the internet really were going to revolutionize the economy. The
mistake with bubbles is that prices disconnect from what the new development
will justify. The difficulty for those of us trying to spot bubbles is to tell
how much is really justified, and how big the disconnect will become. …
As usual, the question is how high is too high. … One of the
characteristics of bubbles is that hope of profit encourages exuberant optimism,
and investors hand over money for projects they'd never consider in normal
times. … The last boom peaked in 2007 along with the stock market, and might
have been a sign of investors having a get-rich-quick mind-set. … [T]oo much
money is already chasing too few good-quality deals." [40] "'These
things can go further than anyone would expect because they tend to be
self-reinforcing' Mr. [Chief Investment Officer of Cambria Investment Management
Meb] Faber said. ... One possible sign of a bubble is a belief that negative
developments are somewhat positive." [41]
"[D]roves of newcomers rushed to trade stocks based on message-board
rumors." [42]"Frenetic trading
in stocks and options of no apparent worth has erupted anew, a classic sign of
speculation that often coincides with tops in the market. … More scary is the
opprobrium heaped on GameStop's detractors, who have been objects of online
attacks." [43]
"Most days, [Kevin Paffrath] live-streams on
the platform for several hours, talking about the stock market and doling out
investing advice in a rapid-fire, self-deprecating manner. … Many of these
influencers have no formal training as financial advisers and no background in
professional investing, leading them to pick stocks based on the whims of
popular opinion or to dispense money-losing advice. … Still, the online model is entirely new, with
influencers judged on the content they produce, rather than their investing
track records; and they often get paid based on numbers of subscribers and
viewers, rather on the investment income their advice generates for clients. …
Many influencers report that when they hype an investment, they get the
page views they crave. When the message is bearish, however, viewers turn away,
or worse, attack the messenger with vicious trolling. … The real danger in the
social-media finance world, he says, is that younger influencers tend to
believe the market only goes up." [44]
"Venerable
institutions … have employees combing through [] internet forum[s] … in
search of trading opportunities. They turned to these sources following a period
of market mayhem dominated by amateurs…." [45]
"You
can never predict when a bubble will actually burst. Some of them can continue
for a remarkably long time. But when they do, they almost always do so quickly
and dramatically." [46]
"At one point, the most coveted Beanie Babies, which sold for about $5 in
the store, were worth about $5,000." [47]
"What goes up often keeps rising. That's the logic at the heart of
momentum investing—a strategy that's been surging lately. ... What's more,
some investing pros say we've entered an era well suited to momentum
strategies—where one asset after another experiences a bubble that then
bursts. ... These momentum trends in markets have more to do with the
faddishness of human behavior than the fundamentals of economics and balance
sheets. In essence, investors often flock to the stocks that have been going up,
which tends to propel them further. Momentum ... traders don't analyze why ...
stocks ... are on a winning streak recently or determine whether the stocks are
expensive or cheap in theory. Momentum seekers jump on the bandwagon, intending
to jump off again before the inevitable train wreck that ends the journey. With
so many traders watching the same charts and seeing the same signals, these
trends often become ... a self-fulfilling prophecy. ... [I]nvestors get excited
because momentum beats the market on the
way up—and often forget that it gets hammered more than the market on the way
down." [48] "What a week for crypto enthusiasts!
…Much of Bitcoin's rise may just be driven by FOMO [an acronym for 'fear of
missing out']. … A survey by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority found that
76% of young people investing in high-risk products felt a sense of
competitiveness with friends, family and other acquaintances, making the
cryptocurrency look more like a machine for YOLO [an acronym for 'you only live
once.' It is a call to live life to its fullest extent, even embracing behavior
which carries inherent risk] trades rather than a reliable store of value. [49]
"Cryptocurrency- related job postings in the U.S. surged
395% between 2020 and 2021 … dramatically outpac[ing] the wider tech
industry…. The most common crypto job postings were blockchain developer and
engineer…. This jobs boom comes as investments are pouring into the industry.
Venture capitalists invested a record $30 billion in crypto companies in
2021…. And in another sign of the times, Los Angeles has renamed its iconic
Staples Center the Crypto.com Arena." [50]
"[C]ryptocurrencies, with their huge price
fluctuations seemingly unrelated to fundamentals, are about as risky as an asset
class can get. … Maybe the rising valuation (although not use) of Bitcoin and
its rivals represents something more than a bubble, in which people buy an asset
simply because other people have made money off that asset in the past."
[51]
"There is something unseemly
… about the famous and fabulously wealthy urging crypto on their fans.
Cryptocurrencies, after all, are in many cases not so much currencies as
speculative thingamabobs - digital tokens whose value is predicated largely on
the idea that someone will take them off your hands at a higher price than it
cost you to acquire them. … The cryptocurrency industry's marketing efforts
are focused on young people, especially young men. … [T]hey amount to a macho
taunt: If you're a real man, you'll buy crypto. …
[C]ulture has taken a sinister turn: that we've sanctioned an economy in
which tech start-ups compete, in broad daylight to lure the vulnerable with
get-rich-quick schemes." [52]
"When a public company is in dire financial straits – with too much debt,
not enough cash and financial metrics going the wrong direction – there's
usually an effort to get the banks or other lenders and/or big investors to
figure out a way to work things out. If things are really bad, that typically
involves issuing new debt to replace the old debt… and doing such things as
granting waivers on debt covenants to give the company one last chance to avoid
having to wear the scarlet 'B'. … [T]hese stocks are almost always of
companies behind a popular brand, product or concept or former high-flyer… the
very kind of companies that are like magnets to the 'meme' stock crowd. … [A]
key attraction is the ability to squeeze heavily shorted stocks higher. That
means buying them for no other reason of forcing short sellers to cover at
higher prices, creating a self-fulfilling momentum driven feeding frenzy. …
But for most investors, it's the same old 'fear of missing out' (FOMO) trap…
that if they don’t get in they'll miss out on the next big home run, which for
some reason always happens to involve a company on the verge of going out of
business. … None of that really matters because these investors – almost
naively – are playing straight into the hands of investment bankers behind
this ingenious strategy…. [W]hat goes up on hot air, plunges when it's
gone…." [53]
"In
a market bubble, it's easy to confuse opportunity for genius. … [I]t's no
surprise that some of the loudest voices from the market's precipitous rise have
gone silent. … Let their silence be a lesson. When financial markets
are minting not just money but celebrities, it's time to be more than skeptical.
It's time to prepare for the kind of disaster that makes once great stock
pickers look like pikers. … The most popular notion of our last rally was a
bet that economic conditions would remain favorable to companies that didn't
make money — that these firms could grow off debt and investment capital
alone. … The market seemed so friendly that influencers realized they
could get average investors in on this action too. … When people are making
money in the market on some new fad or asset, it can be hard to not jump on
board. But if that buzzy money-making investment sounds too good to be true, it
probably is. And if it sounds too stupid to be true, it's probably even stupider
than you think. … It's really never a good sign when you see celebrities
hanging around the stock market, and during the bubble they were everywhere….
Their main message is that it's not hard to make money — in fact, you'll miss
out if you don't get involved. It is a siren song for gullible
people. Good information about the stock market does not come easy, and
Gordon Gekko was right to say that if you want a friend on Wall Street, you
should buy a dog. If anyone tries to make you feel like you're just as smart as
the professionals, they're trying to take your money." [54]
"[T]he bubble pops when everybody
has concluded that what has gone on with prices make sense. ... [T]here isn't
much of a step between believing that a bubble will continue and believing that
not participating in the bubble will amount to lost opportunity." [55]
"A bubble occurs when exaggerated expectations of future price increases
generate unusual demand either by people who fear being price out of the market
or by investors hoping to make a lot of money fast. A bubble is a
self-fulfilling prophecy for a while, as successive rounds of buyers push prices
higher and higher. But the willingness to continue to pay higher and higher
prices is fragile: It will end whenever buyers perceive that prices are no
longer going up. Hence, bubbles carry the seeds of their own destruction. Only
time is needed for the bubbles to end." [56]
"[O]nce a crisis of confidence gets going, it can be impossible to control.
... [I]t's easy to be wise after the event, whereas wisdom before the event is
apparently impossible. ... [F]inancial confidence is always more fragile than it
looks, and [] worst-case scenarios have an infuriating habit of coming
true." [57]
Whether fake news
or not, this article has to signal the top of an overheated financial market.
"A reality TV star who launched a gassy venture
peddling her fancy flatulence to strangers Stephanie Matto, 31, blew away people
on social media when she recently announced that she makes more than $50,000 a
week selling her farts. … But after making $200,000 in sales, the influencer
has announced her retirement when she passed one too many and got the wind
knocked out of her…. Matto was rushed to a hospital with chest pains she
feared were symptoms of a heart attack…. After undergoing a battery of tests,
including blood work and an EKG, Matto was told that her pain was the result of
her steady diet of gas-inducing beans and eggs. … The newly retired fart
peddler said she plans to donate a portion of her income to charity that
supports gastric disorders." [58]
"When things start to go wrong,
they get worse than anyone ever imagined they could. ... Regulators should ask
the dozen or so top financial services firms ... what their most recent crop of
top business school hires are working on—not just their general assignments
but precisely what they're doing. ... [C]rises follow the talent with a
lag of about three years." [59]
"Several top schools have added or rushing to add classes about Bitcoin and
the record-keeping technology that it introduced, know as the blockchain." [60]
"Baruch [College's master's financial
engineering program] teaches students skills like data science and financial
modeling. … Funds have been recruiting the kind of people who can make
investment decisions using code, big data and machine learning. Two of the
Baruch graduates working at hedge funds reported a compensation of $1 million or
more." [61]
If the reports are true and if those reporting believe in their continuing
abilities to generate humongous profits, they could set up their own shops and
not answer to and share with others.
"So what does all this mean to us as investors? In a speculative
environment, just about the only ones who profit are short-term traders.
... If you want to bail out, you have to do so on the way up and not worry about
missing the peak." [62] However, learning and doing
financial statement analysis is not easy, but the effort is worth it—it keeps
your investment decisions rational.
The
Market Cycle: Down
"So
what precipitates a crash? It's not just price—it's
speculation, volatility, stock issuance, accelerated price increases and a
disproportionate rise in prices among newer firms." [63]
"[A] series of manias [] have gripped the
financial world. For months, professional and everyday investors have pushed up
the prices of stocks and real estate. Now the frenzy has spilled over into the
riskiest—and in some cases, wackiest—assets, including digital ephemera and
media, cryptocurrencies, collectibles like trading cards and even sneakers.
… So many got creative and … took on more
risk. … That
has now led to mini-bubbles…. [S]tocks … became even more expensive. That
was when more people started investing in nontraditional assets. … Predicting
when and how the party will end is anyone's guess. … [A] Roaring
Twenties-style era of prosperity … decade ended in a devastating crash, [but]
the euphoria lasted years."
[64]
"[M]any
who saw the bubble inflating [Panic of 1837] warned about it bursting, including
journalists.... People will over-lend and over-borrow until the day of
reckoning. ... It's just the way we are." [65]
"'When people are stressed their reason is hampered, so they look at what
other people are doing. … [I]t leads you to engage in the same behavior,'
[Sander van der Linden, an assistant professor of social psychology at Cambridge
University] said." [66]
[1]
WSJ, 1/3/09, "Why We Keep Falling for Financial Scams"
[2]
WSJ, 7/14/18,
"Don't Get Too Excited by the Earnings 'Surprise' Party"
[3]
WSJ, 8/5/20, "Former Trustify CEO's Indictment Highlights Due
Diligence Dilemma; CEO misstated revenue, sent fake email about investments,
indictment alleges"
[4]
CNBC.com, 1/14/22, "American Greed: Founders
get blamed for start-up scandals, but where were investors?"
[5]
WSJ, 3/28/20, "We Can't Prevent Market
Panics. We Can Control How We React. The dangers lurking in the market can
be hidden or delayed, but never eliminated.
For investors, slumps are a chance for introspection–and, sometimes, new
opportunity."
[6]
WSJ, 1/20/21, "Stocks Could Plunge Even if the Economy
Booms...."
[7]
Bloomberg, 12/17/18, "Investors Are Piling Into Loans That Banks Have
Avoided Since the Crash"
[8]
WSJ, 12/14/05, "Cerner's Growth Has Been Healthy, But Its Accounting
Could Be Ailing"
[9]
Bloomberg, 8/10/18, "Credit
Market's 'Eyeball Valuations' Raise Investors' Eyebrows"
[10]
NYT, 9/1/18, "The Next Financial Crisis Lurks Underground"
[11]
Bloomberg, 3/8/21,"'Hey, Hey, Money
Maker': Inside the $156 Billion SPAC Bubble"
[12]
Bloomberg, 1/3/23, "Investing
Novices Are Calling the Shots for $4 Trillion at US Pensions"
[13]
WSJ, 5/30/23, "Company Insiders
Made Billions Before SPAC Bust; Executives and early investors sold shares
worth $22 billion"
[14]
On The Street, 8/15/23, "SPACs
– The Implosion Continues. And... Where's the SEC?"
[15]
Bloomberg-Money Stuff,
9/21/22, "Crypto investing philosophy"
[16]
Los Angeles Times
[LAT], 12/26/21, "For the U.S., a landmark year for stupidity"
[17]
WSJ, 4/15/22,
"Jack Dorsey Tweet NFT Once Sold for $2.9 Million, Now Might Fetch
Under $14,000...."
[18]
NYT, 11/14/22, "What to make of FTX and
SBF?"
[19]
WSJ, 1/13/23, "An Iowa Farmer Tried to Dodge Stock-Market Turmoil. It
Cost Him $900,000…."
[20]
WSJ, 4/7/23, "Digging Into a $344 Billion
Investing Mystery; Preposterous claims in private investment offerings
illustrate an important point about red-hot 'Reg D' securities: No one is
checking to see if the details in these filings are even remotely true"
[21]
WSJ, 4/17/09,
"A Fortune Up in Smoke"
[22]
Economist, 12/11/21,
"The shortcuts to Theranos"
[23]
LAT, 1/4/22,
"Theranos verdict won't stop foolish investors"
[24]
MarketWatch,
10/20/18, "The
last days of Theranos — the financials were as over
hyped as the blood tests"
[25]
FastCompany, 2/8/21, "Cheating in plain sight: Big, well-known
companies are more likely to commit financial fraud"
[26]
Fortune, 1/1/17, "The Ugly Unethical Underside of Silicon
Valley"
[27]
WSJ, 3/10/23, "SEC Is Focusing on Earnings Manipulation by Companies;
Watchdog scrutinizes financial reports to sniff out accounting Tricks"
[28]
Footnoted.org, 4/24/09, "Pretty sneaky at FTI....")
[29]
Business Insider, 1/31/23, "The Great Fraud Reckoning")
[30]
WSJ, 3/24/23, "Accounting-Fraud Indicator Signals Coming Economic
Trouble; A tool to identify corporate earnings manipulation finds the most
risk in over 40 years"
[31]
WSJ, 2/22/02, "Burst Bubbles Often Expose Cooked Books And Trigger
SEC Probes, Bankruptcy Filings"
[32]
WSJ, 4/13/17,
"Can a Few Words Help Auditors Detect Fraud? …"
[33]
WSJ, 11/3/23, "SEC Accountant Warns of Heightened Fraud Risk…."
[34]
WSJ, 10/30/02, "Uncooking the Books: How Three Unlikely Sleuths
Discovered Fraud at WorldCom --- Company's Own Employees Sniffed Out Cryptic
Clues And Followed Hunches…."
[35]
Institutional Investor, 9/17/18, "How Jim Chanos Uses Cynicism,
Chutzpah—and a Secret Twitter Account—to Take on Markets"
[36]
WSJ, 11/20/20, "A Stock Market Bubble? It's More Like a Fire; Wild
market speculation can feel like an out-of-control blaze: The more it expands and the hotter it gets, the more
havoc it can wreak"
[37]
WSJ, 12/24/20, "Has the Fed Rewritten the Laws of Investing? Things
probably aren't different this time with market valuations so high, but if
they are then that still might not be so good."
[38]
Economist, 11/12/20, "Value investing is struggling to remain
relevant"
[39]
WSJ, 8/7/20, "Do You Know the Difference Between Being Rich and Being
Wealthy?"
[40]
WSJ, 10/19/20, "Wall Street's
Hottest Financing Tool Makes Me Worry About the Market; Shaq, Playboy and
Nikola are all on the blank-check bandwagon, part of a boom in SPACs that is
unsettling"
[41]
NYT, 1/14/21, "A Rally That Won't Stop or a Bubble About to Pop"
[42]
WSJ, 1/24/21," If It Looks Like a Bubble and Swims Like a
Bubble...."
[43]
Barron's, 6/22/21, "GameStop Stock Is Just the Latest Sign of a
Speculative Frenzy"
[44]
WSJ, 8/27/21, "The
Social-Media Stars Who Move Markets…."
[45]
WSJ, 8/27/21, "Wall Street Is Looking to
Reddit for Investment Advice; Deep-pocketed banks and hedge funds now take
their cues from armies of Main Street traders"
[46]
WSJ, 9/14/09, "Burned by Beanie Babies and Other Bubbles"
[47]
WSJ, 2/6/21, "Is GameStop a Bubble? History's Spectacular Crashes,
From Tulips to Beanie Babies. What goes up must come down. Bubbles have
boosted—and burned—investors for centuries."
[48]
WSJ, 5/3/10, "Maybe the Rearview Mirror is Right"
[49]
Bloomberg
Opinion, 10/24/21, "Today"
[50]
Axios, 1/14/22, "Crypto jobs boom"
[51]
NYT, 1/28/22, "How
Crypto Became the New Subprime"
[52]
NYT,
2/2/22, "Why Is Matt Damon Shilling for Crypto?"
[53]
Substack, 8/13/23, "Playing Investors for Fools"
[54]
Business Insider, 10/18/22,
"The stock market crash is exposing Wall Street's biggest
Charlatans"
[55]
WSJ, 5/24/05, "Betting Against the House"
[56] WSJ Opinion, 8/24/04, "Mi
Casa Es Su Housing Bubble"
[57]
Bloomberg, 8/31/18, "Don't Be Baffled by Argentina's Crisis - What's
hard to imagine in good times can quickly become inevitable"
[58]
New York Post, 1/5/22, "'90 Day Fiancé'
star retires from selling farts after heart attack Scare"
[59]
Money, Greed, and Risk [1999] by Charles R.
Morris
[60]
NYT, 2/8/18, "Cryptocurrencies Come to Campus"
[61]
WSJ, 12/30/19, "In Battle to Recruit New
Quants, Hedge Funds Outpay Banks...."
[62]
WSJ, 8/26/09, "Family Money: How I Got
Burned by Beanie Babies"
[63]
TheStreet.com,
4/17/17, "Here's How to Spot a Market Bubble"
[64]
NYT, 3/13/21,
"From Crypto Art
to Trading Cards, Investment Manias Abound"
[65]
WSJ, 4/18/19,
"Easy Money, Bad Decisions"
[66]
CNBC, 5/11/20, "Here's why people are panic buying and stockpiling
toilet paper to cope with coronavirus fears"
The Opportunity
"[A] crisis is not just a bad situation. ... The Chinese have a similar
concept: The characters for crisis (危机)
combine parts of those for danger (危险) and opportunity (机会). A crisis is a point when people have to make rapid choices under
extreme pressure.... A crisis is certainly a test of character. It can be scary.
... Students of crises are fond of dividing them into phases. For example,
Charles Kindleberger's 'Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial
Crises' identifies five phases of a financial crisis: an exogenous, normally
positive, shock to the system; a bubble in which people exaggerate the benefits
of that shock; distress when some investors realize that the game cannot last;
the crash; and finally a depression. ... The bubble is typically characterized
by mania and denial. Things are going well—or, at least, appear to be.
Feedback loops end up magnifying confidence. ... In finance, leverage plays a
big part. ... Manic individuals ... end up taking excessive risks.... But before
that, there is denial. People do not wish to recognize that there is a
fundamental sickness in a system, especially when they are doing so well. ... Market
participants had such a strong interest in keeping the game going that they
turned a blind eye to the unsustainable buildup of leverage. ... It is hard
to recognize a sickness, given that there is usually some ideology that explains
away the mania as a new normal. The few naysayers can be ridiculed by those who
benefit from the continuation of the status quo. ... The crash, by contrast, is
characterized by panic and scapegoating. People fear that the system could
collapse. Negative feedback loops are in operation: The loss of confidence
breeds further losses in confidence. ... Events move extremely fast, and
decisions have to be made rapidly. ... [¶] In this phase, no one denies that
there is a problem. But there is often no agreement over what has gone wrong.
Protagonists are reluctant to accept their share of the responsibility but
instead seek to blame others. Such scapegoating, though, prevents people from
reforming a system fundamentally so that similar crises do not recur. Crises
will always be a feature of life." [1]
"What does it mean when
investment professionals say, 'Buy the panic'? . . . Buying stocks during a
market panic sounds easy to do when you look at history. Still, it's much harder
in practice. ... If investors wait for the market to rally again before
investing, then they are giving up on potential profits. But if they act too
early when making stock purchases, then they may incur even more losses.
Investors can conquer that problem by making measured purchases depending on how
confident they are about where the market is moving. ... However, the largest
hurdle when investing during a panic is that the best time to do so is when you
will likely be least willing…. It's the moment of maximum fear, which will
also coincide with the peak in panic."
[2]
"True contrarians only buy stock
when it makes them feel physically sick. ... Even if you successfully picked the
bottom, would you have held ... ? ... But even with perfect hindsight there were
plenty of great reasons to sell along the way. ... [W]ould you be able to ignore
the temptation to lock in profit?" [3]
"[I]t's easy to say you'd buy more stocks if the market fell 10%, 20% or
more. In a real market crash, it's a lot harder to step up and buy when every
stock price is turning blood-red, pundits are shrieking about Armageddon and
your family is begging you not to throw more money into the flames. Then risk is
no longer a notion; it's an emotion. … The best guide to whether you will dump
stocks in the next financial crisis is whether you did in the last one. If you
weren't investing in 2008-09, look back at the fourth quarter of 2018, when
stocks lost nearly 20%." [4]
"In a severe bear market, you're often trading with someone who has to get
out or go broke so you may have the advantage." [5]
"It's the time to buy for investors able to stomach the market's swoons.
… Mom-and-pop investors have largely been sitting out—a sign that the rally
doesn't reflect widespread optimism. … Paradoxically, some of the most
skeptical investors—short-sellers, who make their money betting that shares
will fall—have contributed to the rally. Short-sellers borrow shares and
immediately sell them in the hope that they can buy them back later at a lower
price and pocket the difference. But when the market goes against them and share
prices rise, short-sellers can face disastrous losses if they don't quickly buy
back the shares and return them to their lender. Retail shares have bounced back
in April, most likely driven by short-sellers rushing to cover their bets.
Nordstrom and Macy's—both up more than 20 percent this month—were top
targets of short-sellers in recent weeks, according to S3 Partners, which tracks
the activity of short-selling. … And don't underestimate the fear of missing
out. As shares rise, professional money managers feel pressure to buy stocks to
protect their reputations. … Concerns over so-called career risk can overwhelm
fundamental analysis of stocks and bonds, forcing a headlong rush into markets
even if a buyer doubts the rally can last." [6]
"Warren Buffett famously said he
tries to be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.
For some money managers, that isn't just clever advice—it is an entire
investing strategy. The idea of embracing out-of-favor stocks, sometimes called
contrarian investing, isn't new. But the approach requires a strong stomach
in the best markets, let alone during historic downturns." [7]
"[C]ontrarian thinking is only helpful at extraordinary inflection
points in the market.... Most people think that contrarian investing means
doing the opposite of what others are doing. But going against the crowd is a
surefire way of getting trampled. The majority of investors are usually
right. True contrarians look for points of maximum exuberance or despair, which
is when the majority is generally wrong. ... The way you can tell most investors
who go against the herd is from the hoof marks on their backs." [8]
"The trick for contrarians … [is] to avoid being contrary all the time.
… At turning points … the herd [i]s nearly always wrong. … [L]ook[] for
'crescendos of euphoria and pessimism'…. Opportunities ar[i]se when 'something
has changed for the better but the market has not yet recognized it' … and
when 'nothing has changed but the market has given too much emphasis to the
negatives.' … 'A lawyer is trained to assemble as many of the available facts
as possible before making a decision … whereas a portfolio manager can gain a
competitive edge if he is able to make a sound decision before all of the pieces
of the jigsaw puzzle are in place.'" [9]
"Meanwhile, company insiders appear
to be buying. According to AlphaSense, a data platform, regulatory filings
announcing purchases by executives and directors have jumped in recent weeks.
… • At companies with market caps of at least $1 billion, there have been
1,305 filings for stock purchases so far this month, compared with just 113
during the same period last year. Executives may think the bear market has hit
their shares too hard, or that purchases with their own money serve as a sign of
commitment during tough times — or a bit of both. [10]
"Everyone thinks
they're a genius in a bull market, but it's only when prices head south that
some people really stand out from the crowd. ... Knowing how to handle fearful
times like these offer the best opportunity to avoid lagging behind the market.
… Investor psychology in a major bear market is a mirror image of what it was
the past few years: The more false alarms there were on the way up, the likelier
investors were to embrace risk, viewing dips as buying opportunities. On the way
down, so-called suckers' rallies—and the technical bull market we reached on
Thursday may well have been one—get our hopes up and then crush them. By the
time a really prolonged bear market is about to end, investors who haven't sold
in disgust probably have a lower percentage of their net worth in stocks than at
the outset. That is one of the costliest mistakes investors make. A
surprising share of a new bull market's returns pile up in its very early stages
when people are most fearful. … Making lemonade out of the market's lemons
sounds tempting, but it isn't easy. The old saw goes that the stock market is
the only one where people run away when there's a sale. Beforehand they crowd in
when the wares are most expensive because they see everyone else getting
rich." [11]
Value Investing
"[]During economic down cycles when everyone's more pessimistic, investors
turn to deep-value stocks,
meaning stocks with relatively
low valuations but with good cash flows and dividend payouts… [] … The
debate between value investors and
growth investors goes back at
least a century, and appears to
be explained in part by genetic
predispositions. Some investors prefer
the safety of companies that have reliable earnings, plenty of cash and stable
business models; others get excited about
finding tomorrow's success stories today. The risk for investors who favor cheap stocks
is 'the value trap,' a
term for stocks that look too cheap to ignore—but stay that way even
after you buy them." [12]
"Most investors 'almost reflexively described themselves as value
investors....' ... No sane person wants to overpay for stocks." [13]
"The cardinal distinction between a share's price and its value goes back
to Benjamin Graham, the father of value investing. Price is a creature of the
market's mood, he wrote. In booms, it is set by the greediest buyer; in busts by
the most fearful seller. A stock's value, in contrast, is enduring. It is
anchored by the worth of a firm's assets. The enterprising investor can profit
from finding stocks that sell for much less than their value, said Graham. There
have since been countless studies showing that value stocks do better than
'growth' stocks, their antithesis, over the long haul. … Frumpy value stock
gets left behind—until sanity returns. … This agonizing is not for most
people, says James Montier, of GMO, a fund-management firm: 'They don't want to
be wrong for as long as it takes.' Value investors hope to be rewarded for being
so out of step with everyone else for so much of the time. But a select few can
endure—and even enjoy—it." [14]
"Prof. Eugene Fama, who won an economics Nobel
Prize, argued that value stocks
"Historically, value-style investing has
performed in fits and starts—typically lagging behind growth for extended
periods but ultimately winning the race, at least for investors who don't drop
out before the finish line. … Value investing isn't as simple as finding great
companies trading at attractive prices. There are many theories for why value
has underperformed. The easiest one to grasp: Legitimate bargains abound early
in a market cycle, but eventually value stocks get picked over. If something is
cheap in the later stages of a bull market, it's usually for good reason."
[16]
"Small-cap stocks ... typically
rise ahead of a wider market rally and fall ahead of a broader market
capitulation. ... Contrarian investors see a buying opportunity in the
recent rout." [17]
"[F]ewer investors analyze one value stock at a time by hand.
Often, they use computers to buy the value 'factor' en masse, capturing
cheapness as a common attribute across hundreds of stocks at once. That has
lower costs for investors. But it has also driven up prices, reducing the supply
of bargains among value stocks...."
[18]
"[T]he
higher long-run return from investing in cheaper stocks is a righteous form of
payback for the pain of sitting around for years watching all those growth
stocks with piddling profits go straight up. If you do not have a vast reservoir
of patience and you can't ignore the better short-term fortune of other
investors, you won't be able to stomach value investing long enough to benefit
from it." [19]
Sometimes,
a "value" fund is wolf in sheep's clothing. "Zoom was priced at
690 times the company's earnings over the past 12 months and 203 times what
analysts are guessing it will earn in the next 12. Among the institutional
buyers were three dozen 'value investors,' whose mission is to find the cheapest
stocks. … Those are tiny stakes. But that might be the point. …
Small bets on scorching-hot stocks make sense for many fund managers. If
they bet wrong, their returns won't suffer much. If they bet right, the payoff
on even tiny bets, can add significantly to a fund's overall return." [20]
[1]
NYT, 10/7/12,
"The Dangers and Opportunities in a Crisis"
[2]
WSJ,
4/6/20, "What Is 'Buy the Panic'? Buying stocks when others are selling
is a proven approach—but sometimes it takes nerve"
[3]
WSJ, 3/8/19,
"It's Hard to Buy at the Bottom and Hang On"
[4]
WSJ, 9/6/19,
"Knowing If You Can Stomach the Next Big Market Swing…."
[5]
WSJ, 9/4/21,
"What You've Lost in This Bull Market; Investors who no longer fear
their bets could explode are seeking out risks they don't have to take"
[6]
NYT, 4/8/20, "A Rush to Stocks,
Driven by Bargains and Bravery"
[7]
WSJ, 5/12/09,
"Contrarian Patience Pays Off—Finally"
[8]
USA Today,
4/16/10, "Contrarian investing doesn't mean 'always do the
opposite'"
[9]
WSJ, 9/26/20,
"Contrarian Money Manager Didn't Always Bet Against
[10]
NYT, 3/20/20, "Who's buying, who's selling"
[11]
WSJ,
3/27/20, "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bear Market; A
surprising share of a new bull market's returns pile up in its very early
stages, when the average investor is at their most fearful"
[12]
WSJ, 8/30/23,
"Chinese Stocks Are in a Slump—and Value Investors Are
Excited…."
[13]
Economist,
11/12/20, "Value investing is struggling to remain relevant"
[14]
Economist,
10/25/18, "The agony of the value investor—A
contrarian strategy fares badly much of the time"
[15]
WSJ, 6/9/20, "Undervalued Stocks Soared, but Not Because They're
Undervalued; The furious rally in cheap-or 'value' stocks gives us reason to
exhume an ancient argument about how investors perceive stocks"
[16]
Barron's,
4/5/19, "Value Investing Will Beat Growth
Again—but Maybe Not for Years to Come"
[17]
WSJ, 7/23/19, "Small Company Shares Fall Behind in Sign of Economic
Worry...."
[18]
WSJ, 5/10/19,
"What Warren Buffet's Teacher Would Make of Today's Market; Value
stocks haven't performed well for a long time. But Ben Graham's lessons
still matter."
[19]
WSJ, 4/27/18,
"Value Should Do Better. But When Is Anybody's Guess"
[20]
WSJ, 10/16/20, "Look Who's Really Chasing Hot
Stocks Like Zoom; Professional investors are blaming everyone else for the
meteoric rise of speculative stocks—but they're part of the problem
themselves"
Persons "who
do independent credit analysis usually do it to find undervalued instruments
that represent investment opportunities...." [1]
"4. Wall
Street analysts don't 'do' complex. Isn't that what securities analysts
are for, you might ask? Silly reader . . . analysis is for kids!
Literally. At most large Wall Street firms, the tedious job of constructing
financial models and answering client accounting queries is handled by the
junior analyst on the team. It still shocks me today that when meeting with a
team of 'sell-side' Wall Street analysts from a firm to discuss a particular
company, the senior analyst invariably concedes the answer to a complex
financial question to a junior analyst working for him. ... Senior analysts
still spend most of their time on the road making client presentations. That is,
of course, if they aren't playing golf with the CEO or organizing the menu at
the next investor conference in Las Vegas. The recent attempts by certain
companies to discourage hard-hitting independent research will only serve to
maintain the chasm between those that 'do the numbers' and those with,
hopefully, the experience to know what the numbers mean." [2]
"[T]he
lessons [Herb Greenberg] have learned can be boiled down to five that are
remarkably obvious and simple but are still often ignored in the heat of battle:
Lesson No. 1: The numbers don't lie. ... That is why some ... analysts don't
like to talk to companies. They want to avoid the spin or the face-to-face
meeting that can create a psychological connection that may skew what otherwise
would be black-and-white analysis. ... Lesson No. 2: Quality, not quantity.
Ignore the 'beat the Street' headlines on earnings. It is what goes into the
earnings that counts. ...[T]he real story is often on the balance sheet. And
let's not forget the cash-flow statement. ... The more complex and convoluted
the financial statements get, especially for businesses that aren't overly
complicated, the more reason to worry. Lesson No. 3: GAAP isn't the same as a
Good Housekeeping seal. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ... include
plenty of gray areas that give management enough rope to hang themselves, if
they so please. GAAP, after all, is subject to interpretation, and some managers
are more conservative than others. ... Lesson No. 4: Don't confuse stocks and
companies. They sometimes go in opposite directions. Stocks sometimes really do
lie. Sometimes they are pushed artificially higher by a rotation by investors
from one industry group to another... (or) short squeezes.... [S]ometimes they
lie because of momentum. Momentum can take stocks to infinity and beyond, but
... reverse momentum ... tends to kick in when you least expect." [3]
"Outright
fraud aside, if securities analysts rely solely on 'the number' (a.k.a. earnings
per share), and a cursory glance at the old annual report to make their
decisions, they deserve to get burned. Abraham Briloff, professor
emeritus of accounting at Baruch College in the City University of New York and
the remaining conscience of the public accountancy world, once wisely said,
'Corporate financial statements are like bikinis ... what they show is very
interesting; but what they hide is vital.' You would think that given the
historical reputation of Wall Street as a locker room with pinstripes, this
statement alone would be enough to induce thousands of hard-working
professionals to tirelessly dig deeply into financial statements. But over the
latter part of the 20th century, the investment management 'industry' has
de-emphasized traditional securities analysis in favor of portfolio analysis,
primarily for two reasons. The first is the hegemony of Modern Portfolio Theory
(MPT), which … shifts emphasis away from individual security analysis to the
analysis of the portfolio as a whole. … The second reason why securities
analysis has been de-emphasized has been the growth in the sheer asset size of
the investment management industry. Peter Lynch aside, very, very few people can
claim competence in managing tens of billions of dollars in portfolios composed
of hundreds of stocks. It is simply impossible for even the best and the
brightest to engage in reasonably deep fundamental analysis on a 300-stock
portfolio. ... What has taken the place of detailed fundamental analysis
over the years is the wholesale adoption of earnings per share as the sole basis
for securities analysis. … Intelligent and constructive securities
analysis has always been the painstaking construction of a mosaic of factors….
The apparent solution to our seemingly collective inability to 'get it,' is to
call for more disclosure in financial statements. What is ironic is that if many
investors have gotten themselves into a financial mess because they never
bothered to carefully read financial statements, then I can almost certainly
say that they are not going to read the colossal piles of paper being thrown at
them now. … Crooks and frauds aside, we have generally gotten enough from GAAP
disclosure to do our work. If we truly shake our heads and can't make heads
or tails of a complicated set of statements, we pass and move on." [4]
"Howard M. Schilit, an accounting expert who runs the Center for
Financial Research and Analysis, an independent research firm, scoffed at
the excuse that analysts could not have detected problems at Enron. 'Everybody
is saying, "they hid from us," he said, but beginning in March 2000,
he added, there were a string of warning signs in Enron's public securities
filings. The problem, Mr. Schilit said, is that analysts who question the
value of a popular company are branded as controversial. 'If you want to move up
the hierarchy of the Wall Street establishment, you don't rock the boat,' he
said." [5]
"John C. Hueston, a well-regarded—and aggressive—prosecutor from
Southern California … advocated charging Mr. [Kenneth] Lay with making false
statements…. [Hueston] interviewed
securities analysts, seeking to understand what Mr. Lay had conveyed to
the marketplace. He was shocked to find that most of them had not bothered to
look closely at Enron's securities filings and were taking Enron's statements
'virtually at face value.'" [6]
"Securities Analysts' Recommendations: Based on available historical
securities analyst information we were able to identify, as of October 18, 2001,
15 firms rated Enron a buy—12 of the 15 considered the stock a strong buy.
Even as late as November 8, 2001, the date of Enron's disclosure that nearly 5
years of earnings would have to be recalculated, although most firms downgraded
their ratings, 11 of 15 continued to recommend buying the stock, 3 recommended
holding, and only 1 recommended selling. In November 2001, one firm upgraded its
recommendation from sell to hold." [7]
"Beginning in January 2001, we spoke with
a number of analysts at various Wall Street firms to discuss Enron and its
valuation. We were struck by how many of them conceded that there was no way to
analyze Enron, but that investing in Enron was instead a 'trust me' story. One
analyst, while admitting that Enron was a 'black box' regarding profits, said
that, as long as Enron delivered, who was he to argue." [8]
"An American writer ... caught the likely cause of the bean counters' blindness to looming danger ... 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something,' wrote Upton Sinclair, 'when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.'" [9] "The history of corporate malfeasance is consistent over the centuries: A few people at the top do bad things and hide them from everyone but a tiny group of confidants. You can work at a company—even be a senior executive—and remain as deeply in the dark as any outsider." [10]
"Mr. [Sam E.]
Antar (former chief financial officer of Crazy Eddie and former
CPA, who stayed out of jail by turning on several others, including his cousin,
Eddie Antar, who was Crazy Eddie's co-founder) says investors should do a
better job 'studying' financial reports, especially the footnotes and 'risk
factor' sections. 'Notice that I used the word "'study'" and not
"'read'" since all information is not meant to be read like a novel,
but meant to be analyzed like a project.' He adds: 'Criminals are scared of
skeptics and cynics,' he says. 'We are petrified when you verify our
representations.' Did he ever have remorse? 'Never ... We simply did not care
about any one of our victims. We simply committed crime because we could.
'As criminals we built false walls of integrity around us,' he adds. 'We walked
old ladies across the street. We built wings to hospitals. We gave huge amounts
of money to charity. We wanted you to trust us. 'Simply said ... if you want
to be an investor, you cannot accept information at face value. 'Unexamined
acceptance' is the greatest cause of investor losses.'" [11]
"When
Sam Antar was cooking the books for his company, he used a number of complicated
accounting tricks to dupe auditors. But some tactics were simple. 'These
auditors from the Big Four accounting firms are usually single kids just a few
years out of school. What do kids in their 20s think about all the time? Sex,'
said Antar, who was at the center of a multi-million dollar fraud 20 years ago.
So Antar would pair 'cute hot female' employees with male auditors as part of
his distraction strategy. 'In effect, I was a fraudster, matchmaker and pimp,'
said Antar.... Another tactic:
Delay. 'They would come in here with maybe six weeks to go through the books ...
my goal would be to leave them 80 percent of the work for the last week, so
they're rushed to finish.' ... One of the best ways to detect fraud in
financial statements is to read only the footnotes, and compare how they have
changed over time. 'Look for subtle differences, and that is where they will
hide the fraud,' said Antar. 'That's what I did.'" [12]
"[Thornton O]'Glove … eschewed meetings with corporate executives for
in-depth analysis of financial results. 'I stay away from the corporate
suite," he said in an interview several years ago. 'There you only hear the
siren song to cover up downtrends in earnings, losses of markets or overloads of
debt.' And so it was that Mr. O'Glove had never met, much less been charmed by,
the fast-talking chief of Crazy Eddie. ... Mr. O'Glove is generally credited
with being the first to sense trouble at Crazy Eddie." [13]
"Many
investors dismissed the spectacular failures of Enron, WorldCom, HIH and ABC
Learning Centres as unforeseeable black-swan-type events. Not Jim Chanos,
founder of Kynikos Associates. He predicted their demise and profited from
them.... Chanos started Kynikos (Greek for 'cynic') to profit from a practice
known as short selling, where investors profit when the stock price of a company
falls. ... You may never short a stock in your life, but if you understand what
Chanos is looking for in a good short, then you'll know what shares to avoid. He
offers three basic pointers: ... Chanos finds the accounting for companies that
serially conduct mergers to be extremely murky. When debt is added to the mix,
it often signals that all is not well—the company may have resorted to
chasing new streams of revenue just to maintain the illusion of earnings growth.
... Some of Chanos' most profitable shorts have been Eastman Kodak, Blockbuster
and, more recently, Hewlett-Packard. These companies appeared cheap, often
selling for single-digit price-earnings ratios. But all operated in sunset
industries, victims of technological change that drove their earnings down year
after year. ... Betting on an ailing business is like backing a bleeding horse;
the pay-off is high but the odds are stacked heavily against you. ... Sensible,
profitable investing is as much about avoiding the losers as it is betting on
winners. The Jim Chanos approach will help you avoid the losers." [19]
"The world is
awash in credit. For the sake of investors, it had better be awash in good
credit analysis, too. ... But in the process of spending so much brain
power slicing and dicing risk and passing it around, Wall Street might miss more
fundamental questions about the underlying health of companies issuing bonds.
Frank Partnoy, of the University of San Diego, and David Skeel Jr.
of the University of Pennsylvania Law School illustrated this point in a recent
paper by pointing out that the banks that financed Enron's debt used massive
amounts of credit derivatives to limit their own risk of the company going into
default. That is one reason they might have fallen asleep at the switch."
[20]
"After 32 years in
the industry—18 of those at Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. of New York—and
for 19 consecutive years being ranked on the Institutional Investor All-American
Research Team, Mr. [Stephen] McClellan ... [authored] 'Full of
Bull' (FT Press, 2007), half of it a critique of Wall Street research, the rest
a sometime quirky but useful guide for investors (and advisors). ... Analysts
are still very bad stock pickers. Their track record is terrible. You can't rely
on their buy recommendations. ... Research is good in terms of analyzing the
business, the competition and trends, but don't pay attention to the
conclusions. ... Companies never have one bad quarter, or one surprise, or
one earnings shortfall. Bad news feeds on itself. It takes awhile to reverse
things. Wall Street never learns that—it's always trying to buy the
stock at the bottom." [21]
"Despite an economy
teetering on the brink of a recession—if not already in one—analysts
are still painting a rosy picture of earnings growth, according to a study done
by Penn State's Smeal College of Business. The report questions analysts'
impartiality.... 'Wall Street analysts basically do two things: recommend stocks
to buy and forecast earnings,' said J. Randall Woolridge, professor of finance.
... 'A significant factor in the upward bias in long-term earnings-rate
forecasts is the reluctance of analysts to forecast' profit declines, Mr.
Woolridge said. ... The study's authors said, 'Analysts are rewarded for biased
forecasts by their employers, who want them to hype stocks so that the brokerage
house can garner trading commissions and win underwriting deals.'" [22]
"The main lesson
for investors comes straight off the hymn sheet of Warren Buffett ... Don't buy
what you don't understand." [23]
A corollary might be: to understand a potential stock investment opportunity,
one must engage in financial statement analysis.
[1]
Treasury & Risk, 5/08,
"Playing it Safer"
[2]
WSJ, 5/30/06, Commentary:
"Short-Lived Lessons From an Enron Short"
[3]
WSJ,
4/26/08, "A Columnist's Parting Advice"
[4]
WSJ,
8/6/02, "We Need Better Stock
Analysis, Not More Info"
[5]
NYT, 2/28/02, "Wall St. Analysts
Faulted on Enron"
[6]
NYT, 6/4/06, "The
Enron Case That Almost Wasn't"
[7]
United States
General Accounting Office Report to the
Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate,
October 2002, "Financial Statement
Restatements Trends, Market Impacts, Regulatory Responses, and Remaining
Challenges"
[8]
James Chanos, President, Kynikos
Associates—Prepared Statement
[before the] U.S. Securities And Exchange Commission—Roundtable On Hedge
Funds—Panel Discussion: "Hedge Fund Strategies and Market
Participation"—Thursday,
May 15, 2003
[9]
The Guardian, 5/29/18, "The
financial scandal no one is talking about"
[10]
WSJ,
10/12/21, "The WSJ Wayback Machine"
[11]
WSJ, 3/3/07, "My Lunch With 2
Fraudsters: Food for Thought for Investors"
[12]
CNN.com, 10/9/99, "Financial fraud
101—accounting for criminals"
[13]
Crain's, 6/5/89, "Calculated
Madness: The Rise and Fall of Crazy Eddie Antar"
[14]
Bloomberg – Money Stuff, 7/17/20,
"Wisecard"
[15]
NYT, 2/8/20, "Wall Street's Most
Reviled Investors Worry About Their Fate"
[16]
WSJ, 10/20/08, "Don't Sell Hedge
Funds Short"
[17]
NYT, 6/8/17, "The Bounty Hunter of
Wall Street"
[18]
BusinessWeek, 5/7/01, "A Long Romp
For The Shorts?"
[19]
The Sidney Morning Herald, 1/21/13,
"Lessons from short seller Jim Chanos"
[20]
WSJ,
11/20/06, "Portfolio Insurance"
[21]
InvestmentNews, 2/4/08, "Stephen
McClellan"
[22]
WSJ, 3/21/08, "Study Suggests Bias
in Analysts' Rosy Forecasts"
[23]
WSJ, 5/22/08, "Black Boxes Skew
Ratings"
Historical Analysis version 2.3 (HAv2.3) and Projection version 2.3 (Pv2.3) are software tools specifically designed for conducting financial statement and quality of earnings analyses and forecasts. The insights generated by these tools are valuable for corporate Directors, individuals conducting thorough investigations before accepting Directorships, commercial lenders, credit managers, stock market investors, business school students, and various other professionals seeking comprehensive financial analyses.
The initial idea behind HAv2.3 and Pv2.3 originated in the Special Credits Department of a prominent West Coast bank during the late 1960s. The department's focus was on working with retailing and manufacturing companies. The bank aimed to create computer software that would aid in the training of Credit Analysts and prevent the approval of risky loans. Additionally, the software was intended to support customer development efforts. Throughout the years, these tools have undergone significant updates and refinements, incorporating numerous additional features.
Corporate directors, prospective directors, credit managers, chief financial officers, accountants, commercial lenders, stock market analysts, individual investors, business planners, loan packagers, and business school students may find HAv2.3 and Pv2.3 beneficial in their work or educational pursuits.
Historical Analysis v2.3 allows a user to input annual-historical-financial data to produce many reports, e.g.,
Analysis Ratios;
Predictor of Financial Distress;
Quality of Reported Earnings;
Statement of Shareholders' Equity;
Funds Statement;
Statement of Comprehensive Income;
Statement of Cash Flow from Operations and Free Cash Flow;
Statement of Cash Variance;
Cash-Generating Efficiency;
Working Capital Analysis;
Common Size Income Statement;
Common Size Balance Sheet; and,
Stock Performance Analysis.
Historical Analysis Version 2.3 is a software tool that efficiently organizes and analyzes large volumes of financial statement data. In order to input data into HAv2.3 input sheets, one must carefully consider the accounting policies used by the company under analysis, as well as the underlying assumptions and financial statement footnotes. It can be beneficial to search for certain words and phrases, such as "substantial doubt," "significant deficiencies," "control weakness," "disclosure failure," "irregularities," "adverse material weakness," "negative impact," "subpoena," "search warrant," "defects," "penalty," or "resigned" in Form 10-K reports. However, we have observed that these words often appear long after our Predictor of Financial Distress and/or Quality of Reported Earnings sections have already indicated concerns based solely on the numerical information provided in the Form 10-K reports.
HAv2.3 readily enables individuals to analyze patterns of important operational metrics such as increasing or decreasing gross-profit margins, return on investment, and corporate solvency. This analysis can assist in making informed decisions regarding investment candidates, whether it be selecting, terminating, or avoiding them altogether. HAv2.3 generates indications of favorable and unfavorable trends based on predefined thresholds. These thresholds have been set by our team with extensive industry expertise to ensure accurate results and minimize instances of incorrect classifications. Please click through and access our comprehensive annotated HAv2.3 Analysis of PetSmart, Inc.
HAv2.3
generates cell color shading to highlight financial "red flags," e.g.,
questionable accounting practices, indicators of financial distress.
"[D]istoring one section of the financial statements throws the numbers out
of whack in some other section. ... Generally, the initial response of corporate
executives caught in a lie is to dig themselves a deeper hole.... [A]nalysts
must be disciplined enough to disbelieve the innocent explanations that
companies routinely provide for ratios that in reality reveal trouble down the
road." [1]
In the computerized spreadsheet, the "red flags" are cross-referenced
to explanatory comments or quotations from related media articles. One may
click through to access an annotated PDF copy of our HAv2.3
Analysis of Twitter Home Entertainment.
HAv2.3 has the ability to detect different financial irregularities and signs of financial difficulties well in advance of companies entering into bankruptcy proceedings or experiencing devastating drops in their stock prices.
One
tool is an Altman Z-Score analysis. "The Z-Score is ... a measure of how
closely a firm resembles other firms that have filed for bankruptcy, i.e., it
tries to assess the likelihood of economic bankruptcy. The model has also drawn
several statistical objections over the years. ... Nevertheless, despite these
flaws, the original Z-Score model is still the most widely used measure of
corporate financial distress." [2]
The Z-Score model is a tool that complements other analytical tools.
Seldom, however, should one use any of the Z-Score measures as one's only means
of analysis. "Usually, when a retail chain files for bankruptcy,
customers see it coming. … [P]eople who know how to
read a balance sheet can see it coming. … Sometimes,
customers can tell based on store shelves. In the days before its bankruptcy,
J.C. Penney's stores had a lot of empty shelves and many items available only in
limited sizes." [3]
We have conducted a thorough evaluation of the capabilities of HAv2.3 by performing back-tests based on examples mentioned in the United States General Accounting Office Report to the Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, October 2002, "Financial Statement Restatements Trends, Market Impacts, Regulatory Responses, and Remaining Challenges." Our research demonstrated that HAv2.3 was successful in identifying potential financial crises in a timely manner. By utilizing HAv2.3, stock investors could have prevented costly purchasing mistakes, or alternatively, taken advantage of short-sale positions or the purchase of put options if pursuing a more aggressive strategy. (It should be noted that conducting a comprehensive analysis of the associated costs, such as the availability and cost of borrowing stock, timing considerations, the impact of meme investors, as well as the benefits of short selling and the complexities of purchasing put options, is beyond the scope of this platform.)
Utilizing HAv2.3 is essential as it provides protection against "a boring market [that] can
prod investors into trying to do exciting things. … [T]his is a good time for
investors to remind themselves that an idle mind is the devil's workshop. …
[I]t's important to resist the pull of action for action's sake." [4]
[1]
Financial Statement Analysis
by Fridson & Alvarez, pp. 130, 148, 162.
[2]
4/13/11,
Stockopedia: "The Altman Z-Score: Is it possible to predict corporate
bankruptcy using a formula?"
[3]
TheStreet.com, 918/23, "Popular
women's clothing retailer files bankruptcy, closes Stores"
[4]
WSJ, 9/2/16, "A
Bored Investor Is a Dangerous Thing"
Projection v2.3 provides the ability for a user with a higher level of expertise to enter a company's financial data for the most recent year-end as well as to input various forecasting assumptions such as growth rates, fixed charges, and turn-days. A significant portion of this data can be obtained from the analyses generated by HAv2.3. Once entered, Pv2.3 will then generate annual financial statements and analyses, enabling the user to test multiple scenarios.
A major feature of Pv2.3 is that one may pre-specific desired constraint ratios and/or amounts, e.g., Worth-to-Debt, Times-Interest-Earned, Fixed-Charge-Coverage and/or Current ratios along with the amount of Working Capital. Using the aforesaid assumptions and constraints, Pv2.3 would allocate the funds needed (to balance the forecasted Balance Sheet) to Short-Term Debt, Long-Term Debt and/or Equity. One would not be required to engage in the seemingly endless task of manually allocating the anticipated funds needed, checking the impact on your desired ratios and amounts, and, then re-allocating and re-checking until you reach the multiple targets. The one-step non-iterative logic in Pv2.3 is more accurate and efficient than an iterative approach. Pv2.3 uses cell color shading to remind that the funds-needed-allocation logic has been invoked and highlights the numerical results. Pv2.3 could reveal the amount, timing and nature of a company's future funding needs.
"The primary attraction of investment books isn't beautiful prose or a compelling plot. Our relationship with such titles is more transactional. We spend the time and money in hopes of learning something that will help us make better investors." (9/8/22, WSJ, "'How to Invest' Review: Masters of Money; Interviews with some of the world's successful investors offer more in the way of biographical interest than practical advice.")
The concepts of financial statement analysis and related red-flag tests used in Historical Analysis v2.3 and Projection v2.3 have been derived from various reputable sources, including books specifically focusing on financial statement analysis.
Analysis of Financial Statements by Leopold A. Bernstein ["The vast resources that must be brought to bear on the competent analysis of equity securities have caused some segments of the securities markets to be more efficient than others. Thus, the market for shares of the largest companies is more efficient because many more analysts follow such securities ... compared to those who follow small and lesser-known companies. ... [T]he prevention of serious investment errors is at least as important a factor in overall investment success as is the discovery of undervalued securities. ... Financial statement analysis ... keeps the decision maker in touch with the underlying realities of the enterprise that is investigated."];
Business Analysis & Valuation—Using Financial Statements by Krishna G. Palepu, Victor L. Bernard and Paul M Healy ["For the smallest publicly traded firms in the U.S., there is typically no formal following by analysts, and would-be investors and their advisors are left to themselves to conduct securities analysis. ... [E]ven though market prices reflect some relatively sophisticated analyses, prices still do not fully reflect all the information that could be garnered from publicly available financial statements. ... Even in the absence of direct information about management expertise, corporate strategy, engineering know-how, and market position, financial ratios can reveal much about who will make it and who will not."];
Cash Flow and Security Analysis by Kenneth S. Hackel and Joshua Livnat ["This investment approach does not attempt to identify firms with superior growth prospects, which may or may not be realized. Instead it focuses on solid firms that temporarily mis-priced by the market. ... The purpose of this book is to advocate a fundamental approach to invest in equity securities based upon the analysis of free cash flows. ... One of the most attractive areas for investment is small-capitalization stocks. ... [F]irms that are controlled by owners are more profitable and have a greater tendency to diversify into related areas of business than firms that are controlled by managers."];
Corporate Financial Reporting and Analysis (3rd ed.) by David F. Hawkins ["This book is based on the very successful Analysis of Corporate Financial Reports course taught in the MBA program of the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration. ... The thrust of the course is that published corporate financial statements can represent genuine managerial performance, or they can represent the illusion of performance. Investors who can tell the difference have a considerable advantage in making their investment decisions."];
CPA Comprehensive Exam Review—Financial Accounting & Reporting by Nathan M. Bisk;
Financial Fine Print: Uncovering a Company's True Value by Michelle Leder;
Financial Shenanigans—How to Detect Accounting Gimmicks & Fraud in Financial Reports (4th ed.) by Howard M. Schilit ["While most companies act ethically and follow the rues when reporting their financial performance, some take advantage of gray areas in the rules (or worse, ignore the rules altogether) in order to 'make the numbers.' ... The lure of accounting gimmickry is particularly strong at struggling companies.... When one of these financial statements [Income Statement, Balance Sheet, Statement of Cash Flows] contains shenanigans, warning signs generally appear on the other ones. ... Accounting rules mandate that a company report its earnings performance using the accrual basis. That simply means you report revenue when it is earned (rather than when cash comes in) and charge expenses when the benefit has been received (rather than when payment occurs). In other words, the significance of cash inflows and outflows is muted under accrual-based accounting. ... [S]avvy investors often compare net income with CFFO and become concerned when CFFO lags net income. ... Executives know that investors test earnings quality by bench-marking earnings against CFFO.... It should therefore come as no surprise that companies have become more creative in their financial reporting and disclosure practices. Many have found innovative ways to mislead investors, using deceptive practices that may go undetected in traditional quality of earnings analysis."];
Financial Statement Analysis — A Practitioner's Guide by Martin S. Fridson ["[D]istorting one section of the financial statements throws the numbers out of whack in some other section. ... [I]nvariably, an allegation of irregularities in corporate financial reporting is followed by a vehement, formulaic denial. ... [A]nalysts must be disciplined enough to disbelieve the innocent explanations that companies routinely provide for ratios that in reality reveal trouble down the road. ... [A]n influential 1966 study ... found that of all the ratios tested, the best predictor of bankruptcy was a declining trend in the ratio of cash flow [Net Income + Depreciation, Depletion, and Amortization] to total debt. ... [F]inancial statements are vulnerable to manipulation, much of which is perfectly legal. Often, the specific aim of the manipulators is to outfox credit analysts who mechanically calculate ratios without pausing to consider whether accounting rules have defeated the purpose."];
Financial Warnings by Charles W. Mulford and Eugene E. Comiskey ["We looked for financial statement clues that helped to indicate that something was amiss. ... We especially thank the approximately 200 lenders who completed the lender survey that provided invaluable information about earnings surprises. ... [W]hen a company overstates revenue, one or more accounts on the balance sheet must be overstated. ... When carefully executed with collusion among management personnel, financial frauds are difficult to uncover. ... Still it is clear that even the best fraud leaves some tracks in the financial statements."];
Guide to Financial Reporting and Analysis by Eugene E. Comiskey and Charles W. Mulford;
Handbook of Financial Analysis, Forecasting & Modeling by Jae K. Shim and Joel G. Siegel;
Quality of Earnings — The Investor's Guide to How Much Money a Company Is Really Earning by Thornton L. O'Glove [He tells investors where to scrutinize financial reports, and how to make sense of them. The "book ... is regarded by many investors as a forensic bible." (WSJ, 6/2/07, "The Buzz....")];
When Stocks Crash Nicely — The Finer Art of Short Selling by Kathryn F. Stacey ["This is a book about the people who profit from collapse, who specialize in detecting disaster, and about the methods they use to track the demise of companies.... How to make money by shorting and how not to lose money by selling are different sides of the same coin. ... James S. Chanos of Kynikos Associates, Ltd. ...shorts large capitalization financial companies with high probability of bankruptcy. ... [He tends] to focus on the numbers. ... One common shortcoming is to rely on management or Wall Street analysts. ... [H]is use of return on invested capital as a key financial indicator is unique. ... Shorts almost always judge correctly whether the business is seaworthy. On the timing of the demise, they're seldom right. Someone is usually available to buy stock, loan money, offer short-term bank debt long after the company financials are in near terminal condition. Add two years to the short's best projection and you may only have a couple more to wait. ... Grizzled analyst wisdom says sell the stock of a company building a new headquarters—owned, not leased: it's a top-of-the-earnings-cycle clue. ... Short sellers ... spend a fair amount of time and energy analyzing their mistakes.... You can hide disgusting accounting practices with growth for a very long time. ... [S]tories of short sale candidates are lessons in the antithesis of good company characteristics."];
Fraud
Auditing and Forensic Accounting (2d
ed.) by G. Jack Bologna and Robert J. Lindquist ["[A]uditors … are not
expected to search for illegal acts, but rather to be aware that some matters
that come to their attention during the examination might suggest that illegal
acts have occurred. If auditors discover an … illegal act, they are required
to report it…."] (Editor's Note: Should an auditor perform a
financial statement analysis? Are they are required to do so? If they do and find
financial-statement fraud, they must act. This places them between a proverbial
rock and a hard place. They could lose a client and audit
fees. On the other hand, if they do not act and financial-statement
fraud is later discovered, the auditors have legal exposure to investors and
their client. Evidence of red flags discovered through financial statement analysis
could justify imposition of damages against them.)
Forensic
Accounting—How to Investigate Financial Fraud by
William T. Thornhill ["The forensic accountant
should never underrate the intelligence of fraud perpetrators and should recognize
that if they know the routine procedures of internal and/or external auditors,
especially as to how they test and review activities and balances in a
particular account, then they will perpetrate their fraud scheme so as to minimize possible discovery working against such review approaches."]
Financial Statement Analysis (10th ed.) by K.R. Subramanyam and John J. Wild ["A survey of CFOs found that auditors challenged the company's financial results in less than 40% of audits. Of the CFOs challenged, most refused to back down-specifically, 25% persuaded the auditor to agree to the practice in question. and 32% convinced the auditor that the results were immaterial. Only 43% made changes to win the auditor's approval. … Primary responsibility for fair and accurate financial reporting rests with managers. Managers have ultimate control over the integrity of the accounting system and the financial record that make up financial statements. … We know judgment is necessary in determining financial statement numbers. While accounting standards reduce subjectivity and arbitrariness in these judgments, they do not eliminate it. The exercise of managerial judgment arises both because accounting standards often allow managers to choose among alternative accounting methods and because of the estimation involved in arriving at accounting numbers. … Identifying earnings management and making proper adjustments to reported numbers are important tasks in financial statement analysis. … The SEC has also moved to discourage 'opinion shopping,' a practice where companies allegedly canvass audit firms to gain acceptance of accounting alternatives they desire to use before hiring auditors."];
The EDGAR Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements—Tips, Tools, and Techniques for Becoming a Savvy Investor by Tom Taulli [Very good non-academic introduction to the subject. Full disclosure: the author gave me an honorable mention with respect to shareholder-rights efforts in the Luby's Cafeterias proxy context.];
StreetSmart Guide to Short Selling by Tom Taulli ["Short sellers like confusion in the financials. It's a hint that the company is trying to hide something."].
Master Financial Statements: Smashing Through Corporate Propaganda by Patrick G. Finegan, Jr. Esq. ["Here is what the auditor is really saying: 1. We took a look. 2. We did a few tests. 3. The financials are probably OK. 4. If they are not OK, we didn't write the financials - management did. Here is what the auditor doesn't say: 1. We guarantee our work. 2. We did an intense, excellent review. ... 6. We hope to get the job next year. 7. We could have been fooled, and therefore be completely wrong."];
Financial
Statement Fraud Casebook --- Baking the Ledgers and Cooking the Books
by Joseph T. Wells [By utilizing
HAv2.3, individuals can potentially identify instances of financial statement manipulation. This resource delves into the intricate details, revealing the underlying paper trail that led to such manipulation, as well as providing guidance on conducting relevant investigations. Interestingly, certain educational institutions offer degree programs in fraud examination and financial forensics.]
Other books, dealing with stock market investing, that may be of related interest, are:
Contrarian Investing by Anthony M. Gallea and
William Patalon III ["Much of what passes for contrarian investing is
actually 'value' investing, a less-extreme discipline that shares some
contrarian characteristics. ... Success as a contrarian demands a long-term
view, and a willingness to hold many of the stocks for two to three years. ... [R]esearch shows that it is not a good practice
for investors to share their market opinions with others. ... By expressing
their views, investors saddle themselves with the additional burden of being
shown wrong. Since so few of us are willing to admit error, we'll go to unusual
ends to stand by our positions. ... [F]undamental analysis [is] beyond the scope
of this book. ... If you're in love with a stock ... [y]ou're so convince[d] that
you're willing to take any kind of pain to be proved right in the end. ...
Averaging down gets people into a lot of trouble. ... [W]e will look at stocks
that first meet a technical measure (stock price down 50 percent from its
12-month high), and the meet at least two of four fundamental indicators: ●
The Psychology of Smart Investing by Ira Epstein and David Garfield, M.D. ["(I)f you arm ... an investor with the right psychological tools, you could give him a critical edge; you could help him avoid mental blunders and seize opportunities he might have missed if he were less self-aware. ... We get so caught up in the markets that we don't even consider our attitudes and biases and how they might be impacting upon our decisions. ... [Y]ou make investment mistakes not because you lack information, but because you ignore the information you already possess. You don't follow your systems or pay attention to your indicators because powerful internal forces are at work that stand between you and success. ... It is not what ails you, but how you deal with it that is the key to success in the markets. ... Some investors are very good at cutting their losses, but they are not so good when it comes to holding a position or increasing it. It all comes down to being 'psychologically ' able to win. ... If you see market forces or receive other information indicating that the winner will soon be a loser, fine, get rid of it. But if your impulse is fear, be skeptical. Winners are tough to find, so once you've latched on to this precious commodity, don't give it up without a solid reason. ... It's a process, and any process takes a while to master and take hold. ... [Y]ou can train [your mind] to make wise and more beneficial decisions about how to invest your money."].
Here are some additional books that cover a range of general business and finance subjects, which you might find interesting:
Ideas Are Free—How the Idea Revolution Is Liberating People and Transforming Organizations by Alan G. Robinson & Dean M. Schroeder ["[M]ost organizations are far more effective in suppressing employee ideas than promoting them. ... Ideas Are Free shows managers how to tap all the ideas their employees have and gain significant advantage over their competitors. ... [M]ost business leaders manage from financial measures-that is, lagging indicators that impart mostly historical information. On the other hand, the most important indicator he uses is the number of ideas implemented in the previous week. This … is the best leading indicator of his company's future performance. …When managers first realize the value in the ideas of their employees, it is a profoundly liberating experience. When they learn how to go after these ideas, they also learn that it is well worth the time and effort. Ideas are free. Employees become allies in solving problems, spotting opportunities, and moving the company forward, to the benefit of all. And when managers decide to let their employees think alongside them-and no longer seek to go it alone-they will have joined the Idea Revolution."];
Ahead of the Curve — Two Years at Harvard Business School by Philip Delves Broughton ["The bankers in the class told us that they would frequently produce proposals to companies, with elaborate valuation spreadsheets, knowing they were nonsense. They bore the appearance of competence and intelligence, but meant desperately little. ... It ... seemed to me ... downright deception. ... The degree enabled them to get jobs that robbed them of their private lives. ... Do what you love. Don't settle. ... If you love what you do, the money will follow."];
Manias, Panics, and Crashes — A History of Financial Crises by Charles P. Kindleberger ["One problem with warnings, of course, is embodied in the fable of the boy who cried, 'Wolf.' Economic forecasters may know the direction of a move in business conditions, prices, and credit, but their capacity to foretell its precise timing is limited. ... In warning the market, or in providing it with information that it ought to have, one must first get the bemused speculators to pay attention, and then time the announcement soon enough to do good but late enough to be credible and heeded. Neither task is easy."];
A Nation of Counterfeiters by Stephen Mihm;
Billion Dollar Lessons by Paul B. Carroll and Chunka Mui;
Money, Greed, and Risk by Charles R. Morris;
Bailout — An Insider Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street by Neil Barofsky;
The Payoff—Why Wall Street Always Wins by Jeff Connaughton ["I should've known that the legal and regulatory system meant to protect us had rotten away. ... I can't explain why President Obama (and Vice President Biden) have failed to support stronger enforcement efforts or financial reform.... Obama and Biden gave the problem a sideways glance and then delegated the solutions to the same circle of Wall Street-Washington technocrats who brought the financial disaster upon us in the first place. ... Unfortunately for American, Obama and Biden ... were both financially illiterate."];
Bull By The Horns—Fighting to Save Main Street from Wall Street and Wall Street from Itself by Shelia Bair ["Financial concepts are not that difficult if you have a little time to study them. ... Sometimes I think that people in the financial sector don't want you to understand the issues."];
A Fighting Chance by Elizabeth Warren ["It was the ultimate insiders' play: Trust us because we understand it and you don't."];
America's First Great Depression—Economic Crisis and Political Disorder After the Panic of 1837 by Alasdair Roberts. ["'Everyone with whom I converse, talks of 100 percent as the lowest return on investment. No one is known ever to have lost anything by a purchase of real estate.' — John M. Gordon, an investor from Baltimore, reporting on land sales in southern Michigan, 1836."];
In My Shoes by Tamara Mellon ["The Holy Grail of private equity is an accounting metric known as EBITDA.... EBITDA multiplied by a certain number—usually around 10-12 in the fashion business—is the basis for valuation upon exit. And in private equity, it's all about the exit. ... It appeared to me that for the right hourly rate, lawyers and financial advisers were more than happy to sign on and ride even a dead horse for as long as it would last. ... These were midlevel private-equity people who hadn't learned that you can't just screw everyone. All they cared about was their own monthly fees, their 20 percent on exit, and their favorable tax rates. They were like feedlot farmers who don't care about the cruel and squalid conditions or the hormones and chemicals flooding into their animals. Their only concern is that their livestock put on sufficient weight to bring top dollar when slaughtered."];
The Chickenshit Club by Jesse Eisinger [The long history of how and why the Department of Justice morphed from seeking individual accountability of corporate officers and directors to seeking Deferred Prosecution Agreements with corporations (think "too big to fail") where shareholders ultimately pay for the culprits' deeds.];
History's
Greatest Deceptions and Confidence Scams
by Rodger and Lazaroff ["[T]he
victims of financial scams have tended throughout history to follow a certain
pattern. … The one group demonstrated a willingness to believe; a higher than
average tolerance for risk, and the need … to be part of an elite group,
believing themselves to better or more educated than the general hoi polloi. …
The second faction exhibits dissatisfaction and often begrudges others who have
a higher economic status, leading to a readiness take precarious risks to
improve their lot. … Church-based affinity crimes are the most common
simply because there is a group of people who have complete faith in a trusted
leader. The con-man draws in the leader and the rest of the flock will follow
until they are all suitably fleeced. ... [T]he majority of us assume
ourselves to be superior to others and therefore above being scammed. With that
perspective, it becomes clear that we are scamming ourselves. ...
Secrecy often has a role to play in cons and scams.... Human beings
want to believe, want to trust and want to think they are smarter than other
people."]
Corporate Fraud Handbook - Prevention and Detection by Joseph T. Wells ["[T]he frauds ... were most commonly detected by tip (40.2 percent)."];
Analysis Without Paralysis—12 Tools to Make Better Strategic Decisions by Babette E. Bensoussan and Craig S. Fleisher ["This book's premise is that businesspeople working in any environment must have a robust and healthy selection of tools and techniques to help them address important issues and answer important questions about their enterprises' abilities to compete--not only in the present, but also in the future. ... [F]inancial ratio analysis is a useful tool for analyzing management's decisions as they are manifest in the marketplace, but it cannot replace the insights afforded by the application of a variety of analysis tools."];
The Intelligence Trap—Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes by David Robson ["(S)marter people are not investing their money in the more rational manner that economists might anticipate; it is another sign that intelligence does not necessarily lead to better decision making. ... [Benjamin Franklin] called his method a kind of 'moral algebra' ... much like a modern pros and cons list. He would ... assign them a number based on importance."];
Dark Towers by David Enrich [Gross is great; but net is where it's at. "And so MortgageIT kept churning out mortgages, and Deutsche kept packaging them into securities, which it sold to investors. As prosecutors later found, the bank lied to clients that it was conducting rigorous due diligence when in fact MortgageIT had stopped doing any due diligence whatsoever."];
Outside
the Box by Marc Levinson ["The amount exported from
any of the countries in a firm's value chain reveals little about those
countries' economies, because those exports contain content, whether parts or
ideas, that originates elsewhere. The numbers that matter economically concern
not exports, but value added. … These basic financial
considerations—finding the least costly way to make and deliver the
goods—drove decisions about organizing value chains. … Half the firms
studied gave no consideration to the possibility that poor quality, long lead
times, late deliveries, empty shelves, and dependence on a single source of
critical products could hurt their bottom lines. Hardly any attention was paid
to the risks arising from the sheer number of firms that might be involved in
any given value chain, each needing to complete its tasks on schedule for the
entire chain to function smoothly. Cheap was what mattered. … Perhaps
the most serious question is what will happen to the arrangements that
encouraged globalization and shaped international relations for the better part
of a century. … For all their many flaws, they reduced the frequency and
breadth of armed conflict around the world and brought a remarkable improvement
in the living standards of billions of people."
You're
About to Make a Terrible Mistake! - How Biases Distort Decision-Making—and
When You Can Do to Fight Them by Oliver Sibony ["Even
if you are a competent, careful, and hardworking executive, you might end up
making avoidable, predictable mistakes. This is precisely the mysterious problem
of bad decisions by good leaders.... [V]iew yourself as the
architect of the decision process on your team.... [O]ne can draw a
false conclusion from accurate facts. Fact-checking is not the same as
story-checking. ... [W]hy shouldn't we study worst-practices? After
all, everyone agrees that we learn from our mistakes even more than from our
successes. Studying companies that collapsed may hold more lessons than focusing
on those that succeed. Learning from their mistakes might be a good way to avoid
making them ourselves. … [I]t's almost irresistibly tempting to quash
one's doubts about the proposed investment…. Even
experienced managers whose interests are all perfectly aligned may choose to
preserve the harmony of the group rather than express a well-founded criticism. … 'We cheat up to the level that allows us to retain our self-image
as reasonably honest individuals.' … In truth, almost all of us are
capable of producing good financial analysis on proposed investment decisions.
… The technical quality of financial analysis is no longer a source of
differentiation between good and bad decisions: it's a prerequisite. … How does a premortem differ from what almost all teams do—have a
discussion of the risks and uncertainties facing the project? … First,
remember what hind-sight bias teaches us: we are much more talented when
explaining what has happened (in the past) than when imaging what may happen (in
the future). The premortem astutely takes advantage of this bias: it asks us to
travel in time to the future so we can look back, as it asks us to explain what
'has happened' in this imagined past. It is a clever oxymoron. …
[T]he most valuable outcome of a premortum is the identification of flaws that
have not been discussed. … A large diversified corporation has
adopted this principle: it systematically submits all its business units to a
regular portfolio review (annually or every two years). The review asks a simple
question: if we didn't own this company, would we buy it today? … [T]he
question of disposal is immediately raised. …
How to Decide—Simple Tools for Making Better Choices by Annie Duke ["Even though you don't have any detail about the decision process, when I tell you how things turned out, it feels like you really know something about whether the decision was good or bad. … You buy a stock. It quadruples in price. It feels like a great decision. You buy a stock. It goes to zero. It feels like a terrible decision. … In every domain, the outcome tail is wagging the decision dog. … Luck is what intervenes between you decision (which has a range of possible outcomes) and the outcome that you actually get. … The actual outcome casts a shadow over your ability to remember what you knew at the time of the decision. … Writing down key facts informing your decision also acts like a vaccine against hindsight bias. … If luck is the culprit, your decision-making is off the hook. If luck is the culprit, the outcome was out of your control. It means that there is nothing to be learned…. In a premortem, you imagine that you made a specific decision that worked out poorly or that you failed to reach a goal. From the vantage point of having already experienced the future failure, you look back to the present and identify the reasons why that might have happened. … A common practice of successful professional investors is to make category decisions to avoid investments outside their circle of competence. … In the wake of positive investing results, you overrate your ability to choose stocks…."];
Discussion Materials—Tales of a Rookie Wall Street Investment Banker by Bill Keenan ["Bankers have no issue advising companies on how to invest billions of dollars, but are more often than not at a loss what to do with their own money. ... Despite what theory says or what's publicly stated as rationale, real companies with real people managing them do deals for one reason: they feel pressure. ... The banker's job is to sniff out its origin and double down with a cast iron clamp to guarantee a transaction closes and a hefty fee follows. ... It's no surprise that most deals are viewed as failures in retrospect."];
The Cult of We by Elliot Brown and Maureen Farrell ["Simply put, bubbles are the result of a herd of people who collectively start paying more for something than its intrinsic value. They are, at their core, a very human creation-a stampede of investors who are following the scent of a compelling narrative. Gluts of capital combine with a fear of missing out. The result is mania. The rising price feeds on itself, and investors convince one another the world has changed-that high prices are here to stay. Those participating are often intelligent-even aware of the madness. Yet conformity has a powerful pull. … In bubbles, the herd and its collective psychology prevail over the individual. Euphoria wins out over skepticism. … Still more investors clamor to get in on the rising riches, pushing prices up further. … These investors were considered the smart money-the ones investing on behalf of wealthy families or endowments or pensions who had their pick of advisers. But in a world awash in cash, these investors feared missing out on the next big, highly lucrative idea. More often than not, the risks were brushed aside, the downsides minimized. ... [I]nnovation and disruption were ascendant and critical questions were often dismissed as obnoxious cynicism."].
What
the Dog Saw and Other Adventures—Open Secrets: Enron, Intelligence, and the
Perils of Too Much Information—by Malcolm
Gladwell ["In the spring of 1998 … a group of six students at Cornell
University's business school decided to do their term project on Enron. [] It
was for an advanced financial-statement-analysis class taught by a guy at
Cornell called Charles Lee…. [L]ee
had led his students through a series of intensive case studies, teaching them
techniques and sophisticated tools to make sense of the vast amounts of
information that companies disclose in their annual reports and SEC filings. …
The people in the group reviewed Enron's accounting practices as best they
could. … They used statistical tools, designed to find telltale patterns in
the company's financial performance - the Beneish model, the Lev and Thiagarajan
indicators, the Edwards-Bell-Ohlsen analysis – and made their way through
pages and pages of footnotes. … The students' conclusions were
straightforward. … There were clear signs that 'Enron may be manipulating its
earnings.' … The report was posted on the website of the Cornell University
business school, where it has been, ever since, for anyone who cares to read
twenty-three pages of analysis."] The question is: What does one do with
the information—avoid, sell, sell-short?
Fair Value Accounting Fraud
by Gerard M. Zack ["Altered Report. Management may have arranged for
and received a valuation report from a respected professional valuation expert.
But the report does not support the position preferred by management. Could it
be possible for
management to make alterations to the report … in order to make it appear that
the expert supported the fraudulent valuation reflected in the financial
statements of the entity? Reports
should be reviewed carefully for signs of altered text, missing pages, additions
inserted into the report, or other signs of alteration. … Here are 10 signs to
watch out for in valuation reports. …Valuation reports should be reviewed
carefully for these warning signs. Just because a fair value is supported by a
professional-looking report is not a justification for blindly accepting it as
accurate."]
Retail Gangster by Gary Weiss ["Having all that cash around was no big deal. Sammy [Antar] later recalled,: 'It wasn't explained. Our dads didn't sit us down and say '"This is nebkdi.'" We just saw and copied, as kids always do. It was part of our early childhood development: reading, writing and skimming.' ... [Eddie Antar] didn't have the foggiest idea how to explain all those numbers he carefully inflated. … [E]ddie was displaying a talent for hiring the right people. … '[The corporate PR man] knew all the analysts on the Street…. He made it easy to be analyst. Wall Street analysts just wrote down what [he] told them and did not bother with all that financial stuff.' … A[] request was made to inflate the value of merchandise in a warehouse, in this case the primary one that served all Crazy Eddie stores. … [B]rokerage house analysts [] crowing about Crazy Eddie had helped elevate the stock, and they were made to look like credulous fools by the company's collapse."] Back testing with HAv2.3 showed that CRZY's financials were "crazy" from the time of its IPO.
Fraud
And Abuse in Nonprofit Organizations --- A guide to Prevention and Detection
by Gerard M Zack
How to Steal A Lot of Money Legally -- Clueless Crooks Go to Jail, Savvy Swindlers Go to Vail by Edward Siedle ["There is absolutely nothing worse you can do to abuse clients that the guys on Wall Street haven't already done/disclosed/gotten away with -- legally."] One is amazed by a system that permits fiduciaries to utilize excessive and unnecessary fees to enrich themselves and their friends at the expense of those who mistakenly think they are protected by honorable people. A better argument for learning investment self-defense, and making informed decisions for yourself, has not been written.
Den of Thieves
by James B. Stewart ["It was the criminals who earned astronomical returns.
… [M]ilken's 'genius' seemed his ability to make so many believe his gospel of
high return at low risk. … With astonishing speed, some of Milken's biggest
boosters began to collapse under the weight of the debt burdens they had
embraced with such enthusiasm. … 'Welcome to the world of sleaze.'" This
is the story of investment bankers, stock and bond traders, attorneys, mutual
fund managers, arbitragers, public-relations specialists acting badly during the
take-over boom of the 1980s, and ensuing investigations, settlements and
convictions. The perpetrators traded on insider information for fun and big
profit. They inflicted unconscionable mark-ups and mark-downs on customers'
trades. They lied to and cheated one another. They parked stocks to avoid net
capital requirements. They obstructed justice, e.g., destruction of documents,
perjury, threats, thinly-disguised bribes. They worked to destroy the integrity
of financial markets. Where were internal controls and supervision? Where was
the "Chinese Wall" to keep confidential information seeping from the
Investment Banking Department to the Trading and/or Arbitrage Departments? Where
were restricted-trading lists? "Poorly paid, shunned by upper-level
managers and partners, compliance officers were kept far from the center of
action. They are paid to maintain an appearance of self-policing in the
securities industry—without actually instigating too many investigations. …
[T]he person in charge of compliance in Beverly Hills reported to Lowell [Milken]…."
The wolves guarded the chicken coop. Highly-paid and well-known
attorneys—so-called pillars of the legal community—did not or did not want
to recognize their many conflicts of interest. Some were irate when asked to
itemize their humongous bills. Where were the regulators' sophisticated
computer-surveillance systems and the NYSE's human investigators? Eventually,
the DOJ and SEC moved up the food chain. However, the government failed to cause
the perpetrators to disclose their total finances before entering into
settlement agreements. Too much was left on the table. Even though only a
perpetrator's ill-gotten gains are legitimately subject to disgorgement upon
conviction, settlement negotiations are different. In one instance, the
government permitted a perpetrator to use non-public information to secure the
government's receipt of a large settlement that depended upon the liquidation of
the perpetrator's large-securities portfolio. One could learn much from these
negative examples.]
Extraordinary
Circumstances by Cynthia Cooper provides a comprehensive account of her role
as an Internal Auditor in uncovering significant financial fraud at WorldCom.
The book delves into her experiences conducting operational and
financial-statement audits. Additionally, Cooper highlights the involvement of
Arthur Anderson, the auditing firm, in conducting analytical reviews to compare
financial statement ratios. Importantly, the main perpetrator of the fraud
manipulated the financial ratios to deceive auditors, analysts, and investors
into believing they were accurate and legitimate. However, the utilization of
HAv2.3 would have effectively detected WorldCom's manipulations of bad-debt
allowances and reserves, as well as the conversion of expenses into capital
expenditures.
A newspaper article that expressed an investor vs. gambler approach to stock market activities, and our responsive letter-to-the-editor:
1. "Stock
market classes: Never a dull moment"
"Less than two weeks before the casino opened, Marvin B. Roffman, a
casino analyst at Janney Montgomery Scott, an investment firm based in
Philadelphia, told The Wall Street Journal that the Taj would need to
reap $1.3 million a day just to make its interest payments, a sum no casino had
ever achieved. 'The market just isn't there,' Mr. Roffman told The Journal. Mr.
[Donald] Trump retaliated, demanding that Janney Montgomery Scott fire Mr.
Roffman. It did. … Mr. Roffman had won a $750,000 arbitration award
from Janney Montgomery for his dismissal and settled a lawsuit against
Mr. Trump for an undisclosed sum. … 'There's something not right when every
single one of your projects doesn't work out,' said Mr. Roffman, the casino
analyst." [1]
"A Philadelphia securities analyst who refused to retract negative comments
about a casino owned by Donald J. Trump and
was subsequently dismissed won a $750,000 award from his former firm yesterday.
The award to the analyst, Marvin B. Roffman, which was ordered by a three-member
arbitration panel of the New York Stock Exchange, was announced by his former
brokerage firm, Janney Montgomery Scott Inc. When Mr. Roffman was dismissed last
March, the firm denied that its move had been prompted by Mr. Trump, who had
threatened to sue unless it forced the analyst to retract and apologize, or
dismissed him. … Mr. Roffman, one of the first to signal that Mr. Trump was in
financial difficulty, was originally quoted in The Wall Street Journal in March
1990 as expressing severe reservations about the future of the Taj Mahal casino
in Atlantic City." [2]
"A former Deutsche Bank AG analyst once ranked among the best in the
U.S. will pay a $100,000 penalty and be banned from the securities industry for
a year to settle a regulator's claims that he issued a buy recommendation at
odds with his personal opinion. Charles Grom recommended buying shares of
discount retailer Big Lots Inc. in a March 29, 2012, report while telling
colleagues internally that he didn't downgrade the company because he wanted to
maintain his relationship with its management, the Securities and Exchange
Commission said in a statement Wednesday. Mr. Grom agreed to resolve the SEC's
allegations without admitting or denying wrongdoing. … Mr. Grom [] was named
the top-ranked department store analyst in 2012 by business-to-business
publisher Institutional Investor…. After visiting with Big Lots executives,
Mr. Grom communicated with a number of hedge fund clients about the company, the
SEC said. Four of the hedge funds subsequently sold their entire positions in
Big Lots stock, according to the regulator. … SEC rules require analysts to
certify that their reports reflect their own beliefs about companies they're
evaluating. Wall Street banks agreed to a $1.4 billion settlement in 2003 to
settle allegations that analysts published misleading stock research in a bid to
win investment-banking business." [3]
"Mr. [James] Melcher of Balestra Capital said he found the research
to be a guide to the prevailing view about a company or industry. Often, he
takes Wall Street's ratings as a contrarian indicator and does the opposite of
what the analysts are recommending. In other words, when all the analysts say
'buy,' it's often a good time to sell. 'When we see all the analysts go one
way, we take a very serious look at going the other way,' he said. 'And
it has paid off over the years.'" [4]
"Most of David Einhorn's ideas work out brilliantly. He is a
39-year-old hedge-fund manager in Manhattan who oversees $6 billion. Bull
markets? Bear markets? It hardly matters. His stock portfolio has averaged 25%
annual returns since 1996, when he opened Greenlight Capital. Now Mr.
Einhorn has written a book. ... In 'Fooling Some of the People All of the Time'
.... The story starts in 2002, with Mr. Einhorn rightly proud of his ability to
spot companies with shoddy accounting practices. ... Convinced that he has found
another juicy target, he zeroes in on Allied Capital, a
business-financing company that seems to dawdle when it comes to marking down
the value of its troubled loans. ... Allied eventually did take big
write-downs.... He grew so irate about the company's accounting that he alerted
the Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC did little with his complaint;
in fact, it investigated him instead for spreading negative views about
Allied. ... An SEC lawyer who quizzed him aggressively about his short-selling
methods later went into private practice and registered as a lobbyist for
Allied. ... The book also shows why good accounting really matters. It is easy
to mock finicky people with green eyeshades who worry about financial footnotes.
But reliable numbers are essential if capital is to be allocated properly in our
economy. ... Mr. Einhorn is a hard-liner, wanting strict accounting standards
that punish missteps quickly. Allied Capital, to judge by his version of events,
liked living in a more lenient world, where there was plenty of time to patch up
problems quietly. Regulators were comfortable with an easy-credit philosophy,
too, to a degree that startled Mr. Einhorn. In the current financial shakeout,
people like Mr. Einhorn are entitled to say: 'I told you so.'"
[5]
"[M]r. [Louis] Lowenstein ... is a lawyer, a former business
executive and a professor emeritus of finance and law at Columbia Law School.
... [H]e is a proud disciple of the 'value investing' principles outlined by
Columbia professors Benjamin Graham and David L. Dodd in 1934. ... Mr.
Lowenstein balances his critique of rapacious mutual funds with an analysis of
two relatively new funds ... [with] business models [that] mirror the
Graham-Dodd philosophy of focusing on a few carefully selected stocks rather
than diversifying in the name of safety, which is typically a euphemism for lazy
research, Mr. Lowenstein says." [6]
"Perhaps all it takes to keep an analyst from downgrading a company's
stock is a couple of favors from the chief executive officer. That, at
least, is the conclusion of a new study by two business-school professors. James
Westphal of the University of Michigan's Stephen M. Ross School of Business and
Michael Clement of the McCombs School of Business at the University of Texas
found that nearly two-thirds of securities analysts receive advice,
introductions to other high-powered executives, or other favors from top
managers at the firms they cover. ... [A]s a company's reported earnings
slipped, executives became more likely to do favors for analysts covering it.
... Analysts are only half as likely to downgrade a company's stock after it
announced earnings below the consensus forecast if one of the firm's executives
does two or more favors for the stock picker. The study also found that
executives tend to reach out to the analysts with the most influence. ... The
favors executives rendered most frequently included connecting an analyst with a
high-ranking official at another company (comprising 28% of favors in surveys of
analysts), providing career advice (20%), offering to meet with the analyst's
clients (13%), and passing along information on industry trends (10%). ...
Professionally, the analysts may stand to gain considerably more from their
access to executives at the firms they cover than they might lose by failing to
downgrade a stock that truly deserves it. ...
So, who loses? Westphal and Clement argue that executives' favor-wielding
risks undermining the objectivity of analysts' reports. For big institutional
investors, who probably have their own stable of analysts, other views may not
be tough to come by. But individual investors should know that analysts and
executives are trading favors...." [7]
"Stock analysts have long been criticized for issuing very few 'sell'
recommendations on stocks they cover. If you want to know why they still often
are reluctant to be publicly negative, spend a few minutes with Eric Wold,
analyst at the San Francisco investment-banking boutique Merriman Curhan Ford
& Co. His reward for slapping a sell rating on Nautilus Inc.? He says
the company won't return his phone calls anymore. ... Their lack of response, he
says, appears directly related to the increasingly critical nature of his
reports, which culminated in June 2006 with his downgrade to a sell 'on
heightened concerns' over a variety of issues. This was one month after Mr. Wold
wrote that he was 'unconvinced' the company, which had a series of missteps and
disappointments, 'has turned the corner.' ... [H]e realized the new strategy was
'cannibalizing existing sales and shifting sales from high-margin channels to
low-margin channels.' ... He red-flagged such things as undershooting on
earnings forecasts, increased competition.... Ron Arp, Nautilus's senior vice
president of corporate communications, says ... (that) it is 'not true' that the
company won't talk to Mr. Wold. ... 'That is hilarious,' Mr. Wold responds. ...
In looking back, the lack of
access forced Mr. Wold to rely only on publicly disclosed numbers and outside
resources for his analysis, and in doing so he got it right. Maybe that is the
moral of this story: Let the numbers do the talking, not the company." [8]
"Journalist
Michelle Leder learned the hard way about not reading the footnotes. ...
Afterward, she decided to go back to see what she might have found had she
looked more closely at the footnotes in the company's Securities and Exchange
Commission filings. There was plenty, says Ms. Leder, who used the experience as
the launching pad for her Web site, Footnoted.org, which tries to ferret
out facts that otherwise might go unnoticed. ... In quarterly filings, Ms. Leder
often heads straight to the footnotes on commitments and contingencies. This
section differs from that on 'risk factors,' she says, because it tends to be
more specific and less boilerplate. ... "[S]ophisticated investors will dig
into the footnotes to determine if everything is as the company said it was. ...
In 10-Ks, Bob Olstein of Olstein Funds ... starts with a review of
the note on income taxes. 'What I want to see,' Mr. Olstein says, 'is
a reconciliation of the income the company is reporting to shareholders and the
income being reported to the [Internal Revenue Service].' A big difference
between the two can be a red flag that requires further research, which he says
was the case with Sunbeam, the appliance maker that got caught up in an
accounting scandal in the late 1990s. ... Mr.
Olstein ... also look[s] at the
footnotes on raw materials, work in progress and finished goods. 'A huge
build in raw materials and work in progress relative to finished goods can mean
orders are picking up,' Mr. Olstein says. 'The reverse can be if finished
goods are building and raw materials are not.'" [9]
"[C]orporate earnings reports have outstripped analysts' expectations,
contributing in no small part to the fizzy mood on Wall Street. But here's a
sobering thought: those expectations were way too low in the first place. ...
But why were analysts so far off the mark? Largely because of the so-called
guidance provided by company after company, setting investors up for a pleasant
surprise when earnings were announced." [10]
"[T]he vast majority of analyst recommendations remain bullish. ...
[I]ndividuals and institutions alike want to see stocks go up, so they prefer
bullish analysts over bearish ones. But another, greater source of pressure are
the companies the analysts cover. Managements that are showered in stock options
have their personal wealth directly tied to a rising stock price, so they are
often infuriated when an analyst puts out a critical report or downgrades a
rating to a sell. And they retaliate. They refuse to allow the negative analyst
to ask questions on conference calls. They somehow 'forget' to include him in
e-mail messages that are sent to other analysts. They decline to attend that
analyst's conferences. They complain to his boss, who then inquires as to why
the analyst has to be so darn negative all the time. Many companies still use
investment banking business as a way to reward the firms that employ analysts
they like and punish the ones with analysts they don't like.... And sometimes
companies sue.... [I]t works. ... These are bullish times in the stock market,
so it is easy to forget how important it is to have skeptical—and even
negative—voices to counterbalance all the happy talk surrounding
stocks. Even when the skeptics are wrong, they make the market healthier
because they offer a point of view that people need to hear." [11]
"Jerry W. Levin says he welcomed help from Sunbeam Corp. directors
when he was named CEO of the consumer-products maker in 1998 after directors
fired Albert J. Dunlap amid accounting problems. Mr. Levin previously had
run Coleman Co., before Sunbeam acquired it. Directors met almost every day by
phone for months, recalls Mr. [Charles] Elson, the Delaware governance expert
who was a Sunbeam director at the time. The board counseled Mr. Levin.... But
Mr. Levin says he was surprised that the board knew so little about the
extent of Sunbeam's accounting problems, as his team uncovered them.
'"They said, 'It's unimaginable that such massive fraud could have taken
place under our noses,'" Mr. Levin recalls. Mr. Elson replies, 'The board
had been seriously misled by prior management.' Sunbeam ultimately restated 18
months of earnings and filed for bankruptcy protection." [12]
"Paid-for research firms typically follow tiny, little-known companies the
big brokerage firms ignore. Without them, there likely would be no research
reports at all on these companies. Critics of paid-for research say it is less
reliable, because an analyst could be influenced to be more bullish or bearish
in his or her report, depending on who pays for it. Others note that paid-for
research isn't that different from companies paying credit-rating firms that
assess their debt. ... The full reports include disclosure information about
potential conflicts of interest. ... Those who can access the full reports and
read the fine-print disclosures will see that.... Some say the paid-for research
isn't that different from other reports. 'Really, on a very basic level, what
research isn't paid for?' says Todd Essary, chief executive of Investrend
Research, member of a consortium of about 15 paid-for research firms...." [13]
"If there ever were a bell-ringer that the market's recent giddiness
appeared likely to end, it was Prudential Equity Group analyst Howard Penney's
recommendation of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts Inc. after the market's close on
Oct. 26. … Here was a company that hadn't filed quarterly reports with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for more than two years; its most recently
filed annual report—in April—was more than a year out of date.
… Mr. Penney not only initiated coverage on the stock with the equivalent of a
buy, but gave it a target of nearly double its price." [14]
"Crazy Eddie is hardly the first stock to confound securities analysts. But
in this case, Crazy Eddie's founder, Eddie Antar, himself has inspired much of
their bullishness. His ability impressed them, and he was their principal source
within the company. Yet, while the public was buying Crazy Eddie shares, Mr.
Antar sold them -- heavily. ... Thornton L. O'Glove, publisher of an
institutional research report called Quality of Earnings, was the first
to sound a cautionary note. In November, he warned that Crazy Eddie's
inventories were bulging in relation to its sales -- an indication of pressure
on earnings. Ms. Chadwick says she and other money managers, enamored of Crazy
Eddie's expansion, paid no attention." [15]
"But that is the nature of such tricksters: they appear bright, articulate,
sincere and likable. Barry Minkow [ZZZZ Best] was certainly
that--and much more. ... What made Minkow believable was his verbal
ability." [16]
"Here are examples of how Mr. [Thornton L.] O'Glove works:
… -- Focusing on Wedtech Corp., the Bronx defense contractor that
collapsed late last year after selling a $75 million junk-bond issue, Mr.
O'Glove says he spotted a big problem in the bond prospectus. He saw that for
the first half of 1986, the gap between income reported for tax purposes and
that reported to shareholders had jumped to 15 cents a share from only one
cent a share a year before. 'I figured that the company was using more liberal
accounting to recognize bigger profits from long-term contracts,' says Mr.
O'Glove. 'Income reported for tax purposes is generally closer to real cash
income than book income reported to shareholders.'"
[17]
"Millennials
and members of Gen Z prefer to seek financial advice from each other than from
parents or from financial professionals. They don't like overwhelming
spreadsheets … written in seemingly foreign languages. … Skepticism of
experts and criticism of financial institutions is especially common among
millennials and Gen Z…." (WSJ, 12/9/23, "What Your Friends Can
Teach You About Money --- Millennials and Gen Z are turning to peers, not
professionals. They don't trust banks and are tired of information
overload.")
[1]
NYT,
6/12/16, "How
Donald Trump Bankrupted His Atlantic City Casinos, but Still Earned Millions"
[2]
NYT,
3/6/91, "Dismissed in Trump Case, Analyst Is Awarded $750,000"
[3]
Bloomberg
News, 2/18/16, "Ex-Deutsche Bank analyst banned over rating at odds with opinion"
[4]
NYT,
5/15/08, "Merrill Tries to Temper the Pollyannas in Its Ranks"
[5]
WSJ, Bookshelf, 4/23/08,
"The Money Kept Vanishing"
[6]
NYT,
4/20/08, "Some Mutual Fund Numbers Look Great, but for Whom?"
[7]
BusinessWeek, 7/27/07, "Analysts
and CEOs: A Love Story?"
[8]
WSJ,
7/14/07, "After an Analyst's 'Sell' Call, Nautilus Flexes Its
Muscles"
[9]
WSJ, 6/2/07, "An Eye-Poke to
Investors Who Ignore the Small Print"
[10]
NYT,
5/13/07, "Surprised? Maybe You Shouldn't Be"
[11]
NYT, 5/12/07, "Making Sure The
Negative Can Be Heard"
[12]
WSJ,
3/19/07, "More Outside Directors Taking Lead in Crises"
[13]
WSJ,
12/13/06, "In Quiet Niche, Paid-For Stock Research Persists"
[14]
WSJ,
11/4/06, "What's Behind Sugary Report On Krispy Kreme? "
[15]
WSJ,
7/1/87, "Analysts Who Liked Crazy Eddie Stock No Longer Beat the Drums
for Retailer"
[16]
Journal
of Accountancy, 8/01, "Irrational Ratios"
[17]
WSJ,
8/4/87, "By the Numbers: How One Analyst Scores Big by Finding the Dark
Side"
The stock market investing strategy mentioned here is founded on the belief that there is a direct link between the accuracy and reliability of a company's financial statements and the eventual performance of its publicly-traded securities in the market.
"This study tests whether there is evidence supporting the claims of
fundamental analysts to be able to forecast deteriorating firm performance. We
also test whether the information in the analysts' research reports is impounded
into the market price of subject firms at the date of the report. The evidence
supports the claims that the analysts are able to anticipate deteriorating firm
performance. That is, we find the firms identified by the analysts have
deteriorating firm performance in the year following the report. … Central to
our interpretation of the results is the claim of the analysts associated with
the CFRA use only publicly available information to generate their research
reports. With that caveat noted, we conclude that fundamental analysis can be
used to detect signals of deteriorating firm performance, and that these signals
in publicly available data are not priced by the market." [1]
"In
conclusion, we have been able to confirm that accounting information can be used
to determine market performance of a stock. … The implications of this study
have yielded the fact that investors can earn abnormal returns simply by looking
at and analyzing accounting information and ratios." [2]
"Financial markets reflect investors'
expectations about the future...." [3]
"Valuations
and fundamentals tend to be closely related over time…." [4]
However, that may not always be true. "Ultimately,
a company that trades on the stock market is worth whatever investors decide it
is worth. There is no fundamental value to which everything must return. That's
in part because the future is uncertain." [5]
You be the judge.
"[V]alue investing ... is actually valuing
businesses—the way a private investor values them on cash flows and
expected cash flows—and then trying to buy them at a discount to what
those cash flows are worth. ... [T]wo or three years is enough time for the
market to recognize the value of a business.... [M]ost people don't have the
ability to value businesses at a discount and the discipline to hold them."
[6]
During those times when the stock market is
rational, investors may use stock screeners, locatable through web searches
and/or available through securities brokerage firms where they maintain
accounts, to find potential investment opportunities. Successful investors
employ various search criteria, e.g., EV/EBITDA, LFCF/EV, PEG, ROIC,
Price/Earnings, Price/Sales, Price/Operating-Cash-Flow and/or Price/Book Value
ratios. There will be few, if any, candidates near market tops—of
course, depending how conservative one's specified search criteria. Using
HAv2.3, one can determine whether favorable search results were produced by a
company's manipulative accounting and/or unsound management practices. (A
short-seller might view companies with manipulative accounting and/or unsound
management practices, where its stock is reaching new highs, as an investment
opportunity.) However, "[c]omputer screening has become very popular....
When everyone starts doing something, the method cannibalizes itself—it
loses whatever edge it might once have had." [7]
The key is to know what criteria to use in one's searches.
Investing requires a strategic approach that involves carefully evaluating opportunities. It is prudent to exercise discretion and not engage in every opportunity that comes along. For instance, it is advisable to steer clear of companies that display stagnant growth and financial instability.
"[T]he threat of zombies — companies that struggle to
service their debt … that are technically insolvent but avoid collapse — is
real. … In financial statements, that's reflected as an interest coverage
ratio of under one. … [T]he basic concept is the same: They are allowed to
keep walking in the hope that life may return to them someday. … [T]here's an
85% chance of zombie companies staying zombies in the following year, up from
about 70% in the late 1980s." [8]
Timing is always an issue. Remember "the
perennial December ritual of 'window dressing.' ... [B]ad losers for the
year-to-date can take a final pounding as the calendar comes to a close. ... A
manager [] may systematically purge the portfolio of its worst losers. 'You
don't want to look like a doofus holding stocks that did poorly,' say Felix
Meschke, a finance professor at the University of Kansas. ... [I]t probably is a
good time to pounce on beaten-down stocks you like. Funds ditch their losers so
ferociously this time of year ... that these stocks tend to recover in early
January when the selling abates." [9]
And, individual shareholders may sell in late December for tax-loss purposes. "The
Leuthold Group chief investment strategist [Jim Paulsen] believes Wall Street
panic is in its later stages. 'We're getting close to the bottom,' Paulsen said,
adding that it appears negative sentiment is 'getting close to burning out.' …
'It's OK maybe to start leaning in and buying some of these things that people
are starting to give away,' Paulsen said." [10]
Sometimes, patience is necessary when no investment
candidate meets the selection criteria. "[David] Einhorn's admirers point
to the decline of value investing and the rise of quants, ETFs, index funds, and
momentum stocks as the main reasons he hasn't done well. That is no doubt part
of the story. But there's another way to look at it: By sticking to his value
investing paradigm, and refusing to buy stocks of companies whose prices are
above a certain multiple of discounted cash flow, or other value metrics,
Einhorn's stock picks are limited. As a result, 'David has found himself with a
lot of lower-quality businesses because he wouldn't pay up,' says an individual
close to Greenlight [Capital]." [11]
"For
value investors, the 'buy' decision, at the outset, may seem to be the most
difficult call to make. We peruse thousands of companies, hone down the list to
a manageable number based on the fundamental criteria we find most compelling,
and ultimately probably pull the trigger on just a handful over the course of a
given year. We hope that our analysis was not flawed, that we did not miss
something material, or that we did not paint an overly optimistic picture of the
sometimes-distressed situations we gravitate toward. We do not expect instant
gratification; some situations take years to play out. That's an eternity these
days, but we are just wired that way, patient until the end, and sometimes to
our detriment. We have to be careful about not falling in love with an idea;
that can blind us to the truth, lead to wishful thinking, and cause us to hang
on to a name far too long. The harder part, in my view, may be when to close a
position. This is especially true when it plays out much quicker than you'd
anticipated. When you are buying damaged turnaround plays, as I often do, you
are usually early to the party, buying shares the growth crowd is selling at
distressed prices. If you are correct, the name turns around and/or the market
realizes that it overly punished the name, and investors begin to plow back in.
At that point, you may be faced with a decision, sometimes more quickly than
anticipated. Being early to the party sometimes means that you are also among
the first to leave, selling a name that has rebounded while it is still enjoying
the momentum of renewed interest. That's something I've come to accept as a
value investor; if you make money on a trade after deciding to close the
position, you need to walk away and not look back. All of the above perfectly
describes my position in Fossil Group Inc. (FOSL),
which I took in January in the mid-$8 range. I never set de-facto price targets;
I may have an idea of what I think a company is worth when I purchase it, but
don't have a hard and fast rule. In Fossil's case, I believed it was potentially
a double, but not a quick one. Just five months later, Fossil is up nearly 300%
thanks to some initial takeover speculation in February that drove shares to
$17, then a KeyBanc research report early this month that put a $32 price target
on the stock. With decision time for me, I closed the position this week. It was
not an easy one to make, nor was it the only option. I could have sold a portion
of the position, played the trailing stop-loss game, utilized options, or a
combination of the three. Instead, I decided to take the money and run and look
for the next one. I again may be a bit early to leave the party, but that's OK.
Situations rarely unfold this quickly in value land, and it's a good outcome no
matter what." [12]
FOSL's
market price subsequently tumbled back to low single digits.
"'Make sure you don't get killed on the
downside," he (Hersh Cohen, chief investment officer of ClearBridge
Advisors, a Legg Mason subsidiary) said. ... Mr. Cohen has managed the Legg
Mason Partners Appreciation fund for 30 years, over which he has beaten the S.
& P. 500.... Last year was 'the worst in my career in 40 years of managing
funds,' Mr. Cohen said. ... Mr. Cohen focuses on companies with 'superior
balance sheets'.... Mr. Cohen holds a doctorate in psychology—a background he
calls most helpful in 'market extremes.' He says he tries 'to act on
extremes—but to act the other way,' cutting back when the market is euphoric,
and increasing his bets when others panic 'and stuff is being given away.'"
[13]
What if your analysis is wrong? "A mind
is a terrible thing to change. ... [O]ur own mind acts like a compulsive yes-man
who echoes whatever you want to believe. Psychologists call this mental gremlin
the 'confirmation bias.' ...[P]eople are twice as likely to seek information
that confirms what they already believe as they are to consider evidence that
would challenge those beliefs. Why is a mind-made-up so hard to penetrate? ...
So how can you counteract confirmation bias? Gary Klein, a psychologist
at Applied Research Associates, of Albuquerque, N.M., recommends imagining that
you have looked into a crystal ball and have seen that your investment has gone
bust. Next, come up with the most compelling explanations you can find for the
failure. This exercise ... can help you realize that your beliefs mightn't be as
solid as you thought. Try estimating the odds that your analysis is wrong.
... This way, if the investment does go awry, you will be less likely to dig in
your analytical heels and desperately try to prove that you are still right."
[14]
"Famed economist Paul Samuelson once
said: 'Investing should be more like watching paint dry or watching grass
grow. If you want excitement, take $800 and go to Las Vegas.' That's not to
say investing can't be exciting; it's an amazing feeling to watch the
positive effects on your portfolio after an investment thesis comes to
fruition. Mr. Samuelson, however, had a point: If you think investing is
like gambling, you're doing it wrong. ... [Y]our investments should allow you to
sleep peacefully." [15]
After conducting a thorough evaluation of the company, including factors such as financial stability and the likelihood of bankruptcy or fraudulent practices, an investor may consider increasing their investment at specified levels of decline. This strategy, known as "averaging-down" or incrementally purchasing undervalued stocks that are believed to be sufficiently stable to withstand financial difficulties and eventually regain value, can be financially lucrative. However, it is important to note that successfully implementing this approach requires emotional resilience, patience, and adequate financial resources. In certain cases, investors who employ an averaging-down strategy may ultimately experience greater profits compared to those who attempt to predict the lowest point of a stock's price through an initial purchase. Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge that averaging-down can be emotionally challenging, particularly when significant paper losses have already been incurred.
There are
risks. "A
big sum of money rivets your attention and can fill you with fear of doing the
wrong thing….
So parcel out big decisions into smaller pieces. Put money to work in
equal increments over time….That should minimize the regret you might feel
from investing either too much at the wrong time or too little at the right
time." [16]
Opinions differ as to the merits of averaging-down.
"Why are some investors turning rashly bullish during the worst bear market
in decades? It is the financial equivalent
of a 'Hail Mary pass'—the desperate attempt, far from the goal line and
late in a losing game, to fling the football as hard and as high as you can,
hoping it will somehow come down for a score and wipe out your deficit. If you
fixate on the money you already have lost, you may feel that a moderate future
gain can only reduce those losses, making it hardly worth seeking at all. On the
other hand, even the slightest chance of striking it rich holds out something
precious: hope. That emotion can elbow aside the fact that most Hail Mary passes
fail, in the stadium and stock market alike. … Just as most football coaches
would never call for a Hail Mary pass unless the game clock is running out,
investors may be feeling the urge to gamble only now that it seems there is no
other way to recover losses. … Every once in a while, they win big; far more
often, they lose. … Hurling your money at the wildest risks you can find is a
bad bet. The best way to recover is by gritting your teeth and grinding out
gains one slow, boring play at a time. You aren't likely to rebuild your wealth
through an act of desperation; recovery is a process, not an event. Leave the
Hail Mary play where it belongs: on the football field." [17]
But is it "the wildest risk"? "Fixating on your underperformance
may lead to what psychologists call loss chasing, or taking bigger, more
frequent and more-impulsive risks in the effort to get back to break-even. That
doesn't necessarily mean buying more of whatever's gone down the most. Often, it
means buying whatever you think can go up the most -- even (or especially) if
it's a long shot. Neuroscience experiments have shown that choosing to quit
chasing your losses can fire up the same part of the brain that registers pain
and disgust. When you hunt what you hope will be gains, it hurts to admit that
what you're likely to catch is more losses. No wonder it can be hard to stop
this behavior -- even if you realize your persistent bad bets are putting you
deeper in the hole." [18]
One should continually monitor one's investments by
setting alerts at News.Google.com and SeekingAlpha, and, at the least,
annually update prior HAv2.3 analyses with the most-recent SEC Form 10-K data.
One can currently obtain a free subscription to SEC Filings (www.secfilings.com)
to obtain filing alerts. "Americans caught up in Enronphobia this year are
embracing the practice of studying corporations' annual reports, also known as
10Ks. ... Spotting the next Enron Corp. before its stock plummets can be
daunting for a novice, and even for professional investors, who wade through
hundreds of pages of small print that 10Ks typically contain." [19]
"Don't
blame Wall Street analysts, rank-and-file investors and journalists for failing
to read corporate earnings reports from beginning to end. For one thing, the
quarterly and annual reports churned out by publicly traded companies are
forbiddingly long. … For another, their prose is often dreary and repetitious.
… It's the financial figures within these pages that are critically
important. … [W]e've been making a mistake. The turgid language in these dull
corporate reports is actually sprinkled with important clues about major
problems — and there is a way to get an inkling about them without actually
having to read every word. … [W]hen the language in the current text varies a
great deal from previous versions, it frequently signals trouble that will
become evident several months later. … Mr. [Lauren] Cohen [of Harvard Business
School] said in an interview. 'It turned out that when there are a lot of
changes, there's a good chance that something important is going on, and most of
the time, it's negative.' …
Textual changes in the 'risk factors' section were most likely to
predict subsequent moves in share prices. … The overwhelming majority —
86 percent — of reports with substantial wording changes were primarily
negative in tone. … Professor Cohen … suggested two things: First, always
download the previous version of a corporate report as well as the current
version, so you can compare the language. Focus on the differences from year to
year. Second, focus on one section, the 'risk factors section.' … The
linguistic clues were another piece of evidence that needed to be evaluated and,
perhaps, bolstered, by other research. … [U]ntil the 'Lazy Prices' research is
widely understood, it may be possible for some investors to profit from
it." [20]
It
seems so easy in theory. How does one determine the practical meaning of
"varies a great deal" and "a lot of changes"? Changes are
just "another piece of evidence." Stick with a thorough analysis of
the numbers.
One might exit an investment—at a profit
or a loss—if and when HAv2.3 indicates unreasonably high valuations
and/or developing financial stress and/or mismanagement. Some costly mistakes
have been made by ignoring HAv2.3's red-flags. "[M]ost people are better
attuned to buying than selling. It's especially hard to part with stocks that
have had a stellar performance. ... [T]he highest price-to-growth (PEG) ratios,
which are often indicators of over-valued stocks. A high PEG suggests that the
price is high relative to the expected earnings; a PEG over 4 is a warning
sign. ... PEG ratios are hardly infallible guides to future performance....
But they do provide an objective measure of valuation, rather than relying on
your gut feelings." [21]
"If you want to bail out, you have to do so on the way up and not worry
about missing the peak." [22]
Unlike averaging-down, our experience has shown that, when liquidating, it is
best to liquidate the entire position. Otherwise, one might be tempted to
average-down another time if the stock's price declines again. Bernard Baruch
noted, "I made my money by selling too soon."
After-action reports are imperative, whether
there was a profit or loss. "Robert A. Olstein says that he was not
surprised by the recent wave of corporate accounting scandals. ... 'It ebbs and
flows, and in a bull market, as valuations grow, so do imaginations and
creativity,' said said Mr. Olstein ... who runs the $1.4 billion Olstein
Financial Alert fund.... Mr. Olstein is so focused on balance sheet analysis
that he refuses to meet with company management for fear of being influenced.
... His newfound skepticism took root in the Quality of Earnings Report, a
newsletter he founded with Thornton O'glove, another analyst, in 1970. The
newsletter scrutinized company balance sheets and often warned subscribers about
problems." [23]
"Olstein sold his entire position in ... the company.... He also reexamined
SEC filings and newspaper reports to learn whether he missed any warning
signals. ... 'There was enough evidence on the table to say that we were too
optimistic...' he said. 'It was right in my face. We autopsy every error we
make to see if there is any message other than we got hit by a bomb." [24]
There is evidence that Olstein's firm does not rely exclusively on financial
screens in its stock-selection process. "Among the recent stocks to make
the cut: Federated Department Stores (FD), which he began studying as a results
of a Barron's article." [25]
Emotions
"The
'strong hands' have what it takes to survive.... Not only are they emotionally
strong enough to avoid selling into a panic, but they also have deep-enough
pockets to avoid doing so for financial reasons. In fact, the 'strong hands' can
actually profit by buying at cheap prices near the bottom of a market." [26]
"Value
investors are known for buying low and selling high, but some big-name
mutual-fund managers who thought they bought low are now selling far lower and
are posting big losses...." [27]
"Emotions are contrarian indicators.... [O]ne
of the toughest feelings to fight is the urge to take a profit...." [28]
"[P]eople tend to hang on to their losing stocks too long and sell their
winners too early." [29]
One should set a target profit-level-selling price when making a purchase.
After averaging down, one's patience could reach a breaking point when a
depressed stock finally rises only to one's breakeven price. Furthermore,
one must learn to control one's greed and exit the investment at a reasonable
profit. For example, after the market price of FOSL rapidly rose from less than
$10 to near $32 per share, its market price plummeted back down to the $3 area
(4/3/20).
"To
be a value investor, it isn't enough to buy cheap stocks.... You have to stick
around until the market recognizes their worth. Mr. (Jean-Marie) Eveillard,
now 73 years old ... is prepared to 'suffer' until the market proves him
right." [30]
"Value investors like Ms. (Kim) Forrest hunt for stocks of companies
that are under appreciated and undervalued. It is an approach championed by Warren
Buffett and many other bargain hunters. But a low share price isn't the same
thing as a good value, particularly if the weakness reflects some fundamental
problem facing a company or its industry. Investors who conflate the two may be
succumbing to a common desire to buy cheaper stocks in order to avoid
overpaying, says Meir Statman, a finance professor at Santa Clara
University in California. It is similar to the impulse that compels investors to
cling to stocks they already own that have declined in price, he says. Research
suggests that is a bad strategy, Mr. Statman says, because stocks that have gone
down over the past six months to a year are more likely to keep going down for
roughly the same amount of time. 'Usually, losers continue to lose,' he adds.
... 'Don't expect these things to shoot up in 2013,' says Fort Pitt Capital's
Ms. Forrest. She thinks it could take three to five years for some laggards to
rebound. That could pay off for investors who have lots of patience. But many
investors are more like 'hyperactive kindergartners playing musical chairs,'
says Sam Stovall, chief equity strategist at S&P Capital IQ. 'They
don't have the patience.' ... 'A lot of investors have been waiting for a strong
correction,' Mr. Stovall says. If that happens, the stocks that have climbed the
most this year could skid, he says—but the same stocks are the most likely to
bounce back strongly if investors see the slide as a buying opportunity. Rather
than buying up laggards, Mr. Stovall says, the appropriate response to this
year's rally may be to 'let your winners run and cut your losers short.''' [31]
"Call it the consumer's Catch 22: Buyers
love bargains, but when they finally arrive—thanks to a financial
crisis—many feel too cash-strapped to take advantage of them. ...
Valuation—always a tricky affair—becomes even more challenging in turbulent
times. For
example, traditional measures based on earnings multiples are less meaningful
when profits are erratic, or nonexistent." [32]
As John Maynard Keynes famously put it: "The market can
stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent." "The technical
term for it is 'negative feedback loop.' The rest of us just call it a panic.
How else to explain yet another plunge in the stock market Tuesday that sent the
Standard & Poor's 500-stock index to its lowest level in five
years—particularly in the absence of another nasty surprise? ... Anybody
searching for cause-and-effect logic in the daily gyrations of the market will
be disappointed—even if the overarching problem of a crisis of confidence in
the global economy is now becoming clear. Instead, the market has become a case
study in the psychology of crowds, many experts say. In normal times, it
runs on a healthy mix of fear and greed. But fear now seems to rule, with
investors often exhibiting a Wall Street version of the fight-or-flight
mechanism—they are selling first, and asking questions later. ... To some,
signs of capitulation can be read as an indicator that the bottom may be near.
Indeed, Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor's Equity
Research, is among those who say the market may be close to a bottom. ... The
opposite of capitulation, of course, is investing at the height of a bubble. ...
At this point, any spreadsheet analysis of underlying and intrinsic values of
stocks becomes meaningless, and concern for preserving wealth overrides the
desire to grow it—what some may call greed." [33]
"Five years ago, the global financial system
was falling apart. … [Some] saw the buying opportunity of a lifetime. … Much
attention has been lavished on the speculators who reaped huge paydays betting
against the subprime mortgages that stoked the financial crisis. Doomsayers like
the hedge fund manager John Paulson and the cast of characters in 'The
Big Short,' the Michael Lewis book, saw calamity coming, and their
contrarian bets delivered when the housing market collapsed. But what about the
big long? During the dark days of late 2008, while other investors dumped their
holdings or sat paralyzed on the sidelines, who decided that it was time to put
money on the line? Who bought low and then sold high? … But a number of other,
lower-profile financiers also made billions by obeying one of Mr. [Warren E.]
Buffett's favorite aphorisms: 'Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy
when others are fearful.' … Each of these bottom-of-the-market wagers offers
enduring investment lessons. …But during the frenzied fall of 2008, the
uncertainty was so great that most investors were immobilized by fear. …
If they waited too long in such a tumultuous market, the opportunity
could pass…. As the stock rose, [they] took profits by methodically selling
[their] stake. … Though [they] left several billion dollars on the
table by unloading shares as they traded higher, [they] defended the sales as
prudent risk management.
… Howard Marks's memos to his Oaktree clients have a cult like
following among the professional-investing cognoscenti. … The dispatches—as
well as a book, 'The Most Important Thing'—harp on recurring themes: the
paramount importance of price, the danger of hubris, the value of contrarianism,
the inevitability of cycles. …'Either this is the greatest buying
opportunity of my career or the world is going to end,' … 'And if it ends,
our clients will have much bigger problems on their hands.' … Clients grew
anxious. Calls began streaming in to check Oaktree's performance. In October,
Mr. Marks tapped out another memo to assuage them. 'Our assets are declining in
value like everything else, but we're comfortable that we're doing exactly what
you hired us to do,' he wrote. 'We're grabbing at falling knives. The best
bargains are always found in frightening environments.' … For months, Oaktree
continued to lose money. Mr. Marks tried to reassure his clients, saying it was
inevitable that they would be buying on the way down, that even the most
experienced investors couldn't pinpoint when the market would stop dropping.
Looking back … if had he waited until March 2009, the eventual market nadir,
Oaktree would not have been able to invest as much as it did. By then, all of
the hysterical selling had run its course, and there were fewer bonds to buy.
… Mr. Marks has also contemplated a new book. His theme? How to identify
market cycles and the pendulum swings of investor psychology. Today, he sees the
markets as neither dangerously expensive nor extraordinarily cheap. He sees some
signs of excessive risk-taking, but also sees continued uncertainty. As a result
of the muddy outlook, Oaktree is investing with caution. For Mr. Marks, it's
easier to know what to do at the extremes than it is in the middle. 'Moments
like 2008 will continue to present great opportunities for as long as emotion
rules the markets,' Mr. Marks said. 'In other words, forever.'" [34]
Leverage
"You
could've been highly leveraged.... Leverage may turbo-charge results on the way
up, but it's crushing on the way down." [35]
"When
you leverage, you use someone else's money to amplify an investment's
gains—and its losses. The word comes from the French lever, to lift up. If
you've ever used a lever to move a heavy object, you know the force is amazingly
powerful—and potentially dangerous. Borrowing might be a basic human urge.
Neuroscientists have found that buying on credit activates the same region of
the brain that anticipates the next hit from an addictive drug. Wall Street's
shorthand for "other people's money," OPM, does sound a bit like
opium. Because borrowing pumps up profits in a rising market, it can make
investors cockier, goading them into taking greater risk. … [I]nexperienced
traders using borrowed money have driven asset prices far above their
fundamental value. … Investing with somebody else's money is at least 3,700
years old.
… Using credit can contribute to the downfall of even the most
sophisticated investors. Consider Long-Term Capital Management, the hedge fund
that imploded in 1998 and nearly took the global financial system with it.
Launched in 1994 by experienced quantitative traders in partnership with two
Nobel laureates in economics, LTCM often leveraged at least 20-to-1, borrowing
roughly $100 for every $5 of its own money." [36]
"Market
downturns 'offer extraordinary
opportunities to those who are not handicapped by debt,'
[Warren Buffett] says, which brings up another
important investing lesson: Never borrow money to buy stocks. 'There
is simply no telling how far stocks can fall in a short period,' writes Buffett.
'Even if your
borrowings are small and your positions aren't immediately threatened by the
plunging market,
your mind may well become rattled by scary headlines and breathless commentary.
And an
unsettled mind will not make good decisions.'" [37]
"[W]hen
the fear system of the brain is active, exploratory activity and risk-taking are
turned off. The first order of business, then, is to neutralize that system.
This means not being a fear monger. It means avoiding people who are overly
pessimistic about the economy. It means tuning out media that fan emotional
flames. ... [I]t means closing the Web page with the market ticker. It does
mean being prepared, but not being a hyper vigilant, everyone-in-the-bunker
type." [38]
"Ignore the pundits. The more the market falls, the wilder the
predictions get. ... But the truth is, none of these folks really know [sic]
where stocks are headed." [39]
"[M]ost
retail investors rush into the market at the top and bail out at the
bottom." (Registered Representative, 9/09, "The 0% Return")
"Experts say amateur investors tend to make two basic mistakes: they are
swayed by emotion, and assume that recent performance will predict the future.
... 'Often, the best investments for the future are those that have been
performing the worst,' Mr. [Stephen] Utkus [head of the Center for Retirement
Research at Vanguard] said. Unfortunately, taking advantage of under pricing
implies a contrarian style of investing that 'most of us aren't emotionally
equipped to handle,' he said." [40]
Retail Stocks
Usually, stocks of retailers, e.g., consumer discretionary, do not have complex
financial statements. "Put simply, hot, trendy retailing companies go up,
hit a wall, and go down. That's it. If you are the kind of person who can
stomach that—as … an investor—more power to you. Otherwise you would do
well to seek other vehicles. (A hedge fund manager once told me that retail
stocks are just shorts … waiting to happen.)" [41]
"Retail stocks have taken a beating in recent years. … [A]re retail
stocks a viable option? They could be if you look at the right companies. …
One of the appealing things about retail investing is that, for many investors,
it fits the criteria of 'buying what you know.' … Another related point is
that investing in retail stocks requires investors to put in the work to
research individual stocks. This research should include (but should not be
limited to) the fundamentals such as same-store sales, revenue growth, and net
operating income. You should also be familiar with what analysts are saying
about the company's valuation using ratios such as P/E, PEG, and P/S. Investors
should also pay attention to the latest news about the company including news
about earnings reports, store openings/closures and/or product launches. And if
that weren't enough, investors need to keep an eye on the competition. If this
sounds like a lot of work, then maybe investing is not right for you. Finally, retail
investing is not for the faint of heart. Retail stocks frequently move in
extremes to the market. "Small
companies are individually more volatile ... given the lack of Wall Street analyst coverage many small companies receive." (WSJ, 10/10/23, These Stocks Are Screaming Recession.
It's Almost Time to Buy Them. Small-capitalization stocks can supercharge
portfolios on the other side of economic downturn") With HAv2.3, you become
your own "Wall Street analyst," and volatility means opportunity. When the economy, and the market, are going well
retail stocks may significantly outperform the market. But when the economy
starts to lag, retail stocks can significantly under perform the market. …
[E]ven if you buy the right retail stocks, you have to be committed to them.
This means having realistic growth expectations and being willing to hold onto
the stocks when the going gets rough." [42]
HAv2.3 would have forewarned those invested in Bed, Bath & Beyond (BBBY)
stock of BBBY's financial perils as early as April 2015 when BBBY shares trader
at an all-time-high price.
February - April 2020
"One study of 178 adults, published in 2013 by
the department of organizational behavior at the business school Insead, in
Singapore, and the Wharton School, at the University of Pennsylvania, showed
that 15-minute sessions of mindfulness can help overcome the sunk-cost
fallacy—the tendency to stick with a failing project because of the time,
effort or money already invested in it. For traders, that means holding on to,
or doubling down on, losing positions." [43]
"The
best-performing stock of the past 30 years … [is] little-known Jack Henry
&Associates Inc. …
[T]o earn such superior long-term results, you have to withstand
bone-cracking short-term downdrafts along the way—something most fund managers
can't do. …Among the top 10 stocks over the past three decades … [some]
suffered interim declines of at least 75%.... To end up earning hundreds of
times your original investment, you would have had to lose at least
three-quarters of your money along the way. …
Surely only a professional investor can withstand that kind of pain? Au
contraire, says Mr. [David] Salem: 'It's potentially career-ending for a
manager to hold such big interim losers. I wonder if any manager has ever
been able to stay the entire course with stocks like these.' … For all the
talk about how individual investors have faded as a market force, results like
Jack Henry's are a reminder that no other constituency is in a better position
to buy and hold…and hold…and hold. No one can fire you for hanging onto a
stock that loses 75% or more; you are free to seek value in the most obscure
companies or to find hope in the darkest hour." [44]
"Professional investors tend to move the fastest when a market suddenly
turns. That's largely out of self-preservation, because the biggest risk they
face is being so out of step with the market that their clients fire them. ...
Patience is a luxury that individual investors can afford. ... The pros are in a
never ending struggle to attract new funds." [45]
The corollary is you need to be able to analyze a financial statement and
wait for institutional managers to run.
"It has been swift, and it's been deep, but
we're not quite at the point where it's just indiscriminate blood-letting all
over the place. … [P]eople have been conditioned in a very Pavlovian
sense—every time they've sold, they've been made to look stupid by a V-shaped
recovery shortly afterwards. … Pros are now petrified of missing the market
recovery. That could shift as the losses pile up and enough time goes by. …
What if you sell, stocks bounce back, and [in] the end clients say, 'That's the
last straw!' on their way out the door? … [W]e might be witnessing the first
ever case of 'Panic Holding' in the stock market."
[46]
"Indiscriminate blood-letting" arrived two weeks later.
"Markets
are usually driven by greed or fear. On mercifully rare occasions, they are
driven by outright panic. … When panic rules the roost, markets can be
governed more by the perceived health of the institutions operating in them than
by a rational understanding of economic developments. In such circumstances,
margin calls can spark sell offs even in assets generally judged to be safe—
gold is a recent case in point —and the prices of risk assets can fall far
further than coolheaded assessments of their fundamental value would
suggest." [47]
"Investing, now more than ever, is about controlling the controllable. You
can't control the markets. … You can control your own behavior, although that
requires making accurate, honest predictions about yourself. Controlling the
controllable … means putting some calm and serious thought into what is within
your power. Your future success may depend … on spending a few quiet minutes
figuring out who you are as an investor. …[Y]ou need to be able to tell, in
advance, how bad you will feel if your decisions turn out to be wrong.
… At the most basic level, those are the two potential regrets most
investors face: the risk of losing massive amounts of money … versus the risk
of missing out on what could be a robust rebound…. Only by creating a circle
of calm around yourself can you honestly evaluate which type of regret is likely
to bother you more down the road. … [S]ee what you did the last time markets
were in meltdown. If you bought or stood pat as the U.S. stock market dropped
more than 55% between October 2007 and March 2009, you're a good candidate to be
able to weather this downdraft, too, without panicking. … Also, regrets tend
to be hotter and more painful when an outcome appears to be caused by your own
actions rather than circumstances that seem beyond your control. Regret is also
more intense when you take an action that is an unusual departure from your
normal pattern. So taking small actions over time, rather than making a big
drastic decision all at once, should help reduce your future regrets regardless
of what the markets do from here. … [I]f the market collapse makes you want to
buy stocks … [n]ibble in equal amounts over the course of weeks or months.
Above all, small steps are the best way to avoid big regrets." [48]
"These
are the moments smart investors are supposed to prepare for, to be ready to snap
up bargains from others desperate to flee the market at any price. …
Investors with the strength of will to ignore the volatility need only
find assets where they are confident that there is little risk of permanent loss
to make money in the long run.
Assessing that risk of permanent loss needs three big judgments. … The
third judgment: Can companies survive even without help? …
What is important is having enough cash to avoid going bust before the
economy rebounds, and to cover a period in case a recession is deep enough to
feed on itself. Chuck out earnings forecasts, and look at debt costs, wages,
and access to credit lines. Strong balance sheets mean survival, which is
vital to avoid permanent loss. Then there is the question of timing. Long term
investors should forget it, and just buy where they think they can avoid
permanent loss. … Selling safe-haven assets and risky assets at the same
time, as we saw this week, is a classic sign of investor capitulation. It
shows a rush into the ultimate safety of cash as fear overwhelms any prospect of
return. Anything that can be sold, is sold. Unfortunately that doesn't guarantee
prices can't fall even further….
Still, stocks have now fallen a very long way, very quickly. It is a
great time to be looking for bargains—but only for those willing and able to
hold on through what could be some very troubled times." [49]
"It isn't just your portfolio that's getting
pounded. You are, too. Every financial asset is falling at once, and the economy
itself seems to be imploding. All investors—individuals and professionals
alike—need to understand the havoc this kind of stress wreaks on the human
brain. … A market crash is always scary, but this time the fear and panic of
huge daily drops are compounded by the dread and uncertainty of a global
pandemic. … [S]tress intensifies the negative. … 'It overwhelms the
knowledge that we don't need to be doing that.'" [50]
"[H]indsight bias [is] the belief, after something happens, that we foresaw
that it would occur. That intuition keeps you from learning from mistakes, leads
you to pay too much attention to unreliable forecasts and makes you mismeasure
your tolerance for risk. … [L]earning what did happen impedes you from
retrieving what you thought would happen. … [T]rack your own forecasts. … [Keep]
an investment diary during the financial crisis, go back and read it. How
accurately did you predict how far stocks would drop and how long they would
take to recover?" [51]
"The true contrarian only buys when it makes him feel physically sick to
press the buy key. … Does that mean it's time to buy? The standard contrarian
approach says it is. Panic is visible everywhere. … Faced with all this, it's
easy for an investor to be paralyzed by fear. … Cheap stocks are increasingly
being priced for failure…. So perhaps it's time to start buying in, accepting
that picking the precise bottom is hard. Another 50% fall is possible…. But
for the long-term investor, being seriously scared should be a reason to
buy—not that knowing makes it any easier." [52]
"'Nothing relieves anxiety more than taking action," [Frank Murtha,
a managing partner of the consulting firm MarketPysch and an expert in
behavioral finance] said. 'You can take small actions that address the emotional
need to do something without putting your finances at undue risk.' Stocks are
one of the few assets that psychologically become harder to buy as they become
cheaper. … Even he missed the great buying opportunity in March 2009, 'I was
too scared,' he said." [53]
"In the coronavirus pandemic, stock analysts have a new job: credit
analysis. … Instead of asking how fast a company can grow, ever-optimistic
equity analysts now have to answer a grimmer question: how long can it last if
its revenue vanishes? This focus on cold, hard cash means they have to do work
that is more familiar to credit analysts: analyzing available liquidity, looking
at debt covenants and repayment schedules and checking the extent to which
assets are unencumbered. … [I]nvestors overlooked credit health in the bull
market.
… Now that balance sheets have taken center stage, traditional metrics
like net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
or even tangible book value are back in vogue. …
Analysts better acquainted with income statements need to pay closer
attention to companies' balance sheets right now." [54]
"[L]osses
hurt twice as much as gains feel good…. Such '[L]oss aversion' helps explain
why a market correction can be so unpleasant that it leads to panic selling. We
are wired to hate a portfolio full of red ink. … What should you do if … you
appear to be hypersensitive to short-term losses? The most immediate thing you
should do is not look at the market." [55]
[1]
Using
Fundamental Analysis to Assess Earnings Quality: Evidence from the Center
for Financial Research and Analysis [October
2000].
[2]
Atanasov,
Tyler, Using Accounting information to Forecast Market Performance
(2017), pps. 14-15.
[3]
Economist,
12/19/20, "What explains investors' enthusiasm for risky assets?"
[4]
WSJ,
1/28/21, "How GameStop's
Reddit-and-Options-Fueled Stock Rally Happened…."
[5]
NYT,
2/1/21, "What Is GameStop, the
Company, Really Worth? Does It Matter?"
[6]
NYT,
10/7/19, "A Value Investor Defends Value Investing...."
[7]
WSJ,
7/17/89, "Two Money Managers Duke It Out In Debate on Stock-Value
Theories"
[8]
Washington
Post, 4/11/23, "Zombies Are Back! Here's Why That's Economic
Trouble"
[9]
WSJ,
12/24/11, "Now That's Performance Art"
[10]
CNBC,
12/24/18, "Market panic enters late stages, sharp rebound coming soon,
strategist Jim Paulsen says"
[11]
Institutional
Investor, 5/16/18, "What Exactly Happened to David Einhorn?"
[12]
TheStreet.com,
6/22/18, "Fossil's Big Surge Doesn't Make Hard Call When to Take
Profits Any Easier"
[13]
NYT,
7/26/09, "Up 40%, but Still Feeling Down"
[14]
WSJ,
11/13/09, "How to Ignore the Yes-Man in Your Head"
[15]
Motley
Fool, 11/13/12, "Beat the market and sleep well with this stock"
[16]
WSJ,
8/27/21, "The Lazy Investor's
Guide to Getting Stuff Done…."
[17]
WSJ,
2/21/09, "The Intelligent Investor: As Stock Losses Loom, Don't Throw a
'Hail Mary"'
[18]
WSJ,
5/20/23, "The Intelligent
Investor: … Trying to make up for stock-market losses can be costly,
impulsive and misguided…."
[19]
WSJ,
4/8/02, "'Footnote Factor' Looms Large This Year --- As Annual Reports
Arrive, Tricks Are Used to Find Any Enron-Like Items"
[20]
NYT,
1/10/19, "How
Companies Like Apple Sprinkle Secrets in Earnings Reports"
[21]
WSJ,
8/12/09 WSJ, "A Time to Let Go Of Overvalued Stock"
[22]
WSJ,
8/26/09, "How I Got Burned by Beanie Babies")
[23]
WSJ,
7/6/03, "This Manager Keeps His Focus on the Balance Sheet"
[24]
Washington
Post, 4/10/05, "Taking the Plunge As Stocks Are Low...."
[25]
Barron's,
2/20/06, "Smitten by the Unloved"
[26]
NYT,
8/9/09, "Hold or Fold, but Don't Waver"
[27]
WSJ,
8/30/08, "Value Investors Cut Losses"
[28]
WSJ,
5/8/08, "If It Feels Bad, It's Probably Good ... the Best Trades Are
Usually the Most Painful."
[29]
WSJ,
6/3/97, "Who's Sorry Now? Folks Who Sold, Study Reports"
[30]
WSJ,
2/16/13, "Value Stocks Are Hot—But
Most Investors Will Burn Out"
[31]
WSJ,
5/25/13, "Beware of 'Bargain' Stocks—Why a Low Share Price
Alone Doesn't Make for a Good Value"
[32]
NYT,
5/22/09, "The Art of Buying in Bearish Times"
[33]
NYT,
10/8/08, "Forget Logic; Fear Appears to Have Edge"
[34]
NYT,
11/9/13, "Treasure Hunters of the Financial Crisis"
[35]
WSJ,
11/25/08, "A Reason to Be Thankful: It Could Have Been Worse"
[36]
WSJ,
1/22/22, "The Force That Can Lift Stocks but Wreck You…."
[37]
CNBC,
12/17/18, "Warren Buffett suggests you read this 19th century poem when
the market is tanking"
[38]
NYT,
12/7/08, "In Hard Times, Fear Can Impair Decision-Making"
[39]
WSJ,
4/1/97, "Advice for Jittery Investors: Sit Tight"
[40]
NYT,
9/22/09, "The Forest, the Trees and Your Portfolio"
[41]
Fortune,
7/1/03, "Nautica's Big Mess The once-hip retail brand is losing
customers, fighting with investors, and looking for a buyer."
[42]
MarketBeat,
10/10/19, "Is Now a Good Time
to Invest in Retail Stocks?"
[43]
WSJ,
2/10/20, "A New Way for Stock Traders to Rebalance: Meditation; Some
studies indicate that mindfulness leads to better investment
performance"
[44]
WSJ,
12/13/19, "How You Can Get Big Gains That Wall Street Can't; A dirty
secret of the investment business is that fund managers don't buy and hold.
Not because they don't want to, but because they can't."
[45]
WSJ,
2/27/20, "Intelligent Investor: Pros Must Sell Stock Now. You Don't
Have To"
[46]
The
Reformed Broker, 2/27/20, "Why it's 'an orderly sell-off'"
[47]
WSJ,
3/9/20, "How to Keep Calm as Coronavirus Fears Turn Into Market
Panic…."
[48]
WSJ,
3/14/20, "Stocks Are in Chaos. Control the One Thing You Can. Whether
the market goes up or down from here, it's time for an honest assessment
about what you can do to minimize your regrets"
[49]
WSJ,
3/14/20, "Take a Deep Breath and Assess Whether It Is Time to Buy;
These are the moments smart investors are supposed to prepare for"
[50]
WSJ,
3/19/20, "This Is Your Brain on a Crashing Stock Market; Fear and panic
over huge daily drops are compounded by dread of a global pandemic"
[51]
WSJ,
3/20/20, "The Panic of 2020? Oh, I Made a Ton of Money—and So Did
You; Hindsight bias suggests that one day you'll look back on all of this
and... lie"
[52]
WSJ,
3/24/20," I'm Scared. That's a Reason to Buy. The true contrarian only
buys when it makes him feel physically sick to press the buy key"
[53]
NYT,
3/27/20, "I Became a Disciplined Investor Over 40Year. The Virus Broke
Me in 40 Days."
[54]
WSJ,
3/27/20, "Stock Analysts Now Need to Be Credit Analysts; Modeling
growth and market size is out; understanding debt covenants and refinancing
schedules is in"
[55]
WSJ,
4/6/20, "Here's Why Some Investors Panic. And Here's How to Make Sure
You Don't. Are you likely to buy high and sell low in a market panic?
There's a pretty simple way to figure that out."
"He and other executives improperly boosted profit by booking
operating expenses as capital spending, which can be deducted from earnings in
small chunks over time." [1]
"[There is] a growing group of companies turning to external
assessments to fine-tune their communications. The target audience isn't just
human analysts and investors: Machine-learning tools, perception studies and
speech recognition are also used by finance and investor-relations executives
seeking to anticipate the reaction of robots that increasingly sway the market
by buying and selling shares on the basis of data analysis. …
These days, a lot of investors are using language-and sentiment-analysis
tools, which means companies have to adjust how they talk about their
finances…. Algorithmic traders using sentiment analysis—an automated process
that identifies positive, negative and neutral opinions in a body of text—can
react negatively to wording…. [Consultants]
are pitching data-crunching software tools that they say can find signals in
companies' public statements. … [One consultant] uses machine learning and
natural language processing to create a lexicon of a company's commonly used
words. This can help institutional investors get a better understanding of a
company's tone and the potential implications. … [A r]ival software firm …
has come up with a 'deception score' tool that warns investors when companies
may be using evasive language, euphemisms or stalling tactics…. Behind the
increased interest [by some companies is the] belief that calibrating their
communications can boost their shares." [2]
So, what value does this divining-rod substitute add to financial statement
analysis? Further, admissions in Form 10-Ks appear years after the numbers
predicted disaster.
"Companies can have unconventional chief executives, but not
eccentric accounting. Tesla, the
electric-car maker, on Friday disclosed that its chief accounting officer had
resigned and was leaving just weeks after his arrival. … The departure of
Tesla's chief accounting officer, David Morton, may be particularly concerning
for investors because of its unfortunate timing. ... But with the sudden exit of
Mr. Morton, investors might now fret about the reliability of Tesla's financial
statements. … Did he discover that his new working environment was difficult
or in disarray? Was there something he was uncomfortable signing off on? Mr.
Morton's predecessor, Eric Branderiz, left after 14 months." [3]
"In general, cases of major fraud should have been prevented by
auditors, whose specific job it is to review every set of accounts as a neutral
outside party, and certify that they are a true and fair view of the business.
… A set of fraudulent accounts will often generate 'tells'. In particular,
fraudsters in a hurry, or with limited ability to browbeat the auditors,
will not be able to fake the balance sheet to match the way they have faked the
profits. Inflated sales might show up as having been carried out without need
for inventories, and without any trace of the cash they should have generated.
… Often, an honest auditor who has buckled under pressure will
include a cryptic-looking passage of legalese, buried in the notes to the
accounts, explaining what accounting treatment has been used, and hoping that
someone will read it and understand that the significance of this note is that
all of the headline numbers are fake. Nearly all of the fraudulent
accounting policies adopted by Enron could have been deduced from its
public filings if you knew where to look. … The problem is that spotting
frauds is difficult and, for the majority of investors, not worth expending the
effort on. That means it is not worth it for most analysts, either. Frauds are
rare. Frauds that can be spotted by careful analysis are even rarer. And frauds
that are also large enough to offer serious rewards for betting against them
come along roughly once every business cycle, in waves. Analysts are also
subject to very similar pressures to those that cause auditors to
compromise their principles. Anyone accusing a company publicly of being a
fraud is taking a big risk, and can expect significant retaliation. It is well
to remember that frauds generally look like very successful companies, and
there are sound accounting reasons for this. It is not just that once you
have decided to fiddle the accounts you might as well make them look great
rather than mediocre. If you are extracting cash fraudulently, you usually
need to be growing the fake earnings at a higher rate. So people who are
correctly identifying frauds can often look like they are jealously attacking
success. Frauds also tend to carry out lots of financial transactions and pay
large commissions to investment banks, all the while making investors believe
they are rich. The psychological barriers against questioning a successful CEO
are not quite as powerful as those against questioning the honesty of a doctor
or lawyer, but they are substantial. And finally, most analysts' opinions are
not read. A fraudster does not have to fool everyone; he just needs to fool
enough people to get his money. If you are looking to the financial system to
protect investors, you are going to end up being disappointed." [4]
"I think the observation about accounting fraud being a priority [at
the SEC] is a fair one. Co-director Ceresney recently gave an entire speech
devoted to financial reporting and accounting fraud, where he highlighted the
SEC's Financial Reporting and Audit Task Force, which they call the Fraud Task
Force. It has 12 lawyers and accountants, who are using analytical tools
to identify companies that are likely to have revenue recognition and other
accounting issues." [5]
"Twitter's red-hot stock offering last week makes clear that, as in
the first Internet bubble, investors will pay up for a company even if it hasn't
turned a profit. And managers of companies that have generated only losses, like
Twitter—and even those that are profitable—are happy to suggest metrics that
they think are better suited for assessing their operations. Managements'
recommended measures, typically not found in generally accepted accounting
principles, have an uncanny way of burnishing a company's results. They do so by
eliminating some pesky costs of doing business. As such, these benchmarks are
also known as earnings without the bad stuff. They were central to the
valuations that propelled Internet stocks skyward in the late 1990s. Then, the
higher the market climbed, the kookier the metrics became. … But the idea that
these items don't cost the company is nonsense, says Jack T. Ciesielski,
an accounting expert at R.G. Associates in Baltimore and publisher of The Analyst's
Accounting Observer. … To plumb the popularity and pervasiveness of
such metrics, Mr. Ciesielski and his associates analyzed filings from technology
and health care companies in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index. … But
Mr. Ciesielski said companies' creativity in accounting metrics was on the way
to becoming ridiculous." [6]
"In
October 2000, short seller James Chanos labored through Enron Corp.'s
annual report, underlining complicated passages and scribbling exclamation
points and question marks. … While even he found the filings hard to
understand, to him they raised multiple red flags. … For their part, Wall
Street analysts argue that they have limited time and resources for the in-depth
research that Mr. Chanos prefers. Many cover dozens of companies." [7]
"What
mostly interested him [Chanos] were a few simple numbers available to anybody
who took the time to look: the company's ostensibly brilliant managers were
earning just seven percent a year on capital that was costing them more than ten
percent to borrow. Enron was bleeding itself dry." [8]
"PricewaterhouseCoopers,
which signed off on Satyam Computer
Services Ltd.'s finances for several years without detecting the fraud by
Satyam's founder and chairman, defended its procedures on Thursday. ... Satyam
Chairman B. Ramalinga Raju said Wednesday that he had created a fictitious
cash balance of more than $1 billion and inflated accrued interest, profits
and debts owed to the company. ... As part of an end-of-year audit, accountants
would have had to verify the amount of money owed to the client.... [M]r. Raju
said the company's cash and bank balance had been inflated by more than $1
billion dollars. ... Normally, checking bank statements wouldn't be considered
sufficient under Indian or U.S. rules -- the auditor would also need to get
direct confirmation from the bank. For investors who relied on Satyam's
financial statements, the fraud would have been difficult or impossible to
discover. 'When a fraud goes so far as to misreport cash, finding warning
signs of the fraud becomes quite problematic,' said Charles Mulford, an
accounting professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology. There were some red
flags though. One indication of fraud accountants often look for is a
discrepancy between net income and operating cash flow, the amount of cash a
company spits out from its operations. ... Another warning sign was a sharp
increase in assets held in the company's bank deposits." [9]
Books authored by Professor Charles Mulford have long been on our list of
Recommended Readings.
"The chairman of one of India's largest information technology
companies admitted he concocted key financial results including a fictitious
cash balance of more than $1 billion, a revelation that sent shock waves across
corporate India and is likely to prompt investors to question the validity of
corporate results as the once-hot economy slows. B. Ramalinga Raju, founder and
chairman of Satyam Computer Services Ltd.
-- "satyam" means truth in Sanskrit -- said in a letter of resignation
that he also overstated profits for the past several years, overstated the
amount of debt owed to the company and understated its liabilities.
Eventually, he said, the scheme reached 'simply unmanageable proportions'
and he was left in a position 'like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off
without being eaten.' The news
prompted concerns about corporate governance and accounting standards across
Indian industry, especially since Satyam was audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers
and had high-profile independent directors, including a Harvard Business School
professor, on its board until recently. ... Immediate comparisons were drawn to
the watershed in U.S. corporate accounting and governance standards that stemmed
from the Enron crisis. ... The corporation grew into India's fourth-largest
technology company by sales, employing 53,000.... It counts among its clients
global giants such as Nestlé SA, General Electric Co., Caterpillar Inc., Sony
Corp. and Nissan Motor Corp. ... In his five-page confessional letter to
Satyam's board, Mr. Raju said that initially the gap between the company's
actual operating profit and the one reflected in the books had been marginal.
But as Satyam grew in size and its costs increased, so did the size of the gap.
Mr. Raju fretted that if the company was seen to perform poorly, it could prompt
a takeover attempt that would expose the gap, so he concocted ways to plug it.
Among them: pledging the shares he and other company backers owned to raise a
total of $250 million in funds for Satyam in the past two years. He said the
loans, which weren't reported on Satyam's balance sheet, were based on 'all
kinds of assurances' and were designed to allow Satyam's operations to continue.
... But the ruse became increasingly difficult to maintain as the company's
fortunes dwindled." [10]
"The problem was that Dynegy's cash flow from operations wasn't
keeping up. And eventually analysts and investors might interpret that
discrepancy as suggesting that the contract valuations had been too high. …
Executives called it Project Alpha. Designed primarily by the company's tax
division…. Arthur Andersen LLP, Dynegy's auditor until last month, blessed the
benefits created by Project Alpha…. Independent accounting experts say they
see little business justification for the Alpha transactions, apart from
improving the appearance of the company's books…. [T]he nation's top financial
institutions and law firms reap big profits from helping American corporations
set up complex accounting arrangements aimed at least in part at touching up
their financial portraits. Dynegy paid a total of $33 million in Project Alpha
fees to, among others, Citigroup and Vinson & Elkins, a prominent Houston
law firm. Citigroup and Vinson & Elkins were involved in Enron deals, as
well. … [A] Dynegy spokesman, says the company disclosed Project Alpha
appropriately. … There is no explicit reference to Project Alpha." [11]
"[T]here
are certain relevant financial ratios that can provide clues. For example,
lending agreements oblige most companies across a wide range of industries to
keep the debt level at no more than about seven or eight times earnings before
interest payments, taxes and depreciation." [12]
"Marc
Cohodes is a short-seller ... who is respected, even by longs, for his
ability to tear apart a balance sheet. And he is not the only short known for
his willingness to rip publicly into corporate executives. But he is among the
few shorts who is both. That combination, along with his recent triumph in
helping to uncover hugely inflated sales at Lernout & Hauspie Speech
Products, a Belgian software company that filed for bankruptcy in November,
has made him highly visible at a time when short-sellers are regaining their
status in Wall Street's ecosystem. … Mr. Cohodes, 41, is nothing if not
creative in his research. He focuses on smaller technology companies with
financial results that appear stronger than their products. Then he combs
balance sheets and income statements, seeking clues that a company is inflating
profits or faking sales. Is the company making a lot of sales to buyers that are
also controlled by its executives, in what are called 'related-party'
transactions? Are receivables -- sales for which the company has not yet been
paid -- piling up on its books? Do a lot of its sales originate in
less-developed countries, where auditors many not be as strict? Has it found
ways to hide its costs by categorizing recurring expenses as capital spending?
Is it reporting profits even though its cash flow is negative? Those possible
tip-offs are visible on a balance sheet for investors who know where to look. If
Mr. Cohodes sees them, he will look deeper, calling the company's clients and
suppliers and asking questions: Do its products work? Does it pay on time? Has
it asked customers to buy more than they need now in return for discounts later.
… But the more red flags Mr. Cohodes sees, the more excited he becomes. …
Lernout & Hauspie is the stock that cemented Mr. Cohodes' reputation. …
After examining the company's financial statements, he decided that Lernout had
pumped up its revenue with related-party transactions. Later, he and other
short-sellers helped point The Wall Street Journal and TheStreet.com to problems
with the company's sales in Singapore and South Korea. … In January 2001,
after several critical articles in The Journal, Lernout filed for bankruptcy in
Belgium. ... Over all, Lernout booked $277 million in fake revenue between 1998
and June 2000, one-third its total sales, according to the company's audit
committee. … Professionals rarely short companies simply because they believe
that their stocks are overvalued. They prefer to focus on companies with
financial statements that they believe are misleading or fraudulent, companies
that may be booking nonexistent sales or selling products to themselves in sham
deals. ... 'But again, we do not want to short legitimate companies.''' [13]
"[I]BM does not have growing revenues. Its top line—the
hardest number to manipulate—has risen just 5% annually since 1995. … Gross
profit margins—the share of revenues left after subtracting the cost of goods
sold—are narrowing too…. Indeed,
it is rather amazing that investors have been willing to suspend their disbelief
as long as they have. Doubts about IBM's earnings quality have been raised for
years…. Some financial sleuths
have long argued that cash flow from operations is a better way to judge a
company's performance. This measure paints a drastically different picture of
IBM than EPS does. … So while earnings have grown magnificently, cash
flow—the actual spendable, re-investable, bankable money that the business
generates—has contracted…." [14]
"Standard &Poor's will shortly launch … a new product that allows
banks, insurance companies and institutional investors to use the Internet to
obtain a fast and cheap online, computer-generated estimate of a company's
creditworthiness. Called
CreditModel, the new product is essentially a group of sophisticated computer
models… S&P is quick to emphasize that CreditModel is no substitute for a
full-blown credit analysis. … A bank or other subscriber selects the business
sector in which the company it is interested in examining operates, its
geographic location and then enters a number of financial statistics or ratios,
such as revenue, equity, total debt and pretax return on capital. … The model
delivers a credit 'score…. [S]&P [] acknowledged … '[I]t's not an
opinion of creditworthiness.'" [15]
"[E]xamine how the company's inventory turnover ratio has changed from year
to year. You compute this ratio by referring again to the income statement for
the revenue figure, then dividing that number by current inventories, which is
listed on the balance sheet. A ratio rising from year to year is good news, but
a declining one is an indication that the company's products are not moving
well." [16]
"[A] test of business health ... depend[s] heavily on financial
ratios as indicators of a business's prospects. What these ratios don't disclose
is the outlook for a company's market or the strength of its competition,
factors that can either save some mismanaged companies or upend the most
efficient of managers." [17]
"[T]he story of the dramatic rise and fall of Frigitemp involves an abuse of a common accounting method for
long-term construction projects. … Internal Arthur Andersen documents show …
early moves [] to encourage Frigitemp to make more frequent use of 'cost to cost
percentage of completion accounting.' This is a technique that allows a company
to declare income from a long-term construction project before the income is
actually received. The method was damned eight years ago in a Senate committee
report as one of the most trouble-prone forms of 'creative accounting.' The
technique assumes that if, for example, 25% of the costs of material needed for
a project had been spent, the project could be declared 25% completed and, thus,
25% of the income to be derived from it would appear on the books." [18]
[1]
WSJ,
2/3/20, "Bernie Ebbers, 'Telecom Cowboy' Who Built WorldCom, Dies at
78...."
[2]
WSJ,
11/19/19, "Companies Adjust Financial Communications to Resonate With
Humans and Robots; As markets scour financial statements for trading clues,
executives turn to machine-learning tools, perception studies and speech
recognition to help them choose their words carefully"
[3]
NYT,
9/9/18,"Tesla Needs to Build Investor Trust. The Exit of Its Accountant
Won't Help."
[4]
The
Guardian, 6/28/18, "How to get away with financial fraud"
[5]
California
Lawyer, January 2014, 2014 Roundtable Series-Securities
[6]
NYT,
11/9/13, "Earnings, Without the Bad Stuff"
[7]
WSJ,
11/5/01, "What Enron's Financial Reports Did -- and
Didn't -- Reveal—Enron
Short Seller Detected Red Flags In Regulatory Filings"
[8]
Yale
Alumni Magazine, Sept/Oct 2013, "The Fraud Detective"
[9]
WSJ,
1/9/09, "Pricewaterhouse Defends Its Audit Procedures"
[10]
WSJ,
1/9/09,"Fraud Rocks Satyam as Chairman Resigns Overstated Profits Raise
Investor Concern About India Oversight"
[11]
WSJ,
4/3/02, "Number Crunching: Enron Rival Used Complex Accounting To
Burnish Its Profile --- With Help From Citigroup, Dynegy Inc. Addressed A
Cash-Flow Concern --- 'Project Alpha' to the Rescue"
[12]
WSJ,
12/31/01, "How to Spot Signs of Companies' Distress"
[13]
NYT,
7/8/01, "Thriving on Bursting Bubbles"
[14]
Fortune,
6/26/00, "Hocus-Pocus How IBM Grew 27% A Year[.] Do you want to believe
in the IBM miracle? Then don't look too closely at the numbers."
[15]
WSJ,
6/17/99, "S&P to Offer Cheap, Online Credit Analysis"
[16]
Chicago
Sun - Times, 4/24/88, "Annual reports: Careful reading can alert
potential investors"
[17]
WSJ,
5/15/87, "Small Business (A Special Report): Growing Pains --- Warning
Flags Up...."
[18]
WSJ,
9/21/84, "Tale of Deceit: Why Arthur Andersen Was So Slow to Detect
Chicanery at Frigitemp --- Biggest Accountant in U.S. Audited Concern's
Books But Missed Irregularities --- Expensive Secret Settlements"
"The
horrendous accounting fraud—what we saw in Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom—is
relatively rare. It breaks the law and violates accounting standards.
We have produced various HAv2.3 analyses that timely revealed financial statement distress and/or fraud, e.g., Enron, Satyam, Tweeter, J.C. Penney, American Apparel, Aeropostale, Ascena, Bed, Bath & Beyond, Bombay Company, Blockbuster, Bebe, Body Central, Circuit City, Coldwater Creek, Crazy Eddie, dElia*S, Eddie Bauer, Francesca's, Gadzook's, Goody's Family Clothing, Gottschalk's, Helig-Meyers, Kmart, Monaco Coach, Pacific Sunwear, Party City, Quick Silver, Radio Shack, Sharper Image, Warnaco, Westpoint Stevens, Wet Seal. (We continuously update HAv2.3. The analyses presented here are based of the version of HAv2.3 that existed at the times of the respective analyses. We will provide the most current version upon request.) Using HAv2.3, a stock investor could have avoided costly errors, or if acting very aggressively, an investor might have initiated short positions or sold a Put option.
Our Satyam HAv2.3 Analysis detected problems, e.g., 62% Probability of Manipulation in 2004, and our Enron HAv2.3 Analysis detected financial problems while the market price of Enron's stock was rising to its all-time high. The early identification of financial issues within Enron, specifically with HAv2.3, would have allowed an investor to capitalize on the significant increase in the stock price. Conversely, it would have also prevented them from experiencing the subsequent and detrimental decline. In the case of short-selling or Put-buying, it would be advisable to wait until the problem is acknowledged by the mass media and the stock's market price commences its decline after a considerable upswing.
Someone asked why few stockbrokers have large yachts.
"It isn't a mistake to try lowering your risk. It is a mistake,
however, to assume that the future will resemble the past, that rules are
infallible and that you should dive into any one strategy with both feet." [1]
"Investors are
constantly under the false impression that they or some vaunted expert knows
something that will help them gain an edge. Unfortunately, people in the
prediction business aren't very good at it. The old joke says that economists were invented
to make weathermen look good." [2]
"The [predictor] is too new to
have much of a record. Financial history is littered with [] predictors that
worked great using historical data that promptly failed when used to predict the
future. It didn't work 'out of sample,' as statisticians would say. So, it
remains to be seen how useful the [predictor] will be." [3]
"Finance Sharing Is for Chumps. Financial experts
argue for a great variety of investment strategies, but these approaches all
have one thing in common: Once the word is out about them, their returns shrink.
That's the finding of a couple of finance professors who looked at 82 market
strategies—differences in valuations that gave investors a chance to profit
and were then described in academic papers. In a working paper, the authors
estimate that the average return decays after publication by about 35%. This
seems to happen mostly because investors learn about the strategy from the
academic papers and trade on it, thereby diminishing the advantage (in keeping
with the way markets are supposed to work). The effect is most pronounced, the
professors write, with strategies focusing on stocks with large market
capitalization, high-dollar-volume trading and dividends." [4]
"Investing
is so competitive that history can rarely repeat for long; if any past pattern
reliably recurred, so many people would pounce on it that it would soon stop
working."
[5]
This study might assume that all investors would be willing or are able to
replicate the efforts necessary to engage in financial statement analysis.
"Confirmation
bias is one of the biggest problems in investing. We all have a set of core
beliefs, and we tend to surround ourselves with people who also believe them and
focus on information that validates them. … But there is a danger in following
only the people and data who support what you believe. It can blind you to the
other side of the argument, especially when your beliefs are strongly held. And
there is almost always another side. … [F]ollowers of value strategies want
other value investors to panic during periods of underperformance. That bad
behavior is in part what makes it work. Permanent followers of the strategy who
won't panic no matter how long it under performs can reduce its effectiveness
over time. And as more investors become educated about the negative effects of
their behavior, it is possible they will stick out the downturns more. … The
point of this exercise wasn't to suggest that value investing is dead. …No
matter what style in investing you use, it is very easy to get caught up in a
feedback loop that does nothing but support it. But by doing that you lose the
ability to question yourself. You lose the ability to figure out how you might
be wrong." [6]
"However confident one is when making a trade on a stock, bond or other
financial instrument, someone on the other side of the transaction has good
reasons for feeling otherwise. What if he or she is right and you're
wrong?"[7]
The Committee of Concerned Shareholders and Financial Statement Analysis
are not investment advisors. The information presented on
this website was obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy
and completeness and any opinions based thereon cannot be guaranteed. It is
presented for general interest and educational purposes. It should not be
construed to be: (a) advice concerning the valuation; (b) recommendation of the
purchase, retention or sale; or, (c) analysis of the securities of any company.
Those seeking such advice should consult with their advisors. The opinions,
findings and/or conclusions of the authors expressed herein are not necessarily
politically-correct and are subject to change without notice. Past results
should not be interpreted as a guaranty of future performance.
In other words, if you think you lost money based on something you read here, don't come crying to us.
[1]
WSJ, 9/19/20, "Some
Investors Tried to Win by Losing Less. They Lost Anyway. The market has a
way of soaking people who
[2]
WSJ, 7/12/16, "Why You're a Lousy Investor and Don't Even
Know It"
[3]
WSJ, 3/24/23, "Accounting-Fraud
Indicator Signals Coming Economic Trouble…."
[4]
WSJ, 11/9/12, "Week in
Ideas"
[5]
WSJ,
7/23/21, "Why Investors Can't
Kick the 'Past Performance' Habit…."
[6] Validea's Guru Investor Blog, 1/29/19, "The Case Against Value Stocks"
[7]
WSJ, 12/27/19, "Even With Inside
Information, Traders Can Get It Wrong…."
FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS
To obtain further information or to share your feedback and suggestions, please contact us at:
Last Revised: October 20, 2024
This Website is Sponsored by:
Law
Office of
====
###