Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 110

How to think rationally about shares

At times of buoyant markets and relatively easy gains, ask yourself whether your approach to investing in shares and building a portfolio condemns you to a lifetime of returns and emotions that rise and fall with the market. If a rising tide lifts all boats and if it’s easy to mistake a rising market for genius, then it pays to examine the approach you have adopted to investing and ask whether it is rational, repeatable and replicable.

Shares are pieces of businesses

It is cause for increasing dismay that despite the rise in popularity of shares and dividend yields, there has been no trend towards a rational approach. And perhaps surprisingly, this is true of both seasoned professionals and part time ‘investors’. For example in the professional space, fund managers, in an effort to reduce portfolio risk, build portfolios of low covariance stocks – buying even very risky companies simply because their shares move in a different direction to the others. Perhaps even more worryingly, part time investors buy shares in companies without proper due diligence and in the hope they’ll simply go up.

Indeed, John Kenneth Galbraith in his book The Great Crash, wrote that one of the key ingredients of a bubble was the replacement of considerations of an asset’s long run worth, future income and its enjoyment, with base hopes of rising prices next week and next month.

Shares need to be treated as pieces of businesses rather than bits of paper that wiggle up and down on a computer screen. But few investors do this. Witness the professional investor who buys a company loaded with debt and a manufacturer of some generic junk because its inclusion in the portfolio reduces its overall volatility. Witness the same professional who cannot buy the shares of a great business when they are truly cheap, instead having to wait until the shares have risen sufficiently to cause them to be included in the S&P/ASX200. Buying shares this way or simply buying in the hope they will rise, is not the same as buying a piece of a business.

Over time, the value of a business changes only slowly, and much less than their daily prices on the stock market. The purchase of shares without reference to the quality or value of the business is no different to betting on black or red. Similarly, the focus on daily quoted prices of shares encourages the treatment of the stock market as a casino. Gamblers and those who frequent casinos tend to lose. In contrast, treating shares as pieces of a business helps investors outperform those who don’t.

Focus on relatively few excellent businesses

Whether it is because it is seen as too difficult or produces too much volatility, few investors simply purchase at attractive prices, a portfolio of 15 to 20 excellent businesses. This is despite the fact that such an approach can produce substantial outperformance.

There are two steps investors need to adopt: first, identify superior businesses, and second, estimate their true value.

Identifying a superior business is easy. Simply look at its economic performance and earnings power.

In our previous article, Airlines and indices, I described the economics of an airline and explained how the behaviour of equity, debt, profits and return on equity, over years, provides an indisputable picture of the economics of a business as if it were owned in its entirety and how this can be used to select extraordinary businesses.

As Warren Buffett once quipped, “If you aren’t prepared to own the whole business for 10 years, don’t buy a little piece of it for 10 minutes.”

Once you embark on an examination of a business from a business owner’s perspective, using equity and return on equity, you not only create a list of candidates worthy of inclusion in a portfolio but you simultaneously simplify your investment process, by creating a benchmark.

A benchmark is a line in the sand or a corral against which you compare outsiders to those things already inside. Your investment process is simplified because nothing needs to be considered unless it is better than the things already on the inside.

Many investment professionals, and the academics who taught them, agree that you reduce your risk by diversifying broadly. I agree that if you buy shares in a lot of different companies whose share prices move in different directions, you will reduce the overall price volatility of your portfolio. But does it make sense to buy shares in an inferior company simply because its share price moves in a different direction to the others that you already have? Why on earth would you buy shares in your twentieth best thing, when you can buy more shares in your best holding? Why cut down your roses to let the weeds through? I believe you reduce real risk – the risk of permanent capital loss - by only owning superior businesses.

Great businesses have high rates of return on equity, little or no debt, bright prospects and sustainable competitive advantages. A sustainable competitive advantage is the intangible thing about a company that the competition cannot replicate or imitate. It’s the reason people will cross the street to get the product even if the guy on this side has an alternative with a lower price. It’s a barrier to entry or a barrier to imitation. Ultimately, it generates the high rates of return on equity. Over time such business should retain profits at a high rate and increase in intrinsic value at a similar rate to the rate of growth in their equity value. And if I told you that company XYZ’s intrinsic value would rise substantially over the next 5 or 10 years, would it matter if the shares fell today?

Choose quality at the right price

Take the case of a company with a low rate of return on equity and little prospect of improving dramatically in the near future. Exclude it. What about a company with bright prospects for its product or service, no debt and 10 years of stable returns on equity of 30%? Include it. Eventually you fill a corral with companies showing a demonstrated track record of superior economic performance. No longer will you be tempted to dabble in the unknown, punting on whether the market or interest rates, employment or inflation will rise or fall in the next few days. Instead, you will keep a protective eye over a short list of great businesses, any of which are candidates for your portfolio if they become available at a discount to intrinsic value.

In our next column for Cuffelinks, we’ll write about that intrinsic value, a DIY on estimating intrinsic value for popular mechanics.


Roger Montgomery is the Chief Investment Officer of The Montgomery Fund. This article is for general education purposes and does not address the specific circumstances of any individual.



Should you be a value or growth investor?

Unwinding is warning of late stages of boom

To zig or to zag?


Most viewed in recent weeks

A tonic for turbulent times: my nine tips for investing

Investing is often portrayed as unapproachably complex. Can it be distilled into nine tips? An economist with 35 years of experience through numerous market cycles and events has given it a shot.

Rival standard for savings and incomes in retirement

A new standard argues the majority of Australians will never achieve the ASFA 'comfortable' level of retirement savings and it amounts to 'fearmongering' by vested interests. If comfortable is aspirational, so be it.

Dalio v Marks is common sense v uncommon sense

Billionaire fund manager standoff: Ray Dalio thinks investing is common sense and markets are simple, while Howard Marks says complex and convoluted 'second-level' thinking is needed for superior returns.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 467

Fund manager reports for last financial year are drifting into client mailboxes, and many of the results are disappointing. With some funds giving back their 2021 gains, why did they not reduce their exposure to hot stocks when faced with rising inflation and rates?

  • 21 July 2022

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 466 with weekend update

Heard the word, cakeism? As in, 'having your cake and eating it too'. The Reserve Bank wants to simultaneously fight inflation by taking away spending power, while not driving the economy into a recession. If you want to help, stop buying stuff.

  • 14 July 2022

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 465 with weekend update

Many thanks for the thousands of revealing comments in our survey on retirement experiences. We discuss the full results. And with the ASX200 down 10%, the US S&P500 off 20% and bond prices tanking, each investor faces the new financial year deciding whether to sit, sell or invest more.

  • 7 July 2022

Latest Updates

Financial planning

Five charts show predicaments facing financial advice

The number of financial advisers in Australia has almost halved at a time of greater need than ever. What has happened to the industry and its clients as yet another Quality of Advice Review takes place?


House price doomsayers: Could housing prices really fall by 20%?

Why do house prices move in an up-and-flat pattern rather than up-and-down like shares? When house prices start to fall, supply reduces to create a new equilibrium, rather than needing even more price reductions.

Latest from Morningstar

Why I’m not ready for an SMSF

SMSFs are increasing in popularity among younger investors, drawn by the investment control and fixed costs. But until a sufficient balance is achieved, it may be better to stay with a large fund.

Investment strategies

Six ways to take a ‘private equity’ approach in listed markets

By taking a private equity approach to investing in the public equity markets in this difficult market, investors can harness the 'best of both worlds' and still make superior returns over the long term.

Investment strategies

How to avoid being a bad investor

It's tough to become the 'best' investor in the world, but we can certainly avoid being the 'worst'. Here are graphical examples of some long-term principles to adopt, including the difficulty of timing the market.

Financial planning

The case for closing the financial gender gap

While the gender pay gap is slowly improving in the workplace, ATO data shows Australian men aged 55-59 average $50,000 more in super than women of the same age. Financial advisers have a role to play.


Three opportunities in property in Australia and APAC

Rising interest rates and occupancy threats have reduced the share prices of many property companies and trusts, but the selling underestimates the strong pockets of demand and robust earnings from good tenants.



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.