Hi Mudit
Forget about Going bust, my key monitorable is whether franchise is broken or not. Even if company does not go bust, if any capital allocation mistake or regulatory action or competition breaks into the franchise then that becomes an exit criteria. This is part of the process, as buy and hold does not mean there is no active monitoring. I almost try to think/introspect about these threats everyday
I would argue that - slow build up of position over long time period will in fact act as a cushion.
Also, my stock selection criteria is curated considering the long term execution. All the positions which has larger allocations should have seen at least one market cycle. In my opinion - market cycles throws data points which I cannot even think while building investment thesis without market cycle. More the number market cycles, better insights and helpfully lower gap between actual and perceived terminal value. I stay away from sector/companies which hasn’t seen cycle but I want to be agile enough to not miss second cycle. `for example - Hospitals, I did not participate in the first cycle when numbers were not reflecting underlying franchise but I want to make most of it from second cycle onwards with right selection and allocation
Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter |