QAV 613 Tim Lin­coln

Cameron  00:06

Wel­come to QAV. Very spe­cial episode, this week. We have with us a guest we’ve want­ed to get on the show ever since we start­ed the show; for, I guess, about four years ago now. Our guest is the cofounder and man­ag­ing direc­tor of the com­pa­ny that pro­duces Stock Doc­tor, the tool that I use every day, Tony uses every day, all of our lis­ten­ers use every day: Tim Lin­coln. Today, very suc­cess­ful com­pa­ny, I think about forty finance pro­fes­sion­als in the busi­ness, thou­sands of sub­scribers to Stock Doc­tor who use it like we use it to man­age their invest­ing. Over $800 mil­lion, I read, invest­ed in their man­aged funds. And in 2021, as if COVID was­n’t bad enough, Tim was appoint­ed as a direc­tor of the Carl­ton Foot­ball Club. But appar­ent­ly, I can’t blame him for their per­for­mance last year. Going to have a bet­ter year, this year, Tim?

Tim  01:03

Well, Cam, yeah. Who knows? It’s a very even com­pe­ti­tion, but we’re very hope­ful that we’ve had a ter­rif­ic pre­sea­son. It’s the sec­ond year with Voss, so the guys aren’t learn­ing from him so much any­more, they’re now prac­tis­ing on imple­ment­ing a game plan and strat­e­gy. So, hope­ful­ly, the fans will get a lot more joy than we’ve suf­fered through over the last fif­teen-twen­ty years. So, the only way is up, Cam.

Cameron  01:30

Well, hope­ful­ly you have a bet­ter sea­son than the mar­kets been hav­ing for the last cou­ple of years. Tony, I’m gonna throw it over to you. I believe you guys have met in the past at var­i­ous Stock Doc­tor func­tions. Where do you want to kick off our chat with Tim, TK?

Tony  01:49

I think you’ve kicked it off nice­ly talk­ing about Carl­ton, because I’m a sup­port­er as well. When I first moved to Mel­bourne, I lived with­in a kick of Princes Park, so that’s why I sup­port Carl­ton. I think one of the first games I went to was at Vic­to­ria Park when the Colling­wood sup­port­ers rolled the police horse dur­ing an upset moment when Carl­ton rolled Colling­wood, back in the 80s.

Tim  02:10

Yeah, it was­n’t a fun place to be at Vic­to­ria Park sta­tion there, was it, after a game?

Tony  02:16

Oh, espe­cial­ly wear­ing a Carl­ton Jer­sey.

Tim  02:18

Yeah, exact­ly.

Tony  02:19

There were two of us with our backs to each oth­er as we got on the train.

Tim  02:24

Even the days of ven­tur­ing out to the West­ern Oval or Windy Hill or Ardern Street, it was a very, very dif­fer­ent envi­ron­ment back then, was­n’t it, to the fam­i­ly friend­ly envi­ron­ments that we get to enjoy today at the footy.

Tony  02:37

Yeah, very much so.

Cameron  02:38

Were those the John Elliott days?

Tim  02:41

Yeah, it was prob­a­bly even before then, Cam. I remem­ber going to the footy as a real­ly young fel­la at the MCG with dad. And you know, I’d be stand­ing on the old steel cans that were emp­ty, just so I could see over the heads of the fans in front of me. But after the game, there was a blood­bath out­side the ground. There were very few women, very few oth­er kids; it was just men who had had way too much to drink and were incred­i­bly ter­ri­to­r­i­al. You know, it’s odd after going today, it’s just so love­ly to be able to go with your wife and fam­i­ly, the younger kids and grand­kids or what­ev­er. Enjoy a nice safe day at the footy and see a real­ly good spec­ta­cle, as opposed to those very ter­ri­to­r­i­al days.

Cameron  03:23

You know, I grew up in Bund­aberg, Tim, coun­try, you know, region­al Queens­land, and nev­er real­ly had any idea how seri­ous Mel­bur­ni­ans took the sport until I moved there when I was sev­en­teen. And I remem­ber like, it took me a long time to even get my head around it with my work col­leagues, how it was seri­ous busi­ness. You’d hear the, you know, the ban­ter going back­wards and for­wards on a Mon­day morn­ing, and I thought they were jok­ing around. It took me like six months to realise, no, they’re will­ing to kill each oth­er, over these foot­ball teams. It was a real shock to the sys­tem.

Tim  04:00

Yeah. And I sup­pose its glob­al, though, isn’t it? Whether it be the Eng­lish soc­cer, the Amer­i­can foot­ball or oth­er form codes of sport. Yeah, we’ve got to release our­selves some­how, and I sup­pose it’s that ter­ri­to­r­i­al ele­ment or com­bat­ive ele­ment again, isn’t it? That patri­ot­ic sup­port, what­ev­er it might be. It’s that pas­sion that we use as a release to every­thing else we do in life. And yeah, when we are deeply, deeply pas­sion­ate it can ooze out in many dif­fer­ent ways at times.

Cameron  04:33

Yeah, well, if peo­ple aren’t get­ting their violent–men aren’t get­ting their vio­lent ten­den­cies out after a game of footy, now where do they take it? Is it Xbox? That’s what I say to my wife; that’s why I need to sit down and play Xbox, it’s to get all my anger out at the end of the day.

Tim  04:49

Yeah, well, it’s great to hear you say and learn that you’re a blue bag­ger too, Tony. You know, it’s a mighty brand that we love, and it’s giv­en us a lot of joy through­out our child­hood, so hope­ful­ly we start to bring a lot more joy to many of our younger supporters–and old­er supporter’s–lives going for­ward. Because it is joy, isn’t it? That’s why we do it. And whether it’s that release of pas­sion or what­ev­er it is, it is that joy that it does deliv­er to so many peo­ple’s lives, too.

Tony  05:17

Yeah, I agree. Well, talk­ing ancient his­to­ry with Carl­ton back in the Vic­to­ria Park days; my wife had a career, or has a career in bank­ing, she’s still a direc­tor of a bank, and she men­tioned years ago that she had con­sult­ed with your father on cred­it risk. So, could you maybe take us through the work of your father and how that evolved even­tu­al­ly into Stock Doc­tor, please?

Tim  05:43

Yeah, well, with absolute plea­sure, Tony. I don’t get to do it as often as I used to, but when I’m asked to, you know, artic­u­late that sto­ry, it gives me an enor­mous amount of pride. So, thanks for ask­ing. So, Dad was obvi­ous­ly a world cham­pi­on ath­lete, too, before he became an aca­d­e­m­ic at Mel­bourne Uni­ver­si­ty. He was a world cham­pi­on fif­teen hun­dred metre run­ner, sev­enth man in the world to break four min­utes for the mile. So, he was a high­ly suc­cess­ful man, not only in busi­ness, but also in sport and acad­e­mia. So, it’s a very, very unique mix. Not too many human beings actu­al­ly can say that they’ve been, you know, world class in all three ele­ments. So, Dad, after his ath­let­ic career then along the way became an accoun­tant. So, he got his MBA and became a prac­tis­ing accoun­tant and man­age­ment accoun­tant, and then he was invit­ed to be senior aca­d­e­m­ic in charge of the eco­nom­ics and finance fac­ul­ty at Mel­bourne Uni. And dur­ing his tenure there, he com­plet­ed his PhD, which was enti­tled “The use­ful­ness of account­ing ratios to describe insol­ven­cy risk.” And so, it was that piece of work that… Through the 80s, he fin­ished, com­plet­ed his PhD in ’82, and then left the uni in ’84 to go out and lec­ture his method­ol­o­gy and the­o­ries to the cor­po­rate world, and that’s where your wife prob­a­bly heard of Dad, Tony. So, it was lec­tur­ing on cred­it risk: how to use account­ing ratios, analyse bal­ance sheets, prof­it loss state­ments, cash flow state­ments, to iden­ti­fy a com­pa­ny that was healthy, as opposed to one that was that was crook, finan­cial­ly weak and at risk of insol­ven­cy. And so, those mod­els could then be applied to cred­it risk or lend­ing, com­mer­cial lend­ing. So, he lec­tured cred­it man­agers and lenders on how to cal­cu­late these ratios man­u­al­ly using slide rules, etcetera, to avoid poten­tial dis­as­ter with­in their debtors’ ledgers or cred­it ledgers. And then through the late 80s, per­son­al com­put­ers start­ed to come in the fray, so he start­ed to become quite inter­est­ed in how tech­nol­o­gy could actu­al­ly assist him in the com­pu­ta­tion of these finan­cial num­bers. So, through main­frame com­put­ers and the like, he start­ed to work on that, and that’s where in the late 80s/early 90s I came back from trav­el­ling over­seas after work­ing in the com­put­er pro­gram­ming indus­try both local­ly and over­seas for a few years. Dad then passed his PhD across the din­ing room table to me after I’d returned from Lon­don and said, “Tim, do you want to have a crack at com­put­er­is­ing and then poten­tial­ly com­mer­cial­is­ing my aca­d­e­m­ic work?” And of course, I embraced that oppor­tu­ni­ty. We had to oper­ate for the first four years on the smell of an oily rag while we test­ed and under­stood mar­ket oppor­tu­ni­ties and the like and dis­cov­ered that there was a high cor­re­la­tion with his cred­it risk mod­els with share price per­for­mance as well through that research peri­od. And then we decid­ed the cred­it risk mar­ket was­n’t that attrac­tive or, or sexy, if you like. What we had a real pas­sion, we dis­cov­ered this real pas­sion for, is to try to help the mum and dad investor avoid these dis­as­ters in qual­i­fied third-par­ty rec­om­men­da­tions from bro­kers, and the like. And there­fore, after years of research, blood, sweat and tears, oper­at­ing off the smell of an oily rag out of his lounge room, we then devel­oped this tool called Stock Doc­tor, or brand­ed as Stock Doc­tor. And in 1997, we final­ly got to the stage where we could actu­al­ly start to com­mer­cialise it. So, Dad had to go from aca­d­e­m­ic at that point in time to entre­pre­neur, and I had to go from com­put­er geek at that time to entre­pre­neur and get out there and try to mar­ket and sell this thing, for which we’ve had a quite a large amount of suc­cess with since that point in time.

Tim  05:44

I real­ly love the part of the sto­ry which says that your father did work in look­ing at the var­i­ous ratios that all bank­rupt com­pa­nies had in com­mon, but then invert­ed it to say, “if I was far away from those ratios, I must be a good com­pa­ny who is unlike­ly to go bank­rupt.” And that was embed­ded into Stock Doc­tor, which I think was very smart.

Tim  05:44

Yeah, and Dad’s unique piece of work was real­ly iden­ti­fy­ing from the forty-eight stan­dard account­ing ratios out there that are wide­ly used, the ones that are most cor­re­lat­ed to either fail­ure or non-fail­ure, suc­cess, rel­a­tive to the indus­tries that they oper­ate in. But at the end of the day, Tony, to real­ly break it down into the most sim­plis­tic form is: is a com­pa­ny prof­itable, yes or no? Has a com­pa­ny got sus­tain­able lev­els of cash­flow, yes or no? And do they have man­age­able lev­els of debt, yes or No? If all of those three things are in place, and they’ve got a good man­age­ment team around the busi­ness, then chances are they’re going to sur­vive. If the answer to those three things is “no”, then they’re at high risk of insol­ven­cy and cor­po­rate fail­ure.

Tony  10:39

And of course, it’s a sta­tis­ti­cal analy­sis, and it’s some­times a very bor­ing way to invest, to look at those kinds of steady as she goes com­pa­nies, but there are com­pa­nies out there which are not mak­ing mon­ey, have high lev­els of debt, but their stock price is going north rapid­ly. But I guess the essence of Dr Lin­col­n’s work was, they’re at risk of one day turn­ing down and crash­ing.

Tim  11:01

Well, they’re pure­ly spec­u­la­tive invest­ments, aren’t they? Unless you know some­thing that oth­ers don’t. But sure­ly, if you have a port­fo­lio of those com­pa­nies, chances are only one or two may at best to do okay over the long term. So, I pre­fer to sleep well at night, and I think all of our mem­bers pre­fer to sleep well at night, know­ing that you’ve got a port­fo­lio of finan­cial­ly healthy com­pa­nies that have a very, very, very low prob­a­bil­i­ty of fail­ure. And if you can invest in those com­pa­nies, and those com­pa­nies also achieve the growth met­rics that we look for in oth­er ratios, like return on equi­ty, return on invest­ed cap­i­tal, return on assets, earn­ings per share growth, have good qual­i­ty in regard to their accru­als and prof­its; and if that’s from a growth per­spec­tive, good prof­it mar­gins, also from a growth per­spec­tive; or from an income per­spec­tive, they’ve got real­ly strong free cash flow, good grow­ing div­i­dends per share, also got pay­out ratios, meet cer­tain thresh­olds, and they’re pay­ing good sol­id yield, then com­bine those growth met­rics and income met­rics with a high qual­i­ty busi­ness that’s finan­cial­ly sta­ble, and it’s almost com­mon sense that over the long term, a fif­teen plus stock port­fo­lio of those types of busi­ness­es should do well over the long term. And that’s the basic log­ic that we apply to our invest­ment the­sis.

Tony  12:26

And I guess the old say­ing is true that to fin­ish first, first, you must fin­ish. So, that’s impor­tant, isn’t it?

Tim  12:32

Yeah, sus­tain­abil­i­ty is crit­i­cal.

Tony  12:34

Yeah. You men­tioned a whole heap of num­bers there. Why do you think it’s impor­tant to be guid­ed by the num­bers, to invest in the num­bers, and how much empha­sis do you place on the sto­ries that CEO’s spin about what’s hap­pen­ing in their com­pa­nies?

Tim  12:48

I think that num­bers are a won­der­ful screen­ing tool. I mean, in Aus­tralia we’ve got four thou­sand list­ed com­pa­nies, and in the US a lot more. So, I think the num­bers allow us to screen and screen real­ly quick­ly, to come up with a reduced list of stocks to real­ly pay atten­tion to. So, that’s the first step in regard to our star stock selec­tion process, is that data, fact. I think, to answer your first part of your ques­tion, data is fact. In a well-reg­u­lat­ed envi­ron­ment for which we oper­ate here in Aus­tralia, in regard to the reg­u­la­to­ry regime around the impor­tance of hav­ing accu­rate num­bers and data to analyse, is impor­tant. So, when you’ve got that, you can have a high lev­el of con­fi­dence that the results the data is pro­duc­ing are reli­able. So, that’s the first step. So, we get that con­fi­dence in that. But I think what’s real­ly impor­tant… So, you’ve done your quant; that your quan­ti­ta­tive analy­sis, or your data ana­lyt­ics, and then what’s impor­tant at the end of that is to have that nice qual­i­ta­tive over­lay where you do assess man­age­ment, you know, you do assess their time in the indus­try, you do assess their capa­bil­i­ties, their prod­ucts, their ser­vices, and the active risks; the risks asso­ci­at­ed which may be unique to the par­tic­u­lar indus­try. That’s very sub­jec­tive, and that’s your qual­i­ta­tive over­lay to give you that final tick at the end of what should be a very rig­or­ous process, but the data allows it to be very quick. The first part, that most impor­tant fil­ter­ing part, is very, very quick. But the qual­i­ta­tive assess­ment, the active risks, takes that lit­tle bit longer.

Tony  14:22

Have you put any of that qual­i­ta­tive assess­ment into numer­i­cal form, like tim­ing the indus­try or how much stock you hold in the com­pa­ny, that kind of thing?

Tim  14:32

Yeah, we’ve got our nine Gold­en Rules. So, the first three rules are very much data dri­ven. The final few rules are more qual­i­ta­tive, but still to a large extent data dri­ven. So, Gold­en Rule Four is share price sen­ti­ment. So, share price sen­ti­ment rel­a­tive to the type of investor you are, whether you’re an oppor­tunist and there­fore volatil­i­ty does­n’t real­ly wor­ry you that much, you embrace volatil­i­ty and take advan­tage of stocks that have been sold down, or if you’re sen­si­tive to volatil­i­ty and might use a tech­ni­cal indi­ca­tor to help man­age the volatil­i­ty, the entry and exits. So, that’s data dri­ven. Or then you get to Gold­en Rule Six, which is liq­uid­i­ty in size. So, how much liq­uid­i­ty, how much stock is trad­ed in the stock every day. That’s data dri­ven, but rel­a­tive to the amount of mon­ey each indi­vid­ual investor may want to invest, liq­uid­i­ty lev­els can change. So, you can’t be pre­scrip­tive with that par­tic­u­lar data point, nor can you with the share price sen­ti­ment. Then you start to go into oth­er data points like mar­ket cap and size, val­u­a­tions. And they can mean dif­fer­ent things to dif­fer­ent peo­ple. So, we try not to be too pre­scrip­tive out­side our first three Gold­en Rules. But the oth­er rules are there for the user to use, as what meets their par­tic­u­lar pro­file or size of invest­ment. That said, though, Tony, we’re real­ly, real­ly proud of the test­ing regime that we’ve got in the busi­ness here. You know, we’re right into AI now, machine learn­ing, test­ing dif­fer­ent finan­cial fac­tors and data sets. As we build up his­to­ry of data sets, we can now see if they can add val­ue to becom­ing more of a sta­tis­ti­cal mod­el going for­ward. So, we’re always look­ing to see if we can opti­mise our mod­els rel­a­tive to new data sets that we iden­ti­fy that could become more pre­scrip­tive in time.

Tony  16:22

Yeah, inter­est­ing. You men­tioned star stocks before. For the unini­ti­at­ed, what’s a star stock?

Tim  16:27

A star stock is a stock that meets our first three Gold­en Rules. So, we’ve got three cat­e­gories of star stocks. One is the star growth stock that are ide­al for investors look­ing for cap­i­tal growth over the long term; bor­der­line star growth stocks that just don’t quite meet our star growth cri­te­ria, but there’s still their elite busi­ness­es; or star income stocks, and those stocks are gen­er­al­ly on the larg­er cap side of things but have sus­tain­able income or div­i­dend dis­tri­b­u­tion mod­els. So, out of the two thou­sand list­ed stocks in Aus­tralia, I think I said four thou­sand before, I should have said two thou­sand, so excuse me on that one. Out of the two thou­sand list­ed stocks in Aus­tralia, gen­er­al­ly there’s around sev­en­ty stocks that meet our star stock cri­te­ria. And that’s prob­a­bly rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the fil­ter­ing process that I men­tioned ear­li­er, Tony, where­by we go through all of those two thou­sand stocks very, very quick­ly with data to get down to about one hun­dred stocks that meet our quan­ti­ta­tive met­rics. Then that qual­i­ta­tive over­lay allows us to then get down to the sev­en­ty stocks that meet our star stock cri­te­ria. But rel­a­tive to the eco­nom­ic envi­ron­ment, that sev­en­ty isn’t a hard num­ber. It can obvi­ous­ly float around quite a bit rel­a­tive to the eco­nom­ic envi­ron­ment.

Tony  17:37

I’ve always found it inter­est­ing that the con­verse is also true; that if only sev­en­ty are investable in the Aus­tralian mar­ket, there’s a lot of flot­sam out there, isn’t there, real­ly?

Tim  17:47

Yeah. But I sup­pose you could extend it out again. There are some great busi­ness­es that are prob­a­bly up to num­ber two hun­dred, but they just don’t quite meet our met­rics. And we pro­vide all the fil­ter­ing tools, as you know, to prospect amongst the ones that don’t quite meet our cri­te­ria. But you’re right, there’s actu­al­ly around 75% of the mar­ket that does­n’t pass our finan­cial health check, Gold­en Rule one, and there­fore they’re the ones that are at risk of cor­po­rate fail­ure. And we’ve got five cat­e­gories with our health mod­el: dis­tress, mar­gin­al, ear­ly warn­ing, sat­is­fac­to­ry or strong. Star stocks must be sat­is­fac­to­ry and strong. The oth­er three cat­e­gories, dis­tress, ear­ly warn­ing, or mar­gin­al, means they’re at risk of cor­po­rate fail­ure. That’s 75% of all list­ed com­pa­nies. So yeah, around one thou­sand five hun­dred busi­ness­es, cer­tain­ly, we don’t regard as being invest­ment grade. Spec­u­la­tive busi­ness­es.

Tony  18:43

Get­ting back to the star stocks. So, if there are sev­en­ty-odd on the star stock list, how do sub­scribers to star stock build a port­fo­lio? How do they invest? When do you sug­gest they buy and sell from that list?

Tim  18:54

First­ly, it depends on their invest­ment pro­file. Are you in accu­mu­la­tion phase? There­fore, the growth stocks would be prob­a­bly more appeal­ing. Or are you in retire­ment phase or near­ing retire­ment? Or you might pre­fer a more defen­sive style port­fo­lio, that’s where the star income stocks would play a role. So, it’s first of all deter­min­ing what type of investor you are and where to fish amongst the star stocks. So, then it’s a mat­ter of the investor then hav­ing a look and iden­ti­fy­ing oth­er rules that they should apply. Are they a trend sen­si­tive investor or are they a non-trend sen­si­tive investor? That would then deter­mine are they going to apply some of our tech­ni­cal indi­ca­tors or not? And there­fore, using our port­fo­lio opti­miser and port­fo­lio con­struct­ed tools to then answer some of those ques­tions, to then pro­duce a list of stocks that ide­al­ly meet their cri­te­ria and their invest­ment pro­file. From there it’s real­ly impor­tant though, Tony, that they drill into each of those stocks. That they don’t just take it on face val­ue, that they real­ly like the busi­ness­es, explore man­age­ment, explore what the com­pa­nies do. They might have eth­i­cal or moral rea­sons why they don’t want to invest in a par­tic­u­lar stock because of the indus­try, whether it be tobac­co, gam­bling, ura­ni­um, min­ing, what­ev­er. So, it’s real­ly impor­tant that they then con­struct a port­fo­lio of stocks that real­ly res­onate with them, and also meet the cri­te­ria of our star stocks, and then con­struct a port­fo­lio ide­al­ly of fif­teen plus stocks to avoid over-con­cen­tra­tion risk. So, fif­teen plus stocks, and then it’s up to them to real­ly just active­ly man­age those port­fo­lios rel­a­tive to the evolv­ing fun­da­men­tals or chang­ing gold­en rules rel­a­tive to their pro­file and objec­tives, again, or when a star stock might be moved out of the port­fo­lio and who they then replace it with. But we’ve got all the tools in Stock Doc­tor, as you know, to help them man­age when there is that churn of star stock.

Tim  19:08

Star stocks have been around a long time, what kind of per­for­mance have they gained over the years?

Tim  20:55

Well, since incep­tion, which is back to… Stock Doc­tor was launched in ’97, but star stocks were actu­al­ly cre­at­ed in ’96. So, since then it’s around 17.5% return per annum, which is, you know, when you con­sid­er what we’ve been through in that almost thir­ty years now, you know, we’ve been through some pret­ty major events. Sure, it’s sort of remained quite sta­ble through time now that return, but on a year-on-year basis, it can look quite volatile. But it is that rock sol­id result. The last two years let’s be hon­est, the last two-two and a half years have been real­ly chal­leng­ing for star stocks, because it’s real­ly only been the larg­er cap stocks, the larg­er banks, and to a cer­tain extent, the larg­er min­ers, that have done okay in the cur­rent mar­ket. Any­thing below them, includ­ing our star stocks, have real­ly had a chal­leng­ing envi­ron­ment. So, the per­for­mance has been dragged back a bit. But as we know, cycles change on what we believe, cycles cer­tain­ly change, and that’s when oppor­tu­ni­ty presents and hope­ful­ly the star stocks have a bet­ter run in the not-too-dis­tant future once that cycle shift changes. But you know, just because they’ve pro­duced 17.5% return per annum over the last sev­en­teen years, there are years in there that are incred­i­bly chal­leng­ing. Again, it’s just about the dis­ci­plined approach and stay­ing with the method­ol­o­gy through all evolv­ing eco­nom­ic envi­ron­ments and cycles. Yeah, not giv­ing up after a year as some peo­ple could cer­tain­ly think of doing after the year or two that we’ve been through recent­ly.

Tony  22:30

Yeah, capit­u­la­tion is cer­tain­ly a sign that things are get­ting close to the bot­tom, aren’t they? When peo­ple give up with the mar­ket. It’s not good for them but it can be an indi­ca­tor that things will change for those that remain.

Tim  22:41

Yeah, for sure. And, you know, we like to think we’re con­trary, we nev­er want to fol­low the herd. We don’t want to adopt that men­tal­i­ty at all. Just stick to the fun­da­men­tals, stick to qual­i­ty, stick to the stocks that align with your pro­file and stay with that for the long term. It’s worked for almost a hun­dred and fifty years now for oth­er high­ly suc­cess­ful investors. And I don’t think bal­ance sheets and prof­it loss state­ments and cash flow state­ments are going any­where in a hur­ry. So, hope­ful­ly, they still must form the basis of informed and con­fi­dent deci­sion mak­ing going for­ward. But yeah, it’s got to be for the long term, that’s for sure.

Tony  23:17

What’s the Tim Lin­coln phi­los­o­phy about val­ue? Is it qual­i­ty at any price, or is there a val­ue over­lay to your process?

Tim  23:26

I think from a growth per­spec­tive, if you’ve got a port­fo­lio of fif­teen plus stocks, you’re going to have some high tech plays in there that trade at ridicu­lous val­u­a­tions, whether it be PE or tra­di­tion­al val­u­a­tion method­olo­gies like DCF or dis­count­ed cash flow val­u­a­tions, what­ev­er. So, some are always trad­ed at high val­u­a­tions. I think you have to accept that for some high-tech plays. But in this envi­ron­ment, it’s always a bonus now, I love see­ing that so many stocks are now trad­ing at deep dis­counts to val­u­a­tion. For me, that’s just a mas­sive tick and rep­re­sents great oppor­tu­ni­ty. But I just think at times, if we intend to stay ful­ly invest­ed and not use tech­ni­cal indi­ca­tors now with entry and exit, some­times in mar­kets, we just have to be pre­pared to pay a pre­mi­um for high qual­i­ty. So, that’s how I treat val­u­a­tions. It’s cer­tain­ly not a pri­ma­ry indi­ca­tor for me: pri­ma­ry indi­ca­tor is qual­i­ty. Absolute­ly. Val­ue is Gold­en Rule five, as far as we’re con­cerned. So, it’s a gold­en rule. It’s cer­tain­ly there in bright lights, but it is part of more of our nine Gold­en Rule check­list as opposed to being a pri­ma­ry lead indi­ca­tor for star stock selec­tion.

Tony  24:38

Can I ask about the evo­lu­tion into funds man­age­ment? What drove that? How’s that going? What do you offer in that space?

Tim  24:45

So, we offer the Lin­coln Aus­tralian Growth Fund, which is an Aussie–obviously–an Aussie growth fund, we offer the Lin­coln Aus­tralian Income Fund, which is obvi­ous­ly an income or high yield­ing fund, and then we’ve got the Lin­coln US Growth Funds: one hedge fund and one unhedged to cov­er for cur­ren­cy risk, or not cur­ren­cy risk. So, what they are is real­ly using our method­ol­o­gy that we applied to star stocks and invest­ing in a full uni­verse of all of our star stocks in those par­tic­u­lar funds, even though we don’t have star stocks yet for the US, but that’s hope­ful­ly not too far away. And the rea­son for cre­at­ing those prod­ucts were there’s a lot of DIY investors out there, a lot of self-man­aged super funds who’d love to do it them­selves, but there’s a lot more who don’t have the time, desire or incli­na­tion to do it them­selves, but believe in our method­ol­o­gy. So, that was the rea­son why we launched the funds, is to still give those who are more time poor but believe in what we do, to give them access to our method­ol­o­gy through man­aged fund ser­vices.

Tony  25:50

Just for exam­ple, the Aus­tralian Growth Fund, does that just hold star growth stocks, or are there oth­er stocks in there as well?

Tim  25:57

Bor­der­line star growth stocks as well.

Tony  25:59

Oh, okay.

Tim  25:59

And what we do now is strict­ly invest in a full uni­verse of those stocks, so long as the liq­uid­i­ty is there. Because that fund is now around three hun­dred mil­lion, some of those beau­ti­ful lit­tle star stocks are sim­ply too small and too illiq­uid for us to invest in now. And that’s, I sup­pose, the leg up, or the advan­tage that DIY investors and stock­bro­ker sub­scribers have, is that they’re nim­ble enough to be able to still invest in those stocks because they’re not man­ag­ing, gen­er­al­ly, that size of port­fo­lio. But yeah, it’s very dis­ci­plined that they must be star stocks.

Tony  26:32

Does the fund per­for­mance match the sort of per­for­mance you were talk­ing about before for star stocks?

Tim  26:38

Since 2003, when we launched the Lin­coln Aus­tralian Growth Fund as an IDPS Ser­vice, it’s sit­ting at around 9% per annum. So, we did­n’t have that nice lit­tle peri­od before that to invest in, plus it was almost hot on the heels of the GFC and oth­er things, but it’s still close to per­form­ing equal­ly with the mar­ket. But the rea­son why it’s prob­a­bly dragged back a bit, too, is that we can’t invest in those small­er caps that real­ly tur­bocharge port­fo­lios. But we’re always look­ing to opti­mise the funds. But over that peri­od, I think, prob­a­bly under­per­form­ing the star growth stocks by about 4% because of the rea­sons I just men­tioned.

Tony  27:16

And is a sim­i­lar method­ol­o­gy used for the US funds? Are they as if star growth stocks were avail­able in the US mar­ket?

Tim  27:23

Yeah, very sim­i­lar, but dif­fer­ent fac­tors I’ll men­tion. So, finan­cial health is pret­ty much the same, the finan­cial health met­ric, but the fac­tors we look for the growth met­rics… Like in Aus­tralia, we’ve got return on invest­ed cap­i­tal for the min­ers, we’ve got return on equi­ty for the indus­tri­al com­pa­nies, return on assets for REITs. Over in the US, the fac­tors relat­ing to the indus­tries that exist over there, there’s a much more diver­si­fied mar­ket, the fac­tors that we use, those ratios that we use to iden­ti­fy growth are slight­ly dif­fer­ent. And dif­fer­ent weight­ings to dif­fer­ent fac­tors because of the unique­ness of the Amer­i­can mar­ket. Where­as we’re dom­i­nat­ed by banks and resource stocks and some indus­tri­als, over there they’re obvi­ous­ly dom­i­nat­ed by a vast array of com­pa­nies, espe­cial­ly from a growth per­spec­tive, high tech. So, dif­fer­ent ratios for those busi­ness­es.

Tony  28:14

I think you let slip that you might be doing a US Stock Doc­tor offer­ing in the future. Can you tell me more about that, please?

Tim  28:20

Yeah, a lot of research now, Tony, to make sure that we’re opti­mis­ing those US mod­els, the fac­tors. Doing a lot of test­ing, final test­ing there to make sure before we go there, or before we offer Stock Doc­tor US in Aus­tralia, and ide­al­ly take that to the US mar­ket and Asian mar­ket as well, that we’ve got it right. So, a bit more work to do there. But I’d like to think with­in the next six to twelve months that, yeah, we’d have that prod­uct on offer for our Aussie clients. And maybe if we can get our dis­tri­b­u­tion strat­e­gy right or find the right dis­tri­b­u­tion part­ners through Asia in the US, then we might be able to offer it there as well, which is excit­ing.

Tony  29:00

Very excit­ing, yeah. That’s great, isn’t it? Before I hand you back to Cam, because I’m get­ting to the end of my list, can you maybe just give us the ben­e­fits of your expe­ri­ence in the mar­kets and tell us what you think about the cur­rent mar­ket.

Tim  29:11

Yeah, expe­ri­ences in the mar­ket. It’s one of endurance, that’s for sure. And belief. You know, you’ve just got to, you’ve got to have that con­vic­tion. And an equi­ty port­fo­lio is an essen­tial asset class at the end of the day, isn’t it? We love our prop­er­ty. We’d love it if we’re for­tu­nate enough to own our busi­ness­es, and that’s great, too. But I think we all realise that it’s real­ly impor­tant that we, as part of wealth cre­ation and income gen­er­a­tion after­wards, we also need ide­al­ly a share port­fo­lio. So, that’s the solu­tion that I’m so proud that we deliv­er to so many Aus­tralians, is the abil­i­ty to have that share port­fo­lio. But in order to be suc­cess­ful in the mar­ket, it’s just about that endurance and that ongo­ing belief and con­vic­tion that, hey, we’ll get through these tougher times, and we’ve been through them, and we always come out the oth­er end. So, it is about, you know, not flip-flop­ping with method­olo­gies, not say­ing after a few months of under­per­for­mance, “this does­n’t work any­more, we need­ed to look for some­thing else.” It’s just stay­ing with method­olo­gies that make log­i­cal sense and stay­ing with them for the long term and hav­ing that belief that you’re sup­port­ed by some­thing that’s real and tan­gi­ble. And the cur­rent mar­ket, yeah, it’s just anoth­er one of those times, but this one’s been longer. I mean, all of the oth­er cor­rec­tions in the past have been quick, haven’t they? The GFC went on for a bit long, but even COVID and oth­er major eco­nom­ic events, geopo­lit­i­cal, what­ev­er, over the last twen­ty-odd-years, have been quick, a lot quick­er. This has been two-and-a-half years. So, I’ve nev­er had to endure this long a peri­od where our style of invest­ing, or stock selec­tion, has been under pres­sure. So, again, the resilience, the patience, the belief, every­thing has not been test­ed, but you’ve just got to stay true to it and try to just hold on and wait for that cycle to turn back in your favour. So, yeah, it’s just con­vic­tion, resilience, belief, patience, and ide­al­ly, being sup­port­ed by some­thing that you trust, that has worked for you in the past. And don’t flip flop.

Tony  31:22

Very impor­tant, as I say, to lis­ten­ers who ask, that when they start with a process like ours or yours, it’s a process for the rest of your life. It’s every day. It’s not some­thing you would change in six months.

Tim  31:33

No, that’s right. And I sup­pose that peo­ple have a propen­si­ty to pro­cras­ti­nate or flip-flop or are high­ly influ­enced by oth­ers out there. They can’t block out the noise or what­ev­er. That’s why, again, why we offer the man­aged fund, I think, too, so they can get on and do what they do, it’s just that they’re relieved of incli­na­tion to change, you know. And so, yeah, it’s real­ly impor­tant.

Tony  32:01

Tim, thanks, I’m going to hand you over to Cam. But before I do, just let me say I’ve lived in Cana­da, I lived in New Zealand, and had a bit of expo­sure to the US, and there’s nev­er been anoth­er prod­uct like Stock Doc­tor in those places, and any­where else that I’ve encoun­tered. So, look­ing for­ward to the US release, and thank you very much for what you brought to mar­ket.

Tim  32:22

Thanks. And thanks for your long-term cus­tom, too, Tony. Incred­i­bly grate­ful, and thanks for those words then, too, and encour­age­ment for what we… You know, we just want to try to help peo­ple as broad and wide as we can invest with that peace of mind and con­fi­dence. So, thank you. Appre­ci­ate it.

Cameron  32:39

Thanks, Tony. That was great, Tim. And I’m excit­ed about your upcom­ing US ver­sion, because we have a num­ber of US lis­ten­ers to our show, and one of the things they’re always ask­ing us to do is to focus on US stocks and we haven’t been able to find any­thing that gives us what Stock Doc­tor gives us. So, keep us in the loop on that. That’ll be real­ly use­ful for us and our Amer­i­can audi­ence as well, when we can start to use it.

Tim  33:06

Will do, Cam.

Cameron  33:08

I’ve got a cou­ple of ques­tions from our audi­ence about poten­tial fea­tures or func­tions I’d like to ask you about. Michael asks, “what are the chances of being able to set up alerts in Stock Doc­tor for com­mod­i­ty price turn­arounds?” One of the things that we track is the per­for­mance of the under­ly­ing com­modi­ties, par­tic­u­lar­ly for min­ing stocks and oth­er stocks built on top of com­modi­ties. Have you ever looked into hav­ing that as an option with the alert func­tions?

Tim  33:38

No, because we’re pure­ly, I sup­pose, real­ly cen­tric around equi­ties. So, com­mod­i­ty prices are all in the chart­ing tool. We’ve got all of the com­mod­i­ty prices there, so it should­n’t be too hard, I would­n’t have thought, to put alerts and alert func­tion­al­i­ty in there for com­mod­i­ty prices if the demands there. So, cer­tain­ly one we can add to the list that’s always has being repri­ori­tised every sin­gle week. So, no, we’ll put that one on the dev list and see how far it goes. But yeah, I’d love to hear from your­selves if there is demand from that from your sub­scribers, and that would mean that helps us retain your mem­bers as our mem­bers over the long term. Then yeah, we’d be sil­ly not to con­sid­er it.

Cameron  34:26

Okay, so every­body lis­ten­ing to this email your Stock Doc­tor rep today and say, Tim said…

Tim  34:36

We’d love to set up a focus group, too. What we’re devel­op­ing is rel­a­tive to what they need. So, I’d love to have those dis­cus­sions.

Tony  34:44

We’ll get you on the Mel­bourne user group What­sApp list.

Cameron  34:48

No, don’t do that to him. Tim, you men­tioned the use of AI before. I have a cou­ple of twen­ty-two-year-old boys, and all I’ve heard from them for the last few months is “mate, you’ve just got to get Chat GPT. You’ve got to do it all. You’ve got­ta run your invest­ing, QAV, through Chat GPT.” Inter­est­ed in your take on tools like Chat GPT, or the anal­o­gous ver­sions that are com­ing out of Google and Meta and peo­ple like that. How do you see that play­ing into invest­ing, if at all? You men­tioned before that you’re using some AI stuff some­where in the back end of Stock Doc­tor. What do you think the future looks like in the next cou­ple of years for those sorts of tools?

Tim  35:33

Well, it’s very inter­est­ing, isn’t it? Yeah, Chat GPT, I actu­al­ly played around with it and said, “give me the fac­tors that are high­ly cor­re­lat­ed to share price per­for­mance for US stocks.” And it came back at a very high lev­el with the fac­tors that are actu­al­ly com­ing out of our test­ing here. I mean, data ana­lyt­ics at the end of the day, machine learn­ing is all data ana­lyt­ics. It’s just pat­tern recog­ni­tion that’s high­ly asso­ci­at­ed or relat­ed to AI. It’s all sort of the same thing. And so, we’re on that path­way. It’s the future, Cam, it has to be the future. And it’s prob­a­bly not that far away. What does that mean for busi­ness­es like mine? Well, I’m not sure. I’m not sure. But we’ve still got many years before it actu­al­ly starts to become a real threat, I sup­pose. Or we’re ahead of it. I don’t know. Our AI might be ahead of it from a stock selec­tion per­spec­tive. But that’s impres­sive stuff. It’s real­ly impres­sive stuff, to be able to pro­duce what I pro­duced the oth­er day on this almost beta ver­sion of the tool is… Righto, well, this AI or com­put­er-gen­er­at­ed intel­li­gence, what­ev­er you want to call it, is going to pro­vide solu­tions to a lot of things in the not-too-dis­tant future.

Cameron  36:50

Yeah, I think one of the chal­lenges I have, you know, I’m sub­scribed to Chat GPT4, and I’ve been play­ing and test­ing with that a lot. But it’s data set is only up to Sep­tem­ber 2021. There’s a big chal­lenge with how large lan­guage learn­ing mod­els work to be feed­ing in real time data, because it’s got this whole analy­sis process that needs to go through before it can spit out its out­put. So, you know, that’s too old for us. If I say, you know, run some num­bers on BHP, its num­bers are eigh­teen months old, right? Or, no, what is that? Two and a half years old. So, it’s not very use­ful for me right now from an invest­ing per­spec­tive, but I’ll be cer­tain­ly keep­ing an eye on where it goes in the next few years.

Tim  37:43

Yeah, I’m sure data cap­ture, data stor­age, effi­cien­cy around all of that will only increase enor­mous­ly over the next few years. Per­haps real time answers to real time data analy­sis is the future. It’s just how we evolve with it and how inno­v­a­tive we can become as things speed up.

Cameron  38:06

How we adapt to the new tech­nol­o­gy.

Tim  38:09

Yeah, how we embrace it, how we use it. Yeah, just got­ta try to be ahead of the game, I sup­pose, and cer­tain­ly play the game. It’s excit­ing.

Cameron  38:18

So, just to wrap up, Tim, at the end of every episode, Tony and I stop talk­ing about invest­ing and we just talk about every­thing else that’s going on in our lives. It’s the one time a week Tony and I actu­al­ly get to catch up and be mates rather than talk about invest­ing these days. So, we know that you’re into invest­ing, we know that you’re into the footy. What else are you into? What’s good? What fills up your life out­side of those things, Tim Lin­coln?

Tim  38:41

Busi­ness, obvi­ous­ly, what we’re talk­ing about now. We’ve got, you know, forty-odd staff here in Mel­bourne and I’m a sin­gle direc­tor, sole-own­er, so the buck stops with me. I’m man­ag­ing a lot of mon­ey and clients, so look­ing to expand my sup­port from a busi­ness man­age­ment per­spec­tive, even though I’ve got a great man­age­ment team. You met Julio, head of mar­ket­ing ear­li­er, great man­age­ment team. But I’m look­ing to get more seri­ous struc­ture around the busi­ness. You know, prop­er board and poten­tial­ly CEO in the not-too-dis­tant future so I can become exec chair­man, to then focus on the oth­er things and get real­ly nice bal­ance again in life. And there’s so much in my life that I love. Num­ber one is fam­i­ly. I’ve got a beau­ti­ful fam­i­ly. My wife Sarah, it’s our thir­ti­eth wed­ding anniver­sary in April. So, that’s excit­ing. We’ve got a beau­ti­ful lifestyle. We want to enjoy as much of our beau­ti­ful lifestyle as we can and spend as much time with our adult kids as we can, but not too much time. Bit more time to our­selves. We love trav­el. We’ve got, as I said, a cou­ple of res­i­dences around the coun­try, so we’d love to get to those. I’m right into my ten­nis as well, right into golf, right into boat­ing. Got a nice boat. I love leisure­ly days out in the bay, hav­ing a fish or just leisure­ly time with fam­i­ly. I do Iron­man com­pe­ti­tions and run marathons and all that sort of stuff, too. So, whether it be just a beau­ti­ful long bush walk with Sarah, we love our hik­ing and things, too. Being real­ly proud how I could get all of that bal­ance in life with, you know, busi­ness and fam­i­ly and doing all of that too, but as we get a lit­tle bit old­er, I think it’s real­ly impor­tant that we do smell those ros­es so we can main­tain the clar­i­ty and the bal­ance to do every­thing else we want to do in busi­ness. Hence why I’ll look to get a lit­tle bit more struc­ture around me so I can do more of the things I just men­tioned.

Cameron  40:34

Iron Man Wow, one of our one of our QAV sub­scribers was doing an Iron­man thing in Maui, I think, a cou­ple of months ago. I’m always a lit­tle bit scared of you Iron­man types, that’s pret­ty scary stuff. You read­ing any­thing good at the moment? I like to get Book and TV and film rec­om­men­da­tions from Tony each week, he’s got good tastes in that stuff. Is there any­thing you can rec­om­mend? Books, music, films, TV?

Tim  40:59

Start with the books. Just one I’ve recent­ly read, the best book I’ve ever read, and it’s all rel­a­tive to what I need to do in life going for­ward, what we just spoke about. And I’m not try­ing to push reli­gion at all here, but it was “Bud­dhism for Busy Peo­ple”. And it was so enlight­en­ing, just the impor­tance of med­i­ta­tion, the impor­tance of being in the moment, the impor­tance, you know, the prin­ci­ples of Bud­dhism, it’s so pure, and it was real­ly inter­est­ing. It was the quick­est book I’ve ever read, only because I was just so engrossed, and prob­a­bly next to “The War­ren Buf­fett Way” or “The Intel­li­gent Investor”, you know, it’s right up there. It was just, it was real­ly pro­found for me. So, I rec­om­mend any­one who’s real­ly busy and look­ing to get bal­ance and clar­i­ty and things in their life, “Bud­dhism for Busy Peo­ple”. And anoth­er great book I just read on the mar­kets was “Physics of Wall Street”. And that’s all about a lot of things we were talk­ing about before, too; where it’s all come from, when physics was first dis­cov­ered in regard to stock selec­tion, and where it is now. And its sort tap­ping on the AI door as well. So, that was anoth­er recent great read. So, they were the two things that occu­py my time. Now it’s all about sit­ting on that lit­tle cush­ion and try­ing to do as much med­i­ta­tion as I can.

Cameron  42:18

That’s great. I think that’s real­ly good for you, stay­ing in the moment.

Tim  42:21

Yeah, exact­ly.

Cameron  42:22

I believe in that myself. What are you watch­ing at the moment? Any­thing good? TV series, films?

Tim  42:27

Oh look, we love The Crown, the lat­est series of The Crown. I love “The Whale”, we went and saw “The Whale” last week. Went and saw Avatar last week, obvi­ous­ly the cin­e­matog­ra­phy in that was just… The sto­ry was okay, what­ev­er, but the cre­ativ­i­ty asso­ci­at­ed with what they pro­duced there was just mind blow­ing.

Tony  42:48

What was that, sor­ry, Tim? I missed out the name of that one.

Tim  42:50

That was Avatar.

Tony  42:52

Avatar. Yeah, gotcha.

Tim  42:54

The lat­est Avatar. The sto­ry­lines a bit weak, but just what peo­ple can do these days in regard to just pure cre­ative tal­ent was just amaz­ing. Whale was a good show. I don’t watch a lot of tel­ly, to be hon­est. I’m too busy to. If it’s not doing the things I men­tioned before, then it’s sleep, or qual­i­ty time with the fam­i­ly. But they’re the things.

Cameron  43:16

Ter­rif­ic. Well, thanks for that, Tim, we real­ly appre­ci­ate your time and your insights. And again, thanks for every­thing you’ve done with Stock Doc­tor. It’s the cor­ner­stone of every­thing we and our mem­bers do in terms of invest­ing, so we real­ly val­ue it. Keep doing a great job.

Tim  43:35

Thanks, Cam, and thanks, Tony, too. Keep your great work up, too. Its edu­ca­tion and empow­er­ing peo­ple, and pro­vid­ing them with method­olo­gies and things that they can repli­cate and imple­ment is so impor­tant. So, well done on your deploy­ing of your pas­sions to peo­ple who need it, and obvi­ous­ly love it too. Well done.

Cameron  43:56

Thanks. And I want to give a shout out to your staff, too. Your staff are always very help­ful, very friend­ly. Vic­tor, in par­tic­u­lar, is always reach­ing out, say­ing, “hey, can I help with any­thing?” Answer­ing all my tech­ni­cal ques­tions. And if we find prob­lems with some datasets, he’s always dig­ging into it. Could­n’t be bet­ter. So, you’ve got a real­ly great cus­tomer ser­vice eth­ic there, obvi­ous­ly, which, you know, in this day and age is rare, when you come across com­pa­nies that real­ly do cus­tomer ser­vice well and take it seri­ous­ly. And I’ve got huge respect for the way that your staff reach out and help us and our mem­bers. I’ve nev­er heard any­thing but real­ly great feed­back on your cus­tomer ser­vice. So, well done.

Tim  44:41

Well, it’s crit­i­cal, isn’t it? I think all great busi­ness­es are client cen­tric, in a gen­uine way. In a gen­uine desire to help based on, again, gen­uine care. And if you do that right and you do it nat­u­ral­ly and you’ve got a good prod­uct to back that up, then it’s a rea­son­able busi­ness mod­el. There’s a lot more to man­ag­ing a busi­ness suc­cess­ful­ly than just that, of course, but I think they’re crit­i­cal ingre­di­ents.

Cameron  45:07

Basics. Like invest­ing, right? You have a good prod­uct, give good ser­vice.

Tim  45:10

That’s it.

Cameron  45:11

I mean, it’s not that hard, real­ly, on paper any­way.

Tim  45:14

Yeah, not that hard. It’s about the dis­ci­pline of con­sis­tent imple­men­ta­tion, isn’t it?

Cameron  45:19

Exact­ly. All right, we’ll let you get back to your day. Thanks a lot, Tim. Appre­ci­ate it.

Tony  45:23

Thanks very much, Tim.

Tim  45:24

Thanks, Cam. Thanks, Tony. Real­ly appre­ci­ate it, it was great fun. Thank you.

Tony  45:27

Thanks, bye.

Cameron  45:30

The QAV Pod­cast is a pro­duc­tion of Space­craft Pub­lish­ing Pro­pri­etary Lim­it­ed, autho­rised rep­re­sen­ta­tive of AFSL 520442, AFS rep­re­sen­ta­tive num­ber 001292718. Please don’t make any invest­ment deci­sions based sole­ly on lis­ten­ing to this pod­cast. This is pre­sent­ed as gen­er­al advice only, not per­son­al finan­cial advice. We don’t know your per­son­al finan­cial cir­cum­stances. Please see a finan­cial plan­ner before mak­ing any invest­ment deci­sions.

Secret Link