Recs

7

What If Warren Buffett Were a Strategic Asset Allocator?

Watch stocks you care about

The single, easiest way to keep track of all the stocks that matter...

Your own personalized stock watchlist!

It's a 100% FREE Motley Fool service...

Click Here Now

Guest contributor Ken Solow, CFP, is the author of the just-released book, Buy and Hold Is Dead (AGAIN): The Case for Active Portfolio Management in Dangerous Markets. Ken is a founding principal and chief investment officer with Pinnacle Advisory Group, a registered investment advisor located in Columbia, Md. Pinnacle provides private wealth management services for more than 500 families throughout the mid-Atlantic region and around the world, and currently manages more than $550 million in assets.

The man invoked more than any other as a proponent of buy-and-hold investing is Warren Buffett, one of the most venerated investors of our age. He's lent the subject such memorable quotes as, "Our favorite holding period is forever," and "Only buy something that you'd be perfectly happy to hold if the market shut down for 10 years." And really, who wants to argue about investing with the Oracle of Omaha?

Actually, I do. Sort of.

In my new book, I take issue with strategic asset allocation, the buy-and-hold strategy loyally followed by elite institutional investors for the past four decades. Yet I have few if any problems with Buffett's particular long-term investment approach. (Well, aside from the caveat that waiting for value to be realized over a decade or more can kill a retirement plan. But that's the subject of an entirely different article.)

Why do I have no qualms with Buffett, when so many others cite him as an example of the strategy I've criticized? To explain, I'll use a little literary license to conjure up one of Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE: BRK-A  ) (NYSE: BRK-B  ) famous annual reports, written as if Buffett were a strategic asset allocator. ("Charlie," of course, refers to Buffett's longtime partner and Berkshire vice chairman Charlie Munger.) Let's see what separates Buffett from the buy-and-hold herd:

As we near the end of 2008, Charlie and I have decided to abandon our long-held acquisition strategy for businesses. As our investors know, we have always attempted to purchase businesses with consistent earnings, good returns on equity, able and honest management, and sensible prices. Beginning in 2009, we will no longer use this methodology. Instead, we will favor a new strategy that has been long used in the institutional money management industry.

For starters, we will no longer worry about the ability of our businesses to generate earnings, have a good return on equity, or have able and honest management. Charlie and I have changed our minds; we no longer believe that it is possible to buy companies at a discount. Instead, we now believe that markets are efficient, and all current share prices must constitute fair value. Berkshire will hereafter assume that all shares of every publicly traded company are available for purchase "at a sensible price."

Instead of wasting precious time analyzing the operating data for the businesses that we will acquire, we will now utilize the following new and more efficient method for selecting our acquisitions for Berkshire.

First, we will analyze as much historical return data as possible, then take the average of those returns as our assumption of how much the shares will appreciate for Berkshire in the future. Charlie and I believe that the average of the past returns will be an accurate forecast of future returns, because the forces that determined prices for the company shares in the past will never change. In addition, all of the investors who invest in this company with us will have the same investment time horizon, same tolerance for risk, same tax situation, same access to information about the company, and same cost of capital and access to credit. In fact, we attribute no risk at all to the validity of our returns forecast. The longer we own the business, the higher the probability that history will repeat itself.

Next, we will assess the volatility of the price of the company's shares, as well as the correlation of the company's price movements with other company shares that we own. We will take the long-term average of this data, along with the average historical price data for the shares, and run all the data through a computer program that will tell us what percentage of our portfolio should be allocated to our new acquisition. Instead of spending valuable time and effort determining earnings quality, return on equity, franchise value, and management capability, Charlie and I will simply let our computer program determine the right allocation for each company in our investment portfolio, and never change it again. Once more, our assumptions about the efficient nature of the investment markets and the rational behavior of investors allow us to acquire companies without analyzing their value characteristics at all, and hold them forever in exactly the same proportion to our other holdings.

We look forward to seeing you at next year's shareholder meeting. We will own exactly the same holdings, in exactly the same percentage allocations, but let's get together anyway.

Bizarro Buffett
I hope you'll recognize the patent nonsense of this fictional Berkshire investor letter. In reality, Buffett is acknowledged as one of the greatest living value investors, which is the exact opposite of being a strategic asset allocator.

While both strategic asset allocators and Buffett will hold positions for very long periods of time, they do so for totally different reasons. Buffett buys and holds because he has such a high conviction in his analysis of a company's intrinsic value, and his ability to acquire businesses at steep discounts to that value, that he's willing to patiently wait, perhaps forever, for the market to realize that value. Strategic buy and hold investors do so because they subscribe to a theory of portfolio construction that requires so many tortured and incorrect assumptions that their theory, and the strategy itself, must be considered obsolete.

For those of you who still believe that markets are efficient, and therefore, that a diversified portfolio of asset classes will properly manage risk and deliver historical average expected returns in the future, regardless of the value characteristics of the markets involved … well, I certainly hope your prayers about expected returns are answered. Personally, I'll stick with Warren Buffett on this one. As he once said, "If past history was all there was to the game, the richest people would be librarians."

Start investing today -- just $7 per trade with Scottrade. Or find the broker that's right for you.

The Steve Jobs Betrayal
You may already know that in the final year of his life, Jobs revealed a stunning betrayal — and told his biographer, "I will spend my last dying breath... and every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank to right this wrong." What was it that made Jobs so irate — and why could it make a few in-the-know investors some major profits over the coming months and years?

Enter your email address below to find out what made Jobs so enraged!

Guest contributor Ken Solow, CFP, personally invests in Pinnacle managed accounts, and may personally own securities mentioned in this article. Ken is chief investment officer of Pinnacle Advisory Group, a registered investment advisor with discretion to manage client accounts that may currently own, on behalf of its clients, long or short positions in any security mentioned in this article. Pinnacle has complete discretion to invest in a variety of securities on behalf of its clients, subject to the constraints of client portfolio policies. Pinnacle Advisory Group and its clients are not subject to the Fool's disclosure policy.

Berkshire Hathaway is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor and Motley Fool Inside Value selection. The Fool owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway. Read more about the Fool's disclosure policy here.


Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On July 24, 2009, at 2:55 PM, Gregeph wrote:

    I believe that Buffett's "buy and hold" philosophy has evolved over time and is now driven to a large extent by the huge amount of capital he needs to invest. He needs to make investments of several billion dollars just to move the needle. He is already invested in most of the large cap stocks which meet his criteria (strong moat, high ROE, good management, etc.). Where would he put the money if he sold these positions? Having said that, he acknowledged that he probably should have sold his stock when the market was extremely overvalued in the late 90's. From Buffett's 2004 shareholder letters: "Nevertheless, I can properly be criticized for merely clucking about nose-bleed valuations during the Bubble rather than acting on my views. Though I said at the time that certain of the stocks we held were priced ahead of themselves, I underestimated just how severe the overvaluation was. I talked when I should have walked." Finally, he does not appear to manage his personal portfolio on a buy-and-hold basis. He is on record as having been 100% in treasuries until October 2008. http://valueinvestingfundamentals.blogspot.com/

  • Report this Comment On July 24, 2009, at 3:44 PM, JGBFool wrote:

    Buffett is "owned by CNBC"? I thought the 13th Amendment prevented that sort of thing.

  • Report this Comment On July 24, 2009, at 6:01 PM, ff4444 wrote:

    Buy&hold may have drawbacks, but one important advantage is that investors are supposed to be less dependent making correct decisions about how to change their portfolio if they never change their portfolio.

    Here is an example site where you can look at historical performance of asset allocation portfolios. And the computer will even tell you what percentage to put in each asset. Ah the irony ;->

    <a href="http://www.riskcog.com">http://www.riskcog.com asset allocator</a>

  • Report this Comment On April 02, 2011, at 10:30 PM, techlvr11 wrote:

    There's no way to convince a "buy and hold" strategist to go for active asset allocation and vice versa. You are either one or other and therein lies the problem.

    I believe that you have to divide your portfolio in several parts.

    Firstly, your after tax money has to be split between emergency fund and safe money. Whatever is left goes into a diversified dollar-cost-averaged portfolio of dividend paying blue chips - ATT, MCD, AZN, PG, IWM, IWF, IWD, SDY etc.

    For retirement accounts - 401K/IRA etc. you could be "active". No taxes on earnings makes it easy to actively manage your accounts.

    I don't see how else I can do this. If I try to be in the market actively managing my portfolio every few months, I may not pick winners. I may lose out on the opportunity of making money when my stock goes up because I sold it thinking that it is tanking.

    Sorry....but active account management sounds like a way for boutique investment firms to make money off average investors.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 949609, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 5/25/2012 7:13:15 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated Moments ago Sponsored by:
DOW 12,454.83 -74.92 -0.60%
S&P 500 1,317.82 -2.86 -0.22%
NASD 2,837.53 -1.85 -0.07%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

5/25/2012 4:00 PM
BRK-B $79.25 Down -0.55 -0.69%
Berkshire Hathaway CAPS Rating: *****
BRK-A $119500.00 Down -717.00 -0.60%
Berkshire Hathaway… CAPS Rating: ****

Advertisement