Wikinvest Wire

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Sunday Morning Coffee

The other day I saw an article whose title was something about picking five stocks to hold forever for retirement. I'm sure the companies are all fine business but there is more than a little folly to projecting forever.

One of the stocks in the list was Apple (AAPL). Obviously it has been a huge winner for holders of the stock and holders of certain ETFs where the name has a huge position.

I have nothing negative to say about the name. However that is not much different of a description someone might have applied to Cisco (CSCO) ten years ago. In the last ten years however the stock has been a bit of a dog. It is up 34% versus an 82% gain for the Nasdaq. The previous ten years CSCO was up 3800% versus a gain of 190% for the Nasdaq (190% for a decade is outstanding BTW). It would be easy to point to CSCO's inclusion into the Dow 30 as being part of the story but either way, if you were around during the 90s you remember what Cisco was.

Something will change the trajectory for AAPL, I don't know what or when just a matter of pointing out that anyone buying anything might be able to hold forever but if the story does change in a meaningful way you need to be on top of it.

AAPL could easily turn into a dog stock the same way Cisco did. How do I know? because it happened before. In the ten years ending Jan 15, 1999 AAPL was down 3% versus a gain of 510% for the Nasdaq--this came after dramatically outperforming the Nasdaq in the 1980s.

I had a more interesting thought though than the folly of picking a stock forever. If we had to pick something to hold forever (of course we don't) then wouldn't it make more sense to think about countries in this context?

This is of course a top down concept. A country index will sort out the companies that fail for you as opposed to one of the stocks you own failing and if the prospects of a country for whatever reasons you care about look promising (after thorough research) then picking five countries (or some other number) would make more sense than picking five stocks.

To clarify a couple of things, I am not a fan of the premise put forth in the referenced, but unlinked, article but someone who is looking for some holy grail of having a few holdings and never doing anything with it again might want to consider countries instead of stocks.

I am all for holding something forever when possible, we have several names in the portfolio that have been there since 2004 (when I started at the company) but as disclosed before we have not hesitated to sell stocks we thought we could hold forever when something serious changed.

A quick word on Operation Twist; more desperate and extreme measures belying just how much trouble the US is in.

8 comments:

drive on said...

I read the same article and I was surprised to see AAPL on a list of stocks to hold forever for retirement since it's not a dividend stock. I agree that a country index would be a better choice than a basket of individual stocks, but if an investor wants to "hold forever" maybe he shouldn't be in any stocks whether they're individual companies or country ETF's . That's why they invented CD's and bonds. By the way, CSCO may be a good value at current levels but it's certainly not a "hold forever" stock.

Don said...

Good point Roger. In Apple's case, there has been a big difference between Apple with Steve Jobs and Apple without him.

That's my problem with Berkshire Hathaway - no one knows what it will be like without Warren.

Buy and hold for a long time is completely different than forever.

Anonymous said...

If you could buy and hold forever, there would be no need for the entire service industry built around portfolio management.

Roger Nusbaum said...

8:55, indexing is a far stronger argument than buy and holding of individual stocks.

Stephen Drone said...

I always read these "stocks to hold forever" articles because they're great humor. I'll never forget Money Magazine and their articles about Worldcom and Enron.

Btw, Roger - Ice Road Truckers on History channel starts their new season of "Deadliest Roads" tonight. They're on the Death Road in South America.

Roger Nusbaum said...

thanks for the IRT heads up

Suresh said...

You are true. Any huge levels of exposure is always risky and should be in moderation. Except extreme events like 2008 which forces one to panic.

Nice to see a 'family production'- if I may call that - its been ~1 year for a big picture video.

Anonymous said...

Five stocks to be held forever - forget about growth or dividends, you need tough survivors that have proven adaptable to changing times. They won't necessarily make you a fortune, but you probably won't go broke, either. How many companies have been around 200 years? A couple of dozen?

Here's my picks: GE, IBM, JPM, XOM, KO.
Rich

Proud Member Of