Skip to main content

Sound Advice: May 26, 2021

Growth vs. Value?

One of the longest-running dichotomies in investing is the ongoing tug of war between growth stocks and value stocks.  Growth stocks are generally seen as companies that are growing consistently and, typically, at above average rates.  Value stocks, on the other hand, are companies whose progress is less consistent and often relatively slow. 

At first glance, one wonders why investors would look beyond growth stocks to fill out their portfolios, but there’s more to the task of portfolio construction than just picking market stars such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and the like.

Here’s the hitch.  Over time, most growth stocks will turn in better returns than most value stocks.  The key word here is most.  A portfolio of diversified growth stocks will usually be selling at significantly higher valuations (price-earnings ratios) than a portfolio of diversified value stocks.  Why?  Because more rapid and more consistent growth rates give investors greater confidence that these patterns will continue.  That confidence is the reason why they will pay more.

The problem is the tendency of growth stock valuations to get stretched beyond reasonable levels.  In Wall Street parlance, that situation is referred to as “priced for perfection”.  These rich valuations lead to the risk of major, rapid price plunges if there are earnings shortfalls or other negative business developments within companies.  In these cases, the impact of even one such drop will markedly bring down the average performance of the entire portfolio. 

Value stocks demonstrate the flip side of this equation.  In reflection of their relatively mediocre financial and market performances, their valuations tend to be quite lean.  Investors don’t expect much from them and exhibit that expectation by buying only when they are relatively cheap.  When earnings are weak or there’s disappointing news, not much happens . . . unlike the case with growth stocks.

Yet every now and then these companies announce results that are well above what had been expected and their shares rise dramatically.  Not surprisingly, when this happens in a diversified portfolio of value stocks, the average performance jumps, often beyond that of growth stock portfolios.

In many ways, this is a mirror image of what’s known as the Dogs of the Dow Theory, which is based upon annual portfolio rebalancing and concentration on the highest yielding stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.  It’s also akin to the popular high dividend yield approach (using a broader universe than the Dow).  

The common denominator for all of these is the importance of having a broadly diversified portfolio to increase the opportunity for positive surprises and limit the exposure to downside disappointments.

N. Russell Wayne, CFP®

Sound Asset Management Inc.

Weston, CT  06883

203-222-9370

www.soundasset.com

www.soundasset.blogspot.com

 

Any questions? Please contact me at nrwayne@soundasset.com

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sound Advice: July 8, 2020

Jobs Are Up, But So Are New Infections Through the spring months, m ost of the economic data was extremely negative, with record declines in employment and consumer spending.  The speed of that decline had no modern precedent. We are now in a recession.   The shortest recession on record occurred in 1980 and lasted just six months.  Second place goes to a seven-month recession in 1918-19, which was tied to the Spanish flu pandemic.  The big question is: When will this recession end? Given surprisingly strong data in May, April may have been the bottom of this economic cycle.  If so, it will have been the shortest recession on record.  With massive support from the Federal Reserve, the federal government, and the reopening of previously closed businesses, employment surged unexpectedly.  At the same time, pent-up demand, stimulus checks, and generous unemployment benefits led to a reacceleration of commercial activity. Still, not all is rosy.   In his recent testimo

Sound Advice: May 13, 2020

Reality Check On the heels of the market plunge of late February and most of March, investors did a sharp about-face in April, bidding up shares at one of the fastest rates in recent history.  Although this recovery probably provided at least temporary comfort from the plunge, it would be unreasonable to view the rebound as a sign that things are all better.  They are not. For one thing, we are now in the midst of earnings reason, when companies report their quarterly results.  Some may have good news for the March quarter, but as we move through the current calendar quarter, only a few will be able to show continuing improvement.  Against the broad backdrop of U.S. business history, the months just ahead will almost certainly prove to be among the worst, from the standpoint of year-to-year comparison. With more than 30 million people filing claims for unemployment insurance, it would be difficult to expect anything other than bad economic news.  Who knows how many of these

Sound Advice: July 22, 2020

Fixed Income: In a Fix Typically, the construction of an investment portfolio has begun with an approximate balance of 60% in equities and 40% in fixed income instruments.   Fixed income generally means bonds, but that includes bond funds and exchange-traded funds holding bonds.   The equity portion is intended to be the driver of capital appreciation over extended periods of time and the fixed income portion is supposed to provide stable, albeit more moderate ongoing rates of return. The theory behind this approach is that as the time periods measured have lengthened, the relative risk of holding equities has diminished while the returns they have generated have been higher than those of other asset classes.   What equities do in the short term, even a year or two, is often anybody’s guess.    To the extent that fundamental analysis can help toward determining future equity values, investors need to look ahead three, four, five years or more before reasonably expecting t