Pick a few of our value buddies portfolio and you have focused approach. To find quantitative approach portfolio, this will be hard. Maybe search through financial blogger or some well known fund taking quantitative approach. Now you have actual portfolio s to compare
(07-10-2014, 10:53 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 11:36 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I would like to share a preliminary finding, over a case study. The case study was base on Yeoman capital (as a representative of focus approach) and AVF (as a representative of quantitative approach). Both covered the same region and similar AUM.
I read from here that Yeoman had around 72 stocks, equal-weighted for diversification, and were spread over 5 countries.
Does that fit into your definition of "focus approach"?
My definition of "focus approach" means "qualitative approach" of value investing, regardless of the diversification level. The term used might be misleading. I will re-phase it in future discussion.
Yeoman's principle is “3-Rights” (Right Business, Right Price and Right Management), which can only be done with qualitative approach.
(07-10-2014, 10:53 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 11:36 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I would like to share a preliminary finding, over a case study. The case study was base on Yeoman capital (as a representative of focus approach) and AVF (as a representative of quantitative approach). Both covered the same region and similar AUM.
I read from here that Yeoman had around 72 stocks, equal-weighted for diversification, and were spread over 5 countries.
Does that fit into your definition of "focus approach"?
I thought this statement is really strange:
"‘We’re aware of what happens on the macro front, but like fishermen, we know what the weather is but we won’t stop fishing no matter the weather,’ he said."
I would think fishermen would look at the weather to go fishing. Unlike Buffett I would also look at the weather to go fishing. But I can understand Buffett's idea that the price has already reflected the weather.
For example, as per my previous posts, I don't think the weather is good for the next 6 months or so starting from August.
(08-10-2014, 11:44 AM)specuvestor Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 10:53 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 11:36 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I would like to share a preliminary finding, over a case study. The case study was base on Yeoman capital (as a representative of focus approach) and AVF (as a representative of quantitative approach). Both covered the same region and similar AUM.
I read from here that Yeoman had around 72 stocks, equal-weighted for diversification, and were spread over 5 countries.
Does that fit into your definition of "focus approach"?
I thought this statement is really strange:
"‘We’re aware of what happens on the macro front, but like fishermen, we know what the weather is but we won’t stop fishing no matter the weather,’ he said."
I would think fishermen would look at the weather to go fishing. Unlike Buffett I would also look at the weather to go fishing. But I can understand Buffett's idea that the price has already reflected the weather.
For example, as per my previous posts, I don't think the weather is good for the next 6 months or so starting from August.
Fisherman also need to eat regardless of the weather. Hand stop mouth stop. The 'fisherman' analogy is a bad one. Unless they are referring 'fishing as a hobby'
(08-10-2014, 09:00 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 10:53 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 11:36 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I would like to share a preliminary finding, over a case study. The case study was base on Yeoman capital (as a representative of focus approach) and AVF (as a representative of quantitative approach). Both covered the same region and similar AUM.
I read from here that Yeoman had around 72 stocks, equal-weighted for diversification, and were spread over 5 countries.
Does that fit into your definition of "focus approach"?
My definition of "focus approach" means "qualitative approach" of value investing, regardless of the diversification level. The term used might be misleading. I will re-phase it in future discussion.
Yeoman's principle is “3-Rights” (Right Business, Right Price and Right Management), which can only be done with qualitative approach.
Haha, interesting, ok.
I don't see how AVF investment process is any less qualitative than Yeoman.
"A deep understanding of the business model and its operating environment and determining the quality of management is paramount when one is trying to see the future – and meetings with the management is mandatory."
http://www.aggregate.com.sg/process/
(08-10-2014, 03:13 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ]Haha, interesting, ok.
I don't see how AVF investment process is any less qualitative than Yeoman.
"A deep understanding of the business model and its operating environment and determining the quality of management is paramount when one is trying to see the future – and meetings with the management is mandatory."
http://www.aggregate.com.sg/process/
The above was noted. I always reminded myself that the world is grey, rather than black and white. In other words, No fund is 100% quantitative or qualitative, but somewhere in between.
If you have followed AVF, you will know the screening process starts with a quant model, with about 10,000 stock initially, then added-value with a qualitative process on the shortlisted stocks. I have chosen to refer it as quantitative.
I have known lesser on Yeoman Capital, but base on the limited knowledge on Mr. Yeo's fund, the selection process isn't depend on quant model, but the 3-Rights criteria. I have chosen to refer it as qualitative.
You might chose differently.
(08-10-2014, 03:57 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2014, 03:13 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ]Haha, interesting, ok.
I don't see how AVF investment process is any less qualitative than Yeoman.
"A deep understanding of the business model and its operating environment and determining the quality of management is paramount when one is trying to see the future – and meetings with the management is mandatory."
http://www.aggregate.com.sg/process/
The above was noted. I always reminded myself that the world is grey, rather than black and white. In other words, No fund is 100% quantitative or qualitative, but somewhere in between.
That's exactly the point. That's why we should not pick 2 shades of grey and use them to represent black and white.
(08-10-2014, 04:09 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2014, 03:57 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2014, 03:13 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ]Haha, interesting, ok.
I don't see how AVF investment process is any less qualitative than Yeoman.
"A deep understanding of the business model and its operating environment and determining the quality of management is paramount when one is trying to see the future – and meetings with the management is mandatory."
http://www.aggregate.com.sg/process/
The above was noted. I always reminded myself that the world is grey, rather than black and white. In other words, No fund is 100% quantitative or qualitative, but somewhere in between.
That's exactly the point. That's why we should not pick 2 shades of grey and use them to represent black and white.
Why should we? Because no good example of pure black/white.
Should we give up then? IMO, we can still do it, knowing that we are not comparing a black and a white, but a 20% grey with a 80% grey, which still a significantly different "grey" level.
The preliminary result showed that it might be worth the effort, at least for me.
(08-10-2014, 03:13 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-10-2014, 09:00 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 10:53 PM)cif5000 Wrote: [ -> ] (07-10-2014, 11:36 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]I would like to share a preliminary finding, over a case study. The case study was base on Yeoman capital (as a representative of focus approach) and AVF (as a representative of quantitative approach). Both covered the same region and similar AUM.
I read from here that Yeoman had around 72 stocks, equal-weighted for diversification, and were spread over 5 countries.
Does that fit into your definition of "focus approach"?
My definition of "focus approach" means "qualitative approach" of value investing, regardless of the diversification level. The term used might be misleading. I will re-phase it in future discussion.
Yeoman's principle is “3-Rights” (Right Business, Right Price and Right Management), which can only be done with qualitative approach.
Haha, interesting, ok.
I don't see how AVF investment process is any less qualitative than Yeoman.
"A deep understanding of the business model and its operating environment and determining the quality of management is paramount when one is trying to see the future – and meetings with the management is mandatory."
http://www.aggregate.com.sg/process/
But I don't see how one can meet 199 companies management easily. So it should be more quantitative, i suppose?
Quote:If you have followed AVF, you will know the screening process starts with a quant model, with about 10,000 stock initially, then added-value with a qualitative process on the shortlisted stocks. I have chosen to refer it as quantitative.
I have known lesser on Yeoman Capital, but base on the limited knowledge on Mr. Yeo's fund, the selection process isn't depend on quant model, but the 3-Rights criteria. I have chosen to refer it as qualitative.
If Yeoman applies the 3-rights criteria on 10000 stocks, isn't that the same?
Teh Hooi Ling used to run quant models in BT invest during her times in BT but I think it was mainly to illustrate that even a blind quantitative analysis was still rather good. I doubt she would use the same technique for her portfolio. It just needs slightly more effort to pick out the better ones from the list.