Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 474

If I get kicked out of the value investors’ club, so be it

Plenty of people want to know if we still call ourselves value investors, or is there a style change in our funds? It's a question we received after our recent roadshow, when we disclosed that about one-third of our Forager Australian Shares Fund (ASX:FOR) is currently invested in tech stocks.

Value can include strong growth prospects

Value investing has always, to me, meant investing in shares of a company at a significant discount to the underlying value of the business. That has often incorporated businesses with strong growth prospects, as long as those growth prospects aren’t reflected in the share price.

Wind back five years to our 2017 Performance Report, many of the best performers that year were growing businesses and tech companies.

Jumbo Interactive, GBST (since delisted) and Reckon were all tech stocks. Jumbo and GBST were barely profitable at the time we bought them. Dicker Data was a growth stock (albeit one trading on a low earnings multiple at acquisition).

Jumbo Interactive

 Dicker Data


Most of our historically-successful investments were businesses that grew, even if they weren’t priced to grow at the time of our first investment.

Most famous value investors are perfectly capable of valuing growing businesses. One of Warren Buffett’s most successful investments, the Coca-Cola Company, was one of the 20th century’s greatest growth stocks. Seth Klarman’s publicly-disclosed holdings currently include Amazon and semi-conductor company Qorvo.

Hanging on to the value moniker

The challenge is that the understanding of what constitutes a value investor has changed with the rise and rise of index funds. By categorising the market as either ‘value’, for stocks with high dividend yields and low price-to-earnings ratios, or ‘growth’ for those with the opposite characteristics, index providers were able to offer factor funds. 

But I’m not yet ready to give up the moniker. Value investors have appreciated growing companies since before the index fund existed, and the distinction between us and the rest is still important.

Quality and growth are not criteria for our portfolios, simply inputs into our valuations. We want to own quality when it is unloved or underappreciated, not quality for quality's sake. We currently have investments in Seven West Media, mining services and Qantas, and neither would meet a ‘quality’ filter. We simply invest on estimates of future cash returns to shareholders. That is equally true of RPMGlobal, where the earnings are going to grow.

More now, because the time is right

There are two good reasons we have ‘drifted’ towards a higher allocation to growing companies over the past few years. 

First, look back at that 2017 list and you will also see Boom Logistics, Hughes Drilling and RNY Property Trust, a cluster of asset-heavy businesses that we invested in at substantial discounts to the ‘value’ of their tangible assets. These did not work out well and were subsequently joined by the likes of Thorn Group and iSelect, similarly ‘cheap’ stocks that never generated the profits we expected. Every business has a price. But the gap between the right price for a shrinking business and a growing one is a chasm. We learned that more than once.

Second, investors should expect us to ‘drift’ a lot. We have a particularly high weighting to tech stocks at the moment but they are all established businesses with predictable and growing revenue streams.

Investors didn’t give a hoot about profits 18 months ago and tech stocks traded on revenue multiples. Today, the share prices have been absolutely hammered and all anyone cares about is profitability.

Change of accounting standards is an opportunity

Yes, some of them are currently reporting losses. But that is largely a function of significant investment in attracting new customers, rather than any reflection on the profitability of the existing customers. Twenty years ago, the accounting standards allowed companies to capitalise customer acquisition costs and spread the expense over the life of the expected revenue stream. That, predictably, led to a proliferation of aggressive and unrealistic assumptions and overstated profitability.

Today’s accounting standards, where all of the customer acquisition costs get expensed upfront, leads to understatement of economic reality.

For the value investor, therein lies the opportunity. These businesses are no more difficult to value than most, and our estimates have not changed meaningfully over the past 18 months. Yet some share prices are 70% lower, taking them from premiums to our valuation estimates to significant discounts. We buy them when they are cheap.

If those share prices rise a lot, and everyone else becomes optimistic, you should expect us to be moving on to the next sector that is out of favour.

If that gets us kicked out of the value investors’ club, then so be it.


Steve Johnson is CIO at Forager Funds, a Sydney-based boutique fund manager. This article provides general information to help you understand our investment approach. It does not consider your personal circumstances and may not be suitable for you.


Claude Walker
May 04, 2023

This article originally seemed to respond to my article asking "Has Forager's Australian Fund Changed Investment Style?" so I thought it worth noting a recent development that pertains to this question.

I note Lonsec has updated their view on Forager's other (International) Fund and "has some concerns around philosophical and style drift which will be acutely monitored in future reviews."

Interesting that mental gymnastics of defining all investing as value investing then claiming that you are still a value investor because you are still an investor does not seemed to have convinced Lonsec.

What is weird to me is that anyone finds it convincing, but I guess that is what makes a market.

Claude Walker
September 07, 2022

This article seems like it in part a response to my article asking if Forager Funds has changed investment style:

The distinction I was making was between loss making tech stocks (now) and profitable, or at least turnaround stocks (or asset plays), previously. The Forager website says the style is “Perhaps best described as a hybrid of the Graham and Buffett styles, we view both asset backing and earnings power as useful valuation tools, depending on the type of business we are investing in.”

I think it is fair enough to ask the question when quite a few of the top holdings are barely profitable, or indeed loss making, these days. That past big 'tech stock' winner (congrats) Jumbo International had been paying dividends since 2008, and Dicker Data about the same.

If we define value investing in the way that you have defined it, then every single fund on the market is a value fund, including ARKK and Frazis Capital Partners. So you can have the mantle moniker forever, even if your style does change.

Nothing wrong with change, anyway; sorry if the question touched a nerve.

September 09, 2022

It seems like a fair question, what is conspicuous in it's absence is "Here's how I was wrong buying Thorn before or profitless tech now and how I'll avoid theses mistakes in future". Managers must learn from mistakes. 

September 07, 2022

Performance is what really matters, not style. 


Leave a Comment:



Is the market’s recession conviction warranted?

Invest in Australian value stocks before it is too late

Global search for short-term losers and long-term winners


Most viewed in recent weeks

Meg on SMSFs: Clearing up confusion on the $3 million super tax

There seems to be more confusion than clarity about the mechanics of how the new $3 million super tax is supposed to work. Here is an attempt to answer some of the questions from my previous work on the issue. 

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 566 with weekend update

Here are 10 rules for staying happy and sharp as we age, including socialise a lot, never retire, learn a demanding skill, practice gratitude, play video games (specific ones), and be sure to reminisce.

  • 27 June 2024

The secrets of Australia’s Berkshire Hathaway

Washington H. Soul Pattinson is an ASX top 50 stock with one of the best investment track records this country has seen. Yet, most Australians haven’t heard of it, and the company seems to prefer it that way.

Australian housing is twice as expensive as the US

A new report suggests Australian housing is twice as expensive as that of the US and UK on a price-to-income basis. It also reveals that it’s cheaper to live in New York than most of our capital cities.

Overcoming the fear of running out of money in retirement

There’s an epidemic in Australia that has nothing to do with COVID-19, the flu, or the respiratory syncytial virus. This one is called FORO, or the fear of running out of money in retirement, and it's a growing problem.

The catalyst for a LICs rebound

The discounts on listed investment vehicles are at historically wide levels. There are lots of reasons given, including size and liquidity, yet there's a better explanation for the discounts, and why a rebound may be near.

Latest Updates

Financial planning

Our finances should enable and not dictate our lives

Most people would prefer to have more money than less of it. But at what point do the trappings of wealth and success start to outweigh the benefits of striving for more?


This vital yet "forgotten" indicator of inflation holds good news

Financial commentators seem to have forgotten the leading cause of inflation: growth in the supply of money. Warren Bird explains the link and explores where it suggests inflation is headed.


Emerging market equities are ripe with opportunity

Emerging markets offer compelling value compared to history and the stretched valuations of developed market equities. Investors can benefit from three big tailwinds, but only if they are selective.


Tomorrow's taxpayers pay for today's policy mistakes

Less affordable housing isn't the only thing set to weigh on Australia's younger generations. If new solutions for pension deficits and the use of resource revenue aren't found quickly, tomorrow's taxpayer will foot the bill.

How would a switch to nuclear affect electricity prices?

The Coalition's plan to build seven nuclear power stations in 15 years faces scrutiny due to high costs and slow construction. And it is unlikely the investment would yield cheaper energy for Australian households and industry.


Reader feedback from our 2024 survey

Articles that are easy to understand, quick to read, and credible; being able to engage via the comments section; and keeping Firstlinks free and independent are just some of the features valued by our readers.


Have your say on Firstlinks and the topics we cover

We’d love to hear your thoughts on Firstlinks and how we can make it better for you. If you’d like to help us out in a just a couple of minutes, please take our short survey.



© 2024 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. 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.