Two Steps To Scoring A 100-Baggermarcuss
Over the past few days, we’ve been sharing essays from our friend Chris Mayer. Chris was a corporate banker for 10 years… but he left that behind to hunt stocks that return $100 for every $1 you invest. Chris’ focus on individual stocks – and not the overall market – has helped him garner average returns of over 17 percent per year for his subscribers.
On Monday, Chris revealed four simple things you can do to succeed in the market. And on Wednesday, he shared a key mistake to avoid when investing.
Today, he’s sharing two steps to find 100 baggers…
Beating the market over the long term is hard to do.
If you want to learn how it’s done, Berkshire Hathaway bears repeated study…
Berkshire was the top performer in my book, 100 Baggers, my study of stocks that returned 100-to-1 from 1962 to 2015.
The stock had risen more than 18,000-fold, which means that US$10,000 planted there in 1965 turned into an absurdly high US$180 million 50 years later, versus just US$1.1 million in the S&P 500 over the same period.
Berkshire – and the other 100-baggers in the study – affirms that not only can you beat the market, but you can also leave it miles behind…
There are two important factors to consider if you want to achieve that kind of outperformance.
No. 1: Don’t Own Too Many Stocks
First, you have to be concentrated. You have to focus on your best ideas. You can’t own a lot of stocks that just dilute your returns.
Berkshire’s founder Warren Buffett, as is well known, did not hesitate to bet big. His largest position would frequently be one-third or more of his portfolio. Often, his portfolio would consist of no more than five positions.
There is, for example, the time he bought American Express in 1964 in the wake of the Salad Oil Scandal, when the stock had been crushed. He made it 40 percent of his portfolio.
His Berkshire partner, Charlie Munger, is also famous for his views on concentration. He’s had the Munger family wealth in as few as three stocks:
My own inquiries on that subject were just to assume that I could find a few things, say three, each of which had a substantial statistical expectancy of outperforming averages without creating catastrophe. If I could find three of those, what were the chances my pending record wouldn’t be pretty damn good…
How could one man know enough [to] own a flowing portfolio of 150 securities and always outperform the averages? That would be a considerable stump.
[Legendary investor Jim Rogers recently told us the same thing… if you want to get rich, you have to concentrate and focus.]
The book Concentrated Investing includes profiles of investors who ran such concentrated portfolios. These include Buffett and Munger, along with John Maynard Keynes and lesser-knowns such as Lou Simpson, Claude Shannon, and more.
Lou Simpson ran Geico’s investment portfolio from 1979 to his retirement in 2010. His record is extraordinary: 20 percent gains annually, compared to 13.5 percent for the market.
Simpson’s focus increased over time. In 1982, he had 33 stocks in a US$280 million portfolio. He kept cutting back the number of stocks he owned, even as the size of his portfolio grew. By 1995, he had just 10 stocks in a US$1.1 billion portfolio.
Claude Shannon is another example. He was a brilliant mathematician. He might also be the greatest investor you’ve never heard of. From the late 1950s to 1986, he earned 28 percent annually with a concentrated portfolio. That’s good enough to turn every US$1,000 into US$1.6 million.
The point is that many great investors focus on their best ideas. They don’t spread themselves thin. And there is also more formal research in the book that supports the idea that focus is a way to beat the market.
No. 2: Leave Your Stocks Alone
The second part of this strategy is to hold on to your stocks. The power of compounding is amazing, but the key ingredient is time. Even small amounts pile up quickly.
During a trip to Omaha, I once heard money manager Raffaele Rocco retell an old parable…
There once was a king who wanted to repay a local sage for saving his daughter. The king offered anything the sage wanted. The humble wise man refused.
But the king persisted. So the sage agreed to what seemed like a modest request. He asked to be paid in grains of rice, the amount of which was to double every day. Thus, on the first day, he’d get one grain of rice. On the second day, two. On the third day, four. And so on.
The king agreed… and after a month, the king’s granaries were empty. He owed the sage over one billion grains of rice on the 31st day.
I have heard other versions of this story, but I like it because it shows you two things. The first is obvious: It shows how compounding can turn a little into a whole lot.
But the subtler, second lesson comes from working backwards. If the king owes one billion grains of rice on the 31st day, how much does he owe on the 30th day?
The answer is half that, or 500 million. And on the 29th day, he pays half again, or 250 million.
So you see that returns are back-end loaded. This is 100-bagger math. The really big returns start to pile up in the later years.
These two factors alone – a concentrated portfolio and low turnover – are important ingredients to beating an index and amassing serious wealth.
Editor, Chris Mayer’s Focus
P.S. Owning a concentrated portfolio and letting it compound over time are also key parts of my newsletter Focus.
Now, I’m taking it one step further… I’m developing a project designed to show ordinary people how they can identify and invest in companies that result in 10,000 percent returns.
Recently, I found a company that fits this model. It’s a small drug maker that has a treatment for America’s opioid crisis. It has the potential to disrupt the industry. And if I’m right, it’ll make investors a small fortune. You can learn more right here.