Graham & Dodd in the NFL Draft
I read Michael Lewis's Moneyball way back when not because I was particularly interested in the Oakland Athletics but because it was recommended to me by a legendary investor, who deemed it, rightly, a management/investment book primarily, and only secondarily about baseball. The book essentially illustrates the "value investing" philosophy of Ben Graham and David Dodd applied to investments in baseball players rather than stocks. I am a devotee of the Gramham & Dodd school and happen to believe that it makes no less sense in building a sports team than in building a stock portfolio. Thus it makes happy, and keeps me ever optimistic, that my beloved New York Giants are devotees of the Graham & Dodd value investing approach. Great value investors exploit inefficiencies that can arise when the market unfairly devalues an asset for a superficial deficiency that it mistakes as more substantive. Here is a story about a Giant draft pick that may fit this theme. The heightened radioactivity of "character issues" may be the source of the inefficiency here, and the Giants' front office, like any good value investor, feel they have done the due diligence and found an undervalued asset. With Tiki gone, here's hoping they are right!
If you like this sort of thing, check out economist Kevin Hassett on the NFL draft.
If you like this sort of thing, check out economist Kevin Hassett on the NFL draft.
2 Comments:
Graham and Dodd had some interesting ideas, but it's hard to imagine that there are many undervalued stocks in the market in this day and age. If a stock is statistically undervalued, then most likely it has structural issues that most investors won't touch. If a stock has structure issues, then is it still undervalued? Is it possible that the reason value investing "works" is because value investors are compensated for taking on more investment risk similar to investing in bonds below investment grade (which would result in higher yield, but one has to take on more credit risk).
I take your point but I would tend to disagree in a broad sense. Yes, many stocks are flawed investments and thus cheap. But many are indeed undervalued because of the way Wall St. works. Small size, lack of liquidity, no m&a activity - these are all things that tend to get a stock consciously overlooked but yet have little bearing on the fundamentals of the business. So you can find mispriced assets. I do it for a living as do many many others.
Post a Comment
<< Home