The Formula For Long-Term Investment Success

 | Sep 03, 2015 03:16PM ET

h3 Introduction

Investing in anything comes with a degree of uncertainty because all investing returns happen in the future. And even though the future is unpredictable, the future is what everyone that invests is investing for. These realities present important challenges that every investor must face and deal with in order to succeed.

But even though we cannot predict the future with perfect precision, there are prudent and rational actions that investors can take that can bring an element of certainty into an uncertain process. This article will review two key strategies that investors can implement to improve their odds of successfully investing in common stocks in an uncertain world.

h3 The 2 Keys to Investment Success: Fair Valuation and Earnings Growth/h3 h3 The 1st Key: Assessing Fair or Sound Valuation/h3

The first major key to successful long-term investing in stocks is to get valuation right on the buy side. I’ve written extensively on fair valuation in my last article.

One of the primary points made in the above article about valuation is that it is a measure of soundness and not an indicator of potential future return. I also pointed out that one of the key points about paying attention to fair value is that it positions you as an investor to achieve results commensurate with what the company is capable of generating as a business. This represents the essence of soundness.

This is critically important and worthy of repeating. Fair valuation empowers the investor to receive the full complement of what the business invested in is capable of producing earnings-wise. In other words, when you are disciplined enough to only invest when fair valuation is present, you position yourself to earn returns that are consistent with what the underlying business earns. However, it’s important to recognize that this means getting the good and/or the bad depending on the individual company. The following excerpt from my previous article elaborates on this point:

“Just because you buy a stock at value doesn't necessarily mean that you will receive a high return. This is because value, although important, is only one component of future return. The other important component is the earnings growth rate of the business.

To clarify, you can buy a slow-growing company at sound valuation and even at the same valuation as a faster growing company, while still earning only a modest rate of return. In fact, it could be argued that only being willing to invest at sound valuation is more critical for a slow grower than it is for a faster grower.”

At this point I will also add that it is also possible to buy a company at fair value based on current earnings and lose money if future earnings fall dramatically. This is where forecasting future earnings in addition to assessing fair current valuation comes into play.

h3 The 2nd Key: Estimating Future Earnings Growth/h3
Get The News You Want
Read market moving news with a personalized feed of stocks you care about.
Get The App

Estimating future earnings growth is the second major key to successful long-term stock investing. This is especially relevant to the business perspective investor because you are actually investing in the business, not the stock. Consequently, the success of the business that you invest in is going to be the primary determinant of how much money you can expect to earn on that investment. Stated more directly; when you invest in a business, you are buying its future earnings potential.

The only logical reason I would ever want to invest in a business is because I believe the company is a profitable enterprise. Like all business owners, I recognize that my reward can only come from the future profits the business can generate on my behalf as an owner. Moreover, the growth of those profits will represent the primary source of the future total return I can expect to receive from investing in it. In the long run, the market will capitalize future earnings growth (apply a reasonable P/E ratio) which will generate my potential capital appreciation, and dividends, if any, will also come from future profitability. Of course, this only applies if I originally invested in the business at fair value.

Therefore, I believe as investors we cannot escape the obligation to forecast future earnings, because our results depend on it. Furthermore, we should not guess, nor should we simply play hunches. Instead, we must attempt to calculate reasonable probabilities based on all the factual information that we can assemble. Then we should apply analytical methods based upon our earnings-driven rationale that provide us reasons to believe that the relationships producing earnings growth will persist in the future. In other words, we must strive to forecast future earnings as accurately as we possibly can. On the other hand, we should simultaneously realize that perfection is not to be expected.

As an aside, there are many who criticize or even claim that we should avoid utilizing forward earnings forecasts when trying to determine fair value, or even when trying to decide what stock to own. I find these positions rather bizarre. I cannot think of any logical reason why anyone would invest in a business, unless they had a reasonable expectation of that business's ability to generate future profits. Since I am confident that both capital appreciation and dividend income will be a function of the company's future earnings power, estimating future earnings must be an essential element of long-term success.

h3 Consensus Earnings Estimates Accuracy/h3

Looking for attractive dividend-paying stocks to add to your retirement portfolio? You might want to try trusting analysts' estimates to aid in your selection process. I cannot tell you the exact number of times that people have commented on how inaccurate analyst estimates are in my articles over the years. However, I can confidently state that there have been many.

Nevertheless, I have always found those comments rather strange. It seems to me that rational people would recognize that forecasting the future of anything can never be perfectly precise. In other words, how high of a standard should we hold analyst earnings estimates to? I will add my personal view a little later in the article. But before I do, I would like to call attention to what I consider excellent work on the subject by highly respected fellow Seeking Alpha author Jeff Miller.

Jeff prepared two separate articles on the subject of forward earnings forecasts. Interestingly, both articles were written in 2010, however, I consider the content just as relevant today as it was back then. One of the primary points that Jeff expressed in these articles is that the perception that analyst estimates are unreliable was based on studies that evaluated long-term earnings growth rate forecasts. However, Jeff pointed out that analyst forecasts over shorter periods of time tend to be more accurate, and for the most part, conservative. For those not interested in reading both articles in their entirety, I include the following two excerpts that I consider irrelevant to this article:

Analysts' forward earnings estimates are very good for a one-year time frame.

To emphasize, in the forward earnings series I am taking this one step at a time.

  1. Earnings are important. Eventually, stock prices reflect the fundamentals. If you do not understand this, you should read some of the work from Chuck Carnevale, whom I have cited on several occasions.
  2. If you have a better estimate of next year's earnings, you will have an investment edge.
  3. The consensus forward estimates are the best method of looking one year ahead. I do not know of any better source. Suggestions are most welcome, but please provide evidence.”

The Market Application

There is a constant drumbeat of criticism about market valuation using forward earnings. The most common criticism, that estimates are too optimistic, is open to challenge. If the estimates are too high, why is the beat rate consistently in the 65% range?

The key choice is the same as our football example. The fans of the Shiller 10-year past earnings method take pride in having solid data. Then they make a wild guess about whether the trend will continue. Those praising this method point to a few notable successes, mostly times when P/E ratios were very low since interest rates were very high.

Those interested in forward earnings are taking the aggregate work of dozens of specialists. If you think they are a little high, you can feel free to add an error range. If you do so, you should look at past data -- especially that of recent years.”

Additionally, we must ask ourselves the question: just how accurate do analysts' estimates need to be to be of real value? I believe the answer to this important question is - within a reasonable range of probability. Since forecasting is all about the future, and much of the future is an unknown, we must accept the fact that estimates will contain a level of imprecision. Therefore, we should expect discrepancies to manifest when our forecast eventually turns to actual reality (reported earnings).

Furthermore, I believe it would be naïve to expect analysts' estimates, or even consensus estimates, to be perfect. There are a lot of unknown variables in the future that could affect the ultimate results. Furthermore, many companies, especially multinationals with numerous divisions and diverse businesses, are complex enterprises with a lot of moving parts. Therefore, and once again, I believe that the best that a rational person can hope for is that estimates fall within a reasonable range of probability and accuracy.

In addition to the flaws that Jeff Miller pointed out behind the perception that analyst estimates are inaccurate to the point of being worthless, I would like to add my own perspective. As previously stated, these perceptions are based on numerous studies that have been conducted on the accuracy of analyst estimates. However, in addition to these studies analyzing forecasts that are too far forward, they also tend to focus on stock price movement immediately following earnings surprises.

However, the biggest problem I personally have with these studies is that they are based on analyzing a large group of stocks. The reason I have a problem with that is because the accuracy of one or two year forward earnings estimates by analysts vary dramatically from one company to the next. Stated more plainly, some companies are easy to analyze and forecast, while others are much more complex. Therefore, I prefer analyzing the accuracy of analyst estimates one company at a time.

In other words, I am not as concerned with how accurate forecasts have been in the aggregate as I am with how accurate analysts’ forecasts have been for the individual company I am examining or interested in investing in. It is for this reason that the F.A.S.T. Graphs™ fundamentals analyzer software tool that I co-developed includes an analyst scorecard reporting the historical accuracy of analysts’ forecasting record on each individual company for 1 year forward and 2 year forward timeframes.

As previously discussed, I believe that forecasting the future earnings power of a business is a major key to long-term investment success. On the other hand, as stated just above, some companies are easier to forecast and others very difficult. Consequently, my personal preference is to seek out companies that are easy to forecast and avoid those that are difficult. I believe it is both interesting and logical that companies with the most consistent historical record of operating excellence are the easiest with which to forecast future earnings. Utilizing the F.A.S.T. Graphs™ earnings and price correlated graphs, Forecasting Calculators and Analyst Scorecard, I offer the following three examples to illustrate my point:

h3 Alcoa Inc (NYSE:AA): Difficult to Trust Analyst Forecasts/h3

All it takes is a quick glance at Alcoa’s historical earnings results to recognize that forecasting future earnings for this deep cyclical would be very challenging. Since 1996 earnings have risen, then fallen, then risen again, then collapsed and disappeared, and then rose and fell again and again. Personally, with this example I see no point in even trying to forecast future earnings.