As investors, we need to qualify the companies in our portfolio.

If they don't meet our cut, we don't invest in them.

Apart from the eventual/current profitability and strong balance sheet, growth is my top requirement.

Here's why:

1/ If a business does not grow, its share price will not grow.

In a corporate lifecycle, a company experiences most growth during its expansion phase. That's where most returns are being created.

This is why high growth companies deliver huge returns.

source: Ravi Kumar
2/ The compounding of growth rates is often underestimated.

It can do wonders for your company.

Growing at 30% turns $1 to $13.79 by Y10.

Growing at 10% turns $1 to $2.59 by Y10.

The share price returns a company can generate based on this is significant.
3/ Here's an example: Crowdstrike $CRWD

It grew its ARR from $71 million in 1Q 2018 to $1,731 million in 4Q 2022.

The magic of compounding.
4/ Simple Back Test

I used my Capital IQ to find out what are the stocks that delivered more than 10x returns in the past 5 years and have at least a market cap of $600m USD.

There are 13 companies.

$APPS $XPEL $TSLA
4/ Simple Back Test (continued)

Apart from Ameresco and SolarEdge, others exhibited huge revenue growth.

This tells us future growth is an important ingredient for long term success.

This is echoed by Stanley Drunkmiller too.
5/ Growth stocks seem to be out of favour but have they truly underperformed?

Look at this picture.

Left: Year-til-Date
Right: 5 Yr Results
8/ Growth is the Long-Run Driver of Stock Performance

What we're experiencing now is most well-explained by this graph by Morgan Stanley.

In the short term, multiples are compressing due to interest rate hikes.

But...

In the long term, revenue growth drives returns.
That's a wrap!

If you enjoyed this thread:

1. Follow me @SlingshotCap for more of these
2. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your audience https://t.co/yRIDcwkPVJ

More from Valuation

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.