Before reviewing what went right and what went wrong in my surprise list for 2013 and previewing my surprise list for 2014, I wanted to give some historical perspective on the lessons of the past, on the role of the consensus and what I am trying to bring to the table in the construction of my annual surprise list.
Lessons Learned Over the Years
"I'm astounded by people who want to 'know' the universe when it's hard enough to find your way around Chinatown."
-- Woody Allen
Must Read: The NHL's Winter Classic Needs Supersizing
There are five core lessons I have learned over the course of my investing career that form the foundation of my annual surprise lists:
- how wrong conventional wisdom can consistently be;
- that uncertainty will persist;
- to expect the unexpected;
- that the occurrence of black swan events are growing in frequency; and
- with rapidly changing conditions, investors can't change the direction of the wind, but we can adjust our sails (and our portfolios) in an attempt to reach our destination of good investment returns.
Consensus Is Often Wrong
"Let's face it: Bottom-up consensus earnings forecasts have a miserable track record. The traditional bias is well-known. And even when analysts, as a group, rein in their enthusiasm, they are typically the last ones to anticipate swings in margins."
-- UBS (top 10 surprises for 2012)
Let's get back to what I mean to accomplish in creating my annual surprise list.
It is important to note that my surprises are not intended to be predictions but rather events that have a reasonable chance of occurring despite being at odds with the consensus. I call these "possible improbable" events. In sports, betting my surprises would be called an "overlay," a term commonly used when the odds on a proposition are in favor of the bettor rather than the house.
The real purpose of this endeavor is a practical one -- that is, to consider positioning a portion of my portfolio in accordance with outlier events, with the potential for large payoffs on small wagers/investments.
Since the mid-1990s, Wall Street research has deteriorated in quantity and quality (due to competition for human capital at hedge funds, brokerage industry consolidation and former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer-initiated reforms) and remains, more than ever, maintenance-oriented, conventional and groupthink (or groupstink, as I prefer to call it). Mainstream and consensus expectations are just that, and in most cases, they are deeply embedded into today's stock prices.
It has been said that if life were predictable, it would cease to be life, so if I succeed in making you think (and possibly position) for outlier events, then my endeavor has been worthwhile.
Nothing is more obstinate than a fashionable consensus, and my annual exercise recognizes that over the course of time, conventional wisdom is often wrong.
As a society (and as investors), we are consistently bamboozled by appearance and consensus.
Too often, we are played as suckers, as we just accept the trend, momentum and/or the superficial as certain truth without a shred of criticism. Just look at those who bought into the success of Enron, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, the heroic home-run production of steroid-laced Major League Baseball players Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire, the financial supermarket concept at what was once the largest money center bank Citigroup (C), the uninterrupted profit growth at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, housing's new paradigm (in the mid-2000s) of noncyclical growth and ever-rising home prices, the uncompromising principles of former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, the morality of other politicians (e.g., John Edwards, John Ensign and Larry Craig), the consistency of Bernie Madoff's investment returns (and those of other hucksters) and the clean-cut image of Tiger Woods.