Insights

Return to insights

Investing: Are You Playing on a High-Scoring Ground or a Low-Scoring One?

12 October 2018

By Rohan Samant, CA
  • Drivers of Equity Returns

If you follow cricket, you would be aware of terms like “high or low-scoring ground or pitch”. Some cricket grounds are known to be favourable for batsmen and on an average, these grounds help deliver high scores while others are known to be low-scoring grounds.

Similarly, in investing we believe valuation at the time of investing is an important variable that determines whether you are playing on a high-scoring ground (high average expected returns) or a low-scoring ground (low average expected returns).

The Math behind Returns

The returns you generate in equities is a factor of three key variables.

  1. The starting valuation multiple (i.e. the valuation multiple that you are paying at the time of investment).
  2. The earnings growth during the holding period.
  3. The valuation multiple at the time of the exit.

At the time of investing, the only variable that you know for sure is the valuation multiple that you are currently paying while you can only make assumptions for the other two variables. The question is, does the valuation at the time of investing have any bearing on future returns? Can it tell you whether you are playing on a high-scoring ground or on a low-scoring ground?

Let’s look at historical SENSEX data to ascertain how future returns have behaved based on the valuation multiple that would have been paid at the time of investing. We have kept the analysis at a broader market level; as an individual investor, your returns could have been better or worse based on your skill and your luck.

We used monthly SENSEX PE and price data (from June 1995 – Sep 2018) and then broke the starting PE (Price/EPS) valuation (as per BSE) at the time of investing into 5 buckets (less than 15x PE, 15x – 17.5x, 17.5x – 20x, 20 – 22.5x and more than 22.5x PE). We then calculated a 3-year CAGR of SENSEX from that point and compared it with the starting PE valuation (in other words, the 3 year CAGR you would have generated going forward based on PE valuation at the time of investment). We have then taken the average and median of returns in each of the PE buckets. The chart below summarises the results.

The chart clearly shows what one would imagine intuitively – the three year average returns are higher in the lower PE bucket when valuations at the time of investing are relatively cheaper. The average returns are lower in the higher valuation buckets when your starting point is in an expensive market. But let’s dissect these numbers further to understand the probabilities and risks involved.

Probability of Making Money (Gain)

First, let’s look at the probability of making money (positive return) in each valuation bucket. This table summarises the probabilities.

The probability that you made money in the three year period is high across the buckets. Even in the PE valuation bucket of above 22.5x, 67% probability of making money is not bad. But if we look at the average gain (CAGR) when the returns were positive we can see the divergence. In the lower/cheaper valuation buckets not only is the probability of making a positive return higher, but the average gains are also high – and the best three year periods had mind-boggling CAGRs. While at the expensive end, not only is the probability of making a positive return relatively lower, the average gain is below the risk-free rate and the best three-year return just matches the risk-free rate. Thus even if you have been really lucky, the returns would not have been so respectable if you had invested in an expensive market.

Probability of Loss

Now let’s look at the risk angle. This table summarises the probability that you lost money in the three year period.

Investing in a cheaper market does not completely protect you from the probability of loss. As can be seen from the table above, there is still a minor probability of loss even if you invest in a cheap market. The probability of loss goes up further as we look at the expensive buckets.

But the average loss (CAGR) whenever you lost money is very low or manageable in the cheaper buckets, while average loss (CAGR) is high as you move to the expensive buckets. If you were really unlucky and had to face the worst case of loss in the three-year period, you would have still faced a relatively manageable loss in the lower valuation buckets as compared to -15.5% CAGR (i.e. 40% capital loss!) in the expensive bucket.

Odds vs. Luck

Essentially the historical data suggests that odds are in your favour when markets are in the cheaper buckets and you have to be really unfortunate to not make money. Essentially you are playing on a high-scoring ground.

However, if the markets are expensive, the odds are against you. Your luck would have to do the extra work to make, at best, the risk-free rate.

As investors in equities, we cannot keep a smooth, linear expectation of returns. We must learn to adjust our expectations based on the ground that we are playing on.

Download Article PDF

Recent Articles

Is this sector going to underperform?

As the world stepped into the year 2020, we were hit by ‘Covid – 19’. While news … Continued

Read more
City landscape

Indian IPO Party Gets a Reality Check

 “IPOs are doing so great…”  “Why don’t you guys ever suggest investing in IPOs”  “Hot IPOs of … Continued

Read more

Do Indian Stocks outperform G-Secs?

The Background: In May 2018 Prof. Hendrik Bessembinder published a study in the Financial Journal of economics … Continued

Read more

Stay up to date with Multi-Act

Receive monthly updates by signing up to our newsletter.

Current complaints

Data for the month ending- November, 2022

Complaints status
Sr. No. Received from Pending at the end of last month Received Resolved* Total Pending # Pending complaints > 3 months Average Resolution time^ (in days)
1 Directly from Investors 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 SEBI (SCORES) 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 Other Sources
(if any)
0 0 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 0 0 0 0 0 0
^ Average Resolution time is the sum total of time taken to resolve each complaint in days, in the current month divided by total number of complaints resolved in the current month.

Trend of Monthly Disposal of Complaints

Sr. No. Month Carried forward from previous month Received Resolved* Pending#
1 April 2022 0 0 0 0
2 May 2022 0 0 0 0
3 June 2022 0 0 0 0
4 July 2022 0 0 0 0
5 August 2022 0 0 0 0
6 September 2022 0 0 0 0
6 October 2022 0 0 0 0
7 November 2022 0 0 0 0
Grand Total
0
0
0
0
*Inclusive of complaints of previous months resolved in the current month. #Inclusive of complaints pending as on the last day of the month.

Trend of Annual Disposal of Complaints

Sr. No. Year Carried forward from previous year Received Resolved* Pending#
1 2019-20 0 0 0 0
2 2020-21 0 0 0 0
3 2021-22 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 0 0 0 0
*Inclusive of complaints of previous months resolved in the current month. #Inclusive of complaints pending as on the last day of the year.