Quality in Active Equity Investing

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Quality in active equity investing Co-Authors: Jonathan Allison, Investment Director, European Equities Dr Mark Vincent, Global Head of Equity Research Additional contributors: Victoria MacLean Nick Robinson James Thom April 2021 Virgilio Aquino 02 of 20 Quality in active equity investing Quality in active equity investing 03 of 20 About active equities at Contents Aberdeen Standard Investments Executive summary 04 We believe that deep fundamental research into companies, combined Part I: with team debate and rigorous stock selection, is the key to driving better investment returns for clients. Our stock-picking process is truly Why invest in quality companies? 07 bottom-up. Our approach to equity investing is underpinned by three Digging deeper: core investment beliefs: a behavioral explanation 10 • Fundamental research delivers insights that we can use to exploit market inefficiencies. In our view, company fundamentals ultimately Part II: drive share prices but they are often valued inefficiently over the Five fundamentals of quality 12 short term. Part III: • ESG assessment and corporate engagement enhance returns. We place constructive engagement and environmental, social and A practical guide to quality 16 governance (ESG) considerations at the heart of company research, ensuring we are responsible stewards of our clients’ assets. We believe that this approach can mitigate risks and enhance returns for our clients, as companies with robust ESG practices tend to enjoy long-term financial benefits. • Disciplined, active investment can deliver superior outcomes for clients. We aim to build high-conviction portfolios where our Our Thinking: stock-specific insights drive performance, giving our clients access to our best investment ideas. Thought Leadership To make full use of our considerable research capability, our equity Our thought-leadership papers deliver thought-provoking teams use a common investment language and research framework analysis of key investment themes. Through focused and that structures how we express our thinking about companies. unique insights into topical issues, we aim to provide Combining research insights with rigorous peer review allows our fund investors with a deeper understanding of the challenges and managers to effectively assess the investment potential of companies. opportunities within global investment markets. By prioritizing particular insights, we can drive distinct client outcomes. The market’s inability to price quality correctly is one of the most common inefficiencies that we see in equity investing. Evaluating the quality of business for every stock we research helps us to ensure that we have properly understood its opportunities and risks. In our Long-Term Quality strategies, we choose to invest only in high-quality companies, aiming to exploit this pricing inefficiency. 04 of 20 Quality in active equity investing Quality in active equity investing 05 of 20 Executive summary This paper focuses specifically on the quality phenomenon. We look at why investing in quality companies has historically been a “ If the business does well, successful approach for investors. At Aberdeen Standard the stock eventually follows.” Investments, our analysts carry out rigorous fundamental research and engage proactively with company management teams in their Warren Buffett search for quality. Much of this process is based on what we call the “five fundamentals of quality”. In our view, evaluating these factors – industry, business model, financials, management and ESG issues – is essential to active quality investing. These characteristics take on even more gravity in the post-Covid environment. Part II of the paper discusses them in detail. Once investors have made their initial analysis, they must also judge the right price to pay for quality. And they must understand how the characteristics of quality companies affect their overall portfolio. To date, the market has systematically undervalued the persistence of returns from quality companies. And so to understand quality in the context of equity investing, investors must use fundamental analysis to define, measure and manage it. By doing so, active investors could have the opportunity to add value. 06 of 20 Quality in active equity investing Quality in active equity investing 07 of 20 Part I: Why invest in quality companies? Quality investing – buying and holding a portfolio of high-quality companies – has proved to be a highly effective strategy in many markets over the past few decades. What are the reasons for this? Past returns are no guide to the future, but are there reasons to believe that investing in quality will remain a compelling approach? After addressing this, we then turn to a deeper analysis of how quality is defined, arguing that past approaches and definitions of quality, while powerful, can be augmented to provide deeper and more nuanced insight into what makes a quality company. 08 of 20 Quality in active equity investing Quality in active equity investing 09 of 20 Powered by persistent returns unique product feature, a recipe, a brand, a network effect or a lack Lessons from management consulting A company with a deep and wide economic moat is well protected We think there are two key avenues for explaining the performance of competitors. Once in place, competitive advantages tend to have A purely quantitative analysis is by no means the only approach to from competition on all sides. This drives sustainable value creation, of quality. The first relates to the persistency of returns and is quite more staying power than the market thinks. By misjudging this quality. In fact, it leaves significant stones unturned. which is the essence of quality. The building blocks can include intuitive to understand. The essential point is that companies that durability, investors might misprice consistent and Before the arrival of quantitative investors, management consultants pricing power, cost competitiveness, superior routes to market, deliver above-average returns due to their durable business model persistent returns. and business school academics developed tools to help businesses better innovation and powerful brands. The natural outcome of this and strong competitive position tend to see those returns persist for This brings us to the second avenue for explaining the performance understand their competitive advantage. They used more qualitative is that investors should look for the following: longer than the market expects. High short-term returns might make of quality, one that comes from the area of behavioral psychology. frameworks to understand the strength of a business. And they • companies with weak competitors among existing firms these companies already more expensive than average. The behavioral biases of the ‘average’ investor (for example the provided important insights that backward-looking measures of Nevertheless, the market does not extrapolate enough for the • high barriers of entry for new entrants to overcome short-term time horizon discussed above) can drive performance company accounts cannot capture. Bruce Henderson’s Growth Share persistency of these returns. As they are delivered year after year, patterns that create opportunities for more rational investors. We Matrix, created in 1968, is an example of this. Henderson was the • multiple customers, and suppliers with limited bargaining power the market is forced to re-appraise. As a consequence, the stock explore this topic further in A Behavioral Explanation of Quality on founder of the Boston Consulting Group and advocated separating outperforms. • limited threat from substitute products page 9. the ‘stars’ from the ‘dogs’ on the basis of their growth and market Is there any systematic evidence to support this theory? A study by share. It is important to note that these economic moats are not static –this Accounting for quality Credit Suisse’s HOLT team provides a useful perspective.1 The study analysis is not something that can be done once and then forgotten. Interestingly, there is no single widely accepted definition of quality. Perhaps the best-known example of the consulting approach is used their proprietary measure of cash-flow return on investment Analysts need to regularly monitor companies’ strengths and quality. There are, however, common strands that we can trace through Michael Porter’s 1979 ‘Five Forces Framework’ for analyzing a (CFROI®), dividing companies into quintiles based on return, Disruption and shifts in competitive dynamics are always a history to the quantitative or passive approaches of today. company’s competitive position. Porter argued that quality and found that companies with the highest returns saw these fade possibility. Looking at a company using only a rear-view mirror businesses are better able to fend off competitive pressures because towards the average over time. Crucially, however, the fade rate was Benjamin Graham, often seen as the godfather of value investing, means that by the time a problem shows up in its numbers, it could they have strong economic moats. slow - and slower than for companies with lower initial returns. Even was an early champion of focusing on quality. In Securities Analysis, be too late from an investment perspective. Taking an active a decade after they were first identified, returns for these written with David Dodd in 1933, he set out seven investment approach to monitoring means they are more likely to identify any highest-return companies remained above average. criteria. Alongside
Recommended publications
  • Alpha Europe Drew's Views

    Alpha Europe Drew's Views

    ALPHA EUROPE DREW’S VIEWS ___________________________________________________________________________ Peak Quality? The message below is quite compelling: “We have a quality-focused investment philosophy, and own the best companies for the long term.” Tough to argue with that one, right? Basically, it is the polar opposite of what must be the worst pitch of all time: “We focus on horrible management teams and low quality businesses, and like to own the lousiest company for as short a period as possible, and then turn our portfolio over by selling one miserable business model and buying an even worse one.” Well, fuelled by some excellent academic research over the last five years, as well as the ever-intensifying canonization of Warren Buffett, Mr. Market has been increasingly attracted to and enamoured by the concept of “quality” investing. So, let’s explore it. What is Quality? Wikipedia tells us that: “Quality Investing is an investment strategy based on a set of clearly-defined fundamental criteria that seeks to identify companies with outstanding quality characteristics.” So far, that tells us exactly nothing. They continue, however, with: “The quality assessment is made based on soft (e.g. management credibility” and hard criteria (balance sheet stability).” This is a little less amorphous, but one of our peers has written an excellent book Quality Investing: Owning the best companies for the long term, and have done an even better job than Wikipedia.1 In it, they write that there are three broad characteristics that indicate quality; “strong, predictable cash generation”, “sustainably high returns on capital”, and “attractive growth opportunities”. They do not mention anything about value as a condition, however they do (rightly) suggest that the combination of the three factors above are “particularly powerful, enabling a virtuous circle of cash flow generation, which can be Hurry up guys, there might be a storm headed our way.
  • Schroders QEP Why Quality Stocks Offer Higher Return and Lower Risk

    Schroders QEP Why Quality Stocks Offer Higher Return and Lower Risk

    Schroders QEP [For professional clients only. Not suitable for retail clients] Schroders QEP Why Quality stocks offer higher return and lower risk For many years, investors thought of “Growth” investing as the natural complement to Value based investment strategies. However, disappointment with the diversification properties of Growth and the failure to identify a sustainable return premium attached to Growth stocks has more recently revived interest in the concept of Quality as both a stand-alone strategy and one that is highly diversifying with Value. The Schroders QEP Global Equity Team has been studying the merits of investing in Quality for almost two decades and has offered a stand-alone Global Quality strategy since 2007. The strategy invests in financially strong companies that have a demonstrated record of generating superior and stable profitability. We believe that Quality is a more systematic and predictable investment approach than typical growth investing as it explicitly avoids the disappointment that is often associated with more glamorous stocks. More specifically, our analysis suggests that Quality companies generate a return premium in excess of the market over time with lower risk whilst we also observe that this return is accentuated when risk aversion is high or rising. Historically, many of these periods have often been associated with Value strategies underperforming, meaning that Quality also appears to offer significant strategic diversification to Value approaches. The complementary role of Value and Quality does not appear to be spurious. We observe that higher quality companies have very different characteristics to Value stocks which are often less profitable, more cyclical and exhibit weaker balance sheets.
  • The Power of Quality Investing International Quality Growth the Power of Quality Investing

    The Power of Quality Investing International Quality Growth the Power of Quality Investing

    International Quality Growth The Power of Quality Investing International Quality Growth The Power of Quality Investing Buy quality companies. It seems intuitively like a cash flow return on investment, and return on equity—is straightforward path to investment success, and history the most important metric, and the driver of the other supports the argument. As an investment style, however, two components used by MSCI. Importantly, companies quality does not get nearly the attention of value (buying with high financial productivity have also consistently cheap companies) or growth (buying fast-growing companies). outperformed other companies since at least 1998, based on Yet, quality has outperformed both value and growth since our analysis. MSCI began tracking it in international markets in 2001. It has even outperformed a theoretical investor who started in value The market often undervalues financially productive and timed the switch to growth perfectly in August 2009— businesses because it assumes, based on economic timing the market being a feat in itself (Exhibit 1). theory, that competitors will slowly (or not so slowly) nibble away a company’s edge, and therefore, its outsized Even more curious than the fact that such a successful profitability. In our view, however, certain companies have strategy is often sidelined in investment debates is that such strong barriers to competition that they can maintain the definition of “quality” is often, at least in our view, high financial productivity for longer than the market profoundly misunderstood. MSCI defines quality as a expects. The length of time a company can maintain its combination of financial productivity, low leverage, and competitive advantage, and therefore its extraordinary stability.
  • The Case for Empowering Quality Shareholders

    The Case for Empowering Quality Shareholders

    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2020 The Case for Empowering Quality Shareholders Lawrence A. Cunningham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons THE CASE FOR EMPOWERING QUALITY SHAREHOLDERS by LAWRENCE A. CUNNINGHAM THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Forthcoming in Brigham Young University Law Review (2020) ABSTRACT Anyone can buy stock in a public company, but not all shareholders are equally committed to a company’s long-term success. In an increasingly fragmented financial world, shareholders’ attitudes toward the companies in which they invest vary widely, from time horizon to conviction. Faced with indexers, short-term traders, and activists, it is more important than ever for businesses to ensure that their shareholders are dedicated to their missions. Today’s companies need “quality shareholders,” as Warren Buffett called those who “load up and stick around,” or buy large stakes and hold for long periods. While scholars in recent years have extensively debated indexers, short-term traders, and activists, they have paid scant attention to quality shareholders and their critical role in corporate finance and governance. This Article corrects this oversight by highlighting the quality shareholder cohort. Adding this fresh perspective confirms some of the angst about myopic short- termism on the one hand and ignorant indexing on the other, but rather than regulate related behaviors, the fresh perspective invites attention to empowering quality shareholders. In particular, rather than taxing short-term shareholders or passing through indexer voting rights, this Article explains how companies could simply increase the voting power of their quality shareholders.