We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP258: Current Market Conditions and Value Investing w/ Tobias Carlisle (Business Podcast)

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to TIP. Hey, everyone, welcome to today's show with Deep Value and Quant Investor Tobias Carlow. On today's show, Toby covers some interesting topics like why value investing has been underperforming and what the future might hold for value investors. Additionally, Toby talks about how someone might think about valuing a company like Netflix and even how one might try to short a company like Netflix. Finally, there's a discussion about the price-to-book ratio and how investors should think about this metric.

Starting point is 00:00:28 Unfortunately, I was unable to join Toby and Stig for this discussion because I was on travel during the discussion, but I'll be back for next week's conversation. So without further delay, here's our discussion with the talented Tobias Carlisle. You are listening to The Investors Podcast, where we study the financial markets and read the books that influence self-made billionaires the most. We keep you informed and prepared for the unexpected. Hi, everyone, and welcome to the show. My name is Dick Broughton. As we said there in the introduction, Preston couldn't be here today because he's away traveling. But guys, we have Tobias Kaila, principal of Acquires Fund here with us today.

Starting point is 00:01:18 Tobias, welcome to the show. Hey, thanks so much for having me, Stig. I don't have that beautiful, molyfluous voice that Preston has, but I got a different accent. So this would be like a United Nations convening of the investors' podcast. I love that you said that. And Toby, today we're going to talk about the current market conditions. And we're going to talk about which picks we can find that we'll perform well. Before we dig into your pick, what are your general thoughts on the stock market right now?

Starting point is 00:01:46 Well, we've had roughly 18 months, two years of sort of volatility and bumping sideways. I think we're up a little bit over that period of time. But I share Preston's views and possibly yours as well. I don't know if you've been quite as vocal as Preston has been about the overvaluation. But I think that the market is very overvalued. you can take any measure that you prefer to sort of look at that, but anything like Tobin's Q, which looks at the replacement value of assets over the market value of assets, which is a measure of what's the market paying for the assets versus what does it cost an entrepreneur to go and

Starting point is 00:02:20 set those up on very long run measures. We can look at that metric going back to the, I think, sort of the mid-1950s sort of time period or a little bit earlier than that. And that's saying we're at historic sort of 80% overvalue, which is extremely high, second only to the dot-com. And you get similar outcomes if you look at different things like the Schiller PE, which is a slightly different metric, but it looks at an inflation-adjusted 10-year average of earnings. And so where the first one looks at assets, the second one looks at earnings, tells us a similar story. Well, you could look at Buffett's preferred measure, which is total market capitalization

Starting point is 00:02:53 to gross national product, which again is just looking at the size of the stock market in the economy. And that also sort of tells us that we're overvalued to about the same scale. So there's no question that we're overvalued. The problem is that we have been variously, very overvalued and closer to sort of average valuation since about 1996. So that's just 24 or 25 years of overvaluation. And you could have done very well if you'd been invested in the stock market through that period. There have been two horrible crashes through that period. And there's a chance we get a third horrible crash. That value is not a great way of determining what the

Starting point is 00:03:31 stock market is going to do in the short term, more what it tells you is what you can expect from your investments or from your equity investments over a sort of 10 or 20 year period. And what it's telling us is that we don't expect much from them or particularly US stock market assets at this point. The rest of the world is not as expensive. And I think we're going to talk about that a little bit more as we go along. Yes, we definitely will, Toby. And it's very exciting to bring you on here to talk about the current mind conditions. And then I also gave you the ungrateful grateful job of coming up with a pick because how can you come up with a stock pick whenever we talk about the stock market being so, you know, highly value right now.

Starting point is 00:04:10 But what you did was you came back to me with a short. Well, played Toby. Yeah. Well, you know, I run a fund, I run an ETF that is long short. So I'm always thinking where the opportunities are likely to come from. And since I've been running, which is only three months old at this stage, Most of the money's been made on the short side, funnily enough, because it's been that kind of market, and there are two reasons for that.

Starting point is 00:04:34 One, there's been a little bit of market weakness, but the main one is that value has been particularly weak through that. We'll talk about that in a little bit, but let's just, let's go to my pick. So I get nervous when I talk about something like this, because this has been a widow-maker trade for a long time. But if I look in my model, and it's the number one thing in my model, and my model's pretty good at this stuff, I've got to go with it. And it gives me no pleasure to say this, but it's Netflix, N, N,

Starting point is 00:04:58 FLX is the thing that I want to be short. You're a courageous man, Toby. Or a silly man, yeah, it makes me nervous, frankly. But we put it on in late June. It's worked for us since then. And I'll tell you why we put it on then and why it's still the number one short in my screen. And I've been talking about this a little bit,

Starting point is 00:05:16 but you can look at Netflix on a valuation basis and on any ratio or multiple, it's extremely expensive. It's like 100 times plus P, high 70s in terms of enterprise multiple, acquires, multiple. It's extremely expensive. On that basis, the only way that this sort of makes sense as an investment on the long side is if it keeps growing at this very high rate. And that's what you have to bet on. It's already a very big

Starting point is 00:05:42 company, and so it has to keep on growing at this very high rate. There are lots of things to like about Netflix. It's got recurring subscription revenue, which is the holy grail of any business, because subscription revenue, you basically know what's coming in next month. You know what's coming in the month after. So on the revenue side, this is a great business, and it costs them, the marginal consumer doesn't cost them much at all, but virtually zero. The cost to Netflix is the content that it produces. So it has to go and buy these shows that it puts on. Content is becoming very, very expensive by historical standards. So you might hear all of these stories about comedians getting gigantic paydays for their specials that they put on these shows. Movies come out,

Starting point is 00:06:22 and they don't actually make it to theater. Netflix swoops in and buys them. And then we don't really know how successful or otherwise they are because Netflix doesn't share those numbers. Basically, what Netflix has, the kind of business that Netflix is in, is more like a movie studio now in the sense that they have to produce this really great content. And that's a really, really tough business to be in.

Starting point is 00:06:45 If you pay up for what you think is a really great idea and it doesn't work out, then you've burnt a lot of money. And this is what happens to the movie. And this is why you see a lot of, here's the 12th Marvel superhero type movie. Here's a sequel. Here's stuff that you've seen before. Here's a remake of something that you saw 10 or 15 years ago because they know that there's a market for it.

Starting point is 00:07:07 People recognize the names. So Disney has got very good at figuring out what people like. So that's why you see they own Marvel. They own all of the Disney princesses. If you've got little girl, they love all of that sort of stuff. They've got Pixar, of course, which makes those very popular movies. movies. And so Disney, of course, is coming out with its own streaming service, and that's going to compete with Netflix. And so they've got a lot of great content there, and that content is

Starting point is 00:07:31 being taken away from Netflix. So now Netflix is just going to be going straight head to head with a great content producer that's going to have its own distribution in the same way, through Hulu and through its own app. What has historically happened? Every time there's a new technology for delivering content, that technology, when it first arrives, becomes very valuable and then pretty quickly, because it gets cheaper access to more people, pretty quickly what happens is the value in that chain accrues to the content producers. So Netflix, in order to compete, needs to be a content producer. They can't get away from that. But that's a really, really tough business to be in. You're competing with people on YouTube. We've all got only a finite amount of time to watch anything every day because we're working. We might have kids. Want to go to the gym, want to socialize, do other things like that. And so you've got to work out where are you going to spend your attention. So some people, people, they find themselves on YouTube, so that's another competitor. YouTube's content costs are zero virtually. They pay you after the fact. So you upload your stuff for free, they run it out, and then you get paid down the track. So someone like Joe Rogan, who has a gigantic podcast

Starting point is 00:08:36 and produce hours and hours of content every week, there are people watching that instead of watching Netflix and say, while times are pretty good at the moment for the most part, I think when times get tough, are people who are going to rationalize what they watch. If you're anything like me, I watch it on the Apple TV. So I pull up the tiles and I can go through those tiles. Some of those tiles I pay for and some of those tiles are just free content that sit there so I can click on a tile and watch what's underneath that. YouTube is one of the tiles on it. We're getting into this stage now where Netflix is carrying an enormous amount of debt. Every time they report, their free cash flow is negative. So they're burning a lot of cash flow and it's getting worse every time they report.

Starting point is 00:09:15 They say that the next one is going to be better, but they've never had one that's better than the last one, so you've got to take that with a grain of salt. I don't think that Netflix goes out of business by any stretch of the imagination. I think that Netflix is around here for the very long term. What I do think happens is that it becomes incredibly hard for it to sustain that enormous valuation. And so what happens is that 100 times P, 80 times enterprise multiple will compress back to a more normal kind of market multiple. As that happens, the valuation comes down. It could be trading half where it is. It could be trading at 25% of where it is now. And so that's the opportunity in Netflix. And the reason that I think now is the time for it is because we're about

Starting point is 00:09:58 to see all of these competing services come out. And Disney is the one I think that everybody is watching. If you've got little kids, you kind of have to sign up for that content of all of the princesses. And a lot of people are going to get rid of something at that time. And I don't know what it'll be, but there's a risk that it's Netflix. And so that's my short thesis. I really like that thesis. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. All right. I want you guys to imagine spending three days in Oslo at the height of the summer. You've got long days of daylight, incredible food, floating saunas on the Oslo Fjord, and every conversation you have is with people who are actually shaping the future.

Starting point is 00:10:36 That's what the Oslo Freedom Forum is. From June 1st through the 3rd, 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum is entering its 18th year bringing together activists, technologists, journalists, investors, and builders from all over the world, many of them operating on the front lines of history. This is where you hear firsthand stories from people using Bitcoin to survive currency collapse, using AI to expose human rights abuses, and building technology under censorship and authoritarian pressures. These aren't abstract ideas.

Starting point is 00:11:07 These are tools real people are using right now. You'll be in the room with about 2,000 extraordinary individuals, dissidents, founders, philanthropists, policymakers, the kind of people you don't just listen to but end up having dinner with. Over three days, you'll experience powerful mainstage talks, hands-on workshops on freedom tech and financial sovereignty, immersive art installations, and conversations that continue long after the sessions end. And it's all happening in Oslo in June. If this sounds like your kind of room, well, you're in luck because you can attend in person. Standard and patron passes are available at Osloof Freedom Forum.com with patron passes offering deep access, private events,

Starting point is 00:11:49 and small group time with the speakers. The Oslo Freedom Forum isn't just a conference. It's a place where ideas meet reality and where the future is being built by people living it. If you run a business, you've probably had the same thought lately. How do we make AI useful in the real world? Because the upside is huge, but guessing your way into it is a risky move. With NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today. NetSuite is the number one AI cloud ERP, trusted by over 43,000 businesses. It pulls your financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM into one unified system. And that connected data is what makes your AI smarter.

Starting point is 00:12:30 It can automate routine work, surface actionable insights, and help you cut costs while making fast AI-powered decisions with confidence. And now with the Netsuite AI connector, you can use the AI of your choice to connect directly to your real business data. This isn't some add-on, it's AI built into the system that runs your business. And whether your company does millions or even hundreds of millions, Netsuite helps you stay ahead. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get their free business guide, demystifying AI at Nessuite.com slash study. The guide is free to you at Nessuite.com slash study. NetSuite.com slash study.

Starting point is 00:13:11 When I started my own side business, it suddenly felt like I had to become 10 different people overnight wearing many different hats. Starting something from scratch can feel exciting, but also incredibly overwhelming and lonely. That's why having the right tools matters. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world, and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from brands just get to be. getting started to household names. It gives you everything you need in one place, from inventory

Starting point is 00:13:43 to payments to analytics. So you're not juggling a bunch of different platforms. You can build a beautiful online store with hundreds of ready-to-use templates, and Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions, and even enhance your product photography. Plus, if you ever get stuck, they've got award-winning 24-7 customer support. Start your business today with the industry's best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash WSB. Go to Shopify.com slash WSB. That's Shopify.com slash WSB.

Starting point is 00:14:26 All right. Back to the show. So this comes from a value investor who's now trying to present the bull case for a stock that's trading 100 times to PE. I am going to cheat a little here because this is not so much my argument, but it's actually the argument from Bill Nygren. Our listeners are very familiar with Bill Nygren.

Starting point is 00:14:44 We had him on episode 254. He is from Oakmark funds and he manages $17 billion. And one of the picks that he pitched here on our show, that was Netflix. So I'm going to borrow his argument and I'm curious to hear Toe's response to this. So the way that Bill Nigrant compares to this

Starting point is 00:15:01 is that he's saying Netflix is like cable TV, 30 years ago. A lot of money was spent on acquiring customers before they became profitable. So we can't really use the PE multiple right now because it's not really showing what the true profitability of that customer is. He uses a valuation, for instance, the one that AT&T used whenever they bought Time Warner. And at that time, an HBO subscriber were valued around $1,000 per recurrent subscriber. If we look at services like Sirius XM, Spotify, HBO Now, that can coexist with Netflix. And in this survey, Netflix was actually the most important to them and what they would least like to get rid of.

Starting point is 00:15:41 It is kind of interesting. Netflix, depending on the type of subscription you have, they're between $9 and $16. So if you, like me or a premium subscriber, you pay almost $200 a year for Netflix. So if you use that valuation, just like rough calculation, $1,000 per subscriber, you have 140 million subscribers. That's $140 billion, which is also more or less the same. as the enterprise value of Netflix. That is one way to justify that valuation. What are your thoughts on that approach to do evaluation? So here's my response. I like the analogy, but it's flawed

Starting point is 00:16:17 in the sense that when you got cable, you only got one cable provider and they punched into your house and it was very, very sticky revenue. They signed you up for two years. There was not much you could do. They don't have any competition in the local areas. I can't choose between. As much as I would like to put my cable company up against another cable company, I've got no choice. The one that I have has a monopoly in this area. I spend more money with them than really that service is worth. Netflix is in a totally different position where it's as easy for me to turn it off as unsubscribing to anything and I can immediately subscribe to something else. So I think that $1,000 may have been the appropriate value of a customer when they were cable, but it's a different business now that

Starting point is 00:17:02 all of that has been unbundled. And so I get my internet from the cable provider and then I go to the internet and I have the choice of any number of these services. And there are some that are going to be advertising supported partially like Hulu so they can be a little bit cheaper. If you go and look at the tiles that are available, there's so much stuff out there that's available. And at the moment, Netflix is the brand name that everybody knows and it's doing very well, but I can easily see that all it requires for you to sign up to another service is a show that you want to watch, that you can't access anywhere else. And that's why this business is tough, and that's why it's going to be a boom-bust business, more like a movie studio. If they have

Starting point is 00:17:39 the content that everybody wants to see, if they have the Game of Thrones, you know, that's an HBO show. To watch that, you needed an HBO subscription or you needed to buy it through probably Apple iTunes or something like that on an ad hoc basis. It's a totally different business to that cable, that sticky recurring revenue from cable. So I don't know. that that valuation is appropriate. I kind of just look at it on the numbers that they're doing now. The things that are good about Netflix, it's still a great business. The underlying business is still good. Their incremental return on capital is excellent. They've still got very high returns on capital. It's just that everybody else can see that. Disney knows that you can make a lot of

Starting point is 00:18:13 money in streaming services. So Disney's coming into it. All of these guys are going to come into it with reasonably deep pockets and lots of great content and that's going to make it a very tough business to compete. And the only way for this to go is for the stock price to go down. Very interesting the way that you debunk that document. Another way of looking at this is to put a value on the growth. So before we talked about, you know, having 140 million subscribers, perhaps they're valued at $1,000, perhaps not. But we also have a lot of growth included. And of course, depending on which type of growth rate we're going to use, we can come up with many different valuations. What Bill Nekron did specifically, once he was talking about a value creation of $25 billion year or a year, because they have $25 million, new subscribers. Again, if we don't believe that the value per subscribers is $1,000, of course,

Starting point is 00:19:02 you can't use that. But that would actually give you a multiple of six, which will make Netflix a very cheap company. Regardless, I do think that growth is very interesting to talk about. I guess to me, there seems still to be room to grow. A year of year, I think they grew 20%. How much more is there in the time to come? Well, probably not a lot in the US. And we also have seen some of the growth slowed down in the US, as much as 64.5% already has a Netflix subscription. And no other country on the planet has as many subscribers. If we look away from the top five countries, so that would be US, Norway, Canada, Denmark and Sweden, all other countries that have 43% or less. And there are so much non-English content on Netflix on international

Starting point is 00:19:47 channels now. And it's already in 23 different languages. Big market in Japan, for example, only 17% penetration. So I guess that leads me into the other argument, where do you see growth go for a company like this? Because that valuation we see now includes a very generous growth. So where do you see that? That's the million dollar question for Netflix. And as you point out, the valuation at the moment is predicated on this enormous growth rate being sustained. And the problem for Netflix is that a company like Disney has already has that global recognition. It, Everybody in the world recognizes the Mickey Mouse is.

Starting point is 00:20:26 I saw a little study the other day. If you put a circle, a black circle with two little black circles above it, there are Kalahari Bushmen who can identify what that is. They know that that's Mickey Mouse. So Disney's very well-known globally. Marvel superheroes are well-known globally. That's going to be the problem for Netflix, that there is this competition from a very well-known competitor

Starting point is 00:20:48 that has great content assets. All that they really have been lacking is the distribution. channel. And the distribution channel is, it's not trivial, but it's not as hard as cabling the entire world. All you need to do is make that offering available and make it possible for someone to click on your tile and to watch the underlying content and pay you for it with a credit card. And all of a sudden, you're acquiring customers globally. The problem for Netflix, I agree that it has potential to grow worldwide, but the problem for it is that its competitors have that same potential. And so it's going to become incredibly competitive. I see margins are going to come down.

Starting point is 00:21:24 Basically, that's the only thing that can happen. And probably the pressure is more from the content spend than it is from. There's still a reasonably cheap option. It's still cheaper than cable by a long shot. I don't know exactly where it is, but it's $14 or $15 a month, I think, at the moment in the US. I still think that the problem for Netflix is the competition. The very high rates of growth that it has seen in the past, are probably going to slow down. Thank you, Toby, for your Netflix short discussion. As you said there, you might be a silly man, you might be a very courageous man. Let's see what happens. We record this August 18th, so it's going to be interesting to see where we're going to go from there. If anyone wants to keep track on the short position,

Starting point is 00:22:07 at the time of recording, it's trading at $302. If we did put a short on Netflix, when would you sell? I will revisit it again at the end of September. So it's possible that we close the short out at the end of September because that's in the fund, that's what we do. We look at them on a quarterly basis and make our decision then so we can trim it back. We're up a little bit on the position. So we can trim it back, which would mean buying some Netflix, or we could exit the position entirely. So I do it on a timing basis rather than a valuation basis because I use it, I use the shorts more as a hedge to the belongs. So there's a short book. If the short book goes down more than the market, then the shorts are doing what they should be doing. It is interesting what you said there. Whenever you say you're going to close out or you're going to buy Netflix, because that is what you're doing. I think I accidentally said when you would sell your position, but you're actually buying into the position whenever you do is short. You sell it beforehand, then you buy back hopefully at a lower price. Hopefully. Yes. So in transitioning into my pick, I was really torn whether or not I should

Starting point is 00:23:14 pitch this to you, Tobias, because this is a value investing pick. And I would be like, hmm, would Tobias be the right person to speak to because he's an expert in value investing? Or would it be a very boring episode because he would be like, oh, Stig, I'm completely there with you, value investing. Now is the time. You get the version of discussing the virtues of value investing with a value investor. And then you can make up your own mind. My pick is an ETF from ICS. The stock ticker is IVLU. And this fund seeks to track the investment results of the MSCI World Hands Value Index. It's based on a traditional market cap weighted index, but it does not include the US. That's very important for me to underline. The market cap aspect basically just means that

Starting point is 00:24:00 bigger companies have a bigger share of this ETF. The top 10 companies would include companies like Normartis, Toyota, broil, dot shell, just to mention a few. And together, they comprise 19% of the funds assets. Like there are many ETFs that require a few stocks, 334. And Japan is the biggest international market with 40%. UK is second with 15%. The value trade on this ETF is basically built around three accounting variables, namely the price to book, price to forward earnings, and then enterprise value to cash flows from operations. The expense ratio is 30 basis point or 0.3%. Since the inception in June 2015, it only returned 1% annually.

Starting point is 00:24:50 So it has dramatically trilled the S&P 500. Oh my God, so why am I pitching this ETF with such a horrible performance? Well, in terms of the international aspect, this is actually, is something I thought a lot about after the conversation we had, we can fish here not too long ago. And he talked about why he was a top-down macro fund manager in the sense that he's fishing in the pond. He might not catch the biggest fish, but at least he wants to fish in their pond with the most fish. And that was kind of like his idea. So if we look at the US right now, it's the third most expensive market that we see there of this 37 most developed stock

Starting point is 00:25:32 markets. Only Ireland and Denmark are more expensive. So by buying a value to F that does not include the US, you might already get some tailwind from that. And then we have the value aspect. Value has not performed well. If we look at the performance just over the past 10 years, we look at an underperformance to growth by 32%. This is data I have from Professor French. If you look at the data, it says that value appears to have the sixth worth drawdown ever over this period from January 2007 to September 2008 compared to growth. The county argument that I would have, and I'm sure that Tobias would have a lot more, is that if we look at historical returns, we actually see from 1927 to 2017 that value upperforms growth stocks by 4.8% annually, which is just

Starting point is 00:26:20 massive. And that is definitely something to consider too. Before we go more into the weeds of why value investing works, I'm curious, Tobias, what are your thoughts? What are your thoughts? on this ETF today? I run a value ETF, so I'm a little bit biased, but let me talk about the things that I like to see in a value strategy and why I'm going to disagree with your pick, only for the interests of playing the devil's advocate, because you know I love your stick. When I go to put together a portfolio, the things that lead to outperformance are first of all, making sure that you're using the right metrics.

Starting point is 00:26:56 And so when we wrote quantitative value that came out in 2012, we went and tested a whole lot of metrics to see what worked, what didn't work. The thing that didn't work was price to book. And the problem for price to book has been, basically there's a change in, there are a lot of arguments for why price to book doesn't work. One of them is that the economy has sort of moved to this more asset, light, intellectual property, and that's not properly captured in price to book. I don't love that argument because I think that you should still have a lot of competition driving returns back down to average returns. I think a better argument is twofold. It's a slightly technical argument, but let me explain it to you. Basically, the way that

Starting point is 00:27:36 companies, successful companies who make a lot of money, what they do is they buy back stock, and they can buy back so much stock that they get negative equity. Now, that doesn't make any sense. Very hard to kind of visualize negative equity. But basically, let's say you put a million dollars into a business to start that business going. So your book value is a million dollars. You buy some assets. you start operating. You're wildly successful. You make so much money out of that business that you're able to buy back some of the stock that you issued onto the stock exchange. And so you can get to this point where you buy back more and your values go up. Your market valuation is $10 million. If you buy back a million dollars worth of stock at a $10 million valuation, your book value

Starting point is 00:28:16 is now zero and beyond that, your book value becomes negative. So if you're a very good business like McDonald's that has made a lot of money for a long period of time and bought back a lot of stock, you wind up with negative equity. Now, McDonald's is a great business. People are still going and buying burgers. They're still eating at McDonald's. They're still making lots of free cash flow. But when price to book value tries to classify McDonald's as a value stock or as a growth stock, it doesn't know where to put it because it's a price to a negative book value. And so that's a problem that the accounting hasn't really kept up with the way that some businesses are run with a lot of buybacks. So that's the main problem for book value. It's not, it hasn't been so

Starting point is 00:28:55 great at classifying businesses as being undervalued or overvalued. Better measures, I like the cash flow measures, so I like price to cash flow, I like price to earnings, I like all of those sort of metrics. The original reason that people preferred book value was that your earnings can go up and down. And so your valuation, you could look cheap one year and look expensive the next year. Basically, all that's happened is your earnings have gone down. Book value is much more stable. It doesn't move around as much as that. You buy it cheaply this year. It should still be cheap. or that's the logic behind it. It's good logic. It's just that the accounting has changed a little bit. So it's not a great metric. So that's the first thing that I look at. And I think that

Starting point is 00:29:31 it fails a little bit on that one. The other problem for it is the market capitalization waiting. So this is the question you ask yourself when you're trying to set up an ETF is, you know, how much money can this thing run? And that's, you make it a market capitalization waiting. You can get a lot more money into it. But your performance will suffer as a result. You won't do it as well. Because what has traditionally happened is equal weighting the positions where you put the same amount of money into each one rather than market capitalization waiting where you put more money into the bigger ones, just because smaller companies tend to be more undervalued. So putting the same amount of money into smaller, more undervalued companies tends to lead to better performance.

Starting point is 00:30:06 And so those two things, I think this is a very good ETF. I think it's cheap. I can look at the top holding. So it's top holding right now is Novartis. That's a great business. It's probably undervalued. Sanofi, Toyota, Mitsubishi Financial, Hitashi, all of these are great businesses, likely the value, probably it's going to go very well. But my criticisms are just that not a great metric and market capitalization waiting. Both of those will dull the returns a little bit. It's interesting that you would say that this study I'm referencing here from French. I'll also make sure to put a link in the show note. He tests that too. And not surprisingly like you, Tobias, he also finds that price to book value is not that good. I feel that's interesting

Starting point is 00:30:46 to discuss here because the accounting rules because of the economy has changed is just not a significantly more. But what you see in all of these value ETFs, in many of these value ETFs, I should say, is that price to book is still one of those metrics that you're looking at together with price to earnings and a few other metrics. And another thing I would like to mention for this, the price to earnings, which also has its own flaws, is probably not the most effective ratio, but still much better than price to book. Across the board for this ETF, it's 10.3. So it's relatively cheap stocks, at least if you compare it to the border US market. So let's talk about why value investing works. I've just said, you know, this, this ETF has

Starting point is 00:31:27 performed 1% you know all the past few years. So most smart people would say that's a horrible strategy that because it doesn't work. Because I'm a value investor, I'm thinking, well, that means it's reached a price now and now it will start to perform. So it's kind of like depends on how you look at it. I have to give credit where credit is due. And that's also one the reason why I want to speak with you, Toby. If you want to really want to understand value investing really in depth. This is how I understand the why they'll invest in work, and then perhaps afterwards, you can comment on that. Markets temporarily punish some stocks more than others, and they make them trade below the intrinsic value. So as the market gradually realized that

Starting point is 00:32:08 the price compared to the value is too low for some of those stocks, it reverts back to the true intrinsic value. This process is often referred to as mean reversion. For you owning a value to F, you can think about it like this. Right now, IVLU, they deem that Toyota is undervalued and it therefore owns stock in Toyota. It's another stock that trades at a P.E. Around 10. When Toyota's no longer didn't undervalued because of the price reverting back to the mean, then the ETF will automatically sell the stock and then buy another attractive based on their price valuation in the meantime and then wait for that price to go up and revert to the intrinsic value. So that's the way to understand value investing. You replace stocks that are trading at a more attractive level, wait for

Starting point is 00:32:54 it to revert, then replace them with different stocks that's doing the same process over and over again. I don't know if I explained the bull argument for value investing too well, Toby. I'm curious to hear your thoughts. Let's talk about the logic of value and then talk about the long-term returns to value. So the logic of value is simply that you're trying to buy something for less than it's worth. If you buy something for less than it's worth, that's really all you have to do. If you do your purchase is correct, then you don't need to trade in and out. You don't need to sell it to recognize the value. You've already got that value and you hope that over time, that holding will make you money. The way that you express that in the stock market is you try to find something trading where the

Starting point is 00:33:35 stock price is at a discount to the intrinsic value and you either do a full valuation or you use some price ratio and you hope that lower price ratios indicate that the presence of some value versus a higher ratio. It may not. Sometimes there are very good businesses that can justify a very high ratio and there are very bad businesses that even at low ratios, they're not worth buying. But on average, on the whole, lower ratios should do better than higher ratios. And that's what the data shows us to. So the French data that you referred to, that's free for anybody who wants to go and have a look at this. You can look at different types of data and you can look at it in the US and you can look at it globally. So the data that they have, they have price to book value data. They're going

Starting point is 00:34:18 back to 1920. They have cash flow data and earnings data that goes back to 1951. When you look at that data, it's very clear. And they cut the data up lots of different ways. But the one that I like to use is they cut it into deciles, which is 10th. So they take every stock in the stock market, rank them on, say, price to cash flow. And then the most expensive ones go into. And then the most expensive ones go into the expensive decile, they call that low 10, and then the cheapest ones go into high 10. Then you can look at the performance of low 10 versus high 10. So I think that many value investors use price to cash flow. That's a pretty good metric enterprise value to cash flow, because what they're trying to do is they're trying to get the enterprise value is a good metric

Starting point is 00:34:59 because it's a good ratio because that looks at how much cash they've got on the balance sheet. Are they carrying any debt? Because these are real costs that an acquirer has to bear. And then on the other side, they look at cash flow, free cash flow, operating cash flow, it doesn't really matter. In this instance, I haven't, I don't know that they've spelled out necessarily what it is. I think it's operating cash flow because I think that's an easier metric to calculate. You compare those to rank the stocks and then you can construct your portfolio either by value weighting, as we discussed before. That's the market capitalization waiting or by equal waiting. And so equal waiting, I think, is that's how most people are probably constructing

Starting point is 00:35:30 their portfolio as you put about the same amount of money into each as you buy it, rather than this is a really big company. I'm going to put a lot of money into this company. This is a small company. I'm not going to put very much money into it. I don't think that people are really doing that. They're probably either equal weighting or they're saying this is a better opportunity. When they do that, so you can check this on the Famer French data. I've actually created the chart and I have it up on my Twitter and I'll send this through to Stig.

Starting point is 00:35:52 I may even update it for the new months, not that it makes much difference because there's now 70-something years of data, I think, so one month doesn't really make much difference one way or the other. But on my Twitter, so that the very long run returns to the value desal, to the value portfolio, it has done 18.8% since the beginning of the data per year. The expensive ones, the glamour, the growth, that has done 9.1% since the beginning of the data. So value has done twice as well as glamour since the beginning of the data. For the last 10 years, glamour has been outperforming value, which is a historical. It's very unusual in the data. It does happen. It happens regularly,

Starting point is 00:36:33 but it doesn't last for very long. So this one that we're currently in is the deepest and the longest underperformance ever. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. No, it's not your imagination. Risk and regulation are ramping up and customers now expect proof of security just to do business. That's why VANTA is a game changer. Vanta automates your compliance process and brings compliance, risk, and customer trust together on one AI powered platform. So whether you're prepping for a SOC two or running an enterprise GRC program, Vanta keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Instead of chasing spreadsheets and screenshots, Vanta gives you continuous automation across more than 35 security and privacy frameworks. Companies like Ramp and Riter spend 82% less time on audits with Vanta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time for growth.

Starting point is 00:37:28 If I were running a startup or scaling a team today, this is exactly the type of platform I'd want in place. Get started at Vanta.com slash billionaires. That's Vanta.com slash billionaires. Ever wanted to explore the world of online trading but haven't dared try? The futures market is more active now than ever before, and plus 500 futures is the perfect place to start. Plus 500 gives you access to a wide range of instruments, the S&B 500, NASDAQ, Bitcoin, gas, and much more.

Starting point is 00:38:02 Explore equity indices, energy, metals, 4X, crypto, and beyond. With a simple and intuitive platform, you can trade from anywhere, right from your phone. Deposit with a minimum of $100 and experience the fast, accessible futures trading you've been waiting for. See a trading opportunity. You'll be able to trade it in just two clicks once your account is open. Not sure if you're ready, not a problem. Plus 500 gives you an unlimited, risk-free demo account with charts, and analytic tools for you to practice on. With over 20 years of experience, Plus 500 is your gateway

Starting point is 00:38:39 to the markets. Visit Plus500.com to learn more. Trading in futures involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone. Not all applicants will qualify. Plus 500, it's trading with a plus. Billion dollar investors don't typically park their cash in high yield savings accounts. Instead, they often use one of the premier passive income strategies for institutional investors, private credit. Now, the same passive income strategy is available to investors of all sizes thanks to the Fundrise Income Fund, which has more than $600 million invested in a 7.97% distribution rate. With traditional savings yields falling, it's no wonder private credit has grown to be a trillion-dollar asset class in the last few years. Visit fundrise.com slash WSB to invest in the Fundrise income fund in just minutes.

Starting point is 00:39:34 The fund's total return in 2025 was 8%, and the average annual total return since inception is 7.8%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, current distribution rate as of 1231, 2025. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. This and other information can be found in the income fund's perspective. at Fundrise.com slash income. This is a paid advertisement. All right, back to the show. One argument is to say that value has underperformed, and there's definitely a lot of good arguments for that, but you could also say that growth has overperformed. It's sort of interesting if you look close at the data, because if you do that ranking that you just talked about before,

Starting point is 00:40:18 what value investing does is that it underweight big tech. Perhaps that's a problem. I referenced the conversation that I had Ken Fisher here not too long ago. Ken said, you know, the U.S. haven't performed better than, you know, the rest of the world in terms of the stock market if you take away big tech. If you do that, it's the same performance. The U.S. tech is just rooting the world. That's why it's better. Of course, if that component has not historically been apart, say for the past 10 years, yen, you will see a huge difference in return. So I guess my question for you, Toby, would be, is that a problem? that for value investing traditionally, we're looking away for something like Big Tech. Let's talk a little bit about why it's underperformed. I think you alluded to this, and I think you're exactly right. Value has actually done pretty well through this period. It's done about 13.5%, which is a little bit lower than it has done over the full dataset. But 13.5% is a great return. You become a legendary investor if you can do that for long enough. And what has happened is value is actually a little bit more expensive now than it usually is or it has been over the

Starting point is 00:41:22 data set. I'd say it's a little bit rich to its long run mean. That's the way I describe it. It might be as much as 50% overvalued because you can look at the underlying holdings and see what kind of free cash flow yield you get when you buy them. And it's a little bit less than you would have got ordinarily. Now, there are reasons for that low interest rates, lots of other things going on. The reason that it has underperformed is that the glamour, the growth, the tech has done so well that it's beaten it by such a wide margin. As a result, that overvalued the glamour, the growth is extremely expensive. By some metrics, it's more expensive than it has ever been in the data.

Starting point is 00:42:00 And that's including the dot-com bubble. If the laws of microeconomics still apply, and I think that this is the question that always gets asked at the top of every stock market bubble, is this time different. There's always a very compelling argument for why it is, which is why people entertain it in the first place. That's why they think about it. I have to say that I don't think that the laws of microeconomics have been suspended.

Starting point is 00:42:23 I think they still apply. I still think that you make more money buying the cash flows that you can see now. So the way that these tech companies, the argument for these tech companies goes, they're going to get so big that no one will ever be able to compete with them. You can't compete with Amazon. You can't compete with Google. You can't compete with Facebook. You can't compete with Netflix.

Starting point is 00:42:39 That's the fang. And you'll never be able to get them back. The thing is that that's the argument at the top of every single dot com, every single boom, including the dot-com boom. And what happens is that the market does eventually come back. And it goes back into this more normal because it's not, I don't think that it's so much, people are putting, they're looking a long way into the future and seeing what these things could be worth a long way down the road and saying, well, relative to that valuation,

Starting point is 00:43:04 that's theoretical valuation that we could achieve in the future, they still look pretty cheap. That's the argument for Netflix run. So let's say that we and the audience by the argument about value investing, will now start to perform. You mentioned it a few times and I mentioned it too. So you have your own value ETF. The stock ticker is CIG as far as I remember because it's sick when the market's sack. Is that correct? That's right. Perfect. Okay. So that is of course the disclaimer. Everyone can go in and look it up and also like see what is your position where you're coming from. And they definitely

Starting point is 00:43:36 should do that as they listen to this conversation and make up their own mind. We also invited you here because you are an expert within value investing. Let's say, that yes, we now think that value investing will start to perform. Would you, in that case, go for a US-only value-itaph, global or international? And why? It almost doesn't matter where you go, because I think that value globally has been really beaten up. The interesting thing is, so one of the arguments that I hear is what happens if the US starts looking like Japan? What if it becomes this long stagnation? So Japan's stock market topped out in 1990, and it's, 25% below where it was in 1990. So it's been a very rough 29 years or so in Japan for the stock market

Starting point is 00:44:22 investors there. And that's coming up on a career, you know, 30 years. That could be a career in an investment. So there are people who've never seen the stock market. There's some guy who's started on the first, on the top of the market in 1990 and the stock market's still trading below where it was. And the reason that they got to that level is because it was trading it 100 times Shillopje. It's taken a really long time to work off the overvaluation. The U.S. got to, I think, 30 something times on a shillopee basis and it's taken it. It took it 15 years to get back before it's got over its all-time high again. Really, whatever happens to stock markets globally, value follows its own idiosyncratic return path. So value did very well in Japan since 1990. It's

Starting point is 00:45:00 been a good place to be a value investor because value investors, the way that a return to a value fund happens is you buy stuff cheap, it gets a little bit less cheap, you sell it, you buy a new crop of undervalued things and that ratchet effect is how you generate returns. The rest of the market doesn't have that. So I think value, it doesn't really matter where you get your value. I think that when you go international, when you go outside of the States, you get a different mix of companies. So the thing that the States does very well is they have these consumer discretionary businesses

Starting point is 00:45:30 like Google and Facebook and Netflix and Amazon that don't really exist anywhere else in the world. And when you say that the US stock market X, that sort of those big tech companies is flat or down, I believe that. And it's really, that's the thing that has kept America going up over the last decade versus the rest of the world. It's kind of slumped because cyclicals and industrials and financials, all these other sectors have been pretty beaten up. I don't think it really matters what you do. I think that it makes some sense to have some of your portfolio overseas. I don't know. You've got listeners all over the world, I know, but this is a very pronounced bias. It's called the home country bias. Everybody puts way too much money into their own stock market and not enough into other stock markets. What are the chances that your stock market is the one that outperforms every other stock market in the world. Pretty low. Pretty low. Like, where are you at the moment, Stig? I'm in Denmark. And we are happy now because Ireland is now more expensive. But we, I mean, like I mentioned before, you know, it's Ireland, Denmark, than the US. So you're right. I mean, my home bias would be Denmark and it would be the US.

Starting point is 00:46:33 Why not look at the 34 other very developed stock markets that are just cheaper? Well, I have this bias. There are developed markets, there are emerging markets. It's probably unlikely, wherever you are right now, it's probably unlikely that your stock market is the one that outperforms the rest of the world. So in addition to that, you're probably working in your own country. You're probably earning income in your own country. So just from a diversification point of view, it makes some sense to invest internationally or globally from wherever you are.

Starting point is 00:47:01 I like the logic of value that it's just going to find the best value stuff globally or internationally. And then it's going to hold onto that stuff. I think that's a good hedge in your own life. That's a good hedge against your income. For me, as a day, you're living in Denmark, I face the same problem as most Europeans that I cannot invest in American ETFs. Or if I do, the tax treatment would just be horrible. Like, I would pay 43% of tax every year, regardless if I even sell the ETF. You need some pretty decent returns before you would do anything like that. I will stop complaining now about it,

Starting point is 00:47:35 But I would also say that there are quite a few ETSs that are already available for Europeans. And I've come to realize that a lot of listeners do not know that. Many of them are traded in Germany, in euros. So that's a way for most people to access it. There's obvious not as many as you can find in the U.S. But I just wanted to give that hand off for you guys. Another question I actually get quite a lot here, Tobias, is we have so many people who have been following you here on the show. I think you've been on the show at least 10 times, it's not more.

Starting point is 00:48:05 and your ETF with the stock ticket CIG, they cannot access that. Why is that the case? It's a European Union restriction. I think it applies in the UK as well. For some reason, they're not allowed to, the brokerage accounts can't even display the ticker. I'm not entirely sure what the reason is. There is a process by which the ETF could be made available, but it requires subjecting the ETF to another compliance regime. The regulatory and compliance regime in the States for the SEC is very, very tough. There's a lot of work that has to go on in the background. It's what makes the ETF so expensive to operate.

Starting point is 00:48:44 There's a cast of thousands in the background, calculating the returns and making sure the money's moved around. Then to subject it to a second regulatory regime just makes it too complicated for small independent issuer like I am. What we would like to do in the future is to create a dedicated European ETF that's listed in a USITs that's listed somewhere we haven't got to this level of detail yet, but somewhere in Europe. Germany's one venue that is the German boss is one possibility. It's not on the front burner right now because we're still trying to digest the last ETF that we've got out,

Starting point is 00:49:17 but that is something that I would like to do. And I have started having those conversations with some of the providers in Europe. Tobias, before we round off this show, where can the audience learn more about you and your fund? I've got a website, acquire as multiple, that's got a free stock screener on it for US stocks. You can see the cheapest 30 and the most in the biggest 1,000 and then there's a little paid component to that too if you want to get access to the other screeners. Have a book called the Acquireers Multiple. That's available through Amazon. You can get that in print or in Kindle format that gives a really easy to read summary of my particular brand of deep value investing. The website for my firm is Acquireasfunds.com and you can go in and you can see

Starting point is 00:50:01 Like in one page I describe what we do in plain English. It's pretty easy to understand why we're sort of traditional Graham investors, but we try to have a sort of systematic approach to it. We're kind of activist, private equity fanboys while we try to follow those guys. And then the fund site is Acquirersfund.com. And there's a little interview with Bloomberg that I did there talking to Scarlett Fu about the fund. And she asks some hard questions about value.

Starting point is 00:50:29 It hasn't been working. It's been a really tough period of time. But these things have happened previously. Value has had multiple periods of underperformance. And this is what keeps the strategy evergreen. Because people lose faith in the strategy. It seems like the easier money is made in the high growth, tech stocks, the more glamorous stuff. This has happened six or seven times in the data.

Starting point is 00:50:50 It's underperformed for a period of time. Every single time that it has happened, it has gone on to have a very, very good period of performance afterwards. And so I don't know when that period starts. We may need a stock market crash to get it going, or it might just start working when people realize how big the differential is between the valuation of the really expensive stuff and the undervalued stuff. The stuff that I own, the businesses aren't going away. Those businesses are here for the long run.

Starting point is 00:51:14 They're throwing off cash flow. They're buying back stock. And so you can see all those names. If you go to Acquireysfund.com, you can download the holdings. You can see what's inside the fund. We're very transparent like that. If you want to pull up the stock, it's the ticker ZIG, as Stig says, ZIG. That's all I do. I live in pretty deep value. And at the moment, we've got the US one out there. And I think it's a very good time for it.

Starting point is 00:51:37 Fantastic. And Tobias, I know we had you quite a few times here on the show. And audience absolutely love you. And we really, really hope I can say that already now that you will come on again. But thank you again also for this time to take time out of your busy schedule to speak with me here today on the Emasters podcast. My absolute pleasure. I love talking to you and Preston. So I'd love to come back again if you'll have me. Before we round off the show, we have a very exciting announcement to make. So Preston and I are constantly being asked to cover new topics on our show. And you probably notice that we're all over the place, with all the financial topics that we already covering. And we will continue to do so, but we would also like to focus more on especially value investing,

Starting point is 00:52:19 but also macroinvesting and currencies, which is what we are most passionate about. On the other hand, we would also like to cover more topics and add more value. And because of that, we're rolling out a network of podcasts. We're calling it the investors podcast network. And here in 2019 alone, we plan to launch three new shows with three brand new hosts. We actually met all three of them at the free TIP live events that we set up all over the globe. And we are honored to say that they're now joining the team.

Starting point is 00:52:49 Because we didn't want it just to set up new shows for the sake of setting up new shows. We really wanted it to be for the TIP community by the TIP. TIP community. Our first show was launched not too long ago, August 21st, and it's hosted by Robert Leonard. Some of you might already know Robert, because Robert has been writing great intrinsic value assessments together with us. These are the assessments of different stocks. You can find our website. We also send them out in the newsletter. And if you read any of his analysis, you could just tell how smart he has. So briefly about Robert, he earned his MBA degree in accounting and finance from the University of Massachusetts. And aside for being a stock investor, he's also a real estate investor.

Starting point is 00:53:31 And he is hosting our first show. It's called Millennial Investing, by the Investor's podcast Network. So to kick this off, we ask Robert to join us here on today's show. Thanks for having me, guys. All right, so Robert, please tell us about your new show, Millennial Investing. Yeah, absolutely. So on my new show, millennial investing, I will be interviewing successful entrepreneurs, business leaders, and investors to help educate and inspire the millennial generation, my goal with the show is to help improve millennials' financial literacy and help them make better investment decisions. Now, while this does include the stock market, it doesn't mean only the stock market. In fact, I'll be talking a lot about other ways to invest your time and money

Starting point is 00:54:15 outside of the market, such as through entrepreneurship, real estate, personal finance, personal development, your career, and much, much more. That sounds great, Robert. And you asked me to co-host the very first episode with you, and then the second one, you co-hosted with Preston. Could you talk to the audience about what we talk about the very first episode? Absolutely. So we talk about how to pick a brokerage company to invest with, how to actually buy and sell

Starting point is 00:54:41 stocks, why compounding is so important for millennial investors, and a bunch more. In the second episode, I sat down with Preston to discuss various different stock market investing in entrepreneurship strategies that millennials can implement. And at the end of the show, Preston takes one of my stock investing questions, flips it on its head, and then provides fantastic advice about entrepreneurship. Thank you so much for joining us. If you were like to subscribe to Robert's show, we created a guide for you in the show notes. You can of course also just search for The Investors podcast, Millionial Investing, whether you're on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your podcasts. But guys, that was all that we had for this week's episode of The Amesters

Starting point is 00:55:20 We see each other again next week. Thank you for listening to TIP. To access our show notes, courses or forums, go to theinvestorspodcast.com. This show is for entertainment purposes only. Before making any decisions, consult a professional. This show is copyrighted by the Investors Podcast Network. Written permissions must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting.

We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP258: Current Market Conditions and Value Investing w/ Tobias Carlisle (Business Podcast)

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.