Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Deep Value Front Cover
I am very pleased to announce that my new book Deep Value: Why Activist Investors and Other Contrarians Battle for Control of Losing Corporations (hardcover, 240 pages, Wiley Finance) is now available.

Deep Value is an exploration of the philosophy of deep value investment. It describes the evolution of the various theories of intrinsic value and activist investment from Benjamin Graham to Warren Buffett and Carl Icahn and beyond.

Filled with engaging anecdotes, penetrating statistical analysis and meticulous research, the book illustrates the principles and strategies of deep value investing and examines the counterintuitive idea behind its extraordinary performance.

The book can be ordered from Wiley Finance, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble.

About the book

It is a simple, but counterintuitive idea: Under the right conditions, losing stocks—those in crisis, with apparently failing businesses, and uncertain futures—offer unusually favorable investment prospects.

This is a philosophy that runs counter to the received wisdom of the market. Many investors believe that a good business and a good investment are the same thing. Many value investors, inspired by Warren Buffett’s example, believe that a good, undervalued business is the best investment.

The research offers a contradictory view.

Deep Value is an investigation of the evidence, and the conditions under which those losing stocks become asymmetric opportunities, with limited downside, and enormous upside. In pursuit of this idea, it canvases the academic and industry research into theories of intrinsic value, management’s influence on that value, and the impact of attempts to unseat management on both market price and value.

The value investment philosophy first described and practiced by Benjamin Graham in 1934 identified targets by their discount to liquidation value. That approach has proven extremely effective; however, those opportunities have all but disappeared from the modern stock market. To succeed, today’s deep value investors have adapted Graham’s philosophy, embracing its spirit while pushing beyond its confines. In Deep Value, I examine Graham’s 80-year-old intellectual legacy using modern statistical techniques to offer a penetrating and highly original perspective: That losing stocks offer unusually favorable investment prospects. The evidence reveals an axiomatic truth about investing: Investors aren’t rewarded for picking winners; they’re rewarded for uncovering mispricings.

And Deep Value shows the place to look for mispricings—in calamity, among the unloved, the ignored, the neglected, the shunned, and the feared.

Each chapter tells a different story about a characteristic of deep value investing, seeking to demonstrate a genuinely counterintuitive insight.Through these stories, it explores several ideas demonstrating that deeply undervalued stocks provide an enormous tail wind to investors, generating outsized returns whether they are subject to attention from private equity, strategic buyers, activist investors or not.

The book begins with former arbitrageur, and option trader Carl Icahn. An avowed Graham-and-Dodd investor, Icahn understood early the advantage of owning equities as apparently appetizing as poison. He took Benjamin Graham’s investment philosophy and used it to pursue deeply undervalued positions where he could supply his own catalyst, and control his own destiny.

As a portfolio, deeply undervalued companies with the conditions in place for activism or private equity attention offer asymmetric, market-beating returns. Modern activists exploit this property by taking large minority stakes in these stocks and then agitating for change. What better platform than a well-publicized proxy fight and tender offer to highlight mismanagement and underexploited intrinsic value? How better to induce either a voluntary restructuring or takeover by a bigger player in the same industry?

We’ll also see how activist investing can be understood as a form of arbitrage. Activists invest in poorly performing, undervalued firms with underexploited intrinsic value. By remedying the deficiency, or moving the company’s intrinsic value closer to its full potential, and eliminating the market price discount in the process, they capture a premium that represents both the improvement in the intrinsic value, and the removal of the market price discount. We scrutinize the returns to activism to determine the extent to which they are due to an improvement in intrinsic value, or simply the returns to picking deeply undervalued stocks.

Deep Value is also a practical guide that reveals little-known valuation metrics that activist investors, corporate raiders, private equity firms, and other contrarians use to identify attractive, asymmetric investment opportunities with limited downside and enormous upside—undervaluation, large cash holdings, and low payout ratios. These metrics favor companies with so-called lazy balance sheets and hidden or unfulfilled potential due to improper capitalization. Activists target these undervalued, cash-rich companies, seeking to improve the intrinsic value and close the market price discount by reducing excess cash through increased payout ratios. We analyze the returns to these metrics, and apply them to two recent, real world examples of activism. The power of these metrics is that they identify good candidates for activist attention, and if no activist emerges to improve the unexploited intrinsic value, other corrective forces act on the market price to generate excellent returns in the meantime.

The book can be ordered from Wiley Finance, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble.

What People Are Saying

I am incredibly excited about the calibre of endorsers for Deep Value, all of whom are extraordinarily talented practitioners:

Jim O’Shaughnessy, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, O’Shaughnessy Asset Management, LLC, and author, What Works on Wall Street:

I highly recommend Deep Value. It takes a lively look at a variety of value investing strategies starting with the father of security analysis, Ben Graham. It outlines how individual investors can vastly outperform simple index strategies. For these value strategies to work, investors must be patient and brave, as it requires looking at stocks that the herd ignores. It will be a useful addition to any value investor’s library.

Joshua M. Brown, author, The Reformed Broker blog and the bestselling book Backstage Wall Street; star of CNBC’s The Halftime Report; Chief Executive Officer, Ritholtz Wealth Management:

Value investing is the most intuitive form of investing ever devised—the attempt to buy one dollar’s worth of assets for sixty cents. In his new book, Carlisle provides a thoroughly contemporary guide to the discipline, informed by killer anecdotes. Deep Value is part historical saga, part treasure map—a must-read for all investors.

Mebane Faber, Chief Investment Officer and Portfolio Manager, Cambria Investment Management, LLC, and author, The Ivy Portfolio:

Deep Value is a smart, modern take on classic Benjamin Graham-style value investment. It’s half history book and half quant stock screen guidebook. Learn both the history of value investing as well as a practical way to put it to work.

Vitaliy Katsenelson, Chief Investment Officer, Investment Management Associates, Inc., and author of The Little Book of Sideways Markets:

Deep Value is a refreshing, and highly entertaining work that makes a persuasive case for traditional value investment and a revival of Graham-style ‘ownership consciousness’. It is a compelling addition to the value investing canon.

Michael van Biema, Founder and Chief Investment Officer, van Biema Value Partners, and co-author, Value Investing: From Graham to Buffett and Beyond:

In Deep Value Carlisle provides a qualitative and quantitative view of why value investing has worked since the time of its conception. The book is a unique combination of careful description of the value styles and players, backed up by data that supports the conclusions reached. I strongly recommend this book to the value aficionado.

John L. Schwartz, MD, Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder, The Value Investing Congress:

Carlisle has written an engaging history of the market, and its influence on the evolving theory of value investment. He has produced a valuable addition to any value investor’s library. I’m glad I read it.

John Mihaljevic, CFA, Managing Editor, The Manual of Ideas and author The Manual of Ideas:

Carlisle’s work succeeds on two levels: It is both a gripping account of some of the most notable episodes in the history of shareholder activism as well as an instructive guide to profiting from mean reversion and activist opportunities in today’s market. Highly recommended!

Christopher Cole, CFA, Founder and Managing Member, Artemis Capital Management, LLC:

From accounts of bold corporate raiders, behavioral psychology, to hard quantitative research, Deep Value leaves no stone unturned in a passionate exploration of what makes value investing and activism work.

Jacob L. Taylor and Lonnie J. Rush, Managing Partners of Farnam Street Investments and Visiting Professors at the UC Davis Graduate School of Management:

Carlisle weaves together a rich tapestry of multi-disciplinary academic research, investment theory, and historical anecdotes to produce the must-read investment book of 2014.

Wesley R. Gray, PhD, Executive Managing Member, Alpha Architect, and co-author, Quantitative Value:

Carlisle rigorously shows why value investing will continue to work. Deep Value is a MUST-READ for value investors.

Allen Benello, Chief Executive Officer, White River Partners, LP:

Carlisle has persuasively rendered a thought-provoking examination of a counterintuitive investment theory. The book is as engrossing as it is useful.

Henry Patner, Director of Research, HEG Capital:

Carlisle’s book provides a wonderful combination of entertaining case studies, synthesized with results from academic research and statistical backtesting, to arrive at sometimes surprising conclusions about what works in investing, and why.

Order the book from Wiley Finance, Amazon, or Barnes and Noble.

About these ads

[Sponsored Content]

The 10th Annual New York Value Investing Congress returns to Manhattan September 8 and 9.  The two-day event will feature 18 brilliant speakers, high-quality stock ideas, and superb networking.  Here are just a few of the world-class money managers who’ll be appearing, and their presentation topics:

  • Leon Cooperman, Omega Advisors – “Are Equities Still the Best House in the Financial Asset Neighborhood?”
  • Alexander Roepers, Atlantic Investment Management – “Global Value Investment Opportunities”
  • Jeffrey Smith, Starboard Value – “Using Board Dynamics to Enhance Shareholder Returns”
  • Sahm Adrangi, Kerrisdale Capital Management – “Misunderstood Situations”
  • David Hurwitz, SC Fundamental – “Activist Investing in Korea”

See the full list of speakers here.

Special 10th Anniversary Rate – Just $2,995 till 8/29!

To celebrate its 10th Anniversary, the Congress is offering Greenbackd readers a special discounted rate of just $2,995 thru August 29, 2014.

Don’t miss out on the profitable ideas you’ll learn at the Congress and the great networking — Register Now with discount code GREENBACKD to guarantee your seat at our $2,995 Anniversary Rate – that’s $3,000 off the price others will pay later to attend, if any seats remain unsold.

To get all the Congress benefits — register for the both the Congress & the full-day Pre-Congress Workshop with discount code GREENBACKD2. Don’t risk a sell-out — register now!

This week I’ve examined the course of bear markets from 1871 to date (really to March 2009, the end of the last bear market). This post is part 2 of last week’s post about the duration and magnitude of all bull market periods in U.S. stocks since 1871, which used the S&P 500 price series from Shiller’s publicly available database and the method adopted by Butler|Philbrick|Gordillo and Associates’ post What the Bull Giveth, the Bear Taketh Away. A bear market is defined as a drop in prices of at least 20 percent from any peak, and which lasted at least 3 months. A bull market was defined as a rise of at least 50 percent from the bear market low, over a period lasting at least 6 months.

Chart 1 and Table 1 describe every bear market since 1871 in the S&P, including duration and magnitude information.

Chart 1. Bear Markets since 1871

US Bear Markets Since 1871

Table 1. Bear Markets since 1871 – Statistics

Bear Markets Statistics

The average bear market lasts 43 months–about 3 1/2 years–and wipes out 40 percent of the market’s gains. Butler et al. point out that a drop of this magnitude requires a gain of about 66 percent to break even. The average bull market since 1871 has gained 182 percent, so the first third of the bull is simply making back losses from the bear. If we could figure out a reliable means to avoid bear markets we could pocket all of that gain, but, as far as I am aware, none has every been found. Timing mechanisms based on valuation don’t work, and neither do timing mechanisms based on price action. Most timing mechanisms generate too many false positives–signals to exit when no bear eventuates–and so increase trading costs and tax events. Bear markets and volatility are simply the cost of doing business in the market.

Very good, long term gains are available for investors prepared to remain invested in value strategies through thick-and-thin. My firm, Eyquem, offers low cost, fee-only managed accounts that implement a systematic deep value investment strategy. Please contact me by email at toby@eyquem.net or call me by telephone on (646) 535 8629 to learn more. Click here if you’d like to read more on Quantitative Value, or connect with me on TwitterLinkedIn or Facebook.

The little wobble in the market last week made me think of a post I ran in April last year on the duration and magnitude of all bull and bear market periods in U.S. stocks since 1871 using charts from Butler|Philbrick|Gordillo and Associates’ What the Bull Giveth, the Bear Taketh Away. I’ve used Butler et al.’s method to update the charts to July 2014.

The study uses the S&P 500 price series from Shiller’s publicly available database. I use Butler et al.’s method to define a bear market as a drop in prices of at least 20 percent from any peak, and which lasted at least 3 months. A bull market was defined as a rise of at least 50 percent from the bear market low, over a period lasting at least 6 months.

Chart 1 and Table 1 describe every bull market since 1871 in the S&P, including duration and magnitude information.

Chart 1. Bull Markets since 1871

US Bull Markets Since 1871

Table 1. Bull Markets since 1871 – Statistics

Bull MarketsI don’t believe that there is anything predictive about the duration or magnitude of the average and median bull markets. I only include that information to contextualize the present market. In that sense, it is decidedly average, if a little long in the tooth. It has delivered about 9/10ths of the gains of the average, and lasted a few months less. It has run 11 months longer than the median, and generated 120 percent of the return. Only the bull markets ending in 1929, 1961, 1987, and 2000 returned more (in each case, much more), and lasted longer (in each case, much longer). Two other bull markets lasted longer–those ending in 1902 and 1968–but neither returned as much as the current one.

The two bull markets that really stand out are the January 1975 to August 1987 market, which delivered a return of 391 percent, and the January 1988 to August 2000 bull, which returned an incredible 516 percent. Each lasted 153 months. The two were separated by the 1987 bear market, which drew down only -26.4 percent peak to trough, and lasted just 5 months. Through the full period from January 1975 to August 2000, the market returned 2,140 percent, or 13 percent yearly (excluding dividends)–almost 3 times the yearly return of the long run average of 4.7 percent (also ex. dividends).

My firm, Eyquem, offers low cost, fee-only managed accounts that implement a systematic deep value investment strategy. Please contact me by email at toby@eyquem.net or call me by telephone on (646) 535 8629 to learn more. Click here if you’d like to read more on Quantitative Value, or connect with me on TwitterLinkedIn or Facebook.

I received a number of emails asking me to revisit the backtests from last week’s post about using the Shiller PE to time the market (Worried about a Crash? Backtests Using Shiller PE to Time The Market (1926 to 2014)). The most common request was to separate the buy and sell rules such that if the strategy sold out at say one standard deviation above the mean, it didn’t buy back until the Shiller PE fell below its mean. The second most common request was to alter the strategy such that it hedged out the market rather than switching to cash.

Edit: Fama and French backtests of the book value-to-market equity (the inverse of the PB ratio) data from 1926 to 2013. As at December 2013, there were 3,175 firms in the sample. The value decile contained the 459 stocks with the highest earnings yield, and the glamour decile contained the 404 stocks with the lowest earnings yield. The average size of the glamour stocks is $7.48 billion and the value stocks $2.54 billion. (Note that the average is heavily skewed up by the biggest companies. For context, the 3,175th company has a market capitalization today of $404 million, which is smaller than the average, but still investable for most investors). Portfolios are formed on June 30 and rebalanced annually.

The following backtests use the market’s state of knowledge at the time about the average, and standard deviations of the Shiller PE. The chart below shows how the Shiller PE’s average and standard deviations have varied over time.

Shiller PE, Average, and Plus/Minus Two Standard Deviations (1881 to Present)

Shliler PE mean and SDs

The mean now is 16.55, but was as low as 14.2 in the 1950s and, excluding the slightly higher reading at the start of the data, as high as 17.5 in the 1900s. The standard deviation has expanded over time. Until the 2000s two standard deviations above the average meant a Shiller PE of about 25, and now it means a Shiller PE of almost 30.

Performance of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

The following chart backtests three strategies. The first–“Sell at 1SD, Buy at -1SD”–buys the price-to-book value decile only if the Shiller PE is one standard deviation below its mean, sells into cash if the Shiller PE is more than one standard deviation above its mean, and holds cash until the market falls back below one standard deviation below the mean. The second–“Sell at 1SD, Buy at Mean”–buys the price-to-book value decile only if the Shiller PE is below its mean, sells into cash if the Shiller PE is more than one standard deviation above its mean, and holds cash until the market falls back below the mean. The third–“Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean”–buys the value decile only if the Shiller PE is below its mean, sells into cash if the Shiller PE is more than two standard deviations above its mean, and holds cash until the market falls back below the mean.

Shiller Moving Average and Value Performance 1926 to 2014

All the strategies underperform the simple buy-and-hold strategy over the full period.

The market returned 13.94 percent compound and the fully invested PB value decile returned 20 percent compound over the full period. Sell at 1SD, Buy at -1SD returned 15.0 percent compound; Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean returned 19.3 percent compound; and Sell at 1SD, Buy at Mean returned 15.9 percent compound.

Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean had good lead until the 1990s, but has woefully underperformed since. Notably, it is still fully invested. Its sell rule won’t kick in until the Shiller PE hits 29.7.

Drawdowns of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

Shiller Moving Average and Value Drawdown Relative 1926 to 2014

The market has the worst maximum drawdown at 86 percent, and the fully invested PB value decile has a comparably bad maximum drawdown of 85 percent. Sell at 1SD, Buy at -1SD had the best maximum drawdown at 50 percent; Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean had a maximum drawdown of 78 percent; and Sell at 1SD, Buy at Mean had a maximum drawdown of 60 percent.

Graham Rule: Performance of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

Benjamin Graham recommended maintaining a minimum portfolio exposure to stocks of 25 percent. Below we re-run the tests, but this time instead of kicking all of the portfolio into cash, we put only 75 of the portfolio in cash, and maintain 25 percent exposure to the value decile.

Shiller Moving Average and Value Performance Graham Rule 1926 to 2014

All the returns are improved, but the strategies continue to underperform the simple buy-and-hold strategy over the full period.

Sell at 1SD, Buy at -1SD now returns 16.8 percent compound; Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean returned 19.6 percent compound versus 19.3 percent above; and Sell at 1SD, Buy at Mean returned 17.2 percent compound.

Graham Rule: Drawdowns of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

Shiller Moving Average and Value Drawdown Relative Graham Rule 1926 to 2014

The tradeoff for slightly improved returns is slightly worse drawdowns. Sell at 1SD, Buy at -1SD still has the lowest maximum drawdown, but now draws down 53 percent; Sell at 2SD, Buy at Mean has the same maximum drawdown of 78 percent; and Sell at 1SD, Buy at Mean had a maximum drawdown of 64 percent.

Market Hedge: Performance of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

In this set of backtests the strategy is levered and hedged. The ratios change depending on the level of the market. When the strategy deems the market cheap, it is 130 percent long the value decile, and 30 short the market. When the market is expensive, it doesn’t sell into cash, but reduces the long to 100 percent, and hedges out 75 percent of the portfolio using the market.

Shiller Moving Average and Value Performance Hedged 1926 to 2014

The Hedge at 2SD, Lever at Mean strategy outperforms the buy-and-hold strategy over the full period, returning 21.9 percent compound, versus 20 percent for the value decile.

Hedge at 1SD, Lever at -1SD now returns 19 percent compound; and Hedge at 1SD, Buy at Mean returned 18.9 percent compound.

Market Hedge: Drawdowns of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (1926 to Present)

Shiller Moving Average and Value Drawdown Relative Hedged 1926 to 2014
The tradeoff for the improved returns is bigger drawdowns.

Hedge at 2SD, Lever at Mean strategy draws down 88 percent, worse than the market’s 85 percent; Hedge at 1SD, Lever at -1SD has a maximum draw down of 67 percent; and Hedge at 1SD, Buy at Mean has a maximum drawdown of 79 percent.

Changing the buy-and-sell rules, and hedging rather than running to cash alters the performance of the strategies. The levered and hedged strategy that maximizes exposure to the market–Hedge at 2SD, Lever at Mean–outperforms the simple buy-and-hold strategy, but does so with an enormous drawdown. Nothing else beats buy-and-hold. As we saw last week, the more conservative the Shiller PE ratio used, the lower the drawdown, but returns suffer. To generate the extraordinary returns of the value deciles I’ve examined over the last few weeks, it was necessary to remain fully invested in those value stocks through thick and thin. My firm, Eyquem, offers low cost, fee-only managed accounts that implement a systematic deep value investment strategy. Please contact me by email at toby@eyquem.net or call me by telephone on (646) 535 8629 to learn more. Click here if you’d like to read more on Quantitative Value, or connect with me on TwitterLinkedIn or Facebook.


Charlie and I would much rather earn a lumpy 15% over time than a smooth 12%.

–Buffett, Chairman’s Letter (1996)

Can an investor concerned about a big crash use a systematic timing tool to exit the market before the crash without giving up too much return? One possible method for doing so is to use the Shiller PE as a valuation tool, and to move the portfolio into cash at some given level of overvaluation. The backtests below show the returns and drawdowns for exiting at four different levels of the Shiller PE ratio, from aggressive to conservative.

The first option is to simply always remain fully invested in the value decile (measured by price-to-book value). For our present purposes, this is the most aggressive. The three other timed strategies kick out of the value decile when the Shiller PE gets increasingly expensive. Mean, the most conservative kicks into cash when the Shiller PE gets just above its mean (17.6 for the data set). Slightly more aggressive is a strategy that kicks into cash at one standard deviation above the mean (a Shiller PE of 24.8) called 1 Std. Dev., and the next most aggressive kicks out at two standard deviations above the long-run average (a Shiller PE of 32.0) called 2 Std. Dev..

Edit: The backtests use Fama and French backtests of the book value-to-market equity (the inverse of the PB ratio) data from 1926 to 2013. As at December 2013, there were 3,175 firms in the sample. The value decile contained the 459 stocks with the highest earnings yield, and the glamour decile contained the 404 stocks with the lowest earnings yield. The average size of the glamour stocks is $7.48 billion and the value stocks $2.54 billion. (Note that the average is heavily skewed up by the biggest companies. For context, the 3,175th company has a market capitalization today of $404 million, which is smaller than the average, but still investable for most investors). Portfolios are formed on June 30 and rebalanced annually.

Performance of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies

Shiller and Value Performance 1926 to 2014

Over the period examined, the market (the equally weighted universe from which the portfolios were drawn) generated a compound average growth rate (CAGR) of 13.94 percent. Cash generated an average return of 5.17 percent over the same period. The fully invested value decile generated the best CAGR over the full period at 20.01 percent. The other strategies underperformed to the extent that they remained out of the market: The strategy that kicked into cash at the mean returned 13.4 percent yearly, the strategy that kicked into cash at one standard deviation above the mean returned 18.15 percent yearly, and the strategy that kicked into cash at two standard deviations above the mean returned 19.36 percent compound over the full period.

We expect underperformance for remaining out of the market. This is the tradeoff we make to avoid drawdowns. Is it worth it? Below we examine how much drawdown we avoid by getting out of the market at the different ratios.

Drawdowns to Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies

Shiller and Value Drawdown 1926 to 2014

The market had a maximum drawdown in 1929 of 86 percent, and has a Sharpe ratio over the full period of of 0.13. The fully invested strategy had a maximum drawdown of 85 percent, and generated a Sharpe ratio of 0.15. The other strategies generate lower maximum drawdowns, but do so for lower Sharpe ratios: The strategy that kicked into cash at the mean had a maximum drawdown of 69 percent, and the worst Sharpe ratio at 0.11;  the strategy that kicked into cash at one standard deviation above the mean had a maximum drawdown of 80 percent, and a Sharpe ratio of 0.14, and the strategy that kicked into cash at two standard deviations above the mean had a maximum drawdown of 84 percent, and a Sharpe ratio of 0.15.

Drawdowns Relative to the Market for Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies

Shiller and Value Drawdown Relative 1926 to 2014

This chart examines the drawdown to each strategy relative to the market. Where it is below the midline, the strategy has drawn down further than the market, and above the midline it is outperforming.

Benjamin Graham recommended maintaining a minimum portfolio exposure to stocks of 25 percent. Below we re-run the tests, but this time instead of kicking all of the portfolio into cash, we put only 75 of the portfolio in cash, and maintain 25 percent exposure to the value decile.

Performance of Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies (Graham Rule)

Shiller and Value Performance Graham Rule 1926 to 2014

The additional exposure to the market improves the returns for the three timed strategies. The strategy that kicked into cash at the mean now returns 15.23 percent yearly, the strategy that kicked into cash at one standard deviation above the mean returned 18.67 percent yearly, and the strategy that kicked into cash at two standard deviations above the mean returned 19.55 percent compound over the full period. All still underperform the fully invested strategy at 20.01 percent.

Drawdowns to Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), Cash and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies

Shiller and Value Drawdown Graham Rule 1926 to 2014

The tradeoff for slightly improved returns is greater drawdowns and volatility. The strategy that kicked into cash at the mean had lower a maximum drawdown of 73 percent, but an improved Sharpe ratio at 0.12;  the strategy that kicked into cash at one standard deviation above the mean remained unchanged with a maximum drawdown of 80 percent, and a Sharpe ratio of 0.14, and the strategy that kicked into cash at two standard deviations above the mean had a maximum drawdown of 85 percent, and a Sharpe ratio of 0.15.

Drawdowns Relative to the Market for Value Decile (Price-to-Book Value), and 3 Shiller PE Timed Strategies

Shiller and Value Drawdown Relative Graham Rule 1926 to 2014

The Shiller PE is not a particularly useful timing mechanism. This is because valuation is not good at timing the market (really, nothing works–timing the market is a fool’s or genius’s game). Carrying cash does serve to reduce drawdowns. It also reduces returns. The more conservative the Shiller PE ratio used, the lower the drawdown, but returns suffer, and Sharpe ratios reduce. To generate the extraordinary returns of the value deciles I’ve examined over the last few weeks, it was necessary to remain fully invested in those value stocks through thick and thin. My firm, Eyquem, offers low cost, fee-only managed accounts that implement a systematic deep value investment strategy. Please contact me by email at toby@eyquem.net or call me by telephone on (646) 535 8629 to learn more. Click here if you’d like to read more on Quantitative Value, or connect with me on TwitterLinkedIn or Facebook.

 

 

The 10th Annual New York Value Investing Congress is just weeks away (Sept. 8-9), ​but there’s still time to ​get your seat and enjoy the many benefits of attending the Congress in-person:

  • Speaker ​Wisdom – Congress speakers explain their stock ideas with detailed, well-reasoned analysis.  But the presentations are not live-streamed or distributed afterwards,so only onsite attendees benefit from the ​brilliance of these ​successful money managers.
  • Audience Q&A – Congress attendees are savvy, professional investors and their insightful questions often clarify and expand on a speaker’s investment thesis.  As with speaker commentary, live Q&A is only available to onsite attendees.
  • Exclusive Information – The Congress is closed to the media and live bloggers– our attendees benefit first from actionable information.
  • Great Networking –  The VIC Cocktail Reception has become a favorite among attendees for sharing new ideas, creating new business opportunities and making friendships that ​can last a lifetime.

Register now and benefit from attending the Congress in-person.  But seats are strictly limited to 275, so we encourage Greenbackd readers to register now, before we sell out.

For a special Greenbackd Discount, register now with Offer Code: GREENBACKD  at Valueinvestingcongress.com/congress/register-now-partners/

Confirmed Speakers include:

  • Leon Cooperman, Omega Advisors
  • Sahm AdrangiKerrisdale Capital Management
  • Carson BlockMuddy Waters Research
  • Andrew LeftCitron Research
  • Alexander RoepersAtlantic Investment Management
  • Jeffrey SmithStarboard Value
  • Amitabh SinghiSurefin Investments
  • Guy SpierAquamarine Fund
  • David HurwitzSC Fundamental
  • Michael KaoAkanthos Capital
  • Guy GottfriedRational Capital Management
  • Adam CrockerMetropolitan Capital Advisors
  • Whitney TilsonKase Capital
  • John LewisOsmium Partners
  • Tim EriksenEriksen Capital Management
  • Cliff RemilyNorthwest Priority Capital
  • With more to come!
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,622 other followers

%d bloggers like this: