1. What is Contrarian Investing?
Why every fund manager says they are a contrarian
Iâve been writing about investment for 15 years. In that time, Iâve never met a fund manager who wasnât a contrarian.
No wonder. Successful contrarians are the closest things that financial markets get to heroes. A contrarian trade that pays off wonât just make you a profit â it could make your reputation. Jesse Livermore, the subject of investment classic Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, became historyâs most famous trader because he made his (second) multi-million dollar fortune by shorting the market ahead of the 1929 stock market crash. One of the trades that made Sir John Templetonâs name was his decision to bet big on beaten-down US stocks just as the second world war was getting underway, quadrupling his original stake in just four years. More recently, the hedge fund managers who made millions by betting against the US subprime mortgage market ahead of the 2008 financial crisis, had a bestselling book â The Big Short by Michael Lewis â written about them, which was then turned into a Hollywood film.
Big bold bets. Getting it right when everyone else gets it wrong. Getting rich while also being able to say âI told you soâ. Itâs very appealing.
So obviously, if a journalist asks you, as a professional investor, âAre you a contrarian?â, the only answer youâre ever going to give is âYesâ. Nobody wants to invest with someone who claims to blindly follow the crowd (even though that, in fact, is what a great many fund managers do, for reasons weâll explore later).
What do contrarian investors actually do?
Everyone knows a contrarian trade when they see one. Yet pinning contrarianism down to specifics is surprisingly hard. Most other investing styles are well defined. Value investors buy cheap stocks. Momentum investors buy stuff that has already gone up. Growth investors buy pricey-looking stocks that are growing quickly. Small-cap funds buy, well, small caps. You can buy funds with these descriptions in the title and youâll have a good idea of what strategy they plan to follow.
But what do âcontrarianâ investors do? Thereâs a vague understanding that contrarian investors bet against the market. They âbuy when thereâs blood on the streetsâ. They âzig when the market is zaggingâ. They âbuy what everyone else hatesâ. These old clichĂ©s are right in certain ways â contrarians do all of these things. But the clichĂ©s are wrong in a very specific and harmful way. Putting the focus on what âthe marketâ is doing, suggests that the most important factor in contrarian thinking is to spend most of your time second-guessing the market.
This is profoundly wrong â and this misconception goes a long way to explaining why many would-be contrarians lose money.
Why I prefer scepticism to contrarianism
The basic problem with doing the opposite of what the market is doing, is that sometimes â often, even â the market gets things right. And even when itâs wrong, it can stay wrong for longer than you can stay solvent (to paraphrase the great economist John Maynard Keynes, who learned this lesson the hard way). Some indicators of market sentiment can certainly highlight potentially profitable hunting grounds (weâll look at those later on) but spotting moments of âirrational exuberanceâ or points of âmaximum pessimismâ is only a small part of what a successful contrarian does.
And not all contrarians use the same methods. Some buy value stocks and hang on patiently for the share price to recover. Others make big, timely bets against investment bubbles, or simply avoid getting sucked into them. Others look for reliably cyclical sectors â buying on the downturns and selling when the good times roll around again. And contrarians understand that things change. The market arbitrages success away â the strategies that worked yesterday may not work tomorrow. In short, contrarian investing is a mindset rather than a specific strategy, which is why itâs so hard to pin down.
This is why I prefer to think of contrarianism as sceptical investing. In fact, thatâs the term Iâm going to use for the rest of this book. Sceptical investors do not define themselves in opposition to the crowd. Yes, they understand that markets make mistakes â a market is made up of human beings, and human beings tend to overreact in predictable ways. However, what matters is the scale of the mistake â the size of the gap between the underlying ârealityâ and the marketâs perception of that reality.
The importance of perception versus reality
Investment author and strategist Michael Mauboussin draws a good analogy. Imagine a horse race. As a punter, you can look at the horseâs diet, the form, the jockey â the âfundamentalsâ. Those can give you a good idea of what the horse is âworthâ â what its chances of winning the race are. But if you want to make money consistently, this isnât all you need to know. You need to know what odds the bookies are placing on the horse actually winning. You wonât get anywhere fast by betting on the favourite every time, even if it is the best horse in the race â the odds on offer for a winning bet wonât compensate for your inevitable losses.
Sceptical investors make their money when the bookie is mis-pricing the horseâs chances. In other words, where the market gets the odds wrong. So as Mauboussin puts it, itâs not just about sentiment â itâs about âhow that sentiment can lead to disconnects between fundamentals and expectations.â
So sceptical investors are always questioning assumptions â both the marketâs and their own. They donât take anything for granted. They do the work required to have as clear an understanding of reality as possible, rather than just working off a hunch or a nebulous sentiment indicator of some sort. This enables them to identify when markets are overreacting to the point where the reward on offer for betting on the gap closing between market perception and reality more than justifies the risk of being wrong.
If this was easy, everybody would be doing it
That sounds simple. In practice, of course, itâs very difficult. If it wasnât, everybody would be doing it. But itâs not impossible. And with the right tool kit and mindset â which I hope to show you in this book â you can learn how to be a more sceptical investor.
It is partly about doing your research. If a companyâs share price falls by 50% after a profit warning, you canât just assume the market is overreacting â you need to build a solid case for investing, which means looking at accounts and thinking deeply about which scenarios may unfold. But at a more conceptual level, itâs also about approaching the market with the correct mental models (in other words, having a sound grasp of what really drives the market, rather than what drives it in theory), and having enough self-knowledge and humility to avoid being hamstrung by your own behavioural flaws.
Thatâs what this book is about. In the chapters that follow, weâll look at how the market really works, and why the sceptical approach is a better way to look at investing, regardless of how active or passive you want to be. Then weâll move on to the psychology of markets, and how to think critically in order to take advantage of their tendency to overreact, while developing techniques aimed at restraining your own self-destructive instincts. Finally, weâll look at some of the most successful methods used by contrarians and sceptical investors today.
Letâs get started.
2. Why Sceptical Investing Works
The prevailing view of markets â the dominant âmental modelâ â is that they are efficient. There is a very long and technical explanation of the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) â indeed, I could write a whole book about it and barely scratch the surface or cover all the arguments and different interpretations â but, put very simply, the EMH argues that markets âprice inâ all available data promptly, as a result of a mass of investors responding to new information as it arrives. That doesnât mean that prices are necessarily always ârightâ as such (no one can predict the future), but in effect they might as well be. Beating an efficient market consistently over time should be impossible, because there is no way to secure a lasting edge over the long run. It also suggests that it should be hard or impossible for apparently obvious or predictable anomalies â such as massive, irrational valuation bubbles â to exist, or to survive for long if they do.
Confessions of an
inefficient investor
Now, most of us would argue that this clearly isnât true, and to be fair, few but the most fundamentalist academics would argue that the market is perfectly efficient. There are plenty of examples in history of markets getting it badly wrong (look at the fallout from any bubble and bust of your choice), even when all of the relevant information is seemingly widely available. For example, during the tech bubble of the late 1990s, a CEO could put a rocket under the share price of their company simply by appending â.comâ to the company name â no change of strategy or connection to the tech industry required.
And if youâre anything like me, then Iâm sure youâre more than aware that individual investors are often anything but efficient. I first started investing as a young finance writer in my early 20s, when I was assigned a feature on online share dealing. I felt that I should go through the process myself, and trade a few stocks too, if I was to explain the ins and outs accurately to my readers. So I opened an account with one of the discount dealers, and invested in three companies. I bought an ATM operator (because it almost literally had a licence...