Tag Archives: Oaktree Capital Management

Oaktree Capital’s Howard Marks: Reasons Why I Am Bullish On Equities

I previously wrote about Nassim Taleb’s position that investors should avoid exposure to the media. The reason is simple: journalists are primarily paid to get a readers attention while disseminating information is secondary. Taleb states, “The problem with information is not that it is diverting and generally useless, but that it is toxic.”

Oaktree Capital’s Howard Marks takes another view. Careful analysis of information presented by the media can be used to take the pulse of the market. Marks describes an article titled, “The Death of Equities” (written in 1979) which presents compelling arguments for why equities would continue to underperform going forward. However, the article actually marked the beginning of a 20-year bull cycle:

So the insightful, unemotional, contrarian investor will read an article like “The Death of Equities” and conclude that things are about as bad as they can get. And if things can’t get worse, they’ll probably get better eventually. it’s no more scientific than that. If in mid-1979 people though things could only get worse, there was no optimism to evaporate. That meant the litany of negatives actually foreshadowed something very different: The Rebirth of Equities. And that’s exactly what happened.

The S&P 500 gained 18.4% in 1979, the year “The Death of Equities” was written, and went on to average 18.9% a year for the next 20 years. There were only two down years during that span: a measly 4.9% in 1982 and 3.1% in 1990. This has to have been the best 21-year period in the modern era. Importantly, the stage had been set for this rise in 1979 by the accumulation and excessively pessimistic discounting of negatives.

Marks suggests that a similar situation may be occurring today. He suggests that sentiment is biased to the negative side at a time when stocks appear reasonably situated. The reasons include:

  • Stocks have returned almost nothing over the last twelve years.
  • For the first time, the 30-year return on stocks has been below the return on bonds.
  • The price of the S&P 500 index is still 8% below its 2000 high, while its companies’ earnings per share have nearly doubled over the intervening period.
  • Thus the P/E ratio on the S&P 500 is in the low double digits, a substantial discount from the post-World War II norm and down from the low 30s at the peak.
  • Just as in 1979, institutional investors have lost interest in equities and are looking increasingly to alternatives. The love affair with equities that ran from 1979 to 1999 seems to be over.
  • Allocations to equities have been cut substantially in favor of bonds and alternatives. For example, according to What I learned This Week of March 15, “The ICI reports that $408 billion was redeemed from U.S. equity mutual funds between 2007 and 2011 and $792 billion was invested in U.S. bond funds in the same period.”

Read the full memo here.

Oaktree Capital’s Howard Marks: The Relationship Between Sports and Investing

Howard Marks of Oaktree Capital Management is out with his latest memo. Readers unfamiliar with him may be surprised to know that Warren Buffet says, “When I see memos from Howard Marks in my mail, they’re the first thing I open and read.” He is regarded as one of the leading thinkers in the field of investment management.

In his latest memo, he draws upon a number of sports-related analogies from tennis, football, baseball, and soccer. His underlying message is that one should remain humble and strive for consistent returns rather than succumbing to the pressure of achieving extraordinary returns. In other words, the best investment managers do not “swing for the fences”:

“The key to investment success isn’t hitting home runs; it’s avoiding strikeouts and inning-ending double plays.” I say this over and over . . . and over . . . as you’ve no doubt experienced. But I truly believe it.

Investing is a testosterone-laden world where too many people think about how good they are and how much they’ll make if they swing for the fences and connect. Ask some I-know-school investors to tell you what makes them good, and you’ll hear a lot about home runs they’ve hit in the past and the home runs-in-the-making that reside in their current portfolio. How many talk about consistency, or he fact that their worst year wasn’t too bad?

One of the most striking things I’ve noted over the last 35 years is how brief most outstanding investment careers are. Not as short as the careers of professional athletes, but shorter than they should be in a physically non-destructive vocation. Where are the leading competitors from the days when I first managed high yield bonds 25 or 20 years ago? Almost none of them are around anymore. And astoundingly, not one of our prominent distressed debt competitors from the early days 15 or even 10 years ago remains a leader today.

Where’d they go? Many disappeared because organizational flaws rendered their game plans unsustainable. And the rest are gone because they swung for the fences but struck out instead.

That brings up something that I consider a great paradox: don’t think many investment managers’ careers end because they fail to hit home runs. Rather, they end up out of the game because they strike out too often – not because they don’t have enough winners, but because they have too many losers. And yet, lots of managers keep swinging for the fences.

Mathematically, this can be explained by realizing that an investor’s cumulative returns are a function of the investor’s geometric average returns and not simple average returns. An investor who achieves a return of -50 percent in the first year and +100 percent in the second year (thus breaking even) will have a geometric average of zero percent but a simple average of +25 percent.

Read the full memo, “What’s Your Game Plan”, here.