Stay abreast of COVID-19 information and developments here
Provided by the South African National Department of Health
how we make investment calls
Alwyn van der Merwe
Director of Investments
Jan 25, 2018
According to our calculations, the combined exposure to Steinhoff and Steinhoff Africa Retail (STAR) detracted 5.9 percentage points from our client portfolios in 2017 after what had looked like a very good investment year. This has understandably led to disappointment and anger – some believe that SPW shouldn’t have risked clients’ money when everyone knows that ‘where there’s smoke, there’s fire’.
Our position is as follows:
The foundation of any of our investment calls is price or valuation. Simply put, we want to buy assets that are cheap relative to their intrinsic value, and we want to sell assets that are expensive relative to intrinsic value based on our analysis and assumptions. We believe that over the longer term, financial markets are quite efficient. Assets are generally correctly priced, as a wide spectrum of investors will digest the available information, and this cumulative knowledge will under normal circumstances result in the ‘correct’ price.
But there are often circumstances when prices of assets are not correct. First, when the average investor overestimates the growth prospects of a company or, conversely, underestimates its growth prospects. Second, prices can deviate materially from the correct price if news flow drives greedy behaviour or causes investors to panic.
In short, investor sentiment can lead to irrational investment behaviour. For active managers like ourselves, this irrational behaviour creates opportunities to acquire assets when they’re sold off in panic, and it provides opportunities to sell assets when greedy investors overpay.
Our clients often question a purchase when we buy an unloved share or sell a share when the underlying investment story associated with the asset is positive. A contrarian call is not uncommon for us at SPW, however, since price is the dominant factor dictating our calls.
The difference between what our analysis reveals to be the intrinsic value of a share, and the market price of that share, provides the so-called margin of safety. However, we need to add at the outset that the intrinsic value we calculate is a function of in-depth, asset-specific analysis – not only a function of historic operational performance.
Back to Steinhoff. When the of rumours of fraudulent activities surfaced – strategically planned from a timing perspective – investors panicked and sold off shares, and the price fell from levels of R80 to below R60 a share. The rapid sell-off reflected the panic in the market. We reviewed our company models based on information at source – the official financial statements. We also reviewed management’s response, and we made the call that the ‘margin of safety’ justified the holding in the company.
As it turned out, the auditors weren’t prepared to sign off the 2017 results, and the company later also declared the results for financial years 2015 and 2016 unreliable. In short, the ‘facts’ on which we based our results were incorrect, and our valuation of the company based on the new information was no longer valid.
We believed Steinhoff’s audited financial statements, and did not price for fraud. Auditors are paid by the shareholders to provide assurance on the company’s financials and in the process are given full access to all the internal accounts, yet they were unable to discover the fraud.
By basing our investment case on the audited financials, we were thus less concerned by the allegations of impropriety coming from the former joint venture partner, which related to years where the firm had received unqualified audits.
Going forward, our investment process will ensure that we take a conservative view of companies with potential red flags. (When we made the initial investment in the company we indeed used very conservative assumptions.) The most pertinent of these are increased scepticism around vain or flashy chief executives, repeated equity raises and any regulatory investigations.
Investors currently have very little trustworthy information on which to base any investment decision concerning Steinhoff. This creates two outcomes. First, without proper information, we cannot make informed, rational investment decisions on whether to buy or sell Steinhoff stock. Second, the market (correctly) values the group using extremely conservative assumptions. We nevertheless need to value the group as best we can, given the information limitations.
The fact that historic information is no longer reliable means our previous Steinhoff valuations no longer apply. We now value the group based on the values of its various parts. The key differences from our previous valuation are the materially higher estimated net debt and the lower value of the European operations, to which we now attribute far lower valuation multiples to compensate for impaired reliability of the profit figures.
Valuing Steinhoff’s listed assets at 10 to 15% discounts to their current market prices, we get a value of around R14 per share. To this we can add R14 a share for the €4 billion European property portfolio.
Next, we add the R7 per share for the group’s most recent acquisitions, where we assume realisable values will be 30% lower than what Steinhoff paid. We then deduct R37 a share for the group’s €10.7 billion of gross debt as disclosed at 14 December. To this we add back R4 per share for the debt in STAR, which is already accounted for in its market price, and R9 per share for the group’s expected gross cash, which includes the proceeds of the recent partial sale of its stake in PSG.
Together, this gives us a value for the ‘trustworthy’ portion of the group’s valuation of around R11 per share, which excludes the European operations. This points to the group having more assets than liabilities, but the market price isn’t much more than half this value, due to concerns around Steinhoff’s short-term liquidity.
The apparent fraud in the group appears to have taken place in the European operations, and any valuation of these assets is therefore largely speculation. Our conservative estimate for the European operations is R3 per share, but this could be substantially different.
The extreme uncertainty means we won’t be buying or selling Steinhoff shares until the group publishes its audited results and the results of the forensic audit by PwC are made known. Only at that point will we be able to make informed investment decisions and act accordingly, as always, within the framework of our investment philosophy.
Sanlam Private Wealth manages a comprehensive range of multi-asset (balanced) and equity portfolios across different risk categories.
Our team of world-class professionals can design a personalised offshore investment strategy to help diversify your portfolio.
Our customised Shariah portfolios combine our investment expertise with the wisdom of an independent Shariah board comprising senior Ulama.
We collaborate with third-party providers to offer collective investments, private equity, hedge funds and structured products.
navigating the complexities
Sanlam Trustees International
are they a good investment?
The great lockdown:
one year on
Head of Equities
IHG: focus on
quality pays off
Sanlam Active UK Fund
BUDGET 2021: THE RIGHT INTENT,
BUT RISKS ABOUND
Investment Economist at Sanlam Investments
INVESTING IN 2021:
WHAT TO EXPECT
Sanlam Private Wealth
MINING: IS THE
THROUGH THE HYPE
Head of Equities
South AfricaSouth Africa Home Sanlam Investments Sanlam Private Wealth Glacier by Sanlam Sanlam BlueStar
Rest of AfricaSanlam Namibia Sanlam Mozambique Sanlam Tanzania Sanlam Uganda Sanlam Swaziland Sanlam Kenya Sanlam Zambia Sanlam Private Wealth Mauritius
GlobalGlobal Investment Solutions
Sanlam Private Wealth (Pty) Ltd, registration number 2000/023234/07, is a licensed Financial Services Provider (FSP 37473), a registered Credit Provider (NCRCP1867) and a member of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (‘SPW’).
All reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the information on this website is accurate. The information does not constitute financial advice as contemplated in terms of FAIS. Professional financial advice should always be sought before making an investment decision.
Participation in Sanlam Private Wealth Portfolios is a medium to long-term investment. The value of portfolios is subject to fluctuation and past performance is not a guide to future performance. Calculations are based on a lump sum investment with gross income reinvested on the ex-dividend date. The net of fee calculation assumes a 1.15% annual management charge and total trading costs of 1% (both inclusive of VAT) on the actual portfolio turnover. Actual investment performance will differ based on the fees applicable, the actual investment date and the date of reinvestment of income. A schedule of fees and maximum commissions is available upon request.
COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES
The Sanlam Group is a full member of the Association for Savings and Investment SA. Collective investment schemes are generally medium to long-term investments. Past performance is not a guide to future performance, and the value of investments / units / unit trusts may go down as well as up. A schedule of fees and charges and maximum commissions is available on request from the manager, Sanlam Collective Investments (RF) Pty Ltd, a registered and approved manager in collective investment schemes in securities (‘Manager’).
Collective investments are traded at ruling prices and can engage in borrowing and scrip lending. The manager does not provide any guarantee either with respect to the capital or the return of a portfolio. Collective investments are calculated on a net asset value basis, which is the total market value of all assets in a portfolio including any income accruals and less any deductible expenses such as audit fees, brokerage and service fees. Actual investment performance of a portfolio and an investor will differ depending on the initial fees applicable, the actual investment date, date of reinvestment of income and dividend withholding tax. Forward pricing is used.
The performance of portfolios depend on the underlying assets and variable market factors. Performance is based on NAV to NAV calculations with income reinvestments done on the ex-dividend date. Portfolios may invest in other unit trusts which levy their own fees and may result is a higher fee structure for Sanlam Private Wealth’s portfolios.
All portfolio options presented are approved collective investment schemes in terms of Collective Investment Schemes Control Act, No. 45 of 2002. Funds may from time to time invest in foreign countries and may have risks regarding liquidity, the repatriation of funds, political and macroeconomic situations, foreign exchange, tax, settlement, and the availability of information. The manager may close any portfolio to new investors in order to ensure efficient management according to applicable mandates.
The management of portfolios may be outsourced to financial services providers authorised in terms of FAIS.
TREATING CUSTOMERS FAIRLY (TCF)
As a business, Sanlam Private Wealth is committed to the principles of TCF, practicing a specific business philosophy that is based on client-centricity and treating customers fairly. Clients can be confident that TCF is central to what Sanlam Private Wealth does and can be reassured that Sanlam Private Wealth has a holistic wealth management product offering that is tailored to clients’ needs, and service that is of a professional standard.