Warren Buffett recommends that individual investors diversify and use low-cost index funds. But that is not what he does. It's not even close. He takes big positions. Early in his career, a few positions comprised his entire invested assets for himself and his partnerships.
What gives? Actually, it's pretty simple, I believe. Few people understand the management of risk better than Warren Buffett. What he understands, and what most people don't get, is what is glibly referred to as "firm specific risk" in the investment texts. Think of it like this: when you buy a stock, you can do a lot of research by cranking the numbers, reading the reports, analyzing the competition, and even taking into account the macroeconomic environment. But, no matter how much research you do, if you are on the outside of the company, there is still a lot you don't know.
As you get ready to click "buy," the CEO and CFO could be having lunch and talking about the phone calls they got yesterday from their two biggest customers and how they were thinking of moving to a competitor. They may be discussing that internal research report that found customers were reporting a surprising increase in company product related injuries. They may be discussing the surprising announcement that the top salesman is considering a competing offer. They may be fleshing out an idea that involves selling barges to Merrill Lynch and then buying them back after the quarter ends, to get the revenue numbers Wall Street is expecting.
This is partly what "firm specific" risk is about. And, again, if you are on the outside, it can blindside you and you have no Michael Oher to protect you.
Unless, you are on the inside and at the top levels on the inside. Even the employees of Enron didn't know what was going on.
But Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger get on the inside. They get appointed to the board. They bring their own people in, if necessary, and make it their job to minimize firm specific risk. They get to know the key people in the companies in which they invest.
Thus, his admonition to diversify is appropriate, despite his approach, because he realizes the firm specific risk the typical investor faces in buying individual companies. If you must buy individual companies, limit your buy in a single name to 5% of total assets. That's my recommendation.
The thing I enjoy about my energy sector is that there are no such things as "losing customers to the competitor" or wondering what the competitor's "next big thing is".
ReplyDeleteFirm specific is reduced to the "kitchen cockroach" that not even the best analyst can uncover until it is too late.
I saw this article saying Warren Buffett has not generated any alpha in 10 years:
ReplyDeleteWarren Buffett's Alpha and Returns
Does this make sense to you?
re: Kevin I love the term "kitchen cockroach" to describe firm specific risk
ReplyDeletere: Buffett Doesn't make sense. He avoided the dot.com meltdown. That didn't generate alpha?
Personally, I don't think it's a problem if 10% of your portfolio is in one stock. I have a couple that are closer to 15% actually. Not ideal, however, you simply need to be mindful of the consequences of doing so. Given all my stocks have a history of paying dividends for at least 20 years, I'm pretty comfortable with that. If anything, I won't be buying more of what I own, I will be buying more of what I don't own; further diversifying.
ReplyDeleteHow about you Robert? Own any individual stocks that are over 5% or 10% of your portfolio?
Have a great weekend!
5% is my limit today. I do have to say that a number of years ago I put my whole 401k in the bank I worked for. It was a chance and I was young and I felt the bank would snap back from a big drop. Today I'll only work with clients who will follow the 5% limit.
ReplyDeleteGood luck if you go more than 5%. I had it but I realize there is a lot of roadkill out there that wasn't so lucky.
By the way industry exposure has to watched as well as we know with the banking sector of the pat few years.