Five Reasons Why I Sold Barclays

Published in Company Comment on 17 June 2009

Barclays' shares have soared since their recent bottom and Bruce Jackson took the opportunity to sell out.

I recently sold my entire holding in banking group Barclays (LSE: BARC). I originally bought my stake in the company back in the months leading up to the last stock market bottom, way back in March 2003.

I purchased the majority of my holding at prices of 374p and 335p. Almost five years later, I then bought more Barclays in February 2008, paying 461p. I sold the entire holding a couple of weeks ago at around 300p.

My Biggest Mistake

Before I go into my reasons for selling, my biggest mistake was in not buying even more Barclays earlier this year. The share price plunged all the way down to as low as 51p. Instead of wading in then, at the time of maximum pessimism, I sat there like a stunned mullet, watching and waiting, but ultimately doing nothing.

I suspect I wasn't alone. In hindsight, it was an obvious trade. But at the time, the entire British banking system was at serious risk of nationalisation.

HBOS, Bradford & Bingley and Northern Rock had all disappeared off the face of the earth. The government ended up with majority stakes in Royal Bank of Scotland (LSE: RBS) and Lloyds Banking Group (LSE: LLOY). Barclays could easily have been next.

Freefall

The other problem was, at the time, banking shares were in freefall. This article, titled Time To Take A Punt On A Bank, told the story of how one highly respected Motley Fool discussion board poster bought RBS at what he thought was the ridiculously cheap price of 24p, only to come home from work and find the shares trading at 11.5p.

To those people who were brave enough to buy banks around that time, and to hang onto them all the way through to around now, I tip my Foolish cap. If you were one of those people, please post your happy tale in the comments boxes below.

That was then and this is now. My no-money hindsight portfolio continues to fly higher, but unfortunately it doesn't help me retire a rich man.

The 5 Reasons I've Sold

So why sell Barclays now?

1. Valuation. If you can believe analyst estimates, Barclays trades on a forward P/E of 14 and a forward dividend yield of 2%. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, its average P/E was 11. Barclays is not cheap. In fact, you could argue it's expensive. Certainly, at around 300p, I believe the downside risks are greater than the upside potential.

2. Difficult accounts. Have you ever tried fully deciphering a bank's accounts? Typically then run into 60 odd pages, full of talk about equity tier 1 ratios, Mandatorily Convertible Notes, risk weighted assets, adjusted gross leverage, loss impairments, etc, etc. For a relative layman like myself, it's impossible to know and understand what these terms mean and how they might affect the bank's profitability. Life is too short.

3. Predictability. In the midst of this global recession, how on earth can anyone predict the level of profits or losses a bank like Barclays might make next year, the year after, or even five years from now? Did Barclays make dodgy loans to people who can't afford to pay them back? How many of them did they make? In which countries? Are they exposed to Alt-A mortgages? What effect will the sale of Barclays Global Investors have on future profitability? It's all a guess.

4. The economy. It's no secret I think we're set for a period of slow economic growth. The recovery will be L shaped rather than V or even W shaped. The Great Recession can't just end early next year and we all get back to how it was in 2007. It doesn't mean I'm not a buyer of shares in the months and years ahead, it's just that I'm more conscious than ever about valuations.

5. Better opportunities elsewhere. As per the first point on valuation, I believe Barclays is fully valued. There are many other companies, particularly large companies, that are cheaper on a P/E basis and have attractive dividend yields. I'd prefer to invest my money in what I think are lower risk companies.

For All You Barclays Bulls Out There…

Of course, I'm sure some people can make compelling cases as to why Barclays shares are a buy or at least a hold today.

  • They have less competition today than they had last year. With the sale of BGI, they will have a very strong balance sheet, enabling them to produce huge profits once the economy recovers.

  • The valuation is based off depressed earnings. If they were to recover to the level of profitability they enjoyed in 2007, they'd be trading on a P/E of 4.6.

  • On a 5- or 10-year perspective, Barclays shares will be fine. The economy will have recovered and the shares will be powering ahead. The shares peaked at 790p in 2007 and are likely to regain that level again in the future.

People have different opinions. That's what makes a market, and continually helps make stock market investing challenging, fascinating and hopefully ultimately rewarding. I've stated my reasons for selling. Time will tell whether I'm right or wrong.

As ever, please let us have your comments in the boxes below.

More on the economy and the markets:

> If you're in the market for buying shares, consider opening an online broker account with The Motley Fool's Share Dealing Service. You can buy and sell shares in real time for a flat rate of just £10. Click here to find out how you can open an account for free today. There is no obligation to trade.

> Of the companies mentioned in this article, Bruce Jackson still has a very small interest in Lloyds Banking Group.

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.

vinniw 17 Jun 2009 , 10:11am

Bruce, In the eye of the financial storm Barclays Bank bought the best bits of Lehman Bros for an absolute pittance, stripping out the deriviatives and property exposures. It isnt the same business it was in 2005,6 and 7 following the integration of the Lehman purchase. Bob Diamond has shown he can turn businesses around and maximise value - to buy into Diamond alone is worth the current share price.

moneymouth77 17 Jun 2009 , 10:35am

I'd say the whole thing is a little bogus, especially considering the Barclays' shares will plateau soon. They can't just keep going up, they have no leg to stand on long-term. Also, their cash machines don't work ;) according to SkyMoney.

lotontech 17 Jun 2009 , 10:46am

Bruce,

No one can predict the future, so only time will tell if you did the right thing. But it occurs to me that you made some classic mistakes: holding on to a falling stock, and then selling out -- with some relief -- when you thought you had almost got back to 'broken even'.

Your decision to not purchase at 51p was only a mistake in hindsight, and at the time you were probably wise not to 'average down' a single stock that could go bust like NR did.

It did buy into Barclays in March (well, you did ask for success stories) using leverage spread bets ;-) Lucky me, but I had also bought shares in another account previously at around 400p in mid-2008 when they had fallen by an unthinkable 50%! But I won't be selling out now that they have recovered because...

a) The Trend is Your Friend, so a share that has risen to 300p is a better bet than a share that has fallen to 400p.

b) Scared money never wins, despite the short-term relief you got for finally braking even... after 6 years of holding.

Just my two cents.

TMFGoogly 17 Jun 2009 , 11:12am

Did you deliberately notice I never once mentioned that I sold out because Barclays got back close to my breakeven price?

It was not even a consideration. In fact, it was only when I was looking back at my previous purchases as part of the research for this article did I remember exactly what I'd originally paid for Barclays.

My buy price is irrelevant to my sell decision. Always.

Good luck to those hanging in there.

LastChip 17 Jun 2009 , 11:59am

Interesting thoughts from you Bruce.

I now understand why you sold out, but don't necessarily agree.

Yes, Barclays may be fully valued right now, but I look for long term investments (I thought the Fool did too!). Certainly, I can't see any reason at present not to hold and in the fullness of time, I suspect my 83 and a bit buying price, will be swallowed up in dividend payments, which I suspect will accelerate faster than most suspect. In effect, they will cost me nothing (if all goes according to plan) and I will have a nice dividend stream for retirement.

In my very humble opinion, far too much is made of company accounts. Can I understand Barclays? No of course not! But I do look at cash and total debt, because the bottom line is, this is pretty much all you need to know. I don't in general like very high gearing unless there is an indisputable good reason and even then, if I'm still doubtful I will generally shy away.

I understand what you're saying; if you can't understand the balance sheet, you don't know what's hidden. But one can name any number of companies, that managed to massage their balance sheets so effectively, that only when they went broke, was anyone aware. One could argue, that after the financial meltdown we've all witnessed, the banks will be whiter than white. I don't know if that's wishful thinking, or it will turn out to be fact.

I've no doubt too, I will miss out on the "ten baggers" that many crave for. But how many of these potential stars crash in a flash and never evolve into anything worthwhile? Furthermore, most of those minnows have a spread so far apart, you have to make a small fortune just to break even after dealing costs.

I'll stick with the boring, major, hopefully steady stocks that produce a return, year in, year out and allow me to sleep very peacefully at night.

bighammo 19 Jun 2009 , 4:54pm

There are several things that you haven't considered to why you will lose out.

1. Barclays is now an up and coming Global player, and is has recently brought in China, India, and Russia. A little more risky is that they have started operations in pakistan.

2. They have picked the best bits of Lehmans brothers. Even little things like a computer centre which means that they do not need to create one as there current spaces run out.

3. They have just enhanced their capital by £13B selling off BGI, but still hold a 20% stake in Blackrock.

4. The big 4 become the big 3 banks in the UK as the banks with big housing debts lose out.

5. The haven't taken a penny of the government that expect to see a return on its money at some stage.

6. Not everything that is expected to be a bad debt becomes a bad debt. Some of them pick up and never seems as bad as originally stated. remember Argentina years ago?

There will be the bears, who will no doubt give you another 10 reasons why you should sell. But I for the long term.

timgwood 28 Jun 2009 , 4:15pm

Cutting your losses is all well and good but you then have to find something else to invest in. I inherited a wodge of RBS shares at daft prices and did nothing - except by a whole lot more at 14p. I will never get all my money back but it was probably the most cost effective way of mitigating the loss.

Investing should be exciting. As J MKeynes onces said, "In the long term we are all dead!"

Some intersting reading - The Zurich Axioms. It might not actually make you as rich as you would like to be but it will explain where you went wrong and encourage you to keep at it. Of course, IMHO and DYOR.

equus4 12 Oct 2009 , 10:13pm

Hi,

I'm very new to all this and have just joined the site. I appreciate that this is an old thread, but I bought a load of Barclays shares when they were crashing in early 2009. i had just read something about "pound cost averaging" and thought "aha!" that sounds like good sense. Long story short, they cost me 171p, on average. As they are now 372p and I'm pretty sure there is a major correction due, who thinks I should offload them?

Florise 31 Aug 2010 , 12:28pm

I have already taken my profit out of my holding in Barclays and I am keeping the rest (on todays valuation worth £20,000) for a rainy day. They are paying a small dividend, I consider it a very safe hold due to the strength of their balance sheet and I don't see any reason at all why the value of my shares should not increase satisfactorily in years to come.

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.