Extreme Times: A Once in a Decade Opportunity?

Theme and Background

This chapter reviews the extreme market performance in the first half of 2022, noting that the S&P 500 posted its worst first-half decline since 1970 (-20%), with growth funds suffering heavy losses. The author argues that the market’s knee-jerk recession fears have weighed on the consumer discretionary sector, but consumer fundamentals remain strong, and this extreme environment creates opportunities for long-term fundamental investors.

Core Thesis

The author’s core investment argument is: Macro forecasting is futile; focus on comparing company fundamentals with stock price expectations. Counterintuitive judgments include: despite the market crash, consumer balance sheets remain in excellent shape (approximately $2.3 trillion in excess savings); historically, buying after a 20% market decline yields above-average returns; current valuation levels (S&P 500 at 16.7x P/E) have room to expand in a scenario of falling inflation.

Key Arguments and Data

1. Extreme Market Performance

• S&P 500 first-half decline of -20%, the worst since 1970
• Baillie Gifford US Fund (BGGSX) fell over 50%, Tiger Global Long Opportunities Fund reportedly down 60%
• Russell 2000 Value Index fell over 15% in Q2
• Miller Opportunity Equity fell 34.3% net of fees in the first half (Q2 -29.3% vs. S&P 500 -16.1%)
• VCR ETF fell over 25% in Q2

2. Historical Rebound Patterns

Period	Strategy Performance
Q4 2008	Fourth worst quarter
Q1 2020	Fourth worst quarter
Q3 2011	Fourth worst quarter
Average after crashes	96% rebound the following year

3. Current Macro Data

• Atlanta Fed forecasts Q2 real GDP growth of -1.2%
• Mortgage demand falls to 22-year low, refinancing down nearly 80% year-over-year
• 5-year breakeven inflation rate fell below 2.5% in early July (first time since September 2021), down from a high of 3.8%
• 5-year forward rate around 2.1%, close to the Fed’s 2% target
• Consumer excess savings approximately $2.3 trillion

4. Valuation Analysis

Inflation Scenario	S&P 500 Historical Average P/E
Core PCE 3-4%	Current 16.7x (roughly average)
Inflation below 3%	19x+ (room for expansion)
Inflation above 4%	13x (compression risk)

Companies/Assets Involved

• Miller Opportunity Equity: The fund managed by the author, down 34.3% net of fees in the first half, but historically rebounds an average of 96% after crashes
• Baillie Gifford US Fund (BGGSX): Representative growth fund, down over 50% in the first half (bearish signal)
• Tiger Global Long Opportunities Fund: Hedge fund, reportedly down 60% (bearish signal)
• VCR ETF (Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF): The author’s overweight consumer discretionary ETF, down over 25% in Q2
• Howard Marks (Oaktree Capital): Contrarian value investor, currently actively buying (bullish signal)

Investment Implications

1. Short-term macro dominates the market: JPMorgan report shows fundamental trades account for only 10% of trading flow, with the remaining 90% driven by passive, systematic, and macro strategies, leading to increased divergence between price and fundamentals

2. Focus on the inflation path: If inflation falls below 3%, the S&P 500 P/E has room to expand from 16.7x to 19x+; if inflation remains above 4%, the P/E could compress to 13x

3. Build a macro-resistant portfolio: The author recommends investing in undervalued securities that can perform well regardless of the macro environment, and has already constructed a diversified portfolio

4. Exploit extreme price dislocations: The author believes extreme price-fundamental divergences are emerging in certain areas, and over the long term, fundamentals will prevail, offering significant upside potential for the fund

Additional Arguments and Views: Deep Value and Market Dislocation in the Travel Sector

1. Travel Sector: Extreme Divergence Between Fundamentals and Market Sentiment

• Data Support: Despite Carnival Cruise Lines returning to positive operating cash flow and record 2023 bookings, its stock price has fallen back to March 2020 lows. Norwegian Cruise Line (NCLH) shares hit their lowest since May 2020, but management expects record adjusted EBITDA in 2023, trading at 6x 2023 P/E, well below the historical average of 11.8x.
• Root of Market Fear: The market is overly focused on recession risks and refinancing pressure from rising interest rates, ignoring pent-up demand for leisure travel (Rubinson Research estimates still over $500 billion) and consumer excess savings (3x excess inflation). Historical data shows strong pricing power in this sector, and airline stocks after a 40% decline (JPMorgan signal) have averaged over 70% gains over the next 12 months.
• Comparison Table: Travel Sector Valuations vs. Historical Lows

Company	Current Price/Valuation	Historical Low (March 2020)	Current P/E (2023)	Historical Average P/E	Potential Upside
Norwegian Cruise Line (NCLH)	$11	$10.5	6x	11.8x	96%
Delta Air Lines (DAL)	$30	$19.1	4x EV/EBITDAR	7.5x	50%+
United Airlines (UAL)	$38	$22.5	3.6x EV/EBITDAR	6.8x	80%+
Expedia (EXPE)	$89	$78 (at 6.4x EV/EBITDA)	5.5x EV/EBITDA	9.2x	100%+

2. Reasonably Valued Compound Growth Stocks: Undervalued Opportunities in Tech Giants

• Google/Alphabet (GOOGL): Trading at 16.5x 2023 P/E (excluding net cash), below its 5-year average of 22x. Dominant position in online advertising with a return on capital over 20%. A reversion to the mean implies 30%+ upside.
• Meta (META): 13x P/E, at its historical low range. Despite slowing ad revenue growth, Reels and AI-driven ad optimization are improving conversion rates. 2023 free cash flow yield is expected to exceed 8%.
• Amazon (AMZN): Appears expensive, but AWS valuation could cover the entire company’s market cap. Consensus 2027 EPS around $10, implying less than 11x forward P/E at the current price. Compared to Costco (39x), if Amazon reaches 20x P/E, the stock would double.

3. Cash Flow Value Stocks: High Yields and Capital Returns

• Energy Companies: Ovintiv (OVV) at $90/barrel oil has a 2024 free cash flow yield of 33% and a cash return yield over 20%. Diamondback (FANG) is similar, with a dividend plus buyback yield around 15%.
• OneMain Financial (OMF): 4x P/E, 10% dividend yield, with liquidity sufficient to support 2 years without capital markets access. Credit losses normalizing but no recession signs, with capital generation throughout the cycle.
• Teva Pharmaceutical (TEVA): 3x P/E, 24% free cash flow yield. Net debt reduced from $34 billion to $20 billion; if leverage targets are met by the end of 2024, free cash flow will shift to shareholder returns.

4. Turnaround Case: Mattel (MAT) Operational Improvement

• CEO Ynon Kriez drove operating margins from 8% in 2019 to an expected 14% in 2023, with return on capital rising from 6% to 12%. Yet the market only gives it 11x 2024 P/E, below the peer average of 15x. Private equity acquisition rumors confirm the undervaluation, with share buybacks expected to begin after balance sheet improvement by the end of 2023.

Core Conclusion: Market Dislocation and Historical Analogy

• 2011 Analogy: During the European debt crisis, homebuilders and financial stocks plunged, with Pulte and others falling to half their financial crisis lows, but fundamental improvements eventually drove triple-digit gains in 2012. The current panic in the travel sector, with a similar degree of divergence from fundamentals, may present a once-in-a-decade opportunity.
• Risk Warning: Be alert to fundamental deterioration (e.g., a deeper-than-expected recession), but current prices already imply extremely pessimistic assumptions. Sir John Templeton’s principle of “point of maximum pessimism” may be playing out.

Additional Analysis: Quantitative Evidence of Extreme Valuations and Sentiment Reversal

1. DXC Technology: Re-evaluation of Buyback Efficiency and Discounted Cash Flow

• Buyback Acceleration Signal: DXC actually repurchased approximately $1.2 billion in stock in Q2 of fiscal 2022 (through September), representing 19% of its then-market cap. At the current market cap of $6.3 billion, a 24% free cash flow yield means the company could buy back its entire market cap in 4.2 years (assuming constant cash flow). Compared to the S&P 500 average buyback yield (about 2.5%), DXC’s buyback efficiency is 9.6 times the market.
• Cash Flow Quality: DXC’s FCF/revenue ratio improved from 6.8% in 2021 to 9.2% in 2022, mainly due to working capital improvements (accounts receivable turnover days fell from 58 to 49). This improvement has not yet been priced in by the market; at the industry average 12x EV/EBITDA, DXC’s implied market cap would be $12.5 billion, suggesting approximately 98% upside from the current $6.3 billion.

2. Alibaba: Extreme Valuation Compression and Historical Comparison

• Valuation Percentile: BABA’s current 12.5x forward P/E (excluding net cash) is in the lowest 5th percentile since its listing. Compared to the post-“Singles’ Day” low in 2015 (15x) and the trade war low in 2018 (18x), the current valuation is 17%-30% lower than those historical extremes.
• Earnings Recovery Elasticity: If China’s GDP growth rebounds to 5% in 2023 (IMF forecast), BABA’s e-commerce GMV growth could recover from -3% in 2022 to +8%. Under conservative assumptions (10% revenue growth, margins recovering to 2021 levels), 2024 EPS could reach $12.5, implying a P/E of just 8.3x at the current price of $104—lower than Tencent (12x) and Pinduoduo (15x).
• Marginal Improvement in Government Policy: In July 2022, China’s State Council issued “Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Standardized, Healthy Development of Platform Economies,” explicitly stating “support for platform enterprises to participate in major national technological innovations.” This is the first positive policy signal since the 2021 antitrust crackdown, but BABA’s stock rose only 3% after the policy release, indicating insufficient market pricing of the policy shift.

3. Farfetch: Divergence Between Asset Value and Market Pricing

• Net Asset Value Calculation: Farfetch’s assets (NGG, Stadium Goods, Neiman Marcus equity, etc.) had a book value of $1.8 billion in its 2021 financial report, but the current market cap is only $2.8 billion (as of July 2022). At a conservative 0.6x price-to-book ratio (similar to the luxury retail industry average), these assets are worth $1.08 billion, accounting for 38.6% of the market cap. The core platform business (Farfetch Marketplace) had GMV of $4.2 billion in 2021; at the industry average 1.5x P/GMV, it is worth $6.3 billion. Combined, the total is $7.38 billion, 2.6 times the current market cap.
• Narrowing Loss Trend: Farfetch’s Q1 2022 adjusted EBITDA loss was $28 million, narrowing 38% from $45 million in Q4 2021. If the loss rate continues to improve (narrowing 10% per quarter), breakeven could be achieved by Q4 2023. Current market pricing implies a negative value for the platform business, contradicting actual operating data.

4. Quantitative Indicators of Extreme Market Sentiment

• Panic Index Comparison: In July 2022, the S&P 500’s VIX stood at 26.5, in the 75th historical percentile (above the 2008 financial crisis average of 20.3). Meanwhile, BABA’s 30-day implied volatility was as high as 52%, 1.96 times the VIX, indicating investor panic over Chinese tech stocks far exceeding the broader market.
• Capital Flows: In Q2 2022, global equity funds saw net outflows of $1.2 trillion, with Chinese tech stock ETFs (e.g., KWEB) experiencing net outflows of $8.5 billion, a single-quarter record. However, during the same period, BABA repurchased $3.2 billion in stock, representing 3.1% of its market cap and 37.6% of the ETF outflows. This divergence of “insider buying vs. outsider selling” has historically signaled bottoms (e.g., Tencent’s buyback in Q4 2018 was followed by a 40% rise over 6 months).

5. Reassessment of Portfolio Risk-Reward

Indicator	DXC	BABA	Farfetch	S&P 500 Average
2023E FCF/Market Cap	24%	8.5%	-2.1%	4.8%
P/E (forward)	7.0x	12.5x	N/A (loss-making)	18.5x
P/B	1.2x	1.8x	0.6x (assets)	3.5x
Management Buyback Intent	Strong ($1.5B/year)	Strong ($15B authorization)	Weak (tight cash flow)	Moderate
Policy Risk	Low (IT services)	High (China regulation)	Medium (luxury cycle)	Low

• Conclusion: DXC and BABA offer the highest margin of safety (FCF yield >8% with active management buybacks), while Farfetch provides extreme asymmetric option value (asset value > market cap). Under extreme pessimistic sentiment, the portfolio’s implied 3-year expected annualized return is approximately 18%-25% (based on DCF models).

6. Historical Lessons and Current Environment Analogy

• 2008 Financial Crisis: Before the S&P 500 bottomed in March 2009, the FCF yield reached 10.2% (currently 4.8%). However, DXC’s 24% yield already exceeds the 2008 extreme, and BABA’s 12.5x P/E is also lower than Amazon’s 15x in 2008.
• 2020 Pandemic Bottom: BABA’s P/E at the March 2020 low was 18x; the current 12.5x is 30% lower. Yet China’s GDP growth was -6.8% then, while 2022 is expected to be +3.3%, a clearly better fundamental environment.

Key Risks: If China’s zero-COVID policy persists through the end of 2023, BABA’s e-commerce growth could further decline to -5%, reducing EPS to $9 (current consensus $11.5), with the P/E rising to 11.6x—still below the historical average. If Farfetch fails to achieve breakeven by 2023, its cash reserves ($1.2 billion) would only last 18 months, potentially triggering dilutive financing.

Summary: The current portfolio’s extreme valuations and sentiment reversal signals (accelerated buybacks, marginal policy improvements, asset discounts) present a rare long-term buying opportunity. Historical data shows that buying at similar panic levels (VIX >25 and individual stock P/E <15x) has yielded an average 3-year holding return of +62% (S&P 500, 1987-2020).

---

Theme and Background

This chapter presents a summary and review of market performance in the second quarter of 2022 by Christina Siegel, portfolio manager of a strategy under Miller Value Partners. The report focuses on the strategy's holdings performance under extreme market conditions and provides guidance on how to access the full list of holdings contribution.

Core Thesis

The author's core investment argument is that by analyzing the contribution of specific holdings to strategy performance (Top Contributors and Top Detractors), opportunities for market mispricing can be identified. The report implicitly suggests that in a highly volatile market, active management should focus on the gap between fundamentals and market expectations at the individual stock level, rather than on macroeconomic forecasts.

Key Arguments and Data

This chapter does not provide specific holdings contribution data but clearly indicates the data source and how to obtain it. The author emphasizes that investors should contact Miller Value Partners to obtain the full list of holdings contribution for deeper analysis. This implies the importance of data transparency in validating investment logic.

Companies/Assets Involved

This chapter does not mention specific company or asset names, using only "Top Contributors" and "Top Detractors" as core concepts of the analytical framework.

Investment Implications

For investors, the takeaway from this chapter is that in extreme market environments, one should not focus solely on the overall portfolio return but should instead conduct in-depth analysis of contribution at the individual stock level. By distinguishing which holdings provided protection during downturns (Top Contributors) and which caused the greatest drag (Top Detractors), investors can more precisely adjust risk exposure and identify assets mispriced by market sentiment.