Patient Capital Management is a Baltimore asset manager founded in 2020 by Samantha McLemore, CFA — Bill Miller's long-time co-manager (working together since 2002, running the flagship Opportunity Equity strategy since 2014). Continuing the Miller-school contrarian tradition, it practices "time arbitrage": exploiting behavioral mispricing to concentrate in controversial growth names (tech, healthcare, Bitcoin-related) at deep discounts to intrinsic value. Its site preserves Bill Miller's complete 1995-2022 market letters, alongside ongoing quarterly letters and webinars.

This report explains how Patient Capital's fund performed in the first half of 2024. While big tech stocks like Nvidia soared, the fund thinks many are no longer cheap. So they sold some tech and bought healthcare stocks like Illumina (a gene-sequencing company with 80% market share) and Biogen (an Alzheimer's drug maker). They believe the market is too pessimistic on these firms. The fund lagged the S&P 500 because some holdings (like CVS pharmacy) dropped sharply, but the manager sees long-term value. Worth a read to see how professionals think against the crowd.
In the first quarter of 2024, the net return of the Patient Opportunity Equity representative account was -1.9%, underperforming the S&P 500 Index's 4.3%. Key detractors included CVS Health, Coinbase Global, Mattel, IAC, and Expedia Group, while Nvidia, Alphabet, Amazon, Biogen, and Energy Transfer
This chapter reviews the performance and portfolio adjustments of the Patient Opportunity Equity strategy in the first half of 2024. The report notes that the market continues to be dominated by large-cap tech stocks, but the author believes some "Magnificent 7" stocks are approaching fair value, shifting focus to overlooked small- and mid-cap stocks and traditional value stocks, particularly in the healthcare sector.
The author's core investment thesis is that the market's enthusiasm for large-cap tech stocks is nearing its end, with more "Magnificent 7" stocks no longer undervalued, while the healthcare sector offers numerous overlooked stocks with unique opportunities. The author has increased holdings in healthcare stocks against market consensus and reduced positions in some large-cap tech stocks.
| Company/Asset | Role | Key Data | Bullish/Bearish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nvidia (NVDA) | Top contributor | 92% data center GPU market share; revenue up 126%, earnings up 392%, FCF up 610% over the past year | Bullish |
| Alphabet (GOOGL) | Top contributor | Contributed 19% of S&P 500 return in Q2 | Bullish |
| Amazon (AMZN) | Top contributor | Contributed 10% of S&P 500 return in Q2 | Bullish |
| Biogen (BIIB) | Undervalued healthcare stock | New CEO with successful M&A record; slow rollout of Alzheimer's drug Leqembi but strong long-term potential | Bullish |
| Illumina (ILMN) | Undervalued healthcare stock | ~80% genome sequencing market share; returned to pure sequencing business after Grail divestiture; trades below market multiples | Bullish |
| Royalty Pharma (RPRX) | Healthcare investment company | Over 20-year history; low double-digit IRR; growing external royalty financing market | Bullish |
| Everi Holdings (EVRI) | New position | Acquired IGT business; pro forma 2025 EBITDA at 4.2x | Bullish |
| Coinbase (COIN) | Largest detractor | Net contribution -52bps | Bearish |
| CVS Health (CVS) | Largest detractor | Net contribution -51bps | Bearish |
| Mattel (MAT) | Largest detractor | Net contribution -51bps | Bearish |
| IAC (IAC) | Largest detractor | Net contribution -47bps | Bearish |
| Expedia (EXPE) | Largest detractor | Net contribution -41bps | Bearish |
| Capital One Financial (COF) | Exited position | Source of funding for new ideas | Bearish |
| Uber Technologies (UBER) | Exited position | Source of funding for new ideas | Bearish |
This chapter focuses on the best and worst performing stocks in the portfolio during the second quarter. In terms of market environment, AI demand continues to drive the recovery of the cloud computing business, but cost pressures in the healthcare sector (especially Medicare Advantage) have raised market concerns. The report argues that the market has not fully priced in the long-term potential of some AI beneficiaries, while being overly pessimistic about certain companies facing short-term setbacks.
The author's core investment thesis is: There is a structural mispricing of AI in the market—on one hand, it underestimates Alphabet's true exposure to AI and its valuation appeal, and on the other, it overreacts to short-term risks in traditional value stocks like CVS Health. Counterintuitive judgments include: 1) Excluding loss-making businesses, Alphabet's core business trades at a P/E ratio below the market average; 2) After a 19% share price decline, CVS's risks have been fully priced in, with its 8x P/E and 5% dividend yield providing a margin of safety.
| Company | Role | Key Data | Bullish/Bearish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alphabet (GOOGL) | Top 10 portfolio holding, AI beneficiary | Q2 up 20.8%; $70B buyback; 24x 2024 P/E; P/E below market ex-loss businesses | Bullish |
| Amazon (AMZN) | Top 10 portfolio holding, cloud leader | AWS growth reaccelerating; 80% retail offline; 85% IT spend on-premise | Bullish |
| CVS Health (CVS) | Core portfolio holding, healthcare integrator | Q2 down 19%; EPS guidance cut 16%; 8x P/E; 5% dividend yield; 16% buyback | Bullish (risks priced in) |
| Coinbase Global (COIN) | Portfolio holding, crypto platform | Declined with crypto pullback | Bullish (early stage) |
| Mattel (MAT) | Portfolio holding, toy IP transformation | Q2 revenue weak but margins beat; 16% buyback | Bullish (early transformation) |
This section primarily discusses the performance, portfolio structure, and attribution analysis of the Patient Opportunity Equity representative account in the first quarter of 2024. The report indicates that the account achieved a net return of -1.9%, significantly underperforming the S&P 500 index's 4.3% over the same period, and details the stocks that contributed the most and detracted the most from performance.
The author's core investment thesis is: The portfolio's overweight and underweight strategies failed to effectively capture market upward momentum during the quarter, leading to significant underperformance relative to the benchmark. The report implies that the main reasons for the lagging performance were the portfolio's overweight positions in sectors such as Consumer Discretionary, Communication Services, Financials, Energy, and Health Care, along with extreme zero-weight allocations to Real Estate, Utilities, Materials, and Consumer Staples. Counterintuitively, despite holding popular tech stocks like Nvidia and Alphabet, the overall portfolio was still dragged down by the negative performance of other holdings.
| Company/Asset | Role | Key Data | Bullish/Bearish |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVS Health | Major Detractor | One of the top five detractors | Bearish (performance drag) |
| Coinbase Global | Major Detractor | One of the top five detractors | Bearish (performance drag) |
| Mattel | Major Detractor | One of the top five detractors | Bearish (performance drag) |
| IAC | Major Detractor | One of the top five detractors | Bearish (performance drag) |
| Expedia Group | Major Detractor | One of the top five detractors | Bearish (performance drag) |
| Nvidia | Major Contributor | One of the top five contributors | Bullish (performance contribution) |
| Alphabet | Major Contributor | One of the top five contributors | Bullish (performance contribution) |
| Amazon | Major Contributor | One of the top five contributors | Bullish (performance contribution) |
| Biogen | Major Contributor | One of the top five contributors | Bullish (performance contribution) |
| Energy Transfer | Major Contributor | One of the top five contributors | Bullish (performance contribution) |
| Everi Holdings | New Position | Added this quarter | Bullish (new buy) |
| Capital One Financial | Reduced Position | Reduced this quarter | Bearish (reduction) |
| Uber | Reduced Position | Reduced this quarter | Bearish (reduction) |
For investors, this report highlights a key risk: A highly concentrated active management strategy can generate significant excess losses in specific market environments. When the portfolio's sector allocation (e.g., zero weight in defensive sectors like Real Estate and Utilities) deviates sharply from the market's upward direction (e.g., tech-led gains), even holding some strong stocks may not offset the drag from other positions. Investors should be wary of the volatility inherent in such extreme allocation strategies and assess whether they align with their own risk tolerance.