The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investment Analysis Clubs / Foolish Collective


Subject:  Selecting stocks the Ben Graham way Date:  12/7/2004  7:52 PM
Author:  StarryNightShade Number:  34756 of 46903

[This is a duplicate of a post made on the 'IV Value Central' board.]

Some time ago (May 2003 to be more precise) I tried to apply Ben Graham's principles to create a couple of stock portfolios, one for the “conservative” investor and one for the “aggressive or enterprising” investor. [Note that the term “investor” implies that the “aggressive investor” was still considered by Ben Graham an investor and not a speculator.]

Over a series of several posts I assessed results of stock screens to identify qualifying stocks to create two portfolios of 5 stocks each. Regrettably at that time I could not find more than that number of stocks without duplicating industries within a portfolio (or stocks across the two portfolios). This is substantially less than the 20 stocks that Ben Graham recommended for a diversified portfolio. Nevertheless fools do rush in….which is exactly what Ben was trying to prevent I guess.

The following post was the conclusion of the series:

But just to save you the effort of wading through those posts, I'll summarize below:

Conservative Portfolio

Ben Graham's criteria for the conservative portfolio are:

1. An Adequate Size
For Industrials - more than $500 million in sales
For Utilities - more than $250 million in assets

2. A Strong Financial Condition
For Industrials - Current Assets more than 2 X Current Liabilities
Long Term Debt less than net working capital (i.e. Current Assets less Current Liabilities)
For Utilities - Total Debt less than 2 X the Book Value of TANGIBLE Equity

3. Good Earnings - positive in each of the last 10 years

4. Dividends - a continuous record of paying dividends in each of the last 20 years

5. Growth - an increase of at least one-third (+33%) of the most recent three year average compared to the three year average 10 years ago (i.e. the earnings for 1999-2002 are 1/3 more than the earnings for 1989-1992)

6. Good Value in terms of earnings yield - the current price is less 15 times the AVERAGE EPS for the LAST THREE YEARS (i.e. Price-earnings or PE ratio < 15). There is a potential modification to this as in one corner of his book Ben Graham inverts the PE to produce the earnings yield in percentage and compares it to the long term US Bond yields. So to allow some leeway here I relaxed this criteria so that the average earnings yield would be less than the average long term bond yi