Market leadership – A question of quality

In the third of a series of four articles, Fidelity Global Special Situations Fund Manager Jeremy Podger undertakes a quality check. He looks back through recent history and outlines why investing in high return businesses has not been as rewarding as finding companies that are improving their returns.

One of the major features of the post-financial crisis landscape across global equity markets has been the strong performance of ‘quality’ companies, as defined by return on capital or margins in the business.

Why has ‘quality’ done so well? Partly because of investor uncertainty about the global economy – when we worry about demand weakness in the economy we would rather have companies that have high levels of profitability and relatively low sensitivity of revenues to the economic cycle. But ‘quality’ was also helped by the long running decline in bond yields which, for now at least, appears to have stopped.

If we think about the types of company that could epitomise ‘quality’, we naturally converge on consumer staples or FMCG companies. Most of these have enjoyed nearly 20 years of expanding profit margins and have traded at progressively higher multiples of earnings.

Since 1999 Nestle, for example, has roughly doubled net margins. The most extreme examples would also include tobacco companies like British American Tobacco. However, after a very strong run since the start of 2000, it has fallen significantly over the last 12 months at a time when many other staples companies have also struggled.

It seems that for many of these companies, the days of strong revenue growth and margin expansion may be behind them. The clear message is that investing in good quality (high return) businesses is nowhere near as rewarding as finding companies that are improving their returns.

In a fascinating study a few years ago, Credit Suisse analysed global data from 2003 to 2012 looking at the best and worst performing companies by CFROI (cashflow return on invested capital). This found that over that relatively turbulent period the top 20% of companies by CFROI returns at the start of the period produced lower returns than the middle and lower slices.

Quite surprisingly, companies that started in the top fifth by CFROI and ended in the top fifth also produced a slightly lower return than middle profitability companies that ended in the middle. The notion being that sometimes investors pay too much for quality.

Previous articles in Jeremy’s market leadership series


Important information

The value of investments and the income from them can go down as well as up, so you may not get back what you invest. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. Investors should note that the views expressed may no longer be current and may have already been acted upon. The Fidelity Global Special Situations Fund uses financial derivative instruments for investment purposes, which may expose it to a higher degree of risk and can cause investments to experience larger than average price fluctuations. Changes in currency exchange rates may affect the value of an investment in overseas markets. Investments in small and emerging markets can also be more volatile than other more developed markets. Reference in this document to specific securities should not be interpreted as a recommendation to buy or sell these securities, but is included for the purposes of illustration only

Explore related Factsheets from THE Library

Fidelity Global Property Class A Accumulation ( GBP )

View Factsheet

Fidelity Global Special Situations Class A Accumulation (GBP)

View Factsheet

MOST READ INSIGHTS

Income: What rising interest rates mean for equi

Read More

Asset Managers under increasing pressure to spee

Read More

PROSPECTS | We’re looking deeper to unlock the

Read More

Views, opinions or claims expressed on this website are those of the authors, and not necessarily the views of FundsLibrary. The content and information contained on the site should not be taken as advice. We accept no responsibility for loss incurred by any person on taking or refraining from action as a result of material contained herein.

All figures correct as at 19.11.2018.