You've Got It All Wrong. Here's the Real Story Behind Warren Buffett's Favorite Stock

The StressTest column appears every Sunday on Fool.com. Check back weekly, and follow @TMFStressTest.

The seemingly obvious story around Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE: BRK-A  ) (NYSE: BRK-B  ) outsized ownership stake in Wells Fargo  (NYSE: WFC  ) is that Warren Buffett opportunistically sank a huge amount of Berkshire's capital into Wells as prices for bank stocks plunged.

Like I said, it seems obvious. It fits well with the view on how Buffett invests. It's also wrong.

Here's how it really happened
The U.S. officially entered recession in December 2007. And though some banks such as Bank of America  (NYSE: BAC  ) saw their stock prices begin to weaken before that point, Wells Fargo's stock held up well until the very end of 2007.

WFC Chart

WFC data by YCharts

That means that if there was truth to the idea that Buffett loaded up on Wells Fargo during the crisis, we'd logically see a lot of buying between the beginning of 2008 and the middle of 2009.

Did that happen? In short, no. By June 2009, Berkshire's ownership of Wells Fargo stock grew by a mere 5%. When you consider that the total number of Wells Fargo shares owned by Berkshire has more than quadrupled since June 2004, it's obvious that buying during the depths of the financial crisis had little to do with the growth in the stake.

Here's how it actually played out.

Source: S&P Capital IQ.

If you look closely enough, you can see a section of the chart above that flattens out right around 2008 and 2009, when the buying tailed off.

The first obvious question
It's easy to assume that Buffett missed out on a golden buying opportunity on Wells stock. That easy assumption appears to be wrong as well.

Wells Fargo's stock finished 2007 at $27.49, and though it spent the first quarter of 2009 trading below $20, including a short-lived drop to below $9, the stock held up much better than other big-bank stocks during the crisis -- most notably, Bank of America and Citigroup  (NYSE: C  ) .

WFC Chart

WFC data by YCharts

In other words, the huge, opportunistic plummet in many other stocks didn't appear to the same extent for Wells.

And it's not as if Buffett wasn't deploying Berkshire capital during the crisis. Among the major Berkshire moves during 2008 and 2009:

  • April 2008: Berkshire helped finance Mars' $23 billion buyout of Wrigley's by taking a $2 billion equity stake in the candy giant.
  • September 2008: Berkshire invested $5 billion in Goldman Sachs  (NYSE: GS  ) preferred stock and warrants. The New York Times' Susanne Craig would later write that the deal "netted Mr. Buffett $1.7 billion, or roughly $190,000 a day."
  • October 2008: Berkshire invested $3 billion in General Electric  (NYSE: GE  ) preferred stock and warrants.
  • February 2009: Berkshire provided $300 million in debt financing to Harley-Davidson that paid 15% per year.
  • November 2009: Berkshire announced the massive $26 billion buyout of Burlington Northern Santa Fe.

Clearly, it wasn't lack of money or conviction in investing during the crisis that kept Buffett from loading up on Wells Fargo.

The second question is ...
I estimate that Buffett, through Berkshire, spent more than $4 billion buying Wells Fargo stock during 2005 and 2006, chocking the portfolio full of one of the country's largest mortgage lenders right before the housing market was about to fall off of a ledge. 

This seems nonsensical to the extreme and a complete counter to the idea that Buffett is an ace when it comes to investing, and investing in financial companies in particular.

But as much as the true Buffett believers -- or, maybe more precisely, those who know more about the idea of Buffett than the reality --  want to believe that he should have perfect insight into the market and the economy, he never claims anything like that. Instead, he focuses on buying the best companies that he can buy. That's likely the bulk of the explanation behind Berkshire's pre-crisis Wells Fargo purchases.

And to the extent that Buffett did have a sense that a banking and financial crisis was approaching, he no doubt realized that the best-run bank in the industry would only benefit as the jokers were shaken out. If that was his thesis, he nailed it, as Wells has picked up significant market share through both the acquisition of the ailing Wachovia and the fact that competitors such as Bank of America and Citigroup had to reel in their business as they licked their crisis-induced wounds.

The outperformance of the stock since mid-2004 also suggests that the pre-crisis buying wasn't a bone-headed move.

^SPXTR Chart

^SPXTR data by YCharts

Still buying
Looking back at the preceding chart, it's clear that it wasn't just the historical ownership and the pre-crisis buying that led to Berkshire's giant position in Wells Fargo. It's also the fact that Buffett continued buying after the crisis.

I estimate that during the crisis years -- 2008 and 2009 -- Berkshire spent in the neighborhood of $750 million on Wells Fargo stock. From 2010 on, the conglomerate has sunk around $4.5 billion in additional investment into Wells, including nearly $1 billion in 2013.

Again, the timing may seem odd, since the post-crisis experience has been not only a rapidly increasing Wells Fargo stock price, but also a valuation on the stock -- currently 1.9 times tangible book value -- well above fellow big-banking peers.

But this, too, isn't nearly as confounding as it first seems. Though people like to refer to Buffett as a "value investor" -- and surely value does play a significant role in his investing -- Buffett is actually an investor who tries to buy the best companies that he can, provided they're selling at a reasonable price.

Wells Fargo may not be a screaming bargain today, but at less than twice book value, it may be a very reasonable price for the best of the big banks.

Buffett may also have his eyes set on the distant future when it comes to Wells. As I pointed out in a previous column, perception of the banking industry among both consumers and investors is as low as it's been in decades. And the last time views about the industry were this dour, it set up a long runway of bank-stock outperformance.

What we can learn from the real story of Buffett's Wells love affair
As should be clear, Berkshire's massive position in Wells Fargo isn't the story of opportunistic buying during the financial crisis. Considering the real story here, I think there are at least three take-home lessons:

1. In the face of an oncoming crisis, own the best.

2. When the market is crashing, your favorite company may not be your best investment.

3. Don't avoid buying just because a stock is going up.

Even more wisdom from Warren
Warren Buffett has made billions through his investing and he wants you to be able to invest like him. Through the years, Buffett has offered up investing tips to shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway. Now you can tap into the best of Warren Buffett's wisdom in a new special report from The Motley Fool. Click here now for a free copy of this invaluable report.


Read/Post Comments (7) | Recommend This Article (7)

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 February 02, 2014, at 2:18 PM, kankemike wrote:

    Good for Warren

  • Report this Comment On February 02, 2014, at 9:20 PM, kberscheit wrote:

    not to mention warren no doubt sold puts on the stock also knowing good and well where the price was headed, then bought futures and made money three ways.when you invest that much money ,you can drive the stock price yourself. with BNSF you cant tell me he didn't have some inside info on when to buy it as the bakken was just a thought , but with the right knowledge anyone can be a winner, with BNSF now he has a mess with the clean up of the ND train derailment. but will no doubt make money somehow on it as he probably had insurance thru his own companies and will take an enormous loss and still come out ahead.

  • Report this Comment On February 02, 2014, at 10:30 PM, ronbeasley wrote:

    First of all, Wells Fargo's stock split 2 for 1 in 2006, so Berkshire's ownership didn't quadruple, it doubled. Secondly, Wells' shares outstanding were impacted by issuance of stock to buy Wachovia (a $15 billion transaction) and to pay for the government's TARP program. And Berkshire's ownership of Wells increased from 3.3 billion shares at the end of 2007 to 5.2 billion shares at the end of 2009. How the author of this article thinks Berkshire could do that for $750 million is remarkable indeed.

    And Berkshire's ownership of Wells stock barely changed in 2005 and 2006. The author thinks they spent over $4 billion. Why? Because he missed Wells 2 for 1 stock split and double counted the shares

    Finally, Berkshire bought about 18 million Wells shares in 2013. That didn't cost anywhere near $1 billion,it was closer to half of that.

    This is typical of the useless, error-laden garbage the Motley Fool bloggers regularly publish. This has to be the worst one yet, although it has a lot of competition. And people actually pay for this?

  • Report this Comment On February 02, 2014, at 11:26 PM, ronbeasley wrote:

    Interesting way to look at it. Buffett did miss an opportunity, its a little curious that he did that, especially after he said that if he could have bought only one stock during the crisis, he would have been all in Wells Fargo.

  • Report this Comment On February 03, 2014, at 10:35 AM, TMFKopp wrote:

    @ronbeasley

    I'm not sure what source you're relying on, but go ahead back and check the Berkshire annual letters: http://berkshirehathaway.com/letters/letters.html

    The original analysis was done with Capital IQ, but it lines up with the letter data. The share counts I used were already split adjusted -- so yes, the number of shares owned did quadruple. And Berkshire's Wells ownership did not go from 3.3b shares in 2007 to 5.2b in 2009, it went from 303m to 334m.

    I don't know even know how you'd come up with Berkshire owning 5.2 billion shares of WFC in 2009. Wells only had 4.5b shares outstanding IN TOTAL. That would've had Berkshire owning all of Wells... and then some.

    The amount spent on stock purchases in 2005 and 2006 were estimates based on the number of shares purchased and the midpoint price of the year. The actual amount spent can be figured from the annual letters though, so I've updated the article with that information -- it was $3.2 billion, not $4 billion.

    If you have a source that shows otherwise, please let me know.

    Otherwise, maybe hop off off your high horse and take a more balanced tact when you do this next time.

    Matt

  • Report this Comment On February 03, 2014, at 2:32 PM, grahamsway wrote:

    Excellent article.

    It is a great point that Buffett, though preferring a bargain, will buy an excellent franchise at a reasonable price.

    I think the figures show just how scary the crisis was and how vulnerable things were, and maybe still are.

    The guy that couldn't wait to get up and buy stocks in some of the toughest times in the 70's and 80's was fearful the roof was going to cave in during the late 2008 troubles. Who can say that badly designed derivatives aren't a weapon of mass destruction.

  • Report this Comment On March 27, 2014, at 5:15 PM, Howie208 wrote:

    Let's take a look at their brilliant ideas here:

    1)Penalizing those who saved 'too much' by taking away their SS - because of course good savers are the "high earners" in retirement. Naturally no effort will be made to make this fair between, for example, two people who made exactly the same amount of money but the one person spent it all and saved nothing and the other guy was a diligent saver.

    Classic socialistic "fairness".

    Don't worry big spenders - they won't make you go back in time and give anyone else a part of your Hawaiian vacation.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2819356, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/19/2014 12:03:54 AM

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...


Advertisement