Five timeless value messages from Howard Marks’s new book
Value giant Howard Marks’s new book was published last month so here we pick out five key messages from it that underpin how we also believe people can best approach investing
Howards Marks, the chairman of Oaktree Capital, is one of The Value Perspective’s favourite investors while his 2011 classic The Most Important Thing is one of our favourite books.
As such we were always going to fall upon his latest work, Mastering The Market Cycle: Getting the Odds on Your Side, the moment it was published last month.
Rather than offer a traditional review, however, we will continue our practice of highlighting the ideas that most interest us about the books we read – or, in this instance, the five messages that underpin how we believe people can best approach investing.
Yes, we concede there is a certain amount of confirmation bias in what follows but, given Marks’s success as a value investor, we feel we are in excellent company.
The macro is unknowable
“Very few investors are known for having outperformed through macroeconomic forecasting. It is not that macro does not matter – rather that very few people can master it. For most, it is just not knowable.”
Financial commentators love talking about big economic ideas such as inflation, say, or the policies of the world’s central banks yet, as value investors, we prefer to focus on more knowable elements, such as a business’s share price and balance sheet.
It is therefore good to hear such words from an investor who has enjoyed a very long and successful career without ever worrying about macroeconomic issues.
Think in terms of probabilities
“Investment success is like the choosing of a lottery winner. Both are determined by one ticket (the outcome) being pulled from a bowlful of tickets (the full range of possible outcomes). In each case, one outcome is chosen from among the many possibilities.”
The idea that investing is ‘probabilistic’ is a recurring theme, here on The Value Perspective, but it tends to be missed by the wider market, which prefers to focus on a particular outcome rather than acknowledging the full range of possible outcomes that could come to pass.
The old rules still apply
“Cycles are inevitable. Every once in a while, an up-or down-leg goes on for a long time and/or to a great extreme and people start to say, ‘This time it’s different’. They cite the changes in geopolitics, institutions, technology or behaviour that have rendered the ‘old rules’ obsolete. They make investment decisions that extrapolate the recent trend. And then it turns out that the old rules do still apply.”
These words – from someone who has invested profitably through many market cycles – should be a caution any time you are tempted to think, this time, the game really has changed.
‘This time’, investors apparently believe they will be OK paying over the odds for stocks because ‘business quality’, say, or ‘the power to disrupt’ mean it is fine to buy in at any price.
Not if you want to make money in the long term, it isn’t.
Scepticism does not equal pessimism
“Scepticism and pessimism are not synonymous. Scepticism calls for pessimism when optimism is excessive. But it also calls for optimism when pessimism is excessive.”
Value investors are rarely viewed as being the life and soul of a party – a reputation we can live with.
Where we would take issue, however, is with the idea that because we are sceptical about every potential investment, it means we are perennial pessimists.
Sure, value investors may well look pessimistic when they sell when others are being greedy but, by the same token, we need to be optimists to buy when others are fearful.
The greatest source of investment risk
“What’s the greatest source of investment risk? Does it come from negative economic developments? Corporate events that fall short of forecasts? Companies whose products become uncompetitive? Earning declines? Low creditworthiness? No, it comes when asset prices attain excessively high levels as a result of some new intoxicating investment rationale that can’t be justified on the basis of fundamentals and that causes unreasonably high valuations to be assigned.”
To that, we have nothing to add – except, perhaps, ‘Full Marks’.
Fund Manager, Equity Value
I joined Schroders in 2015 as a member of the Value Investment team. Prior to joining Schroders I was responsible for the UK research process at Threadneedle. I began my investment career in 2001 at Dresdner Kleinwort as a Pan-European transport analyst.
The views and opinions displayed are those of Nick Kirrage, Andrew Lyddon, Kevin Murphy, Andrew Williams, Andrew Evans, Simon Adler, Juan Torres Rodriguez, Liam Nunn, Vera German and Roberta Barr, members of the Schroder Global Value Equity Team (the Value Perspective Team), and other independent commentators where stated.
They do not necessarily represent views expressed or reflected in other Schroders' communications, strategies or funds. The Team has expressed its own views and opinions on this website and these may change.
This article is intended to be for information purposes only and it is not intended as promotional material in any respect. Reliance should not be placed on the views and information on the website when taking individual investment and/or strategic decisions. Nothing in this article should be construed as advice. The sectors/securities shown above are for illustrative purposes only and are not to be considered a recommendation to buy/sell.
Past performance is not a guide to future performance and may not be repeated. The value of investments and the income from them may go down as well as up and investors may not get back the amounts originally invested.