Ben Graham's Buy List

Published in Company Comment on 25 February 2009

This year marks the 60th and 75th anniversaries of Ben Graham's two highly influential investment books. Applying his thinking today, what would we buy?

Last August I trawled through all the companies on the market to see what met Benjamin Graham's famous value criteria. Graham, you may recall, is often called the “Father of Value Investing”.

The results so far are not good, basically matching the performance of the FTSE All-Share index.

CompanySectorPrice 28th Aug '08 (p)Price 25th Feb '09 (p)Change
Ladbrokes (LSE: LAD)Travel & Leisure219.50179.00-18.5%
Rentokil Initl. (LSE: RTO)Support Services71.7544.75-37.6%
Persimmon (LSE: PSN)Household Goods348.75319.25-8.5%
Signet Grp. (LSE: SIG)General Retailers1,190.00520.00-56.3%
William Hill (LSE: WMH)Travel & Leisure273.50240.75-12.0%
Bellway (LSE: BWY)Household Goods594.00613.503.3%
Barratt Devel. (LSE: BDEV)Household Goods132.5082.50-37.7%
Debenhams (LSE: DEB)General Retailers48.0038.00-20.8%
Johnston Press (LSE: JPR)Media47.506.80-85.7%
Smiths News (LSE: NWS)Support Services80.0057.00-28.8%
Mucklow (A&J) (LSE: MKLW)Real Estate221.00235.756.7%
Mountview Est. (LSE: MTVW)Real Estate3,400.002,250.00-33.8%
Aga Rangemaster (LSE: AGA)Household Goods180.2578.50-56.4%
Boot(H) (LSE: BHY)Construction & Materials91.5068.00-25.7%
AVERAGE   -29.4%
FTSE All-Share 2848.61949.0-30.2%

Six months on, and the world has changed dramatically. But what would a Graham filter produce now, 60 years after he published these ideas in The Intelligent Investor, and 75 years after his first book, with David Dodd, Security Analysis?

As a result of my previous article, ADVFN have improved their filter to facilitate searching based on Graham's criteria, so I was keen to give it a try.

Initially searching only on his four major criteria (see the original article), and restricting the list to companies with market capitalisation greater than £100m, as I did last time, now yielded 32 companies. This compares to 14 originally.

But unlike last time, we can now include Graham's six minor criteria also. Doing this produces only one result, Aga Rangemaster (LSE: AGA), and even this falls below my somewhat arbitrary £100m size requirement.

Relaxing or dropping some of the minor criteria, and going back above £100m in size, gives us the following short-list:

CompanySectorPrice (p)Market Cap. (£m)
3i Grp. (LSE:III)General Financial197.00773
Derwent London (LSE:DLN)Real Estate475.25539
Euromoney Inst. (LSE:ERM)Media181.50195
Ite Grp. (LSE:ITE)Media54.00130
Land Secs. (LSE:LAND)Real Estate500.002,461
Lon.Stk.Exch (LSE:LSE)General Financial428.001202
Misys (LSE:MSY)Software & Computer Services109.50599
Nat.Express (LSE:NEX)Travel & Leisure235.50363
Persimmon (LSE:PSN)Household Goods294.25957
Stagecoach (LSE:SGC)Travel & Leisure116.50867
Wincanton (LSE:WIN)Industrial Transportation116.25154

But it's not really correct for to refer to this as a 'short-list', as the intention here is not to pick individual shares, but to construct a portfolio that might beat the market. Individual companies within that portfolio may crash and burn, but it's the overall performance that matters.

Dividends and earnings are particularly unpredictable at the moment, so that obviously adds to the risk. And it could also be argued that relaxing the criteria, albeit the less important ones, defeats the purpose of the exercise, and might suggest that investors should wait for even better value.

I'll be tracking these portfolios to see how they perform over the longer term.

What's on Maynard Paton's buy list? You can find out right now by taking a free 30-day trial to our Champion Shares stock-picking service.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

Millsee 25 Feb 2009 , 7:12pm

Persimmon? Household Goods?

Esquilax100 25 Feb 2009 , 9:22pm

Millsee said:

Persimmon? Household Goods?

Yes, odd isn't it. I've written about this in the past:

http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/investing-strategy/2007/03/22/the-company-they-keep.aspx

- Padraig

StewJames 26 Feb 2009 , 7:17am

Restricting to 100M market cap seems a bit daft. You shouldn't be striking companies off the list when the only thing that happens is they get cheaper! (Not to mention the fact you are cutting out a swathe of companies where the value is greatest - have you seen some of the absurdities in the micro to small cap end of the market recently?)

If you must have a "company size" criteria, I'd have thought one of the actual business related metrics would be more suitable.

Prof103 26 Feb 2009 , 10:56am

For a defensive investor, Graham lists as one of his criteria that the company be large. In today's terms, that suggests at least £2 billion market cap.

Esquilax100 26 Feb 2009 , 11:14am

StewJames said:

Restricting to 100M market cap seems a bit daft.

Perhaps. Graham specified medium and large companies, and arguably I am already trawling well below that level.

You shouldn't be striking companies off the list when the only thing that happens is they get cheaper!

That's not the only thing that happens: They can also become more difficult/expensive to deal in, especially in volume.

And being small, they can also drop off the radar for institutional investors, so even if their fortunes improve they may remain neglected and small.

In general I prefer small caps, but it's not really what Graham is about.

StewJames 27 Feb 2009 , 3:44am

My point was really that market cap measures the snapshot valuation of a company, not its size. It doesn't matter where you put an arbitrary market cap limit, it's still going to result in potentially taking companies off the list when they get cheaper. This really goes against the spirit of the approach. Profitability averaged over several years seems a more appropriate measure of company size (revenues are too sector dependent)

Ben Graham's criteria are not really relevant in modern markets IMO. Information is too rapidly spread and trading too accessible for the market to be as inefficient as required for the mid+ sized companies outside. Those companies that do occasionally appear in this highly restrictive filter usually only do so because the figures are inaccurate, most typically because asset valuations are an illusion.

I do think his central *ideas* remain just as relevant but it seems to me that the way to find those sort of stocks nowadays is to apply looser criteria (*slightly* looser!) then carefully analyse what turns up to try to determine the *true* margin of safety.

Relative valuation methods are and have always been a house of cards. Thankfully, they seem to be falling into disuse - I see *far* less references to "sector comparison" than when I started investing.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.