Investors love good stories. In recent years, many of these stories have centred around innovations that have fundamentally changed the way we live our lives. Some examples might include the release of the original Apple iPhone in 2007, the delivery of Tesla’s first electric cars in 2012 and the launch of Amazon Prime’s same-day delivery service in 2015 . No doubt, many of you will have had conversations with friends and family around the successes, failures, and prospects of some of the world’s largest firms and the goods and services they offer. In this note, we take a deeper look at the ‘Big Five’ tech companies – Amazon, Apple, Alphabet (Google), Facebook and Microsoft – through the lens of the long-term investor.

In what has been a turbulent year thus far, some larger firms have come through the first - and hopefully last - wave of the ongoing pandemic relatively unscathed. Those investors putting their nest eggs entirely in any combination of the ‘Big Five’ would appear to have done astonishingly well relative to something sensible like the MSCI All-Country World Index, which constitutes 3,000 of the world’s largest firms . At time of writing, Amazon’s share price has fared best, increasing 75% since the beginning of the year.

 Figure 1: The 'Big Five' have held up well so far this year

Data source: Morningstar Direct © All rights reserved. Returns in GBP from 01/01/2020 to 22/07/2020.

These types of firms tend to struggle to stay out of the headlines for one reason or another. Perhaps as a result, many of the investment funds found in ‘top buy’ lists - such as the one on AJ Bell’s Youinvest platform - have overweight positions in one or more of these stocks. The final column in the table below shows the weight of each ‘Big Five’ stock as it stands in the MSCI All-Country World Index.

If an investor were to adopt a purely passive investment strategy that owned each company as its proportional share of the world market, the final column would be that investor’s top 5 portfolio holdings at time of writing. Many of today’s most popular funds are making big bets on one or more of these companies, anticipating that the past will repeat itself moving forwards.

Table 1: AJ Bell's top traded funds in the past week

Data source: Morningstar Direct © All rights reserved. AJ Bell for top traded funds between 15/07/20 – 22/07/20.

Sticking to the long-term view

The challenge for these managers, and others making similarly large bets, is that these are portfolios that will be needed to meet the needs of individuals over lifelong investment horizons, which for the vast majority of people means decades, not years. With the benefit of hindsight, managers who have placed their faith in these firms have stellar track records since Facebook’s IPO in 2012, as the table below highlights.

Table 2: ‘Big Five’ performance since Facebook’s IPO

Data source: Morningstar Direct © All rights reserved. Returns from Jun-12 to Jun-20.

An interesting exercise would be to investigate the outcomes of these firms over a longer period of time, for example 30-years seems more prudent. This is somewhat difficult given that 30-years ago, 3 of these firms did not exist, Mark Zuckerberg was 6-years old, Apple came in at 96th on Fortune’s 500 list of America’s largest firms and Microsoft had just launched Microsoft Office .

A partial solution to this problem is to perform the exercise from the perspective of an investor in 1996, which is the start of Financial Times’ public market capitalisation record . The ‘Class of 96 Big Five’ consisted of General Electric, Royal Dutch Shell, Coca-Cola, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone and Exxon Mobil. The chart below shows the outcomes of each firm over the past 26-years. A hypothetical investor with their assets invested in either Coca-Cola or Exxon would have just about beaten the market over this period, those in Royal Dutch Shell, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone and General Electric were not so lucky.

This experiment is illustrative only, one look at the chart below is enough to see that almost no investor would want to stomach the roller coaster ride they would have been on in any one of these single-stock portfolios.

Figure 2: The winners do not necessarily keep winning

Data source: Morningstar Direct © All rights reserved

Summary

The beauty of the approach you have adopted is that judgemental calls such as these are left to the aggregate view of all investors in the marketplace. No firm is immune to the risks and rewards of capitalism; be it competition from Costco or Walmart taking some of Amazon’s market share, publishing laws causing Facebook to apply heavy restrictions on its users or some breakthrough smartphone entering the marketplace that is years ahead of Apple – remember Nokia?

Rather than supposing that firms who have done well recently will continue to do well, systematic investors can rest easy knowing that they will participate in the upside of the next ‘Big Five’, the ‘Big Five’ after that and each subsequent ‘Big Five’. Those who can block out the noise of good stories and jumping on bandwagons are usually rewarded in this game.

Figure 3: Your eggs are in many baskets

Source: Albion Strategic Consulting. For demonstrative purposes only.

Risk Warning This newsletter does not constitute financial advice. Remember that your circumstances could change and you may have to cash in your investment when the value is low. The value of your investment and any income from it can go down as well as up and you may not get back the original amount invested. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to the future. If you are in any doubt you should seek financial advice.

The tapered annual allowance can be quite complicated to get your head around. We've put together a simple example to show how it works.

The table below aims to illustrate an individual affected by the  tapered rules: 

The tapered annual allowance rules kicked in on 6th April 2016, when those with taxable earnings over £210,000 per annum were limited to pension contributions of £10,000 gross each tax year. ​This was a controversial piece of legislation and also  quite complicated.  The rules were altered from 6th  April 2020, whereby those earning in excess of £312,000 are now limited to an annual allowance of £4,000. ​This has made planning for self-employed individuals quite tricky, especially for those that have a tax year end of 31st March each year. ​Some good news, the carry forward rules still apply to those affected by the taper. 

Nothing contained in this article constitutes or should be construed to constitute investment, legal, tax or other advice. The information contained in this article shall in no way be construed to constitute a recommendation with respect to the purchase or sale of any investment.

One of the hardest concepts to grasp in investing is that a ‘good’ company is not always a better investment opportunity than a ‘bad’ company. If we believe that markets work pretty well – not unreasonable given that few investment professionals beat the market over time - and that they incorporate all public information into prices pretty quickly and efficiently, all of the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ news should already be reflected in these prices.  A ‘good’ company will have to do better than the aggregate expectation set by the market for its share price to rise and vice versa.  If a ‘bad’ company is in fact a less healthy company, it may have a higher expected long-term return, as risk and return are related.  

It is perhaps evident that if the market incorporates the aggregate forward-looking views of all investors, it becomes very difficult to choose which companies, sectors, and geographic markets are likely to do best, going forward.  In an uncertain world, where stock prices could move rapidly, and with magnitude, on the release of new information - which is itself a random process – then it makes good sense to ensure that an investment portfolio remains well diversified across companies, sectors and geographies.  Take a look at the chart below that illustrates how deeply diversified a globally equity portfolio can be.

 Figure 1: If you do not know which stocks are going to outperform well, own them all

Source: Albion Strategic Consulting. Data: Morningstar Direct © 2020. All rights reserved.

The concentration risk in the US’s S&P500, is quite different.  

Figure 2: The US’s S&P500 is increasingly concentrated in a few names. 

Source: Albion Strategic Consulting. Data: Morningstar Direct © 2020. All rights reserved.

Given that all the future promise of a company is already reflected in its price today, it is quite a risk betting a large part of your assets on just a few names, concentrated, for example, in the technology sector.  The top 8 technology stocks in the US now have a larger market capitalisation than every other non-US market except for Japan.  Dominance of companies, sectors and markets ebb and flow over time.  Who is the next Amazon?  What regulatory pressures could these dominant companies face?  Is Donald Trump’s recent rage against Twitter the start?  No-one knows.  By remaining diversified, you will own the next wave of market leaders as they emerge and dilute the impact of ebbing companies.  Whilst it is always tempting to look back with the benefit of our hindsight goggles and wish we had owned more (take your pick), US tech stocks, other growth stocks, gold etc., what matters is what is in front of us, not what is behind us.  

‘The safest port in a sea of uncertainty is diversification.’

Larry E. Swedroe, Investment Author

Risk Warning This newsletter does not constitute financial advice. Remember that your circumstances could change and you may have to cash in your investment when the value is low. The value of your investment and any income from it can go down as well as up and you may not get back the original amount invested. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to the future. If you are in any doubt you should seek financial advice.

Many of you reading this short note will have, at some time, travelled down to Devon for a lovely summer break amongst the rolling fields, moors and beautiful beaches of this somewhat remote county.  

Only a few will have ventured into Plymouth, the famous naval seaport and home to Sir Francis Drake (that famous Elizabethan pirate who so vexed our Spanish friends by stealing their gold) and the site of the departure of the Mayflower with the pilgrims on board heading to America 400 years ago. Even fewer will know that it was the place of an amazing insight into the powerful nature of crowds, which provides us with a wonderful world picture of how markets operate.

In 1906 a Victorian gentleman named Sir Francis Galton attended a livestock fair aptly named The West of England Fat Stock and Poultry Exhibition in Plymouth. One of the many attractions at the fair was a guess the weight of the ‘dressed’ ox on display (similar to the game of guessing how many cookies are in the glass jar). The competition attracted 800 people all paying 6d (half a shilling) to write down their guess, name and address on the back of the ticket. The nearest guess to the actual weight would win a prize. The fair, as you can imagine, attracted many sorts, from the general public (old and young) to farmers and butchers.  

Being a statistician, amongst many other things, Galton bought the used tickets off the stall holder. Of the 800, 787 were usable. Back home he analysed the guesses and published his finding in Nature, March 7, 1917 in an article titled ‘Vox Populi’. His remarkable finding is illustrated below.  

Figure 1: Guessing the weight of the ox – the ‘crowd’ got it more-or-less spot on.

Source: Albion Strategic Consulting

The range of guesses was wide (-133 lbs. below the average to +86 lbs. above it), the participants were varied, and the numbers involved were quite large. The ‘crowd’ in aggregate showed ‘wisdom’ compared to its individual participants.

This story provides a great insight into how modern financial markets work. The markets are made up of many players, from individual DIY investors, day traders, stockbrokers, hedge funds, fund managers, sovereign wealth funds, endowments and other institutional investors. Each investor holds their own view on the future prospects for a specific security, such as the price of BP or Apple shares. Some will like a stock and others not. They cannot both be right.  

The market – given all the information available to it – settles on an equilibrium price for every stock. This price will move, sometimes dramatically, as we have seen recently as the ‘market’ reaches a new equilibrium price, given the new information that it has collectively processed.

At times like these, some investors are prone to running ‘what if’ scenarios in their heads such as: ‘if companies are in trouble because their revenues have been cut off, then they will renege on their property lease terms and the landlords will suffer.  It seems likely that things will get worse over the coming weeks. If property landlords are in trouble that might lead to problems in the banking sector’. It all sounds plausible. They may then be tempted to sell out of property or banks or even equities altogether. The crucial mistake is that they forget that they are not the only person to have thought this through and these very sentiments and views are already reflected in the current price of listed commercial property companies, bank stocks and the markets in general.  

Markets will move again – down or up – based on the release of new information, which in itself is random. Second guessing random events is futile. You may make a guess and be lucky but that is speculating not investing. Accepting the ‘wisdom’ of the market helps us to challenge ourselves as to whether we really have superior insight relative to everyone else. It seems unlikely. As Charles Ellis, the wise sage of investing from the US, states:

‘In investing, activity is almost always in surplus’.

Activity based on guessing – particularly when it relates to shorter-term issues that sit well within your true investment horizon – is best avoided.

Next time you pass Plymouth on the A38, reflect on one of its great historical events, The West of England Fat Stock and Poultry Exhibition of 1906. 

---

Risk warnings:

This article is distributed for educational purposes and should not be considered investment advice or an offer of any security for sale. This article contains the opinions of the author but not necessarily the Firm and does not represent a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment product.  Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed. 

Past performance is not indicative of future results and no representation is made that the stated results will be replicated.

Errors and omissions excepted.