Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 211

Value investing from an Australian perspective

While the long-term returns from 'value investing' are strong and well documented, the technique has struggled over the past decade prompting many investors to question its merits.

This article discusses value investing from an Australian perspective. The traditional classifications of ‘value’ include earnings, book value and dividends, but value investing by ‘free cash flow’ (FCF) has performed well through market cycles. FCF value investing has also displayed lower levels of volatility when compared to traditional classifications.

These conclusions support our investment philosophy, which is built around the notion that companies undervalued by FCF and franking will outperform over time.

A long-term perspective

The chart below highlights the performance of value investing in an Australian context using more than four decades of data provided by Professor Kenneth French.

Returns of ‘value’ portfolios relative to ‘glamour’ portfolios (December 1974 to December 2016)

Source: Professor Kenneth French. Portfolios are formed using four valuation ratios: book-to-market (B/M); earnings-price (E/P); cash earnings to price (CE/P); and dividend yield (D/P). The raw data is from Morgan Stanley Capital International for 1975 to 2006 and from Bloomberg for 2007 to 2016.

The ‘value’ portfolios contain firms in the top third of a ratio and the 'glamour’ portfolios contain firms in the bottom third. Portfolios are formed at the end of December each year by sorting on the four ratios and then computing value-weighted returns for the following 12 months.

Over the 42-year period for which data is available, value portfolios outperformed glamour portfolios by between 5% and 9% per annum depending on the way ‘value’ is defined.

15 years of poor performance

The data presented below shows returns to value investors in more recent periods have been less than stellar, prompting some commentators to question its merits.

Average annual returns of ‘value’ portfolios relative to ‘glamour’ portfolios (December 1974 to December 2016)

Source: Professor Kenneth French. The raw data for Australia is from Morgan Stanley Capital International from 1975 to 2006 and from Bloomberg from 2007 to 2013. US data is from CRSP. The chart represents the average of four portfolios.

Traditional ‘value’ has become a crowded trade

Anecdotally, there has been more institutional asset allocation towards value strategies in recent years, focusing on the traditional classifications listed above. In addition, many commonly deployed ‘risk models’ use the mainstream classifications to measure the extent of a portfolio’s value exposure.

The focus of institutional asset allocation towards simple strategies concentrating on the four classifications may have reduced the excess returns available from pursuing such strategies. The growth of ‘smart beta’ strategies, which are usually focused around simple and observable value classifications, accentuates this situation.

Traditional classifications of value are more often based on accounting earnings and management’s manipulation of dividends. The recent ramp up in dividend payout ratios and the growing divergence between statutory and ‘underlying’ earnings are examples of this. Of course, this unsustainable situation can lead investors to mistakenly classifying stocks as ‘cheap’ at particular points in time leading to poor investment outcomes.

This situation will be helped by classifying stocks based on their capacity to generate cash flow above that needed to sustain and grow their businesses (‘FCF’). The use of FCF rather than accounting earnings or dividends is important because management can less readily manipulate the measure.

Returns of ‘value’ portfolios relative to ‘glamour’ portfolios (March 2004 to June 2017)

Source: Merlon Capital Partners. Portfolios are formed using four valuation ratios: FCF-to-price (F/P); enterprise-FCF-to-enterprise-value (EF/EV); earnings-to-price (E/P) and book value-to-market (B/M). Monthly portfolio returns are calculated by equally-weighting all sample companies and sorting from top to bottom by each valuation ratio. The ‘value’ portfolios contain firms in the top one third of a ratio and the ‘glamour’ portfolios contain firms in the bottom third. The analysis is based on S&P/ASX200 constituents, and the raw data is from Bloomberg.

The performance of a value strategy that classifies stocks based on FCF has performed well with lower risk compared with traditional accounting-based alternatives. This finding supports our investment philosophy built around the notion that companies undervalued by FCF and franking will outperform over time.

Why do cash flow-based value strategies outperform?

We do not believe that value stocks outperform simply because they are ‘cheap’ but rather because there are misperceptions in the market about their risk profiles and their growth outlooks. A good investment requires market concerns to be priced in or deemed invalid. We incorporate these aspects with a ‘conviction score’ that feeds into our portfolio construction framework.

In a second paper to be released next quarter, we will explore why value strategies based on FCF outperform the broader market. We will present findings that dismiss the notion that value investing is 'riskier' than passive alternatives and support the presence of persistent behavioural biases in investor expectations.

 

Hamish Carlisle is an Analyst and Portfolio Manager at Merlon Capital Partners, an Australian-based boutique fund manager specialising in equity income strategies. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.


 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

After 30 years of investing, I prefer to skip this party

Call that disruption? Investors are forgetting

Estimating a share’s intrinsic value 101

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

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.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

Let's make this clear again ... franking credits are fair

Critics of franking credits are missing the main point. The taxable income of shareholders/taxpayers must also include the company tax previously paid to the ATO before the dividend was distributed. It is fair.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Joe Hockey on the big investment influences on Australia

Former Treasurer Joe Hockey became Australia's Ambassador to the US and he now runs an office in Washington, giving him a unique perspective on geopolitical issues. They have never been so important for investors.

Investment strategies

The tipping point for investing in decarbonisation

Throughout time, transformative technology has changed the course of human history, but it is easy to be lulled into believing new technology will also transform investment returns. Where's the tipping point?

Exchange traded products

The options to gain equity exposure with less risk

Equity investing pays off over long terms but comes with risks in the short term that many people cannot tolerate, especially retirees preserving capital. There are ways to invest in stocks with little downside.

Exchange traded products

8 ways LIC bonus options can benefit investors

Bonus options issued by Listed Investment Companies (LICs) deliver many advantages but there is a potential dilutionary impact if options are exercised well below the share price. This must be factored in.

Retirement

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

Investment strategies

Three demographic themes shaping investments for the future

Focussing on companies that will benefit from slow moving, long duration and highly predictable demographic trends can help investors predict future opportunities. Three main themes stand out.

Fixed interest

It's not high return/risk equities versus low return/risk bonds

High-yield bonds carry more risk than investment grade but they offer higher income returns. An allocation to high-yield bonds in a portfolio - alongside equities and other bonds – is worth considering.

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.