Berkshire outguns market as Buffett reaches 60 years in charge
At Saturday's annual meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, the 94-year-old billionaire will mark 60 years in charge of what he built into a $1.15 trillion conglomerate.
Buffett will spend four and a half hours fielding shareholder questions, which typically focus on Berkshire's operating businesses, markets, the economy, life lessons, and the company's future after the Oracle of Omaha departs.
Berkshire's businesses are disparate, and include Geico insurance, the BNSF railroad, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom, and retro brands such as Ginsu knives and the World Book Encyclopedia.
For many, they serve as a proxy for the American economy.
But up to April 30, Berkshire shares have trounced the Standard & Poor's 500 index, rising 18% while the index was down 5%.
That gulf, however, is more likely reflective of whipsaw from US President Donald Trump's policies than new attitudes about Berkshire itself.
Some observers view Berkshire's $334.2 billion year-end cash stake, which at current yields could generate more than $14 billion of income, as a buffer.
"People have so much conviction in Warren Buffett and his ability to deploy capital well in market downturns," said Brett Gardner, author of "Buffett's Early Investments," focusing on decades ago when Buffett's outperformance was substantial.
"Berkshire also has a lot of stable cash flowing businesses that may not be as impacted as other companies," he added.
The early outperformance fueled much of Berkshire's stock price gain of more than 6,400,000% since 1965. Over multiyear periods, Berkshire now performs more like the S&P, but with better downside protection.
Buffett readily acknowledges the folly of expecting stellar outperformance over the long haul.
"We cannot do as well as we did in the past," Buffett said at Berkshire's 2013 annual shareholder meeting. "It's tougher as we get bigger."
At the 2021 meeting, Buffett said a person who knows nothing about stocks and had no "special feelings" for Berkshire should buy the index.
And in his February 2024 shareholder letter, Buffett said Berkshire "should do a bit better" than average American companies, with materially less risk of losing capital, but that anything beyond "slightly better" was "wishful thinking."
A large driver of Berkshire's profit is insurance, which accounted for 48% of its $47.4 billion of operating profit last year.
Still, earnings in 53% of Berkshire's 189 operating businesses fell last year, and Trump's tariffs could pressure some of the businesses.
At BNSF, for example, higher tariffs could reduce cargo volumes if imports decline.
Not even buying and selling homes is immune.
"Tariffs indirectly affect our business, to the extent they cause market instability and affect the 10-year Treasury note, which directly affects mortgage rates and the housing market," said Chris Kelly, chief executive of HomeServices of America, the largest US residential real estate brokerage.
'Dumbest stock I ever bought'
Berkshire's value also derives from its huge cache of stocks, including Apple and American Express, though that portfolio suffered during April's market selloff.
Jim Shanahan, an Edward Jones & Co analyst in St Louis, said Berkshire has been trading near a historically high 1.75 times projected book value for June.
"We've always felt Berkshire was a good stock to own in periods of market volatility," he said, "but we didn't anticipate this level of market volatility."
Buffett took over Berkshire in a fit of anger in 1965, when management of the then-flailing textile company shortchanged him when he offered to sell back his shares.
He later called Berkshire "the dumbest stock I ever bought," saying he missed out on $200 billion over 45 years by making it his vehicle to invest in insurance instead of starting a new entity.
But by adopting the mantra of the company's late vice chairman, Charlie Munger, to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices, rather than fair businesses at wonderful prices, Buffett made Berkshire what it is today.
Gardner called Berkshire's size its "biggest handicap, being unable to move the needle," but said Buffett's record as perhaps the greatest investor ever outweighed it for many.
Planning for the future
Succession-planning is largely set. Vice Chairman Greg Abel, who oversees non-insurance businesses, has since 2021 been Buffett's designated successor as chief executive officer.
It is unclear whether Abel or portfolio managers Ted Weschler and Todd Combs, who is also Geico CEO, would become the chief stock pickers. Buffett's son Howard Buffett would become non-executive chairman.
Abel and Vice Chairman Ajit Jain, who oversees insurance businesses, will also field shareholder questions on Saturday.
Shanahan said he hopes Abel will commit to investing more of his net worth in Berkshire, and assure investors that he will be around at least a decade. "A lot of people think of retiring at 62," Shanahan said.
But he particularly wants to know if April's market swoon provided Buffett an opportunity to buy ... something.
"That would go a long way to calming markets," he said. "Consider the alternative: they go to $340 billion of cash and have been a net seller in April. That would be horrible for markets."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Independent
4 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Trump fire official overseeing jobs data after dismal employment report
Mr Trump said that Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labour Statistics who was appointed by former president Joe Biden, should be sacked (Jacquelyn Martin/AP) Trump, in a post on his social media platform, alleged that the figures were manipulated for political reasons and said that Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, should be fired. He provided no evidence for the charge. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' Trump said on Truth Social. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' Trump later posted: 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.' The charge that the data was faked is an explosive one that threatens to undercut the political legitimacy of the U.S. government's economic data, which has long been seen as the 'gold standard' of economic measurement globally. Economists and Wall Street investors have for decades generally accepted the data as free from political bias. Mr Trump said that Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labour Statistics who was appointed by former president Joe Biden, should be sacked (Jacquelyn Martin/AP) Today's news in 90 Seconds - Saturday, August 2 Trump's move to fire McEntarfer represented another extraordinary assertion of presidential power. He has wielded the authority of the White House to try to control the world's international trade system, media companies, America's top universities and Congress' constitutional power of the purse, among other institutions. McEntarfer's firing was roundly condemned by a group that included two former BLS commissioners, including William Beach, who was appointed by Trump to the position. They particularly objected to the charge that the data was altered for political reasons. 'This rationale for firing Dr. McEntarfer is without merit and undermines the credibility of federal economic statistics that are a cornerstone of intelligent economic decision-making by businesses, families, and policymakers,' the statement from the group, the Friends of BLS, said. In addition to Beach, the statement was signed by Erica Groshen, BLS commissioner under former President Barack Obama. 'Firing the Commissioner ... when the BLS revises jobs numbers down (as it routinely does) threatens to destroy trust in core American institutions, and all government statistics,' Arin Dube, an economist at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, said on X. 'I can't stress how damaging this is.' After Trump's initial post, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said on X that McEntarfer was no longer leading the bureau and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as the acting director. 'I support the President's decision to replace Biden's Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,' Chavez-DeRemer said. Friday's jobs report showed that just 73,000 jobs were added last month and that 258,000 fewer jobs were created in May and June than previously estimated. The report suggested that the economy has sharply weakened during Trump's tenure, a pattern consistent with a slowdown in economic growth during the first half of the year and an increase in inflation during June that appeared to reflect the price pressures created by the president's tariffs. 'What does a bad leader do when they get bad news? Shoot the messenger,' Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said in a Friday speech. McEntarfer was nominated by Biden in 2023 and became the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in January 2024. Commissioners typically serve four-year terms but since they are political appointees can be fired. The commissioner is the only political appointee of the agency, which has hundreds of career civil servants. The Senate confirmed McEntarfer to her post 86-8, with now Vice President JD Vance among the yea votes. Trump focused much of his ire on the revisions the agency made to previous hiring data. Job gains in May were revised down to just 19,000 from a previously revised 125,000, and for June they were cut to 14,000 from 147,000. In July, only 73,000 positions were added. The unemployment rate ticked up to a still-low 4.2% from 4.1%. 'No one can be that wrong? We need accurate Jobs Numbers,' Trump wrote. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified. Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate, they can't be manipulated for political purposes.' Trump has not always been so suspicious of the monthly jobs report and responded enthusiastically after the initial May figures came out on June 6, when it was initially reported that the economy added 139,000 jobs. 'GREAT JOB NUMBERS, STOCK MARKET UP BIG!' Trump posted at the time. That estimate was later revised down to 125,000 jobs, prior to the most recent revision down to just 19,000. During the 2016 campaign, Trump was more critical: He often attacked the jobs figures as they showed the unemployment rate steadily declining while Obama was still president, only to immediately switch to praising the data once he was in office, as steady job gains continued. The monthly employment report is one of the most closely-watched pieces of government economic data and can cause sharp swings in financial markets. The disappointing figure sent U.S. market indexes about 1.5pc lower on Friday. The revisions to the May and June numbers were quite large and surprising to many economists. At the same time, every monthly jobs report includes revisions to the prior two months' figures. Those revisions occur as the government receives more responses from businesses to its survey, which helps provide a more complete picture of employment trends each month. In the past decade, companies have taken longer to respond, which may have contributed to larger monthly revisions. The proportion of companies responding to the surveys has also fallen steadily over the past 10 years, but the survey still gets responses from roughly 200,000 business locations, which can be independent companies or franchises of larger chains. The monthly jobs report has long been closely guarded within the BLS, with early copies held in safes under lock and key to prevent any leaks or early dissemination.
Irish Examiner
13 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Trump's global tariff agenda puts Ireland's pharmaceutical industry at serious risk
The whole world is in thrall to the whims of Donald Trump's tariff agenda, as it has been since the 47th president of the United States' swearing-in last January. We've learned a few uncomfortable truths along the way. Much of the early outcry from America's allies and trading partners surrounded the lack of economic logic to the imposition of tariffs – which are effectively a tax for Americans on foreign products, in theory making them less attractive to US consumers and heightening the allure of their own domestic suppliers. Critics said that the new regime would disrupt the world economy needlessly and perhaps bring about a global recession. That may well come to pass. The problem is that in this stand-off America has the greater wherewithal in terms of raw economic power. It holds the cards as Trump himself might say. And nations worldwide are beginning to fall into line, the EU just the latest after agreeing to a blanket 15% tariff on goods and services going forward. After President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump agreed the trade deal, the spin is that the pain of those tariffs is worth it in order to avoid a global trade war. Also, 15% is better than 30% or worse, is the thinking. Photo:The spin is that the pain of those tariffs is worth it in order to avoid a global trade war. Also, 15% is better than 30% or worse, is the thinking. Whether that represents capitulation in the face of bullyboy tactics, given that little or nothing has been asked of the US in return, is a separate conversation. Ireland's pharmaceutical industry Here in Ireland we have a bigger problem though, and that problem is the pharmaceutical industry. That industry contributes massively to the economy here via billions of euro in corporation tax contributions, with about 90 companies employing 50,000 people in highly-paid roles. A total 30,000 of those jobs are with American firms. Should foreign pharmaceutical concerns exit Ireland the impact on the country would be catastrophic. The industry globally had pleaded with Trump for it to be exempted from any tariff regime, ostensibly for altruistic reasons – that lifesaving medicines shouldn't be subject to capricious taxation. At an EU level, the industry asked that the bloc not apply reciprocal tariffs, one wish that has at least been granted. Pfizer is one of the massive American pharmaceutical companies holding bases in Ireland, in this case Cork. File picture: Dan Linehan Oddly enough, in Trump's world of permanent grievance where everyone has been making a sucker of the United States for decades, the outsize presence the US pharmaceutical industry holds in Ireland is one situation on which he indisputably has a legitimate point. Drug prices in the US can retail for as much as five times what an EU citizen would pay. Meanwhile, American pharma firms make a pretty penny avoiding American tax by basing themselves here. Trump's protectionist agenda demands that those jobs and companies should return home. The Government has been worrying about and planning for a worst-case scenario in terms of tariffs on pharmaceuticals for months. Reaction from the pharma companies But what of the pharma industry itself? The official line from the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA), the industry's lobby group here, is that it is reviewing the announcements coming out of Washington as and when they happen 'as key implications for the pharmaceutical sector remain uncertain'. A stance it's hard to argue with given the whole world has grown used to the haphazard nature of the Trump administration's demands. The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) notes that tariffs are 'a blunt instrument that will disrupt supply chains, impact on investment in research and development, and ultimately harm patient access to medicines on both sides of the Atlantic'. It added that if the goal is to rebalance trade and ensure a 'fairer distribution' of how pharmaceutical innovation is financed, then 'there are more effective means than tariffs that would help'. Impact on pharma in Ireland The IDA, the body with prime responsibility for attracting foreign investment to Irish shores, says of the pharma implications that it 'welcomes' the deal made between Europe and the US, arguing it provides 'much-needed certainty for Irish, European and American businesses who together represent the most integrated trading relationship in the world'. 'We are very much reliant (on the US market), there's no arguing with that,' says one industry insider. Last year a massive €44bn in pharmaceutical products were exported directly from Ireland to the US. 'But when you stand back €100bn was exported globally. So half went to America, but it's not like all business went there, though it is certainly the biggest partner,' says the source. That doesn't mean that those massive American companies holding bases here – MSD, Pfizer, ELI Lilly, Johnson and Johnson etc – are about to up sticks on the back of the new tariff regime. 'They are not going to leave today or tomorrow, no. But it could definitely impact future investment decisions,' the source says. One of the problems is that a great deal of uncertainty still surrounds the 15% tariff agreement, particularly with regard to pharma. One of the Eli Lilly production buildings at its state-of-the-art facility in Dunderrow, Kinsale, Co Cork. For starters, most people concerned thought that the pharmaceutical industry wasn't to be included in the deal. Then about two hours after the deal was agreed European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said it would be included, a point Trump appeared to back up. The following day the White House produced a 'fact sheet' describing how the new regime would work, and affirming the 15% rate for pharma. Except that the same sheet stated that the European Union would pay the tariff – which isn't how tariffs work. Then there is the Section 232 investigation which the US Department of Commerce initiated into the pharma industry in April – aiming to establish if how the pharmaceutical system worldwide currently functions impacts negatively on the US from a national security standpoint. Should the answer arrived at be a 'yes', then additional tariffs on pharma may well follow (such investigations typically take a minimum of six months to conclude, so we'll probably get an answer sometime towards the end of the year). 'Pharma plans in the long-term,' says Aidan Meagher, tax partner specialising in life sciences with consultants EY, noting that most pharma manufacturers will have been planning for this scenario for months and will have frontloaded stock into the American market, thus negating immediate impacts in the near term. He says that companies will be likely looking at 'dual sourcing' initiatives, supplying the American market from within the US itself and using Irish operations for its trade around the rest of the globe. 'Ireland needs to up its game' But Meagher says that it would be 'remiss' of Ireland, and the pharma industry here, to take a 'wait and see' approach, perhaps with the supposition that Trump's policies will last for the remaining three-and-a-half years of his term, and no longer. 'It is all about the next investment. A lot of these drugs only have patent protection for a certain life or longevity. Ireland needs to maintain investment and to incentivise the right kind of activity in terms of attracting that innovation,' he says. That means thinking outside the box in terms of tax credits for research and development, and improvements to infrastructure, particularly housing, Meagher says, areas in which we are notably lagging behind in terms of international competition. But he argues that the situation is far from a doomsday scenario. 'It's not as simple as that, it's a whole range of business factors that need to be considered – it's all about impacts for specific companies,' he says. 'It's not all necessarily doom and gloom. Companies have had plenty of time to consider this. And pharma companies are long-term thinkers. Ireland has had just two issues with the FDA (the US food and drug administration, responsible for approving new drugs) in its history. "The country has a strong reputation. These countries have invested significantly and Ireland is the owner of a lot of valuable intellectual property.' But it's certainly not a time to be complacent, Meagher argues. 'We have dropped down the competitiveness radar, and our competitors now aren't in the EU – they're in Switzerland, Singapore and the US itself. We need to be a top competitor for inward investment, and R&D and infrastructure will be critical. That is where Ireland needs to up its game.'
The Irish Sun
16 hours ago
- The Irish Sun
Donald Trump vows to unleash ‘every tool in our arsenal' in price row with British drug firms
DONALD Trump insists he will unleash 'every tool in our arsenal' if British drug companies don't cut their prices within 60 days. The US President waged war with a total of seventeen firms demanding 'binding commitments' to match the lower prices offered to developing countries. Advertisement The move comes as the White House hit dozens of countries with a fresh slew of tariffs including punishing levies on neighbour Canada. Two UK drug firms, AstraZeneca and GSK, caught up in the pharma row saw their share price drop as Trump aims to lower prices for American citizens. The move could even have damaging consequences for the NHS whose leverage with suppliers due to its size could be reduced. Mr Trump has demanded the firms apply their 'most favoured nation' rates to Medicaid which is the health system for low-income Americans. Advertisement READ MORE ON DONALD TRUMP He said: 'Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government, and American patients. In a letter to the firms, he said: 'But if you refuse to step up we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices. 'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.' Around £16 billion was wiped off shares in the sector across Europe as fears grow higher prices in the rest of the world will fund the US reductions. Advertisement Most read in The Sun Exclusive The move comes after Trump said back in May that he wanted drug prices in the US to be reduced by 80 per cent. Moment Trump 'throws shade' at Meghan and Harry during Starmer press conference But experts appeared wary that he has the authority to reduce prices and a previous effort in his first term failed in court. At the time, he said the tactics were 'subsidising socialism' abroad in paying for the same pills from the same factories, which led to spiralling prices at home. The warning came as Mr Trump signed an executive order applying a wave of tariffs to 68 countries and the European Union. Advertisement Canada was hit with levies – up to 35 per cent from 25 per cent - due to its lack of co-operation in stopping flow of illegal drugs and fentanyl into America. Their PM Mark Carney said that his country was 'making historic investments in border security to arrest drag traffickers and end migrant smuggling'. Switzerland will also keep negotiating with the US after their tariff rate hit 39 per cent, which was far higher than they anticipated. 1 Donald Trump is demanding drug firms cut their prices for US customers Credit: Rex Advertisement
