• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Quant Investing

with Tal Davidson

  • Get Started
  • About
    • Investment Approach
  • Blog
  • Premium
  • Screeners
    • Magic Formula Stocks Screener
    • Graham’s “Defensive Investor”
    • Quantitative Value
    • Deep Value
    • Net-Net Stock Screener
    • Negative EV Screener
    • Microcap Trending Value
    • Quantitative Momentum
  • Performance
    • Quantitative Value Performance 1999-2019
    • Graham’s “Defensive Investor” Strategy Performance 1999-2019
    • Microcap Trending Value Performance 1999-2019
    • Quantitative Momentum Performance 1999-2019
    • Quantitative Value & Momentum Performance 1999-2019
  • Blog
  • Log In

Graham’s “Defensive Investor” Strategy Performance 1999-2019

A stock portfolio based on Ben Graham’s Stock Selection Criteria for the Defensive Investor is a straightforward yet robust method to beat the market. The strategy selects 15 stocks listed in the  S&P 500 and holds them for one year or more. Once a year, investors examine the portfolio and are instructed on replacing between two and three stocks.

I have rigorously tested my screener and strategy using the best-known methods to avoid curve-fitting and cognitive biases. Let’s see how it fared in the short-term (i.e., in 2019) and the long-term.

In chapter 14 of his book “The Intelligent Investor”, Graham provides his lists of stock selection criteria for the defensive investor. Following are the rules and how we applied them:

1. Adequate size of the enterprise

In our model, we defined our stock universe to be the S&P 500. All constituents are large and prominent companies.

2. A sufficiently strong financial position

Graham suggested to filter out companies whose current ratio (current assets divided by current liabilities) is less than 2, or whose long-term debt is less than the net current assets (current assets – current liabilities). We assume that the constituents of our universe, the S&P 500, possess a sufficiently strong financial position. Applying further rules are not necessary. Such rules would be too restrictive and will result in losing good opportunities rather than avoiding bad companies. Our testing confirms this choice.

3. Earnings Stability

Graham suggested a positive net earnings figure in any of the last ten years. We are less stringent and require only five years with some net earnings in every year.

4. Dividend record

Graham suggested uninterrupted payments for at least 20 years. Over the years, paying a dividend has become less popular and were substituted in part by repurchasing shares or re-investing in the firm. We require uninterrupted payments for only five years.

5. Earnings growth

Graham suggested a minimum increase of at least 33% during the last ten years, using three-year averages at the beginning and the end. We adopted the rule as stated.

6. Moderate Price/Earning Ratio

Graham required that the current stock price should not be more than 15 times the average earnings of the past three years. Given the much lower interest rates these days than in Graham’s day, we relaxed the rule to P/E <= 20.

7. Moderate Ratio of Price/Assets

Graham required that the multiple of P/E (using average earnings for the past three years) and P/B would be less than 22.5. This rule is interchangeable with the previous rule (OR function between them). We have relaxed it to P/E * P/B<= 30.

Applying these rules on the S&P 500 universe results in 40-150 stocks at any given time. Graham allows the defensive investor to apply his own discretionary judgment as to which stocks to select out of this group. We have performed backtesting with numerous criteria, and we have found that choosing the least volatile stocks (as measured by 3-y Beta) provides the best risk-adjusted returns. Selecting stocks on the merit of other momentum or value results in an excellent performance, yet the higher volatility may be uneasy to handle, especially for defensive investors.

“Defensive Investor” Screener Performance During 2019

The following chart presents the performance of a quantitatively-selected portfolio of 15 stocks selected according to Graham’s criteria, out of the S&P 500 universe.

All stocks were bought on January 1st, 2019, and held for exactly one year.

Performance during 2019

Unfortunately, Graham’s “Defensive Investor” strategy did not beat the market during 2019. It has returned 20.55% vs. the S&P 500’s 31.22%, including dividends. While a 20% annual return figure is a good result on an absolute basis, it is 11% lower than the benchmark’s return in 2019.

Does it mean that Graham’s criteria for the defensive investor have lost their charm and they are no longer a good investment strategy?

2019 was not a good year for value investors, regardless of their style and specific methodology. We shall elaborate on that below.

Long-Term Performance of Graham’s “Defensive Investor” Screener

The following chart presents the performance of my version of Graham’s strategy over a 5-years period, June 30th, 2014, to June 30th, 2019. The reason I perform all my long term backtests starting June 30th is two-fold: 1) to be consistent with academic research who uses such convention 2) to be consistent across all my other publications, enable readers to compare all my backtests, apples to apples.

Performance 2014-2019

We can see that the performance over a 5-years period was somewhat lower than the S&P 500’s performance.

Testing the strategy over 20 years starting June 30th, 1999, and ending on June 30th, 2019, tells a totally different story.

Performance 1999-2019

The strategy delivered great average annual returns of 9.68% vs. 5.82% for the S&P 500. Over the long term, the strategy beats the benchmark. Moreover, it has done so with lower volatility, as measured by the standard deviation of monthly returns. The standard deviation of the strategy came in 11.35% vs. 14.51% for the S&P 500, as can be seen in the following table. Sharpe ratio is at a super high level of 0.72x vs. 0.32x for the S&P 500. The correlation with the S&P 500 benchmark is a mere 61%. It means that only 61% of the months tested, the S&P 500 and the model both appreciated or both declined. In all other cases, when the market declined during a month, the model appreciated, and vice versa. Over the long term, Graham’s “Defensive Investor” strategy develops a healthy margin over the market and runs much higher.

Strategy Statistics

It is also interesting to see, in the tables above, the contrast between the overperformance in the long term (table on the right) vs. the underperformance during the last three years (table on the left).

Looking at the yearly performance in the following table, we see that in most of the years during the last 20 years, the model delivers positive excess returns over the market.

What Does The Future Hold For the “Defensive Investor” Strategy?

The largest overperformance was achieved following the underperforming years. Following 1999, a disastrous year for Value Investing and a bad year for our model, lagging by more than 22%, came the year 2000-2002 with a fantastic excess of roughly 20% above the market each year. Following 2009, the strategy’s performance has degraded compared to the previous decade. That is comparable with most Value Investing strategies, which have lagged the market during most of the last decade.

The most telling graph I could find about the history of Value Investing a one taken from an article by Dr. Gray titled Alternative Facts About Formulaic Value Investing:

10-years of Value vs. S&P500

The chart shows the 10-year rolling returns (compounded annual growth rate, or CAGR) or Value vs. the S&P 500. Every point on the chart indicates the following: had you invested in a value portfolio (or the S&P 500) 10 years ago and held it until that date, what would have been your CAGR. We can see that during most 10-years periods starting the 1930’s, a Value portfolio had beaten the S&P 500. But there were four long periods where it was not the case. Those periods occurred in the late ’30s to early ’40s, during the late ’50s to early ’60s, during the late ’90s, and recently, since 2010. In those periods, Value Investing fell short of the benchmark, leading investors (different ones each time) to believe that Value Investing is dead. An important observation is that those periods of Value underperformance are long, prolonging for many years, even a decade.

Now, ask yourself, examining the historical trends for almost a century, do you believe that Value Investing will underperform forever? Where would you put your money? And if you, like I, believe that Value will re-emerge, as it always has, wouldn’t you want to be invested in the best-performing Value Investing strategy?

Primary Sidebar

https://youtu.be/06F2t6rklpA


Hi, I’m Tal Davidson. I develop quantitative investing strategies which are based on deep academic research. I’m not the ordinary finance guy. I’m more of a technology geek, working as a computer engineer in one of the largest tech companies in the world. I’ve been learning and experimenting with investment strategies for the last 15 years. In the last few years, I perfected several strategies and have made the transition to being 100% quant. My commitment is to guide you in creating your own quantitative portfolio with confidence, even if you’re not a programmer. You too can the master quant strategies that have the power to help grow your capital and achieve life-changing returns!

Read more…

Free Ebook with Tons of Insights

 

The wisdom of this Graham-and-Doddsville Super-Investor revealed!

Send it to me!

  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Tags

CHL Deep Value lessons strategy

Archives

  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • November 2019
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • January 2018
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017

Footer

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

Cookie Policy

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Pricing

Contact Us

Copyright © 2023 · News Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in