notices - See details
Notices
Enterprising Investor Default Hero Image
3 December 2018 Enterprising Investor Blog

Private Equity: The Emperor Has No Clothes

Enterprising Investor Blogs logo thumbnail

From Bust to Boom

The private equity industry had an abysmal outlook in 2008 and many portfolio companies were at the brink of collapse. Carlyle Capital, a listed affiliate of the US buyout giant The Carlyle Group, defaulted on its debt.

Fast-forward to 2018 and such global financial crisis–related difficulties seem almost forgotten and private equity is flourishing. Indeed, alternative investment firms have $1.8 trillion in "dry powder" waiting in reserve and more than half of that is held by private equity funds.

Subscribe Button

The fondness for private equity among institutional investors is easy to explain: It comes down to high returns, low volatility, and a lack of correlation to traditional asset classes. Of course, such attributes also evoke some skepticism: Don't they sound just too good to be true?

To explore that question, we set out to replicate private equity returns with public stocks.

Private Equity Returns vs. The S&P 500

Private equity returns in the United States have outperformed various equity and bond benchmarks over the long term, according to data from Cambridge Associates. Private equity returns are compiled from 1,481 US private equity funds and are available net of fees on a quarterly basis.

Using this data, we construct a US Private Equity Index that has outperformed the S&P 500 by a significant margin since 2000.


US Private Equity Returns vs. The S&P 500

US Private Equity Returns vs. The S&P 500

Source: Cambridge Associates, FactorResearch. Private equity returns are only available as IRRs and not CAGRs, so should be viewed as an approximation when comparing to public equity returns.


Not only has it outperformed, the US Private Equity Index also has much lower volatility than the S&P 500. This no doubt has an appeal for institutional investors. Unfortunately, it is more illusion than reality. After all, private equity portfolio companies are typically valued on a quarterly basis so lack a daily time series. In addition, most portfolio company valuations are smoothed as they are conducted by external appraisers using business plans from the private equity firms.

If private equity firms valued their portfolio companies on a daily basis using public market multiples, volatility would be much higher and more reminiscent of the S&P 500.

Explaining Private Equity Returns

Bryan Burrough and John Helyar immortalized the private equity industry in Barbarians at the Gates, their account of the 1988 buyout of RJR Nabisco. The deal, which involved many prominent Wall Street characters, was valued at a then-unprecedented $25 billion.

Although private equity today is renowned for enormous buyouts, take-over targets historically were much smaller simply because private equity funds held much less capital. The average transaction size was much more in line with small-cap equities.

Based on this data point, we create an index of the 30% of the smallest US public companies with market capitalizations over $500 million. As it turns out, the small-cap equity index and the US Private Equity Index have almost identical returns. The performance profiles also demonstrate that private equity returns are not as uncorrelated to public equities as institutional investors might like them to be.


Replicating Private Equity with Small-Cap Stocks

Replicating Private Equity with Small-Cap Stocks

Source: Cambridge Associates, FactorResearch


Maybe the US Private Equity Index only represents average returns and not those of the top-performing funds. But ample academic research shows that fund selection is challenging across all asset classes. Choosing the funds with the best historical returns is rarely a winning strategy. Therefore, average returns are likely reflective of the actual returns that investors should expect from private equity allocations.

Liquid Private Equity Alternatives

In addition to their smaller size, private equity target companies have also tended to share other characteristics, among them lower valuation multiples and the ability to carry debt.

Companies trading at lower valuations often have temporary or structural issues that private equity firms see as opportunities. By swooping in and addressing them, the private equity firm can unlock value.

Although much less leverage is applied in private transactions today than when the sector got rolling in the 1980s, recouping the initial equity investment quickly through a dividend recap financed by additional debt remains a popular strategy. Companies with proven cash flows and the ability to take on debt are still popular targets.

So we create two portfolios: one with small and cheap stocks and another with small, cheap, and levered US stocks. Cheap stocks have low EV-to-EBITDA multiples and levered stocks high debt-to-EBITDA multiples.

What did we find? From 1988 to 2018, the liquid private equity alternatives portfolios outperformed the US Private Equity Index. They provide daily liquidity and require minimal initial due diligence and ongoing monitoring. They can also be rebalanced quarterly and managed internally or outsourced to any asset manager for a few basis points.


Liquid Private Equity Alternatives

Liquid Private Equity Alternatives

Source: Cambridge Associates, FactorResearch


Further Thoughts

Exposure to small caps likely explains private equity returns. Liquid alternatives to private equity can be created simply by buying small, cheap, and levered stocks.

Some have reached similar conclusions and proposed that the nature of locked-up capital is what makes private equity so advantageous. It keeps investors from redeeming their funds at market lows and helps private equity firms weather storms like the global financial crisis. But the same fund structure can be replicated through public equities at a fraction of private equity fees.

Furthermore, with $1.8 trillion sitting on the sidelines, too much money may end up chasing too few deals, creating high acquisition multiples that don't augur well for expected returns.

Of course, high valuations are now the rule in both private and public markets. And corporate debt levels are at all-time highs.


Small, Cheap, and Levered Stocks: Valuation and Debt Multiples

Small, Cheap, and Levered Stocks: Valuation and Debt Multiples

Source: FactorResearch


Neither of these developments bode well for expected returns. So investors might be wise to reconsider direct private equity allocations and their liquid alternatives altogether.

For more insights from Nicolas Rabener and the Factor Research team, sign up for their email newsletter.

If you liked this post, don’t forget to subscribe to the Enterprising Investor.


All posts are the opinion of the author. As such, they should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of CFA Institute or the author’s employer.

Image credit: Stamps of Germany (DDR) 1975


Professional Learning for CFA Institute Members

CFA Institute members are empowered to self-determine and self-report professional learning (PL) credits earned, including content on Enterprising Investor. Members can record credits easily using their online PL tracker.

If you liked this post, don’t forget to subscribe to the Enterprising Investor.


All posts are the opinion of the author. As such, they should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of CFA Institute or the author’s employer. Image credit: ©Getty Images / Ascent / PKS Media Inc. 


Professional Learning for CFA Institute Members

CFA Institute members are empowered to self-determine and self-report professional learning (PL) credits earned, including content on Enterprising Investor. Members can record credits easily using their online PL tracker.

 

32 Comments

KC
Kevin Collins, CFA (not verified)
9th January 2019 | 3:17pm

Thank you for the article. This makes sense intuitively.

Can smaller investors replicate the two-part strategy described? One can come close with one of many small cap funds - active or index. But a diversified
“levered” portion seems difficult for smaller investors to replicate. I would be interested in observations or suggestions in this regard. Thanks

NR
Nicolas Rabener (not verified)
10th January 2019 | 2:09am

Hi Kevin, the liquid private equity alternatives can be replicated efficiently via small cap value-focused smart beta ETFs (or funds), which are available at very low cost. The portfolio that sorts for small, cheap and levered stocks could be easily replicated via stocks, but is perhaps more difficult to find as an ETF or fund. However, the analysis also highlights that most PE returns were already captured by screening for cheap and small stocks, adding leverage did not contribute significantly more.

EB
Emilian Belev (not verified)
10th January 2019 | 9:38am

Hi Nicolas,

Interesting idea. One critical point is, as your article points out PE returns are an estimate, not an observation. The CA index uses the PME methodology for calculating "PE" returns, the math of its calculation can make any time series appear correlated with the stock market, or a subset by picking the appropriate public market "discount rates". Using the PME approach, one can make e.g. the sale of Taylor Swift records appear highly correlated to the stock market. The point is that PME should be used and compared to with high caution.

I was wondering how this inherent bias is treated in your work.

Best.

NR
Nicolas Rabener (not verified)
10th January 2019 | 11:31am

Hi Emilian, I'm not sure if you're referring to index we constructed based on CA data or one from CA directly. The CA index featured in this article is one we created by using quarterly IRR data from CA. Naturally we're aware (and also noted) that transforming IRRs and comparing them to public market indices can be challenged easily. Thanks.

JB
JC Berkindale (not verified)
15th January 2019 | 1:40pm

interesting article , thank you. Two other points relevant for most investors: 1. few non-institutional (large) can replicate the PE returns due to the timing and amounts needed to diversify among managers, and 2. the drag of returns on cash required to be held while awaiting the capital calls can materiallt reduce return.
Furthermore the tax efficiency of PE for taxable investors is essentially not manageable. The suggested small cap alternative is advantaged further in taxable situations.

AW
Ashby Watts, CFA (not verified)
19th February 2019 | 2:39pm

Well done. Thank you for sharing your research. Timing and luck are critical performance variables for PE funds. The fund's vintage, relative to the economic cycle, determines much of a fund's performance. As one PE fund managing director shared, "People think I am a rockstar for the returns the fund is generating today. The reality is the returns are on investments we made at the time of the crisis several years ago. Yeah, it took guts to buy then, but we got the tailwind of growth plus multiple expansion when we exited." What I heard was the following: market-timing (which can be difficult), concentrated bets, illiquid and long-term positions. For these reasons, I appreciate the proxy, alternative strategy of small cap stocks presented in article.

J
Jonathan (not verified)
4th April 2019 | 5:49am

Great article and analysis. Just out of interest did you mean companies with a market cap of less than $500m? And if you meant more what was the reason for that cut-off?

Thanks,

NR
Nicolas Rabener (not verified)
4th April 2019 | 10:42am

Hi Jonathan, we only selected stocks larger than $500 million in market capitalization as companies below that to tend to be more problematic, i.e. are fallen angels, recently IPOed stocks, etc, and don't represent typical PE targets, i.e. stable cashflows that can be levered . Naturally $500m today are far less than $500m in 1990, so we could enhance the analysis by adjusting for inflation.

M
Ming (not verified)
25th June 2019 | 11:04pm

What was the total leverage of the PE index vs the small and cheap stock index over time?

It would be interesting to know if it was more, the same or less.

My instinct tells me that the PE index leverage should be greater than the small and cheap stock index as PE is just a levered play on small caps. If this were the case, it can be argued that PE firms add leverage (which adds additional risk) but it does not translate to greater returns to investors net of fees. Any additional returns from this added leverage risk is probably skimmed off via high fees anyways, so the end investor takes on additional risk for no additional return.

Also, can you clarify, '30% of the smallest US public companies with market capitalizations over $500 million' - Is this the smallest 30% of the entire US equity market or smallest 30% of a US small cap index like the Russell 2000?

I'm unsure if any smart beta product exists that constructs a portfolio like that. Are there any?

What about a 3rd option where you take the entire small caps index like the Russell 2000 and gear it to the same as the total gearing of the PE index? How would have this worked out?

NR
Nicolas Rabener (not verified)
26th June 2019 | 11:03am

Hi Ming, thanks for your questions. The following responses:

1) The index itself was not levered, but simply selected stocks with high debt-over-equity ratios, in addition to these being small and cheap. We used the sequential model for the stock selection.

2) We defined the universe as all US stocks above $500 million market cap and selected the 30% smallest companies of that universe.

3) There are mutual funds that replicate this strategy (small, cheap & levered) and smart beta ETFs that focus on small and cheap stocks. Including leverage as a factor is somewhat marginal.

On an unrelated note, adding a factor like high cashflow stability, which many PE target companies feature, and then leveraging the index would be an interesting follow on analysis.