Happy Independence Day! 🇺🇸🎇 Doing some quarter-end portfolio/index maintenance before the pyrotechnics and some interesting observations about S&P 500 index sales and earnings. Expect some negative surprises on the horizon given an extrapolation of what appears to be a boom. 1/
Index sales per share fell 3.7% in 2020, but the share count rose 1.8%, as it does during crises when companies need money but shares are cheap. Buy high, sell low. Overall dollar sales thus declined only 2.0% from $11.72T to $11.48T. 2/
EPS (operating, so pre writeoffs) fell 22% from $157.12 to $122.37. A huge recovery in profit & sales is underway. Wall Street pegs EPS at $187.30 & $210.69 for '21 & '22. Let’s assume a full recovery in dollar revenues to a linear 2.5% nominal growth from 2019 through 2022. 3/
Let’s ALSO assume companies are back to form in retiring 1% of net shares per year here in 2021 and next year (giving 2%, buying 3%). On a full recovery in the top line, 2019’s net margin of 11.1%, which fell to 9.0% in 2020, rises to 12.7% in 2021 and 13.8% in 2022. Sure. 4/
No doubt companies are doing more with less, hence productivity will appear off the charts this year thanks to so many still sitting home collecting stimulus and unemployment checks coupled with some companies shrinking their office overhead. 5/
However, prior to this year the prior quarterly peak in profit margin for the index was 3Q 2018 at 12.13%. It looks like a boom, and by measuring sales and earnings against 2020’s depressed figures it is. It's easy to forget how bad things were last year in certain sectors. 6/
When the investment world catches on and more logically measures growth not year-over-year but from '19 to '21 and '22 (as Nike recently & conservatively did), the reality of an economy growing very slowly will be apparent. Inflation figures are also calculated on a y/y basis. 7/
Yes, interest rates are low, but they are low because total credit market debt is at 400% of GDP and federal debt approaches 140%. Not only do you discount future profits with interest rates, but a low growth component works against valuation. Check Japan on this. 8/
Further, once repos return in earnest (they are, w/ the share count down in 2Q for the first time since 4Q 2019) and chew up more than half of corporate profit, we’re back to giving away the company to insiders and using what should be owner profit to mask front-end dilution. 9/
When shares are repurchased with disregard to price/value, it’s very difficult for shareholders to win. The diversion of operating profit to insiders is enormous. Return on equity is also materially overstated, with companies writing down 23% of operating profit during 2020. 10/
Despite operating earnings of $122.37/share during 2020, book value per share only rose 1.4%, from $914.49 to $927.52. If you think the aggregate of companies are earning 20% in 2021 on trailing equity and REINVESTING at anywhere near that rate, think again. 11/
With more than 100% of profits geared to dividends & expensive repos, little money is invested for the benefit of the shareholder. Individual companies do it differently - some well and others as capital destroyers. In aggregate, however, expect surprises, and not good ones. 12/
Wall Street analysts, both top-down and bottom-up, are generally too optimistic about future profits. They are way ahead of a realistic outcome at the moment. As for $210.69 in S&P 500 profit for 2022, remember the words of President George H.W. Bush, or Dana Carvey...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Outside of the financial reporting of certain car companies, SPAC promoters and countless others, I haven't read fiction in ~30 years. Limited, I know. Outside of investing/business reading, I love US history, particularly the American Revolution. In the spirit of the 4th, 1/
I thought it would be fun sharing some favorites. Mostly bios and written from the "great man" perspective. To McCullough, Adams was the greatest; but to Chernow and Ellis it was Washington. Of course, when Ellis wrote on Jefferson he was the man and so forth. All were great. 2/
What's remarkable about these giants of the revolution is the risk they took in rebellion from England. Captured, the signers of the Declaration and other revolutionaries would have hung. It's amazing how young many of them were. Franklin was the elder statesman at age 70. 3/
Upon further review, looks like you crowned yourself the next Mr. Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway in your past THREE annual letters, @chamath. Two weeks ago we had some fun digging in to your selected disclosure methodologies, didn't we? But oh my does it get even more bizarre. 1/
I’ve now had the misfortune of reading all 3 and am stunned at the apparent need to bend, break really, the facts to make your performance shine. Let’s examine your comparison to $BRKA in your past three letters, digging yourself a hole in 2018 and burying yourself in 2020. 2/
Book value, skip a year, book value, stock price. That’s YOUR selected method for Berkshire as a benchmark moving target. You can’t make this stuff up. Curiouser and curiouser, to quote Alice, can be the only way to characterize the unusual presentation of your performance. 3/
Bravo Tesla on "improved" disclosure. When screwing the customer, let 'em know it up front. Gas is at prices last seen in '14, so good thing for a Tesla's gas savings - except you already paid for it. What? Let’s build a car. How about a practical Model 3. Base price $35,690. 1/
Recently, the customer was informed that gas savings would be $4,300 (more on other models) on the first page of the build, with the final price a surprise at the end. The upfront language is now altered, some would say transparent, some may say obfuscating. You be the judge. 2/
Let’s keep it simple and avoid upcharges by sticking with standard options - Pearl White paint, 18” wheels and All-Black interior. Let’s skip the $10,000 Full Self-Driving as well for now, since we’re now told "regulatory approval may take longer, in some jurisdictions." Sure. 3/
Ten years? Did you read the disclosure in YOUR letter stating YOUR returns begin on 6/1/11, or did you forget when you launched your first fund? You don’t appear to even have a ten-year track record, @chamath. Looks like 9 yrs 7 mos. The whole thing is confusing. Intentional? 1/
Are you desperate to include Berkshire’s 48.7% decline and the S&P 500’s 26.4% drop in your “long-run” comparison? Actually, it appears that you do have a 10-year record. As of tomorrow...Of course a year-to-date presentation would have to include the losses on the four SPACs. 2/
Next, I’m very confused by your reply stating, “the discrepancy in your S&P returns vs ours is because we calculated it as an IRR based on when we made our investments.” What is “IT?” You label your returns as IRR, but are you saying you calculated index returns as an IRR? 3/
I read your 2020 annual letter with interest, @chamath. Odd it was published in late May, but we’re all busy. Before commenting on this incredibly bad take of a comparison to Berkshire Hathaway, allow me to help you with some math. First, 1965 to 1974 is TEN years, not nine. 1/
Berkshire did return 12.5% against 1.4% from 1965-1974 but that’s actually ten, not the nine years you reference. Simple mistake, I’m sure. Had you used nine years Berkshire had returned 22.7% annually, quite a bit higher than the 12.5% you errantly show. More on this soon. 2/
Second, for what its worth, the S&P 500 actually returned 18.4% in 2020, not the 17.88% you mentioned twice and were careful to point out included dividends. I’d rather round to the tenths, check my source and be correct than round to the hundredths and be precisely incorrect. 3/
Strange seeing a $LMND thread deleted "justifying" a 121% gross loss, 50 points from the TX freeze alone & use of AI to deny claims by detecting lying in recorded messages. Stranger still seeing yet another new entrant into the private passenger auto game. Will they not learn? 1/
Fin-tech often means even though we light cash on fire it must be worth a fortune. If you gave me $1.5 billion and said go disrupt some industry, property/casualty insurance would NOT be it. It's remarkable some of the things that get financed in the name of disruption. 2/
For a company that’s raised $1.5 billion to disrupt renter, pet health and homeowners insurance, writing a cumulative $185 million to lose a cumulative $369 million seems like a bad idea. Now Lemonade will go after Progressive, GEICO and the heavyweights in auto? Smart. 3/