This has been a year in
which mid cap stocks have outperformed large cap stocks, and small cap
stocks have performed the best of all.
Here are some of our better
performing stocks for the quarter, in rough order of position size.
|
Stock |
Industry
Group |
Market
Capitalization |
Quarterly
Change |
|
Nam Tai Electronic |
Tech |
Small |
+92.0% |
|
Inamed |
Healthcare |
Mid |
+37.7 |
|
Bennett Environment |
Industrial |
Small |
+54.7 |
|
Cytyc Corp |
Healthcare |
Mid |
+42.3 |
|
Helen of Troy |
Consumer |
Small |
+60.5 |
|
Pacific Sunwear |
Consumer |
Mid |
+28.7 |
|
Univ Forest Products |
Natural
Resources |
Small |
+17.1 |
|
Tesoro Petroleum |
Energy |
Small |
+23.0 |
|
Flextronics |
Tech |
Large |
+36.3 |
|
EMC |
Tech |
Large |
+20.6 |
|
Thor Industries
|
Consumer |
Mid |
+32.3 |
Just for perspective, let’s compare
those returns with some of the best-known stocks, all fine companies. The
problem is that they are widely recognized as such and this is fully
reflected in the stock price. My view is that there is more risk in owning
familiar but overvalued stocks than in owning less well-known stocks that
are attractively priced. This is especially true because the stocks we own
are not highly correlated; it would be different if they were all small cap
tech stocks.
|
Stock |
Quarterly Change |
|
General Electric |
+3.9% |
|
Microsoft |
+8.4 |
|
Exxon Mobil |
+1.9 |
|
Walmart |
+4.1 |
|
Johnson & Johnson |
-4.2 |
|
IBM |
+7.1 |
|
Proctor & Gamble |
+4.1 |
|
Coca-Cola |
-7.4 |
|
Verizon |
-17.8 |
|
Merck |
-16.4 |
One of my theories is that the
trend toward indexing (and closet indexing) has distorted capital flows in
the equity markets. Index buying is in proportion to market capitalization,
so this buying puts upward pressure on prices of the largest stocks, and
that in turn begets a higher allocation of additional indexed dollars to
those stocks. At first, that buying pressure drove big caps to high
valuations and now it helps to sustain those valuations, even as smarter
money sells to indexers and moves to more promising investment
opportunities.
Let us turn briefly to profits we
took on certain positions. We own UT Starcom from the low 20s and and it
grew to one of our largest positions; we sold some at $xx [an average price
of $38.82]; the stock ended the quarter at $31.80. It fell first on fears
of dilution and later on concerns that new technology may threaten their
position in the Chinese telecom market. We took some Nam Tai off the table
with nearly a triple, partly because it is an extremely volatile stock and
no longer extremely undervalued. But with its revenues growing at nearly
90%, it is worth maintaining a decent sized position. We lightened up on
Intel, selling some at $xx [an average price of $27.27]; it closed the
quarter at $27.52.
Here’s
why we cut back on Intel. Intel is expected to earn $0.77 in 2003 and
$1.05 in 2004, and grow earnings at 15.3% annually thereafter. At that
rate, it would take 11.5 years for the earnings to add up to the stock
price. Intel’s P/E is 26 times 2004 earnings. The company’s peak
earnings are $1.53 per share, so it is priced at 18 times peak earnings.
Great company, but all those measures indicate that the stock is richly
priced. So why didn’t I sell it all? Because Intel also seemed
expensive at 22. That’s why I tend to make use of trailing stop-loss
orders (something of a misnomer here, because they get moved higher to
protect gains as a stock appreciates).
We added some new positions this
quarter. Most have done well. Our most recent add is Korean Electric Power
ADRs. It is perhaps the best value play among any major utility in the
world. Merrill says it is cheaper than at any time in a decade. A Forbes
columnist says it is priced at less than half of book value. My model
projects a compound annual return of over 20%, and we get a 3.5% dividend
yield as well. Few utilities are growing revenues as rapidly as KEP.
We also bought xx shares of Cytyc,
which specializes in diagnostic testing for breast and cervical cancer. We
paid $xx [an average price of $11.53]; the stock ended the quarter at
$15.01. We added shares of Car-mart, which aspires to be the Walmart of
auto dealers. We bought at $xx [an average price of $20.24]; the stock
ended September at $29.84. We took a decent sized position in Fedders, the
manufacturer of air conditioning wall units. Given Europe’s heat wave and
lack of air conditioners, they ought to have plenty of room for expansion.
We bought xx shares at $ [an average price of $4.64]; it ended the quarter
at $5.80. We added a modest position in Noble International, which uses
lasers in the auto manufacturing process. Shortly after our purchase, they
announced a better-than-expected quarter, giving us a modest gain to date.
And we also have a modest gain in recently acquired Ruby Tuesday, the
restaurant chain.
Two new positions have not worked
out well to date. We took a position in Itron, which makes software used in
the design of electricity transmission grids. It screened well even before
the blackout, and I thought that earnings estimates could only go up
afterward. At quarter-end, we had a small loss in the stock. The only big
loss on a new position is in MothersWork, a retailer of clothes geared
toward pregnant women. It screened as well as anything else I bought, but
announced poor same store sales shortly after our purchase and fell by about
20 percent from our entry point. I’m hoping it’s just a hiccup.
One other noteworthy new position
is in gold stocks. We bought xx shares of Gold Fields Ltd at $xx [an
average price of $11.84; it ended the quarter at $14.17. Why now? Gold
does well when real interest rates are negative. Real interest rates are
already negative on the short end of the yield curve; inflation is running
about 2.2% (CPI year-over-year) and two year treasuries are under 1.5%.
This might cause some money to seek a higher return in other currencies.
But the Japanese and European economies have their own problems. So if a
negative return is likely in any currency, gold becomes a viable
alternative.
It is interesting that both stocks
and gold rallied in the third quarter. My interpretation is that the
markets sense some upward inflationary pressure as part of our economic
recovery. But stocks and gold tend not to move in tandem over long time
horizons.
For now, the uptrend in stocks
seems intact. September has traditionally been a seasonally weak month, and
it was not that bad. The market is still well above its 200 day moving
average, which is one indication that an uptrend is intact. Earnings
momentum is good; year-over-year gains have been coming in somewhat ahead of
already bullish expectations. The major cautionary note is valuation.
Value Line’s measure of the market’s PE ratio is 18.0. That translates to
an earnings yield on stocks of 5.56. Even though the PE has climbed
somewhat, the earnings yield is still reasonably attractive relative to the
2.81% yield on the five year treasury. And the strong tailwind from both
monetary and fiscal policy continue. The fiscal stimulus could lead to big
debt problems for us down the road, but the stock market is unlikely to
begin to discount that in the near term. The gold market may be a step
ahead of stocks here; time will tell.
Markets can move in one direction
for a lot longer than we tend to expect. The bear market of 2000-02 is an
unpleasant reminder of that. But it’s true on the upside as well. The
stock market had very few pullbacks in 1991 after the 1990 recession. It
has gotten tougher to identify compelling values, but a lot of stocks are
still attractive given the yields on cash and fixed income securities. It
is a time for careful stock selection and continued prudent use of good risk
management tools.
Our returns are well over double
those of the S&P 500 this year; I am hopeful that we can keep it up for the
rest of the year! As always, I am happy to discuss any of this in more
detail with you and to answer any other questions you may have. Thank you
for your continued confidence.