Argentina and YPF: 17 Stocks to Sell Immediately
by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, April 20, 2012: Issue #1756

If Argentina is willing to nationalize its leading oil company, YPF, which company (or companies) is next?

Ever wonder what happens when greed meets stupidity in the stock market? For a profound example, take a look at the recent free fall in Argentina’s largest oil and gas company, YPF (NYSE: YPF).

The country’s President Cristina Kirchner recently took a watershed step in expanding the state’s grip on the economy, saying she will send a bill to Congress to nationalize the firm.

Predictably, shares of YPF – and other Argentine stocks – gapped down on the news.

Kirchner declared that this historic move must be made because the petroleum industry is of “national public interest.” Of course, what industry isn’t? Banking? Telecommunications? Manufacturing? Agriculture?

Kirchner insists that YPF’s low production is forcing the country to spend heavily on imported energy at a time when it is experiencing a scarcity of dollars due to capital flight. And why is Argentina hemorrhaging capital? Because of boneheaded moves like this one.

YPF’s majority shareholder, Spanish energy group Repsol, is not taking this theft lying down. The Madrid government has threatened swift retaliation. And Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy stated the obvious when he said the Spanish company’s controlling stake in YPF – which Repsol was planning to sell to China’s Sinopec – was being expropriated “without any justification.”

Given that most successful developing nations are privatizing industries rather than nationalizing them – and given that investment capital always flows where it is treated best (and conversely flees those countries where it is treated badly) – why would Kirchner do this?

One answer is stupidity. The other is hubris.

There is absolutely no reason to think that a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats – or their appointees – could run YPF better than Repsol, one of the world’s leading energy groups. (Just as there is no reason to think the U.S. government can do a better job than private equity groups of backing speculative solar companies like Solyndra.)

And if Argentina is willing to nationalize its leading oil company, which company (or companies) is next? Here’s a potential hit list, 17 Argentine companies that trade on the NYSE or Nasdaq. If you’re holding any of them, sell them immediately.

The tragic part of this power grab – which has undeniable populist appeal in some quarters – is that it will only undermine investor confidence and do lasting damage to the Argentine currency, the Argentine economy and, ultimately, middle-class Argentinians.

This move is not just greedy. It’s profoundly dim. But then, Ronald Reagan said it best:

“The best minds cannot be found in government. If they could, the private sector would hire them away.”

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Is This Bull Market Over?
by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, April 16, 2012: Issue #1752

Lately the market has been wilting like last week’s roses, drooping in one session after another. Is the bull finally headed out to pasture?

The market had a strong first quarter this year. The S&P 500 rallied 12% on the heels of an 11% gain in the fourth quarter of 2010. In fact, it has more than doubled from its bottom on March 9, 2009.

But lately the market has been wilting like last week’s roses, drooping in one session after another. Is the bull finally headed out to pasture?

Don’t count on it. While no one can forecast the short-term zigs and zags in the market, there are three good reasons to believe there’s still life in this bull:

1. History shows that pullbacks don’t generally follow a strong first quarter. The S&P 500 has soared 10% or more in the first quarter eight times since 1945. According to Standard & Poor’s, the market rose three-quarters of the time in the following quarter. And the one other time the market rose 10% or more in both the fourth and first quarters, stocks gained 5% the next quarter.
2. First quarter profits are likely to be another record. Don’t forget that corporate profits have hit all-time records in each of the last eight quarters. And – while the reporting season is just getting under way – this time isn’t likely to be any different. Yes, the gains will be more modest this time thanks in part to higher oil prices and tougher year-ago comparisons, but we’ll almost certainly see more all-time record profits for the first quarter and a few big surprises could send stocks higher again.
3. Investors are still afraid. That’s actually a good thing. As John Templeton declared, “Bull markets are born on pessimism, grow on skepticism, peak on optimism and die on euphoria.” You talk to anyone lately who’s euphoric about the economy and the stock market? Me neither. And people aren’t investing their money that way, either. According to The Investment Company Institute, investors yanked $1.2 billion out of stock funds in February after taking out $423 million in January. History shows a near perfect correlation between equity fund redemptions and stock market performance. It’s when investors starting throwing cash at the market that you need to worry. And we’re a long way from that.

When you look at the fundamentals, it’s surprising just how negative the average investor is. After all, we’re enjoying low interest rates, low inflation, expanding markets overseas (especially in the developing world) and all-time record corporate profits.

What’s keeping most investors at bay, of course, is volatility. And not just lately. Investors have been clobbered by two massive bear markets in 12 years. The 2000 to 2003 bear market took stocks down 49%. It was the worst market since the Great Depression – until the 2007-2009 bear market showed up. That ripped 57% from the leading market index.

Last year, the S&P 500 fell 3% or more six times, and on one gut-wrenching day in August, 6.7%. That made microscopic money market yields look attractive.

Of course, volatility is the price of admission in the stock market. If equity accounts rose as smoothly as bank accounts, everyone would be fully invested. But they’re not. Not even close.

Paradoxically, that’s another reason stocks actually look pretty good here.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Bond Funds: The Worst Investment You Can Possibly Make
by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, March 30, 2012: Issue #1741

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, March 30, 2012: Issue #1741

Avoid bond funds in 2012. These investors are about to get slaughtered.

At our 14th Annual Investment U Conference at the beautiful Grand Del Mar in San Diego last week, I discussed a number of attractive investment opportunities available right now.

But I also warned them about one of the worst investments you can make. Take a minute now to make sure you don’t have it in your portfolio right now.

As I mentioned in a recent Investment U column, we’re at the tail end of the biggest 30-year rally in bonds the nation has ever seen. Three decades ago, Fed Chairman Paul Volcker pushed the prime rate up to 21.5% to squelch inflation. Long-term Treasury yields reached 16%. From that pinnacle, long-term yields have plummeted to 3.1% today. Bond prices have soared accordingly.

But the financial crisis is over and the economy is beginning to show a pulse. Higher inflation may be just around the curve. And as yields move up, bond prices move down. And perhaps way down.

Just about the worst thing you can own when interest rates are moving up is a leveraged bond fund. When a fund manager borrows short term at low rates in order to buy additional long-term fixed-income investments for his fund, it’s the equivalent of buying stocks on margin. It works fine while bond prices are flat or rising. But when bond prices fall – as they will when interest rates rise – these shareholders take a shellacking. If you’re not sure whether the bond funds you own are leveraged, don’t guess. Call the funds and ask.

And if you owned a leveraged closed-end fund, don’t even call. Just get out, especially if the fund is trading at a premium to its net asset value (NAV).

Recall that closed-end funds are not like Fidelity or Vanguard mutual funds. Like ETFs, they trade on an exchange and can be bought and sold throughout the day (not simply redeemed at the closing price like open-end mutual funds).

However, closed-end funds can see their prices fluctuate well above or below their net asset values (NAV). When a fund trades above its NAV, it is said to be trading at a premium. And when it trades below the NAV, it is trading at a discount.

There is no easier (or more obvious) buy or sell signal than to buy these funds when they trade at big discounts and sell them when they go to a premium.

If those premiums are huge – as many are in the fixed-income sector right now – they are ticking time bombs that you definitely don’t want in your portfolio. Here are just a few that are particularly dangerous right now:

And then there is the biggest stink bomb of them all: PIMCO High Income Fund (NYSE: PHK), currently trading at a 60.4% premium to its net asset value. Over 60%! That is completely nuts. These shareholders are clearly asleep – and overdue for a rude awakening.

Even if your closed-end funds aren’t on this list, don’t be complacent. Call your mutual fund and ask if the manager is using leverage. Or visit a free website like www.cefconnect.com and check out the relationship of your closed-end funds to their net asset values.

It may well be the most important three minutes you spend on your portfolio this year.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Share Buybacks: A Buy Signal You Can’t Ignore
by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, March 12, 2012: Issue #1727

Share buybacks increased by 46% in 2011. Has there ever been a more bullish indicator?

There are a number of signals that bode well for price appreciation with individual stocks: growing market share, rising sales, strong earnings growth and improving margins…

But you shouldn’t overlook another excellent indicator: share buybacks.

According to Standard & Poor’s, U.S. public companies spent at least $437 billion last year buying their own shares back. That was 46% more than in 2010.

Is this a good thing? Absolutely…

Regardless of whether you’re an individual or a corporation, sitting on cash isn’t terribly rewarding these days with the average money market fund paying five one-hundredths of 1%. And if the outlook is uncertain, a business owner doesn’t want to commit to building new facilities or taking on employees that aren’t needed. Nor is it necessarily in the best interest of shareholders to distribute this cash in the form of taxable dividends.

So buying back shares often makes good sense. Why? Because when you divide net income into a smaller number of shares outstanding, you get greater growth in earnings per share. And, ultimately, that’s what drives share prices higher.

Of course, stock buybacks boost earnings per share only if they’re larger than stock issuance. Historically, that hasn’t always been the case. (Much executive compensation today comes in the form of stock options that have a dilutive effect on existing shareholders.)

But in recent quarters, the supply of shares outstanding has been shrinking. And, according to analyst Howard Silverblatt at Standard & Poor’s, during the current earnings season, 97 of the S&P 500 enjoyed a boost to earnings per share of at least 4% from repurchases alone.

More Buybacks Ahead

Expect to see more of these buyback announcements in the weeks ahead. Why? Because U.S. corporations are sitting on more than $2 trillion in cash. That’s enough to buy all of ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) and IBM (NYSE: IBM).

There are some caveats, however. Some companies announce their intention to buy back shares and then don’t follow through. If business conditions change, interest rates rise, or cash flow decreases, a repurchase program may never get completed.

The other thing to watch is the exercise of stock options, as mentioned above. If a company is only buying back enough shares to offset the dilution that occurs when executives exercise stock options, you won’t see the buyback boost earnings per share.

But, generally speaking, share repurchase programs are a decided positive. And right now, with money cheap and corporate earnings strong, buybacks are occurring at record levels. Attractive companies in the midst of major share buybacks right now include L-3 Communications (NYSE: LLL) and ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP).

Having Your Cake and Eating it, Too…

Of course, some analysts would rather see corporate executives buying shares with their own money rather than the company’s money. And I don’t disagree…

But sometimes you can have your cake and eat it too. In a recent study, stocks that were subject to repurchases but not insider buying beat other stocks by nearly nine percentage points over four years. But stocks that were the subject of both repurchases and insider buying beat others by a whopping 29 points over four years.

Which companies have enjoyed share buybacks and insider buying recently? Two of them are Boston Scientific (NYSE: BSX) and Bank of New York Mellon (NYSE: BK).

These are the kind of companies that should handily outperform the market in the months ahead.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

The U.S. Aging Crisis: A Threat to Stock Market Prices?
by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, March 9, 2012: Issue #1726

Robert Arnott claims that the U.S. aging crisis is a threat to future stock market prices. But do the numbers add up?

There’s a new scaremonger in town. And his name is Robert D. Arnott, a portfolio manager, asset-manager executive and Chairman of Research Affiliates in Newport Beach, California.

Mr. Arnott has a simple thesis. Over the next 10 years, the ratio of retirees to active workers will balloon. Retirees, of course, must eventually sell their stocks to support themselves. But there will be fewer young investors around to buy them. Ergo, returns on stocks over the next 10 to 20 years will be anemic.

If this sounds simplistic, congratulations. You probably have a brain and at least a modicum of common sense. This type of “stock market analysis” is really no analysis at all. More to the point, it doesn’t work. Just ask failed economic futurist Harry Dent, whom I’ve written about before.

While it’s inevitable that there will be 10 new senior citizens for each new working-age citizen over the next decade, that in itself doesn’t portend paltry equity returns.

For starters, let’s look at what’s happening to the world population as a whole. There are currently seven billion human beings living on the planet. At the current growth rate, that total is likely to hit eight billion within a decade.

Now, if you believe that investors in China, India, Brazil and other countries will have no interest in buying companies like Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG), ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), or Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) in the future, no matter how inexpensively they’re priced, I guess you might put some credence in Mr. Arnott’s thesis.

But that’s highly unlikely. Citizens of capitalist countries are getting wealthier and better educated all the time. And the world is becoming more integrated. Would you really have a problem buying shares of Toyota (NYSE: TM), British Petroleum (NYSE: BP) or Nestle (OTC: NSRGY.PK) if they were bargains?

Of course not, regardless of the demographic trends in Japan, Britain, or Switzerland.

Mr. Arnott doesn’t just miss the big picture about the future, however. He also misinterprets the past. In a recent Wall Street Journal interview, for example, he talks about the collapse of Japan’s stock market over the last 23 years and blames it on the country’s aging population.

I have a better explanation. When the Nikkei 225, Japan’s leading stock market benchmark, climbed to nearly 40,000 in 1989, it was a bubble of epic proportions. Many stocks traded at more than 100 times earnings. And real estate was even more absurd. Just the 1.32 square miles that encompassed the Imperial Palace in Tokyo were valued at more than all the real estate in California combined.

Now that’s nuts. Crazier still were the Japanese banks that loaned money against these wildly inflated property values. This led to a protracted banking crisis that Japan’s political class refused to clean up.

To imagine that the two deflationary decades that followed this mania were the result of an aging population is like blaming this year’s warm winter on your aching big toe. Yet Arnott insists we should hunker down since “[Japan’s] demography is 10 years ahead of ours.”

Want to know what will really determine stock prices in the future? Earnings. I challenge you to look back through history and find even one publicly traded company that increased its profits quarter after quarter, year after year, and the stock didn’t tag along.

Perhaps our aging retirees will buy less in the future and contribute less to U.S. corporate profits. But there are billions of consumers around the world hungering for homes, computers, cars, phones, health insurance, credit cards, pharmaceuticals and golf clubs. They’re likely to be an engine of world economic growth – and rising U.S. corporate profits – for decades to come.

Don’t let anyone scare you otherwise.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

At our Oxford Club Chairman’s Circle conference at The Ritz-Carlton in Naples last week, I noted a decided optimism about the outlook for the bond market. This enthusiasm is almost certainly misplaced.

We’re at the tail end of the biggest 30-year rally in bonds the nation has ever seen. Recall that three decades ago, Fed Chairman Paul Volcker pushed the prime rate all the way up to 21.5% to squelch inflation. Long-term Treasury yields reached 16%. But from that pinnacle, long-term yields have plummeted to around 3% today. Bond prices have soared accordingly.

It isn’t just unlikely that today’s bond buyers will see annual double-digit returns going forward, it’s mathematically impossible. And yet I sense that many fixed-income investors don’t understand this.

It’s not unusual to meet an investor who has plunked money in a bond fund because “its long-term track record is excellent.” They don’t seem to realize that it’s also irrelevant. Never has the old saw, “Past returns are no guarantee of future results,” been more apropos.

This doesn’t mean you should avoid bonds altogether, of course. But if you’re going to buy bonds, now more than ever you need to be smart about it. Here’s what you should do:

1. Ladder your maturities. You should buy two-year, five-year and 10-year bonds. If rates go up – as they will eventually – your bond prices will fall, temporarily. But you will get your principal back at maturity and be able to reinvest your principal at higher rates. And paltry as bond yields are today, they still beat the heck out of the 0.05% that the average money market fund is paying.
2. Keep a close eye on expenses. In the world of fixed-income investing, keeping a Scrooge-like eye on expenses is essential. Why? Because it’s difficult to work magic in the button-down world of fixed-income investing. Managers rarely earn their fees. And 12b-1 fees can eat away at your returns like termites in an antebellum house. My advice is to stick with individual bonds, Vanguard funds (whose expenses are one-sixth of the industry average) and low-cost ETFs.
3. Avoid leveraged bond funds. Ever wonder how bond yields can be so low and yet the yield on your closed- or open-end bond fund is higher, even after expenses? Open your eyes. Unless you’re holding junk bonds, your fund manager is using leverage, the fixed-income equivalent of buying stocks on margin. By borrowing cheap, he or she is leveraging the portfolio to add yield. This works just fine while bond prices are flat or rising. But when bond prices fall – as they will when interest rates rise – these shareholders will take a shellacking. Consider yourself forewarned.

Some fixed-income investors tell me they feel safe for now since Bernanke has pledged to keep interest rates low through 2014. Think again. The Fed has only announced its intention to keep rates low. (Future economic conditions could quickly change that.) The Fed is also keeping long-term bond yields artificially low by buying these instruments to goose the economy.

Inflation could tick up. The Fed could raise rates and/or quit buying long-term Treasuries. In the end, the Federal Reserve sets short-term interest rates, but not bond yields and prices.

Know this. Understand it. And act accordingly. Bond investors today should be in a defensive posture, capturing higher yields than what’s available in cash instruments, but prepared for that point in the future when bond yields will rise and prices will fall.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

(You won’t believe the difference it makes!)

 by Momentum Alert Research Team

Way too many investors love to “bottom fish.”

A bottom-fisher is an investor who looks for bargains among stocks whose prices have recently dropped dramatically. He believes that the price drop is temporary or is an overreaction to recent bad news and a recovery is soon to follow.

“It’s down so much, I can’t go wrong,” they say.

Unfortunately, much more often than not, there dead wrong…

What is certain is that when bottom fishing for stocks, you are rarely going to find a prize. Instead it’s likely to be a company facing some sort of issue that is going to take a long time to resolve itself.

Here’s what James O’Shaughnessy, author of What Works on Wall Street has to say about the strategy: “If you’re looking for a great way to underperform the market, look no further.”

In fact, you’d have made a fortune doing the opposite… investing in the top performing stocks – the best momentum stocks – over the preceding months.

And O’Shaughnessy can back up his statement.

O’Shaughnessy sliced and diced the stock market in his book, sizing up nearly every possible way to make money in stocks – usually going back over 80 years. And he found that buying what has fallen the most is one of the worst strategies.

O’Shaughnessy’s conclusion is: “Unless FINANCIAL RUIN is your goal, avoid the biggest losers.”

Looking back at eighty years of stock data, here’s what O’Shaughnessy found:

If you’d bought the top 10% of performers (the best momentum stocks) over the preceding six months for each time period he looked at, you’d have made more than half a billion dollars.

If you’d “bottom-fished” and bought the bottom 10% of performers over the previous six months you’d have made less than $293,000… about 0.05% as much.

Which would you prefer? More than $500 million… Or less than $300,000?

It’s All About Momentum

 His study shows that buying what was already “up” proved incredibly successful…

 “Over six-month and 12-month periods, winners generally continue to win and losers general continue to lose,” O’Shaughnessy writes.

And owning the most recent crop of momentum stocks (without taking on unnecessary risk) – allows you to do just that. It’s a common sense approach to investing that works in good markets, and in bear markets, too. It doesn’t depend on

what the market averages are doing. Or whether your fund manager is on or off his game.

Momentum stocks are, by definition, the fastest-growing companies – and the most rapidly moving stocks – in the market. There’s nothing mysterious about them. Quite simply, they lead virtually all other companies in terms of sales growth, operating margins, profitability and “relative strength.”

As O’Shaughnessy points out; the key to making money in a short time (and a fortune over the long-haul) is to invest in the best performing stocks over the preceding months.

So the next time you hear someone say his main strategy is to buy what has fallen a lot recently; realize this person has no idea what actually works.

What works is buying what was up, not down. Simply buying what was up over the previous six months turned $10,000 into over $500 million. Doing the opposite performed far worse than the stock market (with much more volatility, too).

Do what works… invest in momentum stocks. History shows you’ll be well-rewarded if you do.

Over President’s Day weekend, I took my family to Massanutten Ski Resort in the beautiful Virginia Mountains. (It’s not Telluride, but when you have an eight-year-old son who yells “Woo-Hoo!” all the way down the slopes, it really doesn’t matter.)

We had admittedly low expectations for skiing when we arrived. It’s been an unusually warm winter and the snowfall has been virtually nil. Yet the night before we skied, the snow dumped fast and furious on top of the base of artificial snow.

The next day we woke up to a winter wonderland. Everything was covered with snow. The sun was shining. And it ended up being a perfect day. I couldn’t help thinking this was a lot like the stock market.

Here’s what I mean…

As well as being the Chairman of Investment U, I’m also the Chief Investment Strategist for The Oxford Club – a private fellowship for investors trying to achieve and maintain financial independence.

And our club has won numerous industry awards for editorial excellence. (The independent Hulbert Financial Digest ranks us among the top-performing investment letters in the nation for 10-year performance.) Yet much of our success actually comes from being well positioned to take advantage of completely unexpected circumstances.

Right now, for instance, the nearly two dozen recommendations in our Oxford Trading Portfolio are up an average of 43%, even though our average holding period is just 188 days.

Our portfolio is beating the market by a wide margin for two primary reasons:

• The first is that we have a proven system for identifying great companies at attractive prices.

• The second is that we don’t try to time the market. So when it suddenly puts on an impressive rally, as it has over the last three months (tacking on more than 1,500 points), we’re set to enjoy the benefits.

I don’t have a crystal ball. And neither does anyone else. Three months ago, we couldn’t have told you that the market was about to power higher. And two weeks ago, when I made my reservations for a mountain villa at Massanutten, I couldn’t have known that the skies would suddenly open up. But in both cases, it did.

Of course, stocks might not have rallied and the snow might not have fallen. But at least we took a chance. Successful investing is about hedging your bets, taking intelligent risks and being prepared for whatever happens.

Folks who wait for that mythical day when the investment landscape looks perfect will regret it. Just as those who wait for ideal conditions before planning a ski trip will find the fares are higher, the lift lines are longer or, if they wait too long, the snow is already gone.

Market bears will counter that the conditions may look right today, but that can change quickly. I don’t disagree. But we’ve thought about that, too.

We own plenty of investments outside the stock market, so our performance isn’t based on equities alone. We abide by strict position-sizing rules to limit our risk. And we run a trailing stop behind all of our stocks, assuring ourselves that our profits don’t slip through our fingers.

It’s not a perfect system, but it works, delivering high returns during the good times and protecting capital during the bad ones.

It sure beats sitting at home… wondering if it will snow.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

More than two thousand years ago, the Greek sage and philosopher Epictetus counseled, “It is impossible for anyone to begin to learn what he thinks he already knows.”

Nowhere is this truer than in the stock market. You need only ask the many thousands of investors who have sat out an historic rally – the market has doubled from its lows years ago – because they just knew stock prices were only going to go lower.

That mindset has proved to be an expensive one. Yet these individuals now face another test.

If they jump into stocks today, having already missed one enormous move, they risk being in for the next leg down. That would hurt. On the other hand, if they continue to sit on the sidelines – earning next to nothing in bonds or cash – the market may well power higher and leave them with an even more extreme choice in the weeks and months ahead.

What is the prudent investor to do?

They Rise and They Fall

The first is to understand the error of your ways. Every market timer believes that if he sits patiently on the sidelines, he will get a better opportunity to buy stocks at lower prices.

And they often do. Unfortunately, they generally get to feeling so good about missing the downdraft that they convince themselves that the market will keep falling.

And, again, if often does. Until, of course, it doesn’t.

As the market climbs, they begin to rationalize that this is just “a bear market rally” or “a dead-cat bounce.” Until it becomes obvious that the train left the station and they’re still standing on the platform.

Cash is Not King, but Stocks Might Be

Warren Buffett’s mentor Benjamin Graham once said that no investor should have more than 75% of his money in stocks or less than 25%.

That’s a good rule of thumb. Seventy-five percent keeps you from getting overly enthused when times are good. And twenty-five percent keeps you from throwing in the towel when times are bad.

But what do you do now if you’re one of those who has played it too cautious until now and are fed up with your negative real returns in Treasury bonds or cash?

First, stop justifying what you’ve done and get off the dime. Start committing money to high-quality stocks in a gradual way. After all, if you shift a big percentage of your portfolio into stocks right now, you could regret it. And if you remain in cash, you could regret that, too.

So hedge yourself. Start moving money into stocks at regular intervals, being sure to keep buying if the market dips so you get better entry prices.

An Easy Way to Start Investing

A conservative place to start would be the Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (NYSE: VYM). True, it currently yields just 2.9%, but that’s still 50% more than 10-year Treasuries are paying and 50 times as much as the average money market fund.

Even if stocks go nowhere over the next 10 years – highly unlikely given the decade we just had – you’d still be better off in this fund than in a bond or money market fund.

There are a ton of reasons to put off making this move from the state of the economy to the size of the deficit. But that’s just the kind of thinking that got you stuck on the sidelines.

Look at the bright side. Inflation and interest rates are low. We’ve had five straight months of declines in the jobless rate. The ECB has extended three-year, low-cost loans to European banks. The Greek parliament has voted to actually cut spending. And we’re in a period of all-time record corporate profits.

So cast off. As the great nineteenth-century theologian William Shedd pointed out, “A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for.”

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Apple’s share price exceeded $500 this week, giving it the largest market cap of any U.S. company.

Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) so successfully sells computers, phones and other electronic gadgets that recently announced fourth-quarter profits soared 118% on a 73% increase in revenue. This is unheard of for a $475-billion company.

To put this in perspective, earnings at the companies in the S&P 500 stock index are on track to post a 6.6% year-on-year rise for the fourth quarter. Yet once Apple’s earnings are factored out, the expected fourth-quarter gain shrivels to just 2.8%. This so skews results that many Wall Street analysts are now stripping Apple from the index before weighing valuations and making forecasts.

Of course, it’s just a matter of time before Apple’s torrid growth begins to wane. It’s not possible for $500-billion companies to keep growing at the rate of $5-billion companies… or even $50-billion companies.

So the key is to search for the next Apple. But how do you find it?

Fortunately, the factors that make a great-performing stock are well known and have been intensively studied by academics and researchers. We know the key characteristics that top-performing stocks generally possess before making their parabolic moves up.

Here are just a few:

1. Double-digit sales growth. You can only grow the bottom line for so long by cutting costs. Every business needs to have healthy top-line growth before it can generate robust and sustainable long-term earnings growth. Note that sales at Apple jumped 73% last quarter.
2. At least 25% quarterly earnings growth. In an economy as weak as this one, most companies can’t meet these first two hurdles. But, again, Apple is seeing earnings growth at more than four times this rate.
3. A return on equity of 17% or more. Return on equity – an excellent measure of management’s efficiency with capital – is calculated by dividing earnings per share by book value per share. (This is one of Warren Buffett’s key metrics, too.) Note that Apple’s return on equity is a whopping 46%.
4. New products and services. Apple is the king of innovation, regularly bringing out not just new versions of products but entirely new products: iPods, iTunes, iPhones and iPads.
5. High-quality management. Never forget that every company is essentially a team of people. And just as every great sports franchise needs a highly qualified coach, so does each company require a visionary leader. Apple’s co-founder and former CEO Steve Jobs was one of the greats. Now that he’s gone, it will be interesting to see how the new management performs.
6. Institutional support. The vast majority of shares traded on the major exchanges are mutual funds, hedge funds, pension plans and endowments. You want to own the same stocks the institutions are buying. And, indeed, institutions own more than 70% of Apple’s outstanding shares.

These are some of the key criteria that companies need to meet to generate superior long-term returns for shareholders.

We may not see another company in our lifetimes that transforms the business landscape the way Apple has. But there are plenty of great innovators out there, including Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN), Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), Genentech, eBay (Nasdaq: EBAY), Costco (Nasdaq: COST) and Intuitive Surgical (Nasdaq: ISRG).

These companies – and others like them – are likely to be among the best-performing stocks in the years ahead.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green