FREE NEWSLETTER
WHY IS IT THAT GREAT companies don’t always make great investments? This is a conundrum that’s long puzzled investors because it so clearly flies in the face of intuition.
Indeed, today’s market leaders—companies like Apple, Amazon and Microsoft—are impressive businesses, and their stocks have delivered equally impressive performance, so much so that they and their peers have been dubbed the “Magnificent Seven.” The others in this group are Google parent Alphabet, Facebook parent Meta, chip maker Nvidia and Tesla. Result? Investors find it hard to believe that the stocks of great companies won’t turn out to be the best investments.
But that’s what the data say.
Despite their glittering reputation, growth stocks have underperformed their humble counterparts on the value side of the market. Value stocks include old-line manufacturers, banks, insurance companies and the like. Over the past roughly 60 years, according to data compiled by Larry Swedroe in his book Enrich Your Future, an index of value stocks has returned 13.2% a year, while growth stocks returned just 10%.
The data seem so clearly upside down that it can be hard to believe. Both intuition and recent experience suggest the opposite is true. Over the past 10 years, all of the Magnificent Seven stocks have outperformed the S&P 500 by hundreds of percentage points. While the S&P has returned a cumulative 180%, Apple has gained nearly 900% and Amazon 1,000%. Nvidia, benefiting from the growth in artificial intelligence, has risen 25,000%. How could the long-term data suggest these aren’t the best investments?
Moreover, it isn’t just anecdotal evidence that would lead investors in the direction of growth stocks. Basic logic also leads us in this direction. While not always moving in lockstep, stock prices do, on average, tend to rise and fall in response to corporate profits. It stands to reason that investors would want to invest in companies with faster earnings growth since—all things being equal—that should translate into faster share price increases. But again, the data say otherwise.
How do we explain this disconnect? There are several factors. For starters, today’s Magnificent Seven stocks capture all the attention, but they’re outliers and aren’t representative of growth stocks as a group. As I’ve noted before, research by Hendrik Bessembinder, a professor at Arizona State University, has shown that just 4% of stocks are responsible for nearly all of the stock market’s net gains relative to Treasury bills. In other words, as terrific as these seven have been, they’re also unusual, so we shouldn’t draw broad conclusions from this small set of outliers.
If we put aside the outliers, why do other seemingly great companies not deliver great stock market returns?
One key factor: When it comes to growth stocks, emotion plays a disproportionate role. People fall in love with these stocks in ways that they’d never fall in love with a value stock. I’ve seen this in my own experience. On several occasions, folks have asked me to “never sell my Apple.” They don’t make these sorts of requests about banks or insurance stocks.
Love can be fleeting, however. If a company isn’t delivering results that meet investors’ lofty expectations, they’ll be much quicker to abandon the stock, and this can drive the share price down. Growth stocks also tend to be popular with short-term traders, and that can exacerbate this dynamic. The result is that growth stocks might do well for a while but then drop off.
Value stocks, on the other hand, are less well known and certainly less loved. Expectations are much lower. As a result, there aren’t as many prospective buyers bidding up their shares. The result is that value stocks tend to have depressed valuations relative to their earnings. But over time, as these companies deliver results that exceed low expectations, their share prices move up. That contributes to their outperformance.
Fast-growing, profitable companies are also magnets for competitors. In fact, ironically, highly profitable companies can end up sowing the seeds of their own decline. Think of BlackBerry, which had the smartphone market to itself for a time. But it didn’t take long for others to take notice and enter the market.
This is a common pattern. Years earlier, the same thing happened to Kodak, when Fuji entered the market. Aspiring entrepreneurs, on the other hand, rarely get out of bed and decide to go compete with the local trash hauler or chemical manufacturer.
Fast-growing companies also tend to attract regulatory scrutiny, which ultimately can dent profitability. Just last week, the government opened a probe into Nvidia. Other market leaders, including Microsoft, Google and Meta, always seem to be responding to government inquiries.
There’s another, more technical reason growth stocks sometimes badly lag behind: They’re more susceptible to slight changes in interest rates and earnings expectations. That’s because a large part of the value of a fast-growing company lies in its future earnings. When investors pay 30 or 40 times earnings for a growth stock like Nvidia, they’re betting that the company’s future profits will eventually catch up with its current share price.
Meanwhile, with value stocks, investors aren’t betting on much future growth. Consider a company like Corning. It’s a fine company, but it’ll probably sell about as much glass next year as it did this year. For that reason, its share price doesn’t rely very heavily on future expectations. Its value is more heavily weighted toward the present than is the case with a company like Nvidia. And since a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow, and since future dollars need to be “discounted” using an interest rate tied to prevailing rates, that makes growth stocks much more vulnerable to both rising interest rates and modest earnings disappointments.
If we accept the data that growth stocks—excluding the likes of the Magnificent Seven—have tended to underperform, what conclusions can we draw? In my view, this is a key reason to avoid stock-picking and instead opt for index funds. When picking stocks, it’s all too easy to be lured by the best-known names, which are almost always highflying growth stocks. This phenomenon, dubbed the “magazine cover indicator,” has been documented.
When you opt for an index fund, you’ll still own those growth stocks—so you’ll still benefit from the next Apple or Nvidia—but, at the same time, you’ll own stocks on the value side. Those are the stocks that don’t make it onto magazine covers, but do, according to the data, tend to outperform.
For most investors, a simple S&P 500 or total-market index fund is sufficient to cover U.S. stocks. But if you have the inclination to do a bit more, you might also include a fund which tracks a value stock index. Since the S&P 500—and, by extension, the entire market—is currently skewed toward growth stocks, this is a way to help tilt your overall portfolio back toward a more even mix.
Adam M. Grossman is the founder of Mayport, a fixed-fee wealth management firm. Sign up for Adam’s Daily Ideas email, follow him on X @AdamMGrossman and check out his earlier articles.
Want to receive our weekly newsletter? Sign up now. How about our daily alert about the site's latest posts? Join the list.
I recently had a T-Shirt Designed. It is black and has the following printed in large white letters on the front,”VTI…Until I Die!”
Article after article, book after book, study after study, and yet 94% of the time professional investors do not even manage to “beat the S&P 500.”
I have 90% on my invested dollars in VTI, 5% in BRK-B, and 5% in VXUS. No Bonds, because I also own annuities for safe and reliable, guaranteed income. 24 months of cash and that is my entire portfolio.
SS covers 111% of our non-discretionary retirement income, so at age 74 and 70, we are quite comfortable with our future’s outlook.
Growth, Value, Sectors, Tilts…I own them all in one investment VTI. Life on Earth is good.
Growth, value, small/large, etc., funny how in summary, all of these articles (if they are honest) will end up back to index funds.
Thank you for this reminder for me. Since we have income (two S.S. checks and three pension checks) to cover all of our expenditures in retirement I’ve never felt the need for bonds in our portfolio. Maybe I just don’t understand them enough, all I see is something that keeps up with inflation and now much else. We are equally divided investments in VUG and VTI. If anything, I would probably sell our VUG and purchase VTV to be a little more conservative. Bonds? Stay the same? Or sell and buy? I’m still not sure but that is why I enjoy Humble Dollar, it always makes me reconsider or it reaffirm my choices
Nowadays, even the value stocks are picked over. You can’t buy a good company at 10 times earnings with a 4% dividend, because none are available.
For me, this signals that investors shouldn’t be buying right now. This situation definitely won’t last forever.
Another great piece, Adam.
Over time, I did well with larger purchases of Apple and JPM purchased back in 2008/2010. In particular, I recall being quite nervous about the Apple purchases. In more recent times, it was difficult to watch their share prices stagnate while other companies were soaring. I sold off some good size chunks of my beloved stocks to get into the likes of a few AI focused stocks and built up their positions in my portfolio over a couple of years. Pretty enjoyable watching our assets grow so much so quickly but now those positions are oversized and it’s time to trim and adjust as early lots have reached LTCG status. I must say, it is mighty hard to let go of some portions of your big gainers, again. The bigger problem now is, “…and buy what now with the proceeds?” After experiencing this multi-year sugar rush, and looking now for more stable G&I positions for my total portfolio, I find the returns to be lackluster and boring in comparison. This is part of the danger here. I’ve been very fortunate indeed but it’s time to adjust. However, I can definitely understand many investors not wanting to leave the gravy train.
A value tilt is one of the few factors that has boosted total returns over long periods. As long as emotions drive Mr. Market, particularly at tops and bottoms, that should continue. Less price risk and higher dividend yield add to the appeal of value index funds.