Monday, April 13, 2099

DPA Groep N.V. 2022
Esperite: 2018 Stem Cell Bank losing money, selling shares. Price recently fell from 3 to 0,25
oktober 2019 falliet, koers: 0,046 geen handel.

FNG 2019 Failliet 2022 https://fngnv.com/17-02-2022-fng-nv-vraagt-faillissement-aan/
Gemalto Thales offer 2018

GeoJunxion formerly AND 2023 EUR 1,1 distribution

GrandVision 2019 EUR 28 offer DELISTED on 10/01/2022
Groothandelsgebouwen N.V. bought for EUR 56,92

Hunter Douglas 2021 bought for EUR 175

Intertrust 2021 taken private at EUR 20,-

ICT Group NV 2021 EUR 14,50 private

Kardan 2019 June 2020: https://www.iex.nl/Nieuws/ANP-240620-111/Kardan-geeft-beursnotering-in-Amsterdam-op.aspx

KAS BANK 2019

Kiadis Pharma taken private in 2020

Klepierre cheap at €20? 2019 French

K. VolkerWessels 2019 taken private (again) in 2020

K. Wessanen 2019 buy out

Lucas Bols 2022 2023 Nolet buyout EUR 18 at Graham Value

Neways bought by Infestos

NIBC bought by Blackstone in 2020

Oranjewoud 2018 EUR 6 2022 https://www.tubantia.nl/enschede/sanderink-is-gesteggel-met-toezichthouder-afm-beu-en-haalt-oranjewoud-van-de-beurs~a1cadfeb/

Ordina 2022 bought at 42% premium

RoodMicrotec 2021

SnowWorld 2023 private at EUR 10,50
Yatra Capital 2020

Other countries:

Alibaba 2023
Starbucks

Thoughts on share prices: Peter Lynch and Nick Kraakman https://www.valuespreadsheet.com/blog/dangerous-sayings-about-stock-prices

Tuesday, April 08, 2025

Allfunds (AMS: ALLFG) notes

Share price EUR 4,66 today , april 2025 is almost 90% lower than an offer* from Euronext in 2023.

Too difficult pile. Earnings don't seem to be increasing, no dividend. Not very cheap?

*Euronext's indicative offer amounted to 8.75 euros per share and consisted of 5.69 euros per share in cash plus 0.04059 new shares.

While the offer valued the Madrid-based Allfunds above its market value of 4.6 billion euros at the time it was made, it was below the 7.2 billion euros the distribution firm reached in its Amsterdam listing in 2021.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/allfunds-board-poised-reject-euronexts-offer-source-2023-02-28/

ABN Amro stock price is much lower than Graham Value

SECTOR: FAIL ABN AMRO is in the Financial sector, which is one sector that this methodology avoids. Technology and financial stocks were considered too risky to invest in when this methodology was published even decades ago. Several of Graham's criteria, like the Current Ratio and Debt to Current Assets, do not apply to financial companies. As a result, the company will not be able to pass this methodology, although we will include the remainder of the analysis for informational purposes.

SALES: PASS The investor must select companies of "adequate size". This includes companies with annual sales greater than 260 million Euros. ABN AMRO's revenue of 6 500? million, based on 2024 figures, easily passes this test.

CURRENT RATIO: FAIL The current ratio must be greater than or equal to 2. Companies that meet this criterion are typically financially secure and defensive. ABN AMRO is a financial stock so the current ratio analysis cannot be applied and this criterion cannot be evaluated.

LONG-TERM DEBT IN RELATION TO NET CURRENT ASSETS: FAIL Long term debt must not exceed net current assets. Companies that meet this criterion display one of the attributes of a financially secure organization. ABN AMRO is a financial stock so this variable is not applicable and this criterion cannot be evaluated.

LONG-TERM EPS GROWTH: PASS FAIL Companies must increase their EPS by at least 30% over a ten-year period and EPS must not have been negative for any year within the last 5 years. EPS for ABN AMRO have been increasing. In the past, ABN Amro (and many other banks) failed. In 2020 ABN Amro booked a loss.

Earnings Yield: PASS The Earnings/Price (E/P) ratio, based on the lesser of the current E/P or the E/P using average earnings over the last 3 fiscal years, must be "acceptable", which this methodology states is greater than 6,6%. Stocks with high Earnings Yields are more defensive by nature. ABN AMRO's Earnings Yield of 15% (based on an average of 3 years earnings) passes this test.

GRAHAM NUMBER: PASS The geometric average of 1,5 x book value and 15 x EPS is the Square Root of 1,5 x 29 Euros x 15 x 2,7 Euros = 42 Euros.

DIVIDEND: ABN AMRO pays a dividend of 50% of earnings, was 1,35/17 = 8%.

"NLFI as a majority shareholder is currently executing a trading program with the intention to bring its stake down to approximately 30%. " It is unclear (to me) what the government's minimum selling price per share is.

https://www.nlfi.nl/ which is the government, is selling at a low price keeping the share price low??

CONCLUSION 2024: ABN Amro seems to be profiting from increasing interest rates. The stock is not expensive at EUR 15. The buyback will increase book value and earnings per share and NLFI sales keep share price low (which is good for long-term holders).

CONCLUSION 2025: The price seems good at EUR 17 as well. Seems like a good price at which to buy back more shares? Defensive investors don't invest in banks, because of the risks such as bank runs, but ABN Amro seems inexpensive at EUR 17.

Tuesday, April 01, 2025

Jonathan Rauch Christianity and democracy

Q: "Basic principles of Christianity according to Jonathan Rauch. fear not and?"

A: Jonathan Rauch identifies three core principles of Christianity that align with the values of liberal pluralism:

1. **"Fear not"**: This principle encourages Christians to have faith and not view challenges or losses as catastrophic. It parallels the democratic value of sharing power and accepting electoral outcomes without fear[1][3].

2. **"Imitate Jesus"**: Christians are called to emulate Jesus's teachings, emphasizing the dignity and equality of every individual and prioritizing care for the marginalized. This reflects liberalism's commitment to protecting minorities and treating all individuals as ends in themselves[1][3].

3. **"Forgive each other"**: Forgiveness aligns with democratic virtues like forbearance and compromise, urging people to coexist peacefully despite differences, rather than seeking domination or exclusion[1][3].

Rauch argues that these principles can help revitalize Christianity while supporting democracy, urging Christians to focus on their faith's teachings rather than political fears or divisions[1][2].

Citaties:

[1] Christianity as a democratic institution Jonathan Rauch 2025 https://www.democracyworkspodcast.com/episodes/jonathan-rauch-2025

[2] Jonathan Rauch underscores 'civic theology' of The Church of Jesus ... https://www.deseret.com/2023/10/8/23906311/jonathan-rauch-christianity-religion-democracy/

[3] Christian Renewal and the Future of American Democracy https://wheatley.byu.edu/religion/christian-renewal-and-the-future-of-american-democracy

[4] When Liberalism Meets Christianity | Jonathan Rauch - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHs7M7xiUNQ

[5] Jonathan Rauch: The Christianity-Democracy Break Up https://www.commonwealthclub.org/events/2025-02-10/jonathan-rauch-christianity-democracy-break

[6] Jonathan Rauch | The Christianity-Democracy Break Up https://www.commonwealthclub.org/events/archive/video/jonathan-rauch-christianity-democracy-break

[7] The Gay Jewish Atheist Arguing that American Christianity Needs a ... https://jonward.substack.com/p/the-gay-jewish-atheist-arguing-that

[8] Jon Rauch On Evangelical Christianism - by Andrew Sullivan https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/jon-rauch-on-evangelical-christianism

[9] Church and State of the Union - Commentary Magazine https://www.commentary.org/articles/michael-rosen/christianity-democracy-jonathan-rauch/

[10] Jonathan Rauch on the Politicization of Christianity - Persuasion https://www.persuasion.community/p/jonathan-rauch-on-the-politicization

Friday, March 28, 2025

Vlaggetjesweken vlaggetjesdag voordeel , higher expected stock market returns after crashes. Perplexity deep research

The Impact of Market Crashes on Long-Term Expected Returns

After a significant market decline, many investors wonder if they might benefit from higher expected returns by investing post-crash. This analysis examines how a 10% or 20% market drop might affect long-term investment outcomes based on historical data.

Market Crashes and Subsequent Returns

When markets experience sudden downturns, they create potential entry points with improved return prospects. However, the magnitude of this opportunity depends on several factors including the severity of the crash, recovery patterns, and long-term market dynamics.

10% Market Corrections

Market corrections of 10% or more occur with surprising regularity. Since 1980, the S&P 500 has experienced a drop of 10% or more in 47% of calendar years37. Despite this frequency, the market has maintained an average annual return of approximately 13.3% over the same period3.

A 10% correction typically takes about five months to reach its bottom, with recovery occurring relatively quickly—around four months on average4. This rapid recovery pattern means that while investing after a 10% drop offers some advantage, the window to capitalize on lower prices is often brief.

Research indicates that in cases where a 10% correction occurs, investors who wait could gain about a 10% return benefit compared to those who invested before the correction12. However, this advantage must be weighed against the opportunity cost of waiting for corrections that don't materialize.

20% Market Crashes

A 20% or greater market decline (a bear market) represents a more significant opportunity but also comes with longer recovery periods. Historical data shows that bear markets have averaged 35.8% declines from peak to trough and typically last about a year and a half4.

Recovery from these larger crashes takes considerably longer—about two years and two months on average4. The COVID-19 crash of 2020 was an exception, with the market recovering in just eight months despite a 34% decline2.

One important consideration is that nominal recovery periods don't account for inflation. When adjusted for inflation, real recovery times are substantially longer. For instance, after the 2000 "tech wreck," inflation totaled 35.7%, prolonging the real recovery in purchasing power by an additional seven years and nine months beyond the nominal recovery5.

Expected Return Enhancement

While it's intuitive to assume that buying at lower prices should increase expected returns, quantifying this advantage is complex. The empirical evidence presents several key insights:

Short-term advantage: Following a 10% correction, historical data suggests an approximate 10% return benefit compared to pre-correction investing12.
V-shaped recovery pattern: Markets typically follow a V-shaped pattern around recessions, with sharply negative returns heading into downturns and strong recoveries as recessions unfold9. This pattern indicates that the window to capitalize on lower prices may be brief.
Post-crash positive momentum: Following severe market declines, returns tend to be significantly positive. One year after each of the S&P 500's 10 worst one-day drops, the index delivered double-digit positive returns in all but one instance6.
Compounding disadvantage: The opportunity cost of waiting for crashes that don't materialize is substantial. In scenarios where a 10% correction doesn't occur within three years (44% of cases), the opportunity cost averages about 30%12.

When considering these factors collectively, the expected return enhancement from investing after a 10% crash might be around 10%, while a 20% crash could potentially offer a greater advantage in the short term. However, this advantage diminishes over longer time horizons as market recoveries progress.

The Risk of Waiting for Crashes

A critical consideration is the risk associated with waiting for market crashes before investing. Multiple studies demonstrate that attempting to time the market by waiting for corrections frequently underperforms a strategy of immediate investment:

Missing best market days: Missing just the 10 best days in the market over a 20-year period reduces annualized returns from 9.7% to 5.5%14. This risk is significant because the best days often occur during volatile periods when investors might be hesitant to enter the market.
Net expected cost: When factoring both the benefit of investing after a correction (10%) and the opportunity cost when corrections don't materialize (30%), the net expected cost of waiting is approximately 8%12.
Time in market versus timing: Across multiple studies, lump-sum investing outperforms dollar-cost averaging in approximately 80.6% of periods since 199719, suggesting that immediate market exposure typically produces better long-term results than attempting to time entry points.

Investment Strategies Following Market Declines

If a significant market decline does occur, several investment approaches can help optimize returns:

Lump-Sum Versus Phased Investment

During normal market conditions, lump-sum investing typically outperforms dollar-cost averaging. However, following significant market declines, this relationship changes:

In drawdowns of 10-20%, phased investment approaches (such as investing over six tranches) outperformed lump-sum strategies 92% of the time18.
For drawdowns exceeding 20%, all phased-in approaches maintained positive returns while lump-sum returns often turned negative18.

A "fixed income first" approach—where investors deploy cash into bonds before gradually shifting to equities—has shown particular effectiveness following severe market declines18.

Industry-Specific Considerations

Not all sectors recover uniformly after market crashes. Research indicates that high-beta stocks (more volatile than the market) lose more value during crashes but tend to gain more during post-crash recoveries8.

During specific crashes, certain industries have experienced stronger rebounds after being hit hardest—high-tech stocks following the 1997 crash and manufacturing stocks after the 2008 crash showed evidence of investor overreaction and subsequent recovery8.

Conclusion

Based on historical patterns, a 10% market crash might increase expected returns by approximately 10% in the short term, while a 20% crash could offer potentially greater enhancement. However, these advantages tend to diminish over longer time horizons as markets recover.

The evidence suggests that while investing after crashes can provide improved return prospects, the risks of waiting for crashes often outweigh the benefits. Market timing strategies historically underperform strategies that maintain consistent market exposure, primarily due to the difficulty of predicting market movements and the risk of missing strong recovery periods.

For long-term investors, the most reliable approach appears to be maintaining consistent market exposure rather than attempting to time entry points around potential crashes. As Warren Buffett's famous adage suggests, it often pays to "be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful"—but implementing this wisdom requires being in the market when fear arises, not watching from the sidelines.

Citations:

Antwoord van Perplexity: pplx.ai/share

Historically, a 10% market correction creates conditions for elevated long-term returns due to improved valuations, though the exact magnitude depends on recovery patterns and investment timing. Based on historical evidence from major corrections:

Post-crash return enhancement: Investors entering after a 10% decline typically gain a 10% return advantage compared to pre-correction entry points37. For example, buying after the COVID-19 crash (34% drop) allowed investors to capture a 15.6% annual return during the recovery phase39.
Valuation mechanics: A 10% price decline increases future earnings yield. If earnings remain stable, this effectively raises expected returns. For instance:
- Pre-crash: $100 investment with 13% average return → $113 in one year
- Post-10% crash: $90 entry point → $101.7 (13% return) + additional 11.1% recovery gain → combined 24.1% first-year return3 7
Long-term compounding: While immediate post-crash returns spike, the effect dilutes over time. A 10% crash might add ~1-2% annually to long-term expectations when spread across a 10-year horizon, potentially pushing returns toward 14-15%79.

However, this assumes reinvestment during the downturn and excludes inflation impacts. Real-world outcomes vary depending on economic context – the 2008 crash required 6 years for full recovery, while 2020's rebound took months29.

Citations:

Antwoord van Perplexity: pplx.ai/share

Friday, March 14, 2025

Aalberts Industries

Aalberts Graham Defensive Analysis:

SECTOR: [PASS] Aalberts is neither a technology nor a financial company; therefore, this methodology is applicable.

SALES: [PASS] The investor must select companies of "adequate size." This includes companies with annual sales greater than €260 million. Aalberts' €3 148 million sales, based on 2024 sales, pass this test.

CURRENT RATIO: [FAIL] The current ratio must be greater than or equal to 2. Companies that meet this criterion are typically financially secure and defensive. Aalberts' current ratio €1 388m/€1 007m of 1,4 fails the test.

LONG-TERM DEBT IN RELATION TO NET CURRENT ASSETS: [FAIL] For industrial companies, long-term debt must not exceed net current assets (current assets minus current liabilities). Companies that meet this criterion display one of the attributes of a financially secure organization. The long-term debt for Aalberts is €618m while the net current assets are €381m million. Aalberts fails this test.

LONG-TERM EPS GROWTH: [PASS] Companies must increase their EPS by at least 30% over a ten-year period and EPS must not have been negative for any year within the last 5 years. Companies with this type of growth tend to be financially secure and have proven themselves over time. Aalberts' EPS growth over that period of 33% passes the EPS growth test.

EARNINGS YIELD: [PASS] The Earnings/Price (inverse P/E) %, based on the lesser of the current Earnings Yield or the Yield using average earnings over the last 3 fiscal years, must be "acceptable", which this methodology states is greater than 6,5%. Stocks with higher earnings yields are more defensive by nature. Aalberts's E/P of 7,4 % (using the average of last 3 years) just fails this test.

GRAHAM NUMBER VALUE: [PASS] The Price/Book ratio must also be reasonable. That is the Graham number value must be greater than the market price. Aalberts has a Graham number of √(15 x €2,5 EPS x 1,5 x €23 Book Value) = €36

Dividend: EUR 1,13/27= 4%

Conclusion april 2025: The balance sheet is not ideal, but the stock price makes Aalberts seems like a good pick for the Defensive Investor.