Robeco logo

Disclaimer Robeco Switzerland Ltd.

The information contained on these pages is solely for marketing purposes.

Access to the funds is restricted to (i) Qualified Investors within the meaning of art. 10 para. 3 et sequ. of the Swiss Federal Act on Collective Investment Schemes (“CISA”), (ii) Institutional Investors within the meaning of art. 4 para. 3 and 4 of the Financial Services Act (“FinSA”) domiciled Switzerland and (iii) Professional Clients in accordance with Annex II of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (“MiFID II”) domiciled in the European Union und European Economic Area with a license to distribute / promote financial instruments in such capacity or herewith requesting respective information on products and services in their capacity as Professional Clients.

The Funds are domiciled in Luxembourg and The Netherlands. ACOLIN Fund Services AG, postal address: Leutschenbachstrasse 50, CH-8050 Zürich, acts as the Swiss representative of the Fund(s). UBS Switzerland AG, Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, postal address: Europastrasse 2, P.O. Box, CH-8152 Opfikon, acts as the Swiss paying agent.

The prospectus, the Key Investor Information Documents (KIIDs), the articles of association, the annual and semi-annual reports of the Fund(s) may be obtained, on simple request and free of charge, at the office of the Swiss representative ACOLIN Fund Services AG. The prospectuses are also available via the website https://www.robeco.com/ch.

Some funds about which information is shown on these pages may fall outside the scope of CISA and therefore do not (need to) have a license from or registration with the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA).

Some funds about which information is shown on this website may not be available in your domicile country. Please check the registration status in your respective domicile country. To view the Robeco Switzerland Ltd. products that are registered/available in your country, please go to the respective Fund Selector, which can be found on this website and select your country of domicile.

Neither information nor any opinion expressed on this website constitutes a solicitation, an offer or a recommendation to buy, sell or dispose of any investment, to engage in any other transaction or to provide any investment advice or service. An investment in a Robeco Switzerland Ltd. product should only be made after reading the related legal documents such as prospectuses, annual and semi-annual reports.

By clicking “I agree” you confirm that you/the company you represent falls under one of the above-mentioned categories of addressees and that you have read, understood and accept the terms of use for this website.

I Disagree

08-01-2021 · Insight

Why do ‘quality compounder’ stocks always look impossibly expensive?

Trends investing focuses on the structural winners of secular growth trends, better known as ‘quality compounders’ – quality growth stocks able to compound shareholder value on a consistent basis. Skeptics of trends investing often dismiss these stocks because they tend to trade at multiples that are – sometimes much – higher than the market’s. But such reasoning is typically shortsighted.

    Authors

  • Steef Bergakker - Portfolio Manager

    Steef Bergakker

    Portfolio Manager

  • Sam Brasser - Consumer Analyst

    Sam Brasser

    Consumer Analyst

Summary

  1. Focusing solely on valuation multiples misses the full picture

  2. Steady-state value must be distinguished from future value creation

  3. Eyepopping multiples can turn out to be very ‘reasonable’

Most investors tend to implicitly assume there is some reasonable range of multiples at which most, or all, companies should trade relative to the market. Usually, this notion of ‘reasonable’ is based on a historical average or a peer group of similar companies. Multiples, however, have become a shorthand for the valuation process.

Importantly, multiples obscure the value drivers that really matter. It is the value drivers that determine the reasonableness of the multiple, not the multiple that determines the reasonableness of the valuation. More specifically, the market value of a company and its associated valuation multiple can be broken down into two main parts:

  1. The steady-state value assumes that the current assets in place, properly maintained, will produce a level of normalized profits indefinitely into the future. This steady stream of future profits can be valued as a perpetuity – in other words, the normalized profit divided by the cost of capital. Therefore, the appropriate multiple to determine what should be paid for the steady-state value of a business is the reciprocal of the cost of capital. So, if the cost of capital is 8%, the steady-state price/earnings (P/E) multiple is 12.5 (1/8%).

  2. Future value creation is driven by three fundamental factors. First, the spread between returns on incremental invested capital and the cost of capital. Second, the relative size of profitable investment opportunities. And third, the duration of competitive advantage.


Differences in multiples across comavpanies are determined by differences in expected future value creation

The steady-state value is the straightforward function of prevailing risk-free capital market rates and the equity risk premium, which itself depends on aggregate investor risk appetite at a given point in time. The steady-state value of a company can vary a lot over time, as both capital market rates and investor risk appetite fluctuate.

However, this does not cause divergence in multiples across companies. Differences in multiples across companies are determined by differences in expected future value creation. Companies that earn high returns on future investments, have sizeable profitable investment opportunities and can be expected to maintain their competitive

The justified multiple as a function of the company life cycle

There is an obvious link between a company’s life-cycle stage and the multiple it should trade at. Young companies that have a long runway of future value creation ahead of them deserve to trade at much higher multiples than older, larger and more established companies. The latter make up the bulk of the equity market, but have fewer or no growth opportunities relative to their existing assets.

The Big Book of Trends & Thematic Investing

Figure 1: The justified P/E multiple with perfect foresight

Figure 1: The justified P/E multiple with perfect foresight

Source: Robeco Trends Investing

Figure 1 shows the theoretical multiple trajectory of a fictitious company that starts out with a positive spread of 25% over its 8% cost of capital. The spread is assumed to erode by 1% every year, so that the firm’s competitive advantage will last 25 years. Assuming perfect prescience, investors should be willing to pay a seemingly astronomical P/E multiple of 96.9 at the start of this company’s life.

This high multiple is warranted, however, by the prospect of 25 years of profitable, value-creating growth. As the company matures over time and steadily realizes its growth opportunities, the justifiable valuation multiple will slowly converge towards the steady-state P/E multiple of 12.5 (1/8% after 25 years), reflecting the shrinking prospects for future profitable growth.

Find out more on this topic in our ‘Big Book of Trends and Thematic investing’.

Get the latest insights

Subscribe to our newsletter for investment updates and expert analysis.

Don’t miss out