Category

Aging

154 quotes from 48 investors

You never get a bubble until the public, the brokerage community, the financial institutions, the pension funds, and even the universities are all involved.
Current earnings, future prospects, management, marketability are all factors more or less independent of assets which contribute their share to the intrinsic value.
I don’t think the objective of investment should ever be to take a risk in order to get a return. I think the objective of shrewd investment should be to find opportunities which offer a larger return than the average, combined with adequate safety.
Please do not forget that as the common stock level advances, the advantages of common stocks appear to be more attractive and the basic need for owning them becomes more persuasive in everybody’s reasoning. Yet in fact, common stocks undoubtedly become riskier as the price advances, and thus the risk increases as the widespread acceptance of common stock develops.
To my mind, the so-called growth-stock investor — or the average security analyst for that matter — has no idea of how much to pay for a growth stock, how many stocks to buy to obtain the desired return, or how their prices will behave.
Real investment risk is measured not by the percent that a stock may decline in price in relation to the general market in a given period, but by the danger of a loss of quality and earning power through economic changes or deterioration in management.
It may be that professionally managed funds are too large a part of the total picture to be able to outperform the market as a whole; it may also be true, as I suspect, that certain weaknesses in their basic principles of stock selection tend to offset the superior training, intelligence, and effort that they bring to this task.
The problem of investment in common stocks is either to insulate yourselves from the speculative influences, or else to adjust your investment policy so that you can take advantage of the speculative fluctuations that are imposed upon the basic investment quality of common stocks.
There are two principal mistakes that nearly all amateurs in the stock market make. The first is to have an inexact knowledge of the securities in which one is dealing, to know too little about a company’s management, its earnings, and prospects for future growth. The second mistake is to trade beyond one’s financial resources, to try to run up a fortune on a shoestring.
Two things seem pretty clear to me: first, no one can consistently buy at the low or sell at the high (except liars, as Bernard Baruch said), and second, lowest average cost wins.
About the only advantage of being old in this business is that you have seen a lot of markets, and sometimes market patterns recur that you believe you have seen before.
Passive management does not give investors the return of the index; it gives them the return of the index less costs. So, the longer they have their money passively managed, the greater their underperformance will be relative to the index.
Large losses are forever – in investing, in teenage driving, and in fidelity. If you avoid large losses with a strong defense, the winnings will have every opportunity to take care of themselves. And large losses are almost always caused by trying to get too much by taking too much risk.
Contrary to their oft-articulated goal of outperforming the market averages, investment managers are not beating the market: The market is beating them.
Beating the market averages, after paying substantial costs and fees, is an against-the-odds game; yet a few people can do it, particularly those who view it as a game full of craziness with an occasional mispriced something or other.
Beating the market averages, after paying substantial costs and fees, is an against-the-odds game; yet a few people can do it, particularly those who view it as a game full of craziness with an occasional mispriced something or other.
Averaged out, betting on the quality of a business is better than betting on the quality of management. In other words, if you have to choose one, bet on the business momentum, not the brilliance of the manager.
There are huge advantages for an individual to get into a position where you make a few great investments and just sit back. You’re paying less to brokers. You’re listening to less nonsense.
If a money manager cannot explain in plain English what their investment principles are, they probably don’t have any. And if they cannot explain their process for finding and researching an investment idea, they probably don’t have that either.
One of the major differences between behavioral economics and standard economics is that, in standard economics, the individual agent is supposed to be driven or motivated by the utility of future wealth and discounted future wealth and present wealth. In behavioral economics, agents are supposed to be motivated by something else: gains and losses.
The public today is just as eager to buy a mystery as it was fifteen years ago or fifty years ago. The psychology of greed and cupidity has not changed appreciably.
All booms are alike. The stage setting varies, but fundamentally they are as drops of water. Customs, like costumes, change from force of environment and economic conditions, but human nature remains the same.
For years I have contended that the average speculator does not lose his money in Wall Street. He loses it wherever he happens to be the instant he decides to let the ticker put unearned dollars in his pocket. The game does not beat the player; he beats himself.
I think I am safe in asserting that the margin trader, speculator, gambler, or whatever you choose to designate the average man who goes to Wall Street after easy money, does not lose money when he sells. He loses it when he buys!
The principle of “managed” investment trusts is absolutely sound, granted only one premise. The premise is that there are somewhere people of such experience and insight that they can predict with some sort of accuracy the future behavior of securities.
Our attitude toward cash generation and asset management came out of our own thought process. It is not copied. After we acquired a number of businesses we reflected on aspects of business. Our own conclusion was that the key was cash flow.
There’s nothing you can do in the interest of being above average that does not expose you to the risk of being below average.
Investing is a funny business. It’s really easy to be average. Just buy an index fund. It’s really hard to be above average.
The concept of surviving on average is irrelevant. You have to survive every day. Which means, really, that you have to survive on the bad days.
On average, the average large-stock fund manager produces average returns before fees and below-average returns after fees. So compared with after-fee returns, an index fund is superior.
A great mob of easily led investors, eagerly searching for “straight tips” which may bring instant wealth, make their mistake in common, and when the mistake is disastrous they try, en masse, to escape.
When investors — individual and institutional alike — engage in far more trading –inevitably with one another — than is necessary for market efficiency and ample liquidity, they become, collectively, their own worst enemies.
We don’t get involved in all the analytical baggage of trying to figure out where a stock is going to sell. Just try to figure out what it’s worth. And I dare say all the really great investors do it the same way.
When you look carefully at the economics of shorting, it makes no sense to take the bet. The lowest price a company’s stock can go to is zero, but there’s an unlimited upside. An unleveraged short position has a maximum payoff of 2:1.
The thesis underlying everything, whether you’re an actively managed fund or a passive fund, is that the U.S. will be OK. If you don’t believe that, you shouldn’t be in the stock market.
If it’s a choice between investing in a good company in a great industry, or a great company in a lousy industry, I’ll take the great company in the lousy industry any day. Good management, a strong balance sheet, and a sensible plan of action will overcome many obstacles, but when you’ve got weak management, a weak balance sheet, and a misguided plan of action, the greatest industry in the world won’t bail you out.
If some of the most astute people in Wall Street have frequently guessed wrong in trying to profit by stock market movements, it may not be too much to assume that the attempt itself has represented a misconception of the proper function of management.
Despite the advantages of size, wealth, a good name and a long tradition, a large enterprise will cease to be profitable if the men at the head get hardening of the arteries or atrophy of the brain tissue or if their heirs prove unequal to inherited responsibilities. Momentum alone will not carry a business forward under such circumstances. Some younger and more aggressive group will assume the leadership of the industry.
Most useful and most dangerous are the stock market averages, most useful in revealing the general trend of the market, most dangerous if they mislead the trader into forgetting that, after all, his profits depend on the movements of the individual stocks in which he deals.
I want companies that welcome dissent, rather than stifle it, that don’t penalize people who criticize what management is doing.
I think you have to be an undying optimist, and perhaps a Pollyanna to enjoy and to be successful at managing common stock portfolios over a long period of time.
To beat the market is not easy. In addition to a good investment manager, the investor needs perspective, patience, and courage — qualities that do not abound in today’s intensely competitive world.
A good record doesn’t necessarily prove good management. Outside economic factors such as the business cycle can make any company look good for a while.
Good management has an extraordinary way of making money for you, and bad management, no matter how favorable the environment, has a way of missing opportunities.
People think they’re hiring a manager to make them money. But probably, they’re hiring a manager to keep them out of trouble and maybe fight their own instincts sometimes.
The laws of probabilities tell us that almost anyone can achieve phenomenal success over any given measurement period. It is the task of those evaluating a money manager to ascertain how much of past success is due to luck and how much to skill.
It is always easiest to run with the herd; at times, it can take a deep reservoir of courage and conviction to stand apart from it. Yet distancing yourself from the crowd is an essential component of long-term investment success.
Higher risk investments often erode one’s capital and produce lower returns — the worst of all investment worlds. Higher-returns-for-higher-risks only applies on average and over time.
I’ve thought a lot of things when I’m managing money with great, great conviction, and a lot of times I’m wrong. And when you’re betting the ranch and the circumstances change, you have to change, and that’s how I’ve always managed money.
I’ve made so many mistakes over the years that I struggle to isolate just one as the biggest single mistake. Among the choices though I think excessive leverage has been the most personally painful.
Successful investing requires the management of your own ego and temperament and usually that of your clients as well.
As an investor in businesses, which generate enormous cash flows, my single most important issue to get right is what management will do with cash flow through reinvestment. Do they care about the owner, or do they care about themselves?
It is obvious that a variation of merely a few percentage points has an enormous effect on the success of a compounding (investment) program. It is also obvious that this effect mushrooms as the period lengthens.
The availability of a quotation for your business interest (stock) should always be an asset to be utilized if desired. If it gets silly enough in either direction, you take advantage of it. Its availability should never be turned into a liability whereby its periodic aberrations, in turn, formulate your judgments.
The key to investing is not assessing how much an industry is going to affect society, or how much it will grow, but rather determining the competitive advantage of any given company and, above all, the durability of that advantage.

Advertisement