Monthly Archives: January 2010

Sidoti Micro Cap Conference Notes (Part 2 of 2)

Continuing with our notes from the Sidoti Micro Cap Conference, today we highlighte Hooker Furniture (HOFT) and Answers Corporation (ANSW). In addition, we provide a small summary of the topics covered by the keynote speaker Larry Kudlow.

Again, for a list of presenters along with corresponding financial snapshots, see the conference company list HERE.

Hooker Furniture Corp. (HOFT)

Presenter: Paul B. Toms Jr. (Chairman & CEO)

  • Hooker Furniture Corporation designs and imports residential wood, metal, and upholstered furniture products in North America. Its wood furniture products include home entertainment, home office, accent, dining, bedroom, and bath furniture. The company also offers motion and stationary leather furniture, and occasional chairs. In addition, it specializes in leather reclining and motion chairs, sofas, club chairs, and executive desk chairs.
  • Recession hit company hard, but has still turned a profit. In fact, in all 86 years company has been in business it has lost money only in one year: 1930.
  • The company competes in the mid to high end case goods and upholstered furniture market.
  • Upholstered furniture has a faster replacement rate than case goods (wood) because they wear out faster and have lower price points. Manufacturing these goods requires high fixed costs and the process is highly automated.
  • Hooker sells its furniture in the US through independent sales representatives to independent furniture retailers, catalog merchandisers, and national and regional chain stores.
  • Company has now turned its attention to the 24-45 age groups. This is because studies have shown that furniture acquisitions are largely correlated to important life events, such as marriage, buying a new home, having a child, etc.
  • To target 24-49 age groups, HOFT launched another brand: Envision. This new brand is more affordable than its signature furniture.
  • Fast paced business: one third of the company’s furniture line is replaced every year.

Answers Corporation (ANSW)

Presenter: Steven Steinberg (CFO)

  • Company simply operates as an online answer engine.
  • Products include, which combines and presents targeted information on various categories and, a user-generated content, and community-based question and answer site where users ask questions and the community answers them.
  • Main competitors are Yahoo Answers,, and Wikipedia.
  • Advantage of WikiAnswers’ approach is that allows the community to transform each question and answer into its own “wiki” page, a collaborative page that can be improved upon by others in the community. Unlike other pages, it is not operated in a message board format.
  • Its pages receive unique 56 million visitors a month in the U.S., and 83 million worldwide. This makes it the 13th most visited site in the U.S., and 25th in the world.
  • The exact presentation can be found HERE.

Keynote Speaker: Larry Kudlow

Mr. Kudlow’s keynote speech was almost exactly the same as his weekly economic/political commentary on CNBC. His commentary is posted HERE.

The Buffett Paradox

By Andrew Bary (Barron’s)

Warren Buffett threw cold water last week on Kraft Foods’ bid for British candy maker Cadbury. But in doing so, he seems to be saying: “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway (ticker: BRKA), Kraft’s largest shareholder, with a 9% stake, voted against a proposal that would let Kraft (KFT) sharply boost its share count to facilitate a higher bid for Cadbury (CBY) — which has rejected Kraft’s original offer. Buffett views Kraft stock as undervalued, and issuing more shares dilutes existing stockholders’ stakes.

Yet Berkshire is issuing $10 billion in shares of its own stock, which some investors view as quite undervalued, for its $34 billion cash-and-stock acquisition of Burlington Northern Sante Fe railroad (BNI), at $100 a share.

This could be a factor keeping Berkshire stock trailing the market, despite a strong 2010 profit outlook, stemming in part from Buffett’s smart high-yield investments in Goldman Sachs (GS), General Electric (GE) and other companies during the financial crisis. Berkshire made over $20 billion in such investments, and the $2 billion in resulting annual income could help lift its operating profits to a record $6,000 per Class A share this year, from an estimated $4,900 in 2009.

Based on earnings and book value, Berkshire fans consider the Class A very attractive now, at around $100,000 a share. After rising just 3% in 2009, the stock, which is way below its late 2007 peak of $149,000, fetches a mere 1.2 times our estimate of the company’s year-end 2009 book value of $84,500 a share — compared with an average 1.65 times in the past decade. The stock rarely has been cheaper, relative to book value, in 15 years.

Says one longtime Berkshire holder: “Buffett appears to be giving up a piece of a very cheap company to buy one that is fairly priced. He is not so happy when his investment companies do the same thing.”

Book value, moreover, understates what Buffett calls Berkshire’s intrinsic value: the discounted value of its cash flow. Buffett won’t estimate this, but has stated that it “significantly” exceeds book value, because auto insurer Geico and some other businesses are worth more than their carrying value on Berkshire’s balance sheet.

Berkshire’s book value could hit $92,000 to $95,000 a share this year if the financial markets stay strong. Thus, Berkshire may be trading below its 1.1 times forward book value. Why, then, is Buffett willing to issue equity for Burlington? He declined to comment last week, but he likes the railroad business, having accumulated a 22% stake in Burlington prior to the deal. In the past, he’s called the transaction “an all-in wager on the economic future of the United States.” And he’s said that, while he’s not enthusiastic about issuing more shares, the deal is too large to be all-cash and that he wants to give Burlington shareholders a tax-free option. Some think the 79-year-old investor wants to trim Berkshire’s $24 billion in cash to cut the pressure on his successor to make investments.

Still, Berkshire is paying a full price for Burlington — 18 times projected 2010 profits for a capital-intensive business. Other major rail companies are valued at about 15 times estimated 2010 earnings. One saving grace: Berkshire is using cash on its balance sheet and an estimated $8 billion in cheap financing for the deal, which uses a 60/40 mix of cash and stock.

The last time Berkshire did a major all-stock deal — the $22 billion purchase of reinsurer Gen Re in 1998 — its shares were at a lofty three times book value, a far cry from the currently low price/book ratio. If Berkshire’s intrinsic value is $125,000, as some bulls assert, Burlington holders will get about $110 a share in value for their stock, which was trading near 99 late last week.

Berkshire watchers say the stock may be depressed from arbitrage activity ahead of the deal’s closing, expected in the current quarter. The stock may get a lift subsequently, because arbitrage pressure will end and because Berkshire’s Class B shares, now trading around $3,320, will become more accessible to individuals after a 50-for-1 split that will drop the price to about $66.

It’s possible that Berkshire could be added to the S&P 500 when Burlington is removed, assuming that the deal clears antitrust hurdles. S&P has kept Berkshire out of the index due to concern about the stock’s liquidity. But the Burlington exit may give S&P an opportunity to reconsider. Joining the S&P 500 probably would boost Berkshire’s share price, as index funds, whose holdings mirror the index, buy the stock.

The Burlington deal doesn’t dent the investment case for Berkshire, which has a stock-market value of $155 billion. But it’s surprising to see Buffett parting with a stock that is at its lowest valuation in a decade to buy an asset that seems fairly valued, at best. Maybe the railroad business has better prospects than most people think.

Sidoti Micro Cap Conference Notes (Part 1 of 2)

Yesterday I attended Sidoti’s Micro-Cap Conference in NYC, where I had the opportunity to hear the strategies these companies are implementing to grow their business directly from executives. Today, I am including the notes from the first 3 companies I visited: Zoom Technologies (ZOOM), Cryptologic (CRYP), and Monmouth Real Estate Investment Corp (MNRTA). Keep in mind that these are not meant to be company analyses, but only notes taken while listening to the presentations. Each presentation was 15 minutes.

Tomorrow I will be highlighting Hooker Furniture (HOFT) and Answers Corporation (ANSW). In addition, I will also be providing a summary of the topics covered by the keynote speaker Larry Kudlow.

For a list of presenters along with corresponding financial snapshots, see the conference company list HERE.


Zoom Technologies (ZOOM)

Presenter: Anthony Chan, CFO

  • Zoom Technologies provides electronic manufacturing services (EMS) for Chinese and global original equipment manufacturer (OEM) customers, as well as involves in the design and production of mobile phone products. It develops and produces GSM and CDMA mobile phones, wireless telecommunication modules, digital cameras, cable TV set-top boxes, and GPS equipment. It also produces its own brand of cell phones in China.
  • Only 47% of people China have cell phones, compared to 94% in the US. According to CFO, the company will be able to capitalize on the land to mobile shift in China.
  • Company is majority owned (51%) by Mr. Lei Gu, who serves as Chairman & CEO.
  • Industry margins are thin, but company’s margins are even thinner. These are expected to remain thin for the foreseeable future. It seems that company is a price taker, not a price setter. Therefore, CFO is satisfied with getting contracts that will allow the company to make money even at razor thin margins.
  • Company’s structure is dictated by the requirements imposed by the Chinese government.
  • CFO described Chinese government partnership as positive, citing that the government provides interest-free loans to the company as long as company manufactures cable set-top boxes for the state-run cable company.
  • An interesting concept the company has developed is burning ads into the company-branded cell phones. When these phones are activated, an ad is displayed for the buyer. Not much additional detail was given on this.


Cryptologic (CRYP)

Presenter: Brian Hatfield, President & CEO

  • Company is a leading developer of online casino software.
  • After the US prohibition of online gambling passed in 2006, the company re-focused its growth efforts to Europe and Asia. The UK is currently its largest market.
  • Company has gained 26 new customers since Mr. Hatfield took over the company in 2008.
  • Company is focused on bringing entertainment brands to their casino games, as branded games are fastest growing segment of their business. Some of these brands include The Incredible Hulk, Daredevil, X-Men, and Wonder Woman.
  • Cryptologic has exclusive gaming and casino rights to Marvel comic book characters. However, it also has a licensing agreement with DC Comics, Marvel’s main competitor, allowing the company to keep total control of comic superheroes in the gaming industry. The DC brand includes Batman and Superman, the two best-known comic heroes in the world.
  • From concept to delivery, the company’s mean turnaround cycle is roughly 1 year.
  • Deposits can be made freely, but first-time players cannot withdraw winnings from a Cryptologic-powered casino until they receive a PIN number, which is sent through the regular postal service. The policy discourages some players, but it is a lot more secure than other sites. According to CEO, this fraud control measure has resulted in one of the lowest fraud rates in the industry (under 1%).
  • Cost-cutting measures expected in the future, as company will be merging Cyprus and Malta offices into one (announcement will be made later this week).
  • CEO does not think prohibition is likely in European countries at least not in the near future. It is also interesting that he sees online gambling returning to the US, but not any time soon. He mentioned that a kay barrier is the opposition byVegas casinos, which have lobbied strongly in 2006 for the prohibition of online gaming in the US.


Monmouth Real Estate Investment Corporation (MNRTA)

Presenters: Eugene Landy – Founder, Chairman & CEO

                      Michael Landy – VP, Investments

  • The company’s primary business is the ownership of real estate. Its investment focus is to own net leased industrial properties, which are leased to investment-grade tenants on long-term leases. In addition, the company holds a portfolio of REIT securities.
  • The Company has approximately 6,132,000 square feet of space that it leases, of which approximately 2,910,000 square feet, or 47%, is leased to Federal Express Corporation (FDX) and its subsidiaries. The company also leases to other high-quality tenants such as Coca Cola, Kellogg, Caterpillar, Anheuser Busch, among others.
  • The company operates at a 4% vacancy rate, much lower than the national average of 12%.
  • Company owns a total of 61 properties in 25 states. It leases them at an average of $5.36 per square ft.
  • Roughly 10% of company is invested in REIT securities, weighted towards preferred shares. Additionally, company offers 8% yield.
  • For the past 3 years, company has returned 9% vs. -43% for MSCI US REIT benchmark.
  • Company’s founder (over 42 years in the industry) mentioned all data points tracked by company indicate a V-shaped recovery.

Sidoti’s Micro Cap Conference

I am attending Sidoti’s Micro Cap Conference in New York today, where I am hoping to find investment opportunities in the micro cap space. The conference is a great opportunity to meet management one-on-one. I’ll be posting my conference notes, in addition to company writeups throughout the week. Stay tuned.

Using Altman’s Z-Score to Create a Short-Only Portfolio

Bookmark and Share

We aim to use Altman’s Z-Score model to create the Valuehuntr Short-Only Portfolio and track the effectiveness of Altman’s regression.

The Z-Score

The Z-Score is a predictive model created by Edward Altman in the 1960s while serving as an Assistant Professor at NYU.  The model combines five different financial ratios to determine the likelihood of bankruptcy amongst companies. In general, these financial ratios are used to predict corporate defaults or financial distress status of companies.

The model’s regression is as follows:

Z –Score = 1.2*A+1.4*B+3.3*C+0.6*D+0.999*E


A = Working Capital/Total Assets

B = Retained Earnings/Total Assets

C = EBIT/Total Assets

D = Market Value of Equity/Total Assets

E = Sales/Total Assets

According to Altman, companies with Z-Scores above 3 are considered to be healthy and, therefore, unlikely to enter bankruptcy. Scores in between 1.8 and 3 lie in a gray area. Scores of 1.8 or less indicate a very high probability of insolvency. This is because each of the variables, A to E, was found to be significantly different among bankrupt and non-bankrupt groups in the original study.

In its initial test, the Altman Z-Score was found to be 72% accurate in predicting bankruptcy two years prior to the event. In a series of subsequent tests covering three different time periods over the next 31 years (up until 1999), the model was found to be approximately 80-90% accurate in predicting bankruptcy one year prior to the event. Althought the model has performed well over the years, it is important to keep in mind that it is only a statistical regression. In fact,  plenty of businesses with dangerously low Z-scores have come back from the brink, producing extremely attractive performance. Therefore, investors should not rely solely on this model to find investment opportunities.

ValueHuntr Short-Only Portfolio

Our short-only portfolio consists of companies with Z-scores less than 1.8, as specified by Altman, with an additional screen requiring a current ratio of less than 0.5 as reported by the companies on the latest quarter. We believe this additional requirement shortens the time period of expected bankruptcy occurrence, as the ratio is an indication of whether or not a firm has enough resources to pay its debts over the next 12 months. Furthermore, we limit our screen to stocks trading in US exchanges with market capitalization greater than $1 million.

The result of our screen is shown below:

Our short-only portfolio consists of 30 companies, ranked according to their respective Z-scores. Most of the companies in the portfolio have Z-scores that are much lower than Altman’s lower limit of 1.8. Such negative scores indicate a much higher probability of bankruptcy than the average company studied by Altman for his original study.

The ValueHuntr Short-Only Portfolio can be tracked real-time HERE.


Warren Buffett the Activist

Yesterday, Buffett made it clear that he is not happy about Kraft’s plan to authorize share-issuance to facilitate the Cadbury acquisition. For years, Buffett’s strategy has been to invest in businesses with talented and trustworthy managers and then remain mostly on the sidelines, even when Buffett was on the board of those companies. Does this move represent a subtle shift in Buffett’s investing style to a more active approach?

Apparently that’s not the case.

According to Buffett insiders, it’s not unusual for Buffett to actively protect its investments from value-destroying actions such as issuing new stock to overpay for acquisitions. For example, when the Coca-Cola was considering buying Gatorade, Buffett was behind the scenes actively trying to persuade the company not to overpay for the sports-drink maker. We do think, however, that the language Mr. Buffett used on the press release is stronger than the typical annual letter, and hence all the press coverage.

Buffett’s press release is included below:

Berkshire Hathaway has voted “no” on Kraft’s proposal to authorize issuance of up to 370 million shares. Berkshire, taking into account both its own holdings and those of its pension funds, believes that the 138,272,500 Kraft shares it owns – 9.4% of the total outstanding – make it the company’s largest shareholder.

The share-issuance proposal, if enacted, will give Kraft a blank check allowing it to change its offer to Cadbury – in any way it wishes – from the transaction presented to shareholders in the proxy statement. And we worry very much that, indeed, there will be an additional change from the revision announced this morning.

To state the matter simply, a shareholder voting “yes” today is authorizing a huge transaction without knowing its cost or the means of payment.

What we know with certainty, however, is that Kraft stock, at its current price of $27, is a very expensive “currency” to be used in an acquisition. In 2007, in fact, Kraft spent $3.6 billion to repurchase shares at about $33 per share, presumably because the directors and management thought the shares to be worth more.

Does the board now believe those purchases were a mistake and that Kraft’s true value is only the current price of $27 per share – and that it is therefore fine to structure a major acquisition based upon that price? Would the directors use stock as merger currency if the price were, say, $20 per share? Surely the true business value of what is given is as important as the true business value of what is received when an acquisition is being evaluated. We hope all shareholders will use this yardstick in deciding how to vote.

Our understanding is that Kraft must announce its final offer for Cadbury by January 19th. If we conclude at that point that the offer does not destroy value for Kraft shareholders, we will change our vote to “yes.” At this time, however, we believe no shareholder should vote “yes” when he can’t possibly know what he is voting for.


Aspen Exploration Corporation: Liquidation May Still Have Value

Aspen Exploration Corporation (ASPN.OB) is being added to the ValueHuntr Portfolio. ASPN is an interesting special situations play we have been following for some time now. Based on yesterday’s trading price, we believe there may still be some value for shareholders in the event of a sale, merger or liquidation even after the payment of $0.73/share dividend.  For the purpose of keeping our estimates as conservative as possible, we assume at least liquidation value.


Aspen Exploration Corporation does not have significant operations. It intends to seek possible business combinations with third parties. Prior to June 30, 2009, the company operated 67 gas wells and had a non-operated interest in 26 gas wells in the Sacramento Valley of northern California and approximately 37 oil wells in Montana.


On November 30, 2009, Aspen held its annual meeting of stockholders in Greenwood Village, Colorado. Two proposals were submitted to the stockholders for approval as set forth in Aspen’s definitive proxy statement dated October 19, 2009. A total of 5,965,534 shares (approximately 70% of the total outstanding as of the record date) were present at the meeting in person or by proxy.

According to the 12/02/09 SEC Filing, Aspen’s stockholders did not approve the resolution to grant Aspen’s Board of Directors the discretion to dissolve the company. To be approved Delaware law required that this proposal be approved by a majority of shares outstanding and entitled to vote thereon. Although more stockholders voted in favor of the proposal than voted against it, only approximately 41% of the total shares outstanding and entitled to vote on the proposal voted in favor of its approval. As a result, Aspen maintained its corporate status and decided to explore other business opportunities.

On November 2, 2009 ASPN declared a cash dividend of $0.73/share. The news release describing the dividend said:

The distribution follows the final settlement of the sale of Aspen’s California oil and gas assets to Venoco, Inc., at which the parties made a number of immaterial adjustments to the purchase price paid at the June 30, 2009 closing, and made certain other payments that were not determined until after the closing. At the final settlement date Aspen received a net payment from Venoco, but was required to make various payments to third parties which ultimately resulted in a cash outflow from Aspen in an amount not considered to be material.

Aspen expects that after the payment of the dividend, and its anticipated operations through the end of the current calendar year, on December 31, 2009 it will have more than $3 million of working capital remaining. Aspen currently intends to utilize its remaining funds to maintain its corporate status as a reporting issuer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and to explore other business opportunities. “


It is likely that if no interested buyer is found for ASPN’s remaining assets, the company will end up liquidating. Our rough estimates for an eventual liquidation, including expected operational expenses to be incurred until March, 2010 is shown below.

Currently trading at $30/share, our estimates show that there is still some value in ASPN. However, our estimates are highly dependent on the timing of the potential liquidation and on the assumptions outlined above. We believe that management will do what is right for shareholders, as the company’s CEO owns 20% of all shares.


ASPN has no significant operations, but it may have enough cash on its balance sheet to offer some value to shareholders. Although we wish we had a larger margin of safety, we believe it is likely that ASPN’s CEO will find the best deal for shareholders, or liquidate the company. As we have shown, even in liquidation the company’s value is above the company’s current price.

The Best Company in America

We typically post investment ideas that we like enough to add to our portfolio. However, we have not been able to find a lot of bargains out there lately, so we’ll start posting ideas that are close to meeting our requirements.

A Valuehuntr near miss is Church & Dwight Co. Inc. (CHD). CHD is one of those boring companies we would love to own. It also happens to be the largest producer of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) in the world, and likely one of the best run companies in America.  The company was founded in 1846, and (as Coca Cola) it still uses the original company formula today.

The company develops, manufactures, and markets a range of household, personal care, and specialty products under various brand names in the United States and internationally.  Its top brands include ARM & HAMMER, TROJAN, and OXICLEAN.  The company meets a lot of the characteristics we look for when searching for good businesses, such as wide barriers to entry and great management, but the stock seems overvalued, which is the reason why it has not been added to the Valuehuntr Portfolio. Although CHD is not being added to our portfolio, we will like to highlight the company anyway.


The company operates in three segments: Consumer Domestic, Consumer International, and Specialty Products.

The Consumer Domestic segment offers household products for deodorizing, such as ARM & HAMMER baking soda, cat litter products, laundry/cleaning products, and consumer care products such as TROJAN condoms and ARM & HAMMER deodorants and toothpaste.  The Consumer International segment sells the personal care products highlighted above in international markets, including France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Brazil, and China. Finally, the Specialty Products segment produces sodium bicarbonate, which it sells together with other specialty inorganic chemicals for a range of industrial, institutional, medical, and food applications. This segment also sells a range of animal nutrition and specialty cleaning products. Operating data for FY 2004-2008 is shown below.



The core product of the company has historically been baking soda, which is used in products within every business segment. The main advantage of baking soda is in its versatility of use. For instance, it is estimated that 95% of US households have a product containing baking soda at their home. Baking soda is not only used for cooking, but it is also an active ingredient in tooth paste, laundry detergents, pool cleaners, fire extinguishers, chemotherapy machines, deodorants, among many others.

(For more information about the versatility of baking soda, we recommend reading: “75 Extraordinary uses of Baking Soda”)


  • Market share gains:  Throughout the financial crisis, CHD has been the only company in the home and personal care products sector that has seen its weighted average market share increase, according to ACNielsen.
  • Better manufacturing: new $170m plant is slated to open in York, PA, by the start of 2009 Q4, replacing an older factory in Brunswick, NJ. It’s expected to be at least 25% more efficient than the old location.


  • Manufacturing Advantage: The baking soda manufactured by CHD is more than 99% pure, which requires proper materials, equipment, and personnel training.
  • Government Regulation: baking soda must meet the requirements specified by the FDA as a substance that is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS). Distribution of baking soda is prohibited unless the product meets the GRAS specifications.
  • Supply Advantage:  soda ash deposits at the Green River Basin are large enough to meet the entire world’s needs for baking soda for thousands of years.
  • Cost Efficient: mining operation in the Green River is less expensive for production of soda ash than the synthetic soda ash process that predominates in the rest of the world.


We could use DCF to come up with company value estimates for the next few years to perpetuity. Instead, we’ll make our lives simpler by assuming the company will be able to generate earnings equal to at least its 3-year average EPS. The two quick calculations we show are the value of CHD with no growth, and its value with growth assuming terminal growth roughly equal to historical U.S. GDP.

PV = (Avg. 3-Yr EPS)/WACC = $35/share

EPV= (Avg. 3-Yr EPS)(1+G)/(WACC-G) = $63/share

(Assuming WACC~7%, G=3%)

Currently trading at $61/share, these quick calculations show the company may be currently trading at the top of its valuation range. Additionally, the stock price implies a 5.3% earnings yield, which is only slightly higher than the 4.6% 30-Year T-bill. Based on this price, there are likely other opportunities where investors could get a better return for their money. This is mainly the reason why CHD has not been added to our portfolio.


In our view, there are two things every potential investor should take a closer look at before investing in CHD.

1)     Cost of Raw Materials: the cost of soda ash, surfactants, diesel fuel, corrugated paper, liner board and oil-based raw and packaging materials used in the household and specialty products businesses  are not hedged (only diesel fuel costs for transportation are).

2)      Off-Balance Sheet Liabilities: Pension Plan was underfunded by USD -14mm in 2008 based on a discount rate of 6.58%. Company’s Post Retirement Benefits Plan was also underfunded by USD -22mm (We were not able to find 2009 numbers).


CHD has one of the best independent boards in America. This is evident in the governance policies the company has developed over the years for executive compensation.  Over the years, the rewards given to company executives have been highly correlated with the stock price, as shown below.



Church & Dwight operates and manages some of the most trusted brands in the world. Although the company is not trading at a bargain price, the earnings generated from its assets are protected by wide competitive advantages expected to continue in the future. The level of usage and versatility that CHD baking soda enjoys is hard to replicate, but because the stock is a bit too pricy we are not adding CHD to our portfolio.


ValueHuntr Reader Feedback

Dear Hunters,

We are in the process of improving the blog to meet the needs of our readers. To that end, we are asking readers to fill out a short 5-question survey.  Please click the button below to proceed to the survey.

Warren Buffett Continues to Obliterate S&P Over Decades

Shares of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway far outperformed the benchmark S&P 500 stock index over the decade of the 2000s, with a gain of 73.9% The S&P dropped 6% over the same ten-year period. In fact, Buffett has easily beat the S&P benchmark over the last 3 decades, with only 5 years in the negative and 25 positive years.