<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Graham&#8217;s 50 Year Study &#8211; Foolproof?</title> <atom:link href="http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/</link> <description>Intelligent Value Investing</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 12:50:07 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator> <item><title>By: Christian Troche</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-85</link> <dc:creator>Christian Troche</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 06:53:16 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-85</guid> <description>Answers for Preston (see comment above): 1) Graham sought a 50% return on price.  He did not mention annualizing returns, nor did he consider dividends received in his return objectives.  (I believe he saw dividend yields more as a measure of value than as a component of return).  His stated selling targets of either (a) a 50% increase above cost or (b) completion of a two-year holding period was his way of enforcing intelligent investing behavior.Fifty percent was not an arbitrary number, but the logical result of Graham&#039;s value discipline when buying stocks.  For example, if a company&#039;s tangible book value was $9/share,  Graham would consider buying shares at $6, or 2/3 of the book value.  Not only would $6/share provide a sufficient margin of safety between price and value, but a 50% increase in price from $6 would bring the stock price to the $9 tangible book value.  Selling the shares at $9 would not only be logical (obtaining fair value for what was purchased at a discount, i.e. tangible assets), but enforces a value discipline, as the margin of safety that once existed in the stock price has disappeared.(2)  Regarding your second question, I&#039;m not sure Graham answered that question specifically, but his many writings, lectures, interviews, etc. provide helpful clues.  First, a value investing strategy should be pursued at all times except when the broad market valuation is &quot;dangerously high&quot; (Graham&#039;s term).  During those periods, intelligent investors should be content with a cash position until the overvaluation is corrected.Second, Graham would have likely approved an investor committing funds over an extended period of time, perhaps several quarters.  (Joel Greenblatt, a noted value investor, endorses this strategy in his &quot;magic formula&quot; concept.)  This way, various groups of stocks &quot;mature&quot; at different points in the market cycle.  Of course, the 50% selling discipline forces an investor out of stocks in a rising market, and the margin of safety concept doesn&#039;t allow reinvestment of funds until values are available.(Note:  in a taxable account, selling into a bear market can create &quot;assets&quot; for the investor in the form of tax-losses that can be used to offset capital gains taxes for both current-year and future gains, and new investment opportunities should be readily available.)In the end, regardless of bull or bear market, taxable or qualified account, the 2-year selling discipline should still be enforced, because if a catalyst for a higher stock price hasn&#039;t materialized within two years, it is reasonable to assume better opportunities exist for the intelligent investor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Answers for Preston (see comment above):<br /> 1) Graham sought a 50% return on price.  He did not mention annualizing returns, nor did he consider dividends received in his return objectives.  (I believe he saw dividend yields more as a measure of value than as a component of return).  His stated selling targets of either (a) a 50% increase above cost or (b) completion of a two-year holding period was his way of enforcing intelligent investing behavior.</p><p>Fifty percent was not an arbitrary number, but the logical result of Graham&#8217;s value discipline when buying stocks.  For example, if a company&#8217;s tangible book value was $9/share,  Graham would consider buying shares at $6, or 2/3 of the book value.  Not only would $6/share provide a sufficient margin of safety between price and value, but a 50% increase in price from $6 would bring the stock price to the $9 tangible book value.  Selling the shares at $9 would not only be logical (obtaining fair value for what was purchased at a discount, i.e. tangible assets), but enforces a value discipline, as the margin of safety that once existed in the stock price has disappeared.</p><p>(2)  Regarding your second question, I&#8217;m not sure Graham answered that question specifically, but his many writings, lectures, interviews, etc. provide helpful clues.  First, a value investing strategy should be pursued at all times except when the broad market valuation is &#8220;dangerously high&#8221; (Graham&#8217;s term).  During those periods, intelligent investors should be content with a cash position until the overvaluation is corrected.</p><p>Second, Graham would have likely approved an investor committing funds over an extended period of time, perhaps several quarters.  (Joel Greenblatt, a noted value investor, endorses this strategy in his &#8220;magic formula&#8221; concept.)  This way, various groups of stocks &#8220;mature&#8221; at different points in the market cycle.  Of course, the 50% selling discipline forces an investor out of stocks in a rising market, and the margin of safety concept doesn&#8217;t allow reinvestment of funds until values are available.</p><p>(Note:  in a taxable account, selling into a bear market can create &#8220;assets&#8221; for the investor in the form of tax-losses that can be used to offset capital gains taxes for both current-year and future gains, and new investment opportunities should be readily available.)</p><p>In the end, regardless of bull or bear market, taxable or qualified account, the 2-year selling discipline should still be enforced, because if a catalyst for a higher stock price hasn&#8217;t materialized within two years, it is reasonable to assume better opportunities exist for the intelligent investor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Christian Troche</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-84</link> <dc:creator>Christian Troche</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:38:03 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-84</guid> <description>Regarding Jeremy&#039;s question (above), the answer is yes.  Graham sought an earnings yield (the inverse of the P/E) at least twice the current AAA-corporate long bond yield.  (See http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA for the current yield.)  The current yield is 4.96%, so an intelligent investor should currently seek an earnings yield of at least 9.92% (that translates to a P/E multiple of 10).Recall, however, Graham ALWAYS sought a margin of safety.  Problems can arise when screening for low P/E stocks, as current earnings (i.e. trailing four quarters) can be distorted by recent events (e.g. spiking commodity prices, introduction of a &quot;hot&quot; new product, one-time asset sales, etc.).Graham suggested investors use a moving average of earnings (i.e. 5-, 7-, or even 10-years) under the current price to smooth out the cyclical earnings volatility experienced by many businesses.  James Montier (formerly of SocGen, now at GMO) has written about this metric, referring to it as the &quot;Graham and Dodd P/E.&quot;  It is also the same technique Robert Shiller of Yale uses to value the S&amp;P 500, after adjusting for inflation.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding Jeremy&#8217;s question (above), the answer is yes.  Graham sought an earnings yield (the inverse of the P/E) at least twice the current AAA-corporate long bond yield.  (See <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA" rel="nofollow">http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA</a> for the current yield.)  The current yield is 4.96%, so an intelligent investor should currently seek an earnings yield of at least 9.92% (that translates to a P/E multiple of 10).</p><p>Recall, however, Graham ALWAYS sought a margin of safety.  Problems can arise when screening for low P/E stocks, as current earnings (i.e. trailing four quarters) can be distorted by recent events (e.g. spiking commodity prices, introduction of a &#8220;hot&#8221; new product, one-time asset sales, etc.).</p><p>Graham suggested investors use a moving average of earnings (i.e. 5-, 7-, or even 10-years) under the current price to smooth out the cyclical earnings volatility experienced by many businesses.  James Montier (formerly of SocGen, now at GMO) has written about this metric, referring to it as the &#8220;Graham and Dodd P/E.&#8221;  It is also the same technique Robert Shiller of Yale uses to value the S&amp;P 500, after adjusting for inflation.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Preston</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-78</link> <dc:creator>Preston</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:21:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-78</guid> <description>Two questions: 1) In Graham&#039;s article his target profit was 50% above cost: so even if the stock jumps 15% in 2 months, that would be an annualized rate of return of 90%, so what he&#039;s saying is I would still hold on to it until it reached 50% of it&#039;s cost (ex. $6 dollar stock sell at $9) correct? 2) I guess I&#039;m still a little worried about the 2 year strategy ending on a bear market--in that case would you continue on and sell your stocks at the target holding perior and then buy your next 2 yr stocks and eat the loss or would you hold onto them and wait for them to go back up since it ended in a bear market?Any answers would be great. thanks.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two questions:<br /> 1) In Graham&#8217;s article his target profit was 50% above cost: so even if the stock jumps 15% in 2 months, that would be an annualized rate of return of 90%, so what he&#8217;s saying is I would still hold on to it until it reached 50% of it&#8217;s cost (ex. $6 dollar stock sell at $9) correct?<br /> 2) I guess I&#8217;m still a little worried about the 2 year strategy ending on a bear market&#8211;in that case would you continue on and sell your stocks at the target holding perior and then buy your next 2 yr stocks and eat the loss or would you hold onto them and wait for them to go back up since it ended in a bear market?</p><p>Any answers would be great. thanks.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jeremy</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-76</link> <dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 17:16:02 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-76</guid> <description>Would number 1 mean &#039;at least&#039; twice the aaa yield?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would number 1 mean &#8216;at least&#8217; twice the aaa yield?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Manish</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-73</link> <dc:creator>Manish</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 19:11:44 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-73</guid> <description>Although I think it is kind of unnecessary (as it is late to reply), but still I would like to add my points in response to Chris&#039;s suggestions/questions about &quot;allowed himself room for at least a 50% return,”.I think that 50% appreciation is not for the price and price does not represent the true value. That 50% appreciation of the price is regarding the tangible book value of the stock, as Graham believed that after some point the stock will follow/match its book value (efficient markets concept). With price at 67% of the book value, the appreciation potential is 50% from there to reach the book value assuming there is no degradation in the book value of the stock.Manish</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although I think it is kind of unnecessary (as it is late to reply), but still I would like to add my points in response to Chris&#8217;s suggestions/questions about &#8220;allowed himself room for at least a 50% return,”.</p><p>I think that 50% appreciation is not for the price and price does not represent the true value. That 50% appreciation of the price is regarding the tangible book value of the stock, as Graham believed that after some point the stock will follow/match its book value (efficient markets concept). With price at 67% of the book value, the appreciation potential is 50% from there to reach the book value assuming there is no degradation in the book value of the stock.</p><p>Manish</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Frank Hayes</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-72</link> <dc:creator>Frank Hayes</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 08:58:32 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-72</guid> <description>How can I go about searching for stocks that fit these criteria?   Thank you for sharing.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How can I go about searching for stocks that fit these criteria?   Thank you for sharing.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Christian Troche</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-63</link> <dc:creator>Christian Troche</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 12:37:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-63</guid> <description>The St. Louis Fed has tracked the Moody&#039;s Aaa Corporate Bond yield back to January 1919.  The current yield (as of March 2010) is 5.27%.The data series may be found at http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The St. Louis Fed has tracked the Moody&#8217;s Aaa Corporate Bond yield back to January 1919.  The current yield (as of March 2010) is 5.27%.</p><p>The data series may be found at <a href="http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA" rel="nofollow">http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AAA</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: The Graham Investor</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-62</link> <dc:creator>The Graham Investor</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:34:38 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-62</guid> <description>Definitely the 20 Year.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Definitely the 20 Year.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kyle Laracey</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-61</link> <dc:creator>Kyle Laracey</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 15:26:36 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-61</guid> <description>A great article, but just one question -- does the Corp Bond AAA rate apply to a 5yr corp bond, 20 yr? I don&#039;t think Graham specified in the Intelligent Investor (although I don&#039;t quite remember).Thanks a lot! Kyle Laracey</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A great article, but just one question &#8212; does the Corp Bond AAA rate apply to a 5yr corp bond, 20 yr? I don&#8217;t think Graham specified in the Intelligent Investor (although I don&#8217;t quite remember).</p><p>Thanks a lot!<br /> Kyle Laracey</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Christian Troche</title><link>http://www.grahaminvestor.com/2010/01/03/grahams-50-year-study-foolproof/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link> <dc:creator>Christian Troche</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 05:56:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grahaminvestor.com/?p=571#comment-60</guid> <description>Regarding method #3, Graham and James Rea (Graham&#039;s partner in conducting the referenced studies) made it clear that price should be measured against TANGIBLE book value (i.e. book value after removing goodwill and intangible assets from the calculation).  This is an important distinction, as Graham analysed balance sheets on a liquidation basis, and, to my knowledge, he assigned no value to goodwill or intangibles in a liquidation scenario.The Yahoo! Finance site conveniently provides a current snapshot (from the EDGAR database) of any company&#039;s tangible book value or &quot;net tangible assets&quot; within the Financials/Balance Sheet link.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding method #3, Graham and James Rea (Graham&#8217;s partner in conducting the referenced studies) made it clear that price should be measured against TANGIBLE book value (i.e. book value after removing goodwill and intangible assets from the calculation).  This is an important distinction, as Graham analysed balance sheets on a liquidation basis, and, to my knowledge, he assigned no value to goodwill or intangibles in a liquidation scenario.</p><p>The Yahoo! Finance site conveniently provides a current snapshot (from the EDGAR database) of any company&#8217;s tangible book value or &#8220;net tangible assets&#8221; within the Financials/Balance Sheet link.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using apc (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 26/41 queries in 0.007 seconds using apc

Served from: grahaminvestor.com @ 2010-07-30 15:29:18 -->