Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 263

Should you be a value or growth investor?

The traditional distinction between ‘value’ and ‘growth’ investors is too simplistic. Classically, ‘value’ investors aim to generate returns from shares that offer a high yield from current earnings or dividends relative to their prevailing share price, whereas ‘growth’ investors buy shares with superior earnings growth potential. Since rapidly-growing companies are unlikely to be available at bargain prices, the two schools of thought are often considered to be at loggerheads.

Our approach is different. Investing isn’t about putting stocks into boxes. It’s about delivering superior long-term returns relative to the risks taken. When we make our assessment of a stock’s future-return potential, we’re primarily motivated by its intrinsic worth, an appraisal which includes due consideration for the value of future growth (if any). The critical question is whether we can buy a company’s shares for much less than they are truly worth.

Unlikely bedfellows

Viewed through a value/growth lens, Facebook and Peabody Energy would make unlikely bedfellows. How much common ground can there be between the growth-rich business of mining for data and the growth-starved business of mining for coal? Perhaps more than first meets the eye. Dig deeper and it’s evident that there is enormous economic demand for high-quality sources of both coal and data. Both are also targets of popular and regulatory backlash that threatens to restrict supply. And in both cases, we conclude that the prospects are brighter than implied by the current price.

Peabody Energy is the world’s largest publicly-traded non-state-owned pure-play coal miner. Amid all the talk of a shift to cleaner fuel sources like gas and renewables, it’s sobering to note that coal’s share of electricity production was 38% last year – exactly where it was 20 years ago. As global demand for electricity has increased, coal has proved its worth as a cheap and reliable fuel.

Can we do without coal?

That’s not to say coal is without its problems, and the environmental cost of burning coal is well known and beyond dispute. That said, the social cost of not burning coal is not to be ignored either. Consider China, the world’s most populous nation, which accounts for more than 50% of global coal use. Its drastic 2016 directive to cut coal production as part of a project to restore ‘blue skies’ over Beijing proved to be so punitive for households and small businesses that it was relaxed just months later. So as tempting as it may be to say, “let’s stop investing in coal”, the reality is not that simple.

A better solution to the pollution problem needs to consider how coal is used, not just whether it is used. If coal isn’t going away, at least those who rely on it can burn higher quality sources. That’s where producers like Peabody stand to benefit. Its most valuable mines are located in Australia and have been blessed with higher energy-content coal than the Indonesian mines that currently account for most of Chinese thermal coal imports. By gradually switching from Indonesian to Australian coal, the Chinese can generate the same amount of electricity with less coal, thereby releasing fewer pollutants into the air. As a result, Australian mines are struggling to keep up with demand.

But you’d never know that from market sentiment. Among widespread condemnation of coal in general, such differences in quality are often overlooked. Indeed, so out-of-favour has coal become that even the most promising coal projects are finding it hard to obtain approval from regulators or financing from banks.

Peabody itself has learned its lessons the hard way. Flying high in the commodity bull market that peaked in 2011, Peabody took on too much debt and found it could not meet its obligations when the price of coal turned south, eventually filing for bankruptcy in April 2016. Investors tend to ‘fight the last war’ and are worried about a repeat. But while Peabody’s operations haven’t changed much since the last peak, its financial position is markedly different. Net debt has fallen from $5.7 billion to zero, capital expenditure is down by almost 75%, and the company has plenty of loss carry-forwards to shield it from future tax. The result? Free cash flow has more than doubled from the last peak, while the company’s enterprise value is down by over 70%. In terms of cash flow yield, Peabody is a true outlier.

The risk, of course, is that Peabody’s present could be much brighter than its future. We think that’s unlikely, but it highlights one challenge of being a contrarian investor: if you are contrarian and wrong, it is generally for reasons that were obvious to everyone else. Lots of people hate coal, and if regulators go for broke and attempt to reduce coal use at any cost, they could hurt Peabody’s fundamental prospects.

Is Facebook also an outlier?

The graphs below chart the percentage distribution of companies on a trailing 5-year average revenue growth and a trailing 12-month free cash flow yield.

 

Source: Datastream, Orbis. Statistics are compiled from an internal research database and are subject to subsequent revision due to data cleaning or changes in methodology. Distributions show the percent of stocks in the FTSE World Index (excluding financials) in each bracket. Each value on the x-axis represents the maximum value in the range. Orbis estimate of trailing 12-month free cash flow used for Peabody.

Priced at a multiple that is close to the market average, Facebook is an outlier in a different respect: its growth rate has been spectacular. It too has more than its share of haters, with the Cambridge Analytica fiasco putting personal data squarely in the regulators’ spotlight. But, as with Peabody’s coal, there has been no let-up in demand for Facebook’s services along with its Instagram and WhatsApp properties. Users are still engaging with these platforms as much as they did before the scandal, while advertisers have shown no signs of deserting Facebook en masse.

The revenue that Facebook generates is primarily from advertising services. The company’s ability to deliver more effective and relevant ads, and to therefore charge a premium for them, is unparalleled because of the amount of data it knows on its users. Regulation that seeks to discourage the sharing of this data with third parties would strengthen Facebook’s competitive position, potentially allowing Facebook to capture revenue which previously had to be shared with partners. Meanwhile, the likely regulatory burden of having to identify and block inappropriate content is an exceptionally difficult task, one at which only the companies with the most sophisticated technology, like Facebook’s, will stand a chance of succeeding.

Regulation as a barrier to entry

No doubt increased regulatory scrutiny is a fact of life for both Facebook and Peabody. However, while heavy-handed regulation is often viewed with trepidation by investors, again we take a different view. In our assessment, higher levels of regulation tend to act not as a barrier to corporate success, but as a barrier to competitive entry, and are often beneficial for incumbents’ profitability in the long term.

We believe both Facebook and Peabody offer compelling returns for the long-term investor. Whether the returns are realised via growth or yield, or some combination of the two, is of little consequence: it’s the total return potential that counts for us, and always has been.

It’s true that we usually do a better job in market environments when shares with low expectations have outperformed those that everyone seems most excited about. But ask us if we are value or growth investors and our answer is: neither.

 

Ben Preston is Portfolio Manager at Orbis Investments, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This report constitutes general advice only and not personal financial or investment advice. It does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation or individual needs of any particular person.

For more articles and papers from Orbis, please click here.

RELATED ARTICLES

Changing landscape of US large and mid caps

Unwinding is warning of late stages of boom

To zig or to zag?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Unexpected results in our retirement income survey

Who knew? With some surprise results, the Government is on unexpected firm ground in asking people to draw on all their assets in retirement, although the comments show what feisty and informed readers we have.

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Three all-time best tables for every adviser and investor

It's a remarkable statistic. In any year since 1875, if you had invested in the Australian stock index, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods.

The looming excess of housing and why prices will fall

Never stand between Australian households and an uncapped government programme with $3 billion in ‘free money’ to build or renovate their homes. But excess supply is coming with an absence of net migration.

Five stocks that have worked well in our portfolios

Picking macro trends is difficult. What may seem logical and compelling one minute may completely change a few months later. There are better rewards from focussing on identifying the best companies at good prices.

Six COVID opportunist stocks prospering in adversity

Some high-quality companies have emerged even stronger since the onset of COVID and are well placed for outperformance. We call these the ‘COVID Opportunists’ as they are now dominating their specific sectors.

Latest Updates

Retirement

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Interviews

Sean Fenton on marching to your own investment tune

Is it more difficult to find stocks to short in a rising market? What impact has central bank dominance had over stock selection? How do you combine income and growth in a portfolio? Where are the opportunities?

Compliance

D’oh! DDO rules turn some funds into a punching bag

The Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) come into effect in two weeks. They will change the way banks promote products, force some small funds to close to new members and push issues into the listed space.

Shares

Dividends, disruption and star performers in FY21 wrap

Company results in FY21 were generally good with some standout results from those thriving in tough conditions. We highlight the companies that delivered some of the best results and our future  expectations.

Fixed interest

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Investment strategies

Seven factors driving growth in Managed Accounts

As Managed Accounts surge through $100 billion for the first time, the line between retail, wholesale and institutional capabilities and portfolios continues to blur. Lower costs help with best interest duties.

Retirement

Reader Survey: home values in age pension asset test

Read our article on the family home in the age pension test, with the RBA Governor putting the onus on social security to address house prices and the OECD calling out wealthy pensioners. What is your view?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 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. 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.