Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 629

The DNA of long-term compounding machines

Investors are often trained to look for size as a proxy for safety. Blue chips, household names, and index leaders dominate portfolios not only because they feel familiar, but also because of herding bias – the psychological pull to follow the crowd rather than stand apart. But history shows that tomorrow’s champions are often built quietly, well before they attract mainstream attention.

Canva’s rise offers a case in point. Barely more than a decade old, the private design platform is now worth around $65 billion. It is more valuable than Telstra, Brambles, and Rio Tinto – companies that have taken over a century to build. While Canva is exceptional in scale, it highlights a broader trend: founder-led firms with aligned incentives and disciplined cultures will continue to reshape Australia’s corporate landscape.

Why incentives matter

The way leaders are rewarded has a direct impact on the way businesses grow. According to the Australian Council of Superannuation Investors, 91% of Australia’s top listed CEOs received a performance bonus last year, typically vesting over three years. This structure often drives short-term priorities.

Founders, in contrast, are rewarded only if their businesses thrive over decades. Their ownership stakes and reputations are tied to long-term outcomes. Their long-term motivation is reflected in bolder decision making, leaner organisational structures, and faster responses to change. For investors, understanding these differences is critical in assessing why some companies compound value more effectively than others.

Telltale signs of founder behaviour

Founder-led firms are not immune from challenges. Some stall, others remain niche, and a few will fail outright. But collectively they demonstrate a pattern of behaviours investors can analyse:

  • Capital discipline: prioritising sustainable margins and reinvestment over empire building.
  • Alignment: boards, executives, and shareholders cohesively building long-term value rather than chase personal gain.
  • Strategic patience: committing to opportunities that compound over decades, even when short-term sentiment resists.
  • Scalable structures: setting up organisation structures that ward off corporate bureaucracy and continue to proliferate the founder’s philosophy

These traits do not guarantee success, but they are observable markers that investors can use when evaluating businesses and management team’s decision-making.

Emerging examples

This mindset is visible across a range of Australian companies. Objective Corporation [ASX:OCL] in government software, Hansen Technologies [ASX:HSN] in specialised software products, and Macquarie Technology Group [ASX:MAQ] in cloud and data services have all grown under founder influence. Private firms such as Expert360 and Lakeba are building new models in talent platforms and applied technology. Even mature names like Technology One [ASX:TNE] retain founder DNA in their culture of customer focus and capital efficiency.


Source: Morningstar.com.au

These are not stock recommendations, but case studies of how founder structures can shape performance. For investors, the lesson is not just which names to watch, but what patterns to recognise when allocating capital.

The takeaway for investors

The next generation of wealth creation is unlikely to come from the obvious megacaps. It is more likely to emerge from founder influenced firms that combine scalable models with long-term alignment. By the time these companies appear in index products or attract heavy broker coverage, much of the edge is already gone.

Investors who want exposure to this trend need to build frameworks for identifying founder alignment early, before the crowd does. That means going beyond market capitalisation, looking at ownership structures, and assessing the decision-making culture that sits behind the numbers.

 

Lawrence Lam is the author of The Founder Effect (Wiley) and Managing Director of Lumenary Investment Management. He writes on leadership, markets, and the traits that define exceptional management. More at lawrencelam.org and lumenaryinvest.com. The material in this article is general information only and does not consider any individual’s investment objectives. Companies mentioned have been used for illustrative purposes only and do not represent any buy or sell recommendations.

 

  •   17 September 2025
  • 3
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Nvidia's CEO is selling. Here's why Aussie investors should care

Compare the pair: Expensive versus cheap

Lessons from the rise and fall of founder-led companies

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
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. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. 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.