The Next Home Run Stockhttp://www.fool.com/investing/general/2003/09/24/the-next-home-run-stock.aspx Tom Gardner
September 24, 2003
I assume that you, like everyone and their Aunt Avis, would love to find the next Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT ) -- to dig out the market's best Hidden Gems. Back in January 1990, Microsoft traded at a split-adjusted $0.62 per share. Today, the stock is up around $30. That's an increase of 47 times for long-term investors. Put another way, $5,000 invested in Microsoft in 1990 is worth $235,000 today.
Of course, you'd love to buy the next Microsoft.
But you wouldn't want to take on extraordinary risk, right?
I think you're smart to think that way. And so does a long list of great money managers -- from Peter Lynch to Seth Klarman, Jean-Marie Eveillard to Charles Royce. They all search for small companies with a mixture of sales and free cash flow growth, superior returns on invested capital, heavy insider ownership, and healthy assets -- all at a reasonable price.
Born to be the best
Companies like Microsoft are run conservatively by executives who themselves own large positions. They're run to sustain profit growth indefinitely. That's in contrast to the whisper-stock party tips that destroy wealth over time.
Contrary to popular perception, to invest in the best small caps, you need not assume substantial risk.
And finding these hidden gems doesn't involve some desperate dig through barn-sized haystacks in search of the elusive platinum needle. The public markets feature plenty of promising smaller companies run successfully by founders with large personal stakes in the business. In fact, hidden gems thrive in every industry -- technology, finance, leisure, medicine, retail, and beyond. Take a look at these seven great investments from 1990-2003.
Note first that this group reflects a broad variety of sectors. Some are familiar consumer brands while others -- for example, Medtronic and Applied Materials -- are to this day largely unknown on Main Street. But each was a small cap back in 1990. Not only weren't they industry stalwarts, they were largely unknown to consumers and investors. Companies like Charles Schwab and Dell and Lowe's -- household names today -- had yet to attract Wall Street analysts and big institutional investors.
And their stock prices reflected that. These sorts of opportunities exist today.
The next big thing
They are companies with founding leadership, or at least insider ownership north of 15%. Companies without debt concerns. Companies that generate excess cash from their operations. Companies that function without any real reliance on Wall Street for financing or table-pounding "Strong Buy" ratings.
I know it sounds contrary, but I want you to consider the fact that many of these small businesses offer rewards that substantially exceed the risks of owning them. How could a small company be less risky than a larger one? Well, the mere fact that even the best-run small companies are underfollowed on Wall Street creates pricing inefficiencies that strongly favor long-term investors.
Does that sound possible? Does it sound logical? It's certainly contrary.
The small-cap risk myth