You want Value, but Active or Passive? - Ranmore

You want Value, but Active or Passive?

Y

Consider this, JP Morgan (JPM) is the 2nd largest holding & #1 bank in the S&P500 Value index @ a 2.7% weighting.

Goldman Sachs (GS) is 29th at 0.68%.

It’s quarterly earnings time.

JPM reported revenue growth of 14% & an ROE of 23%, flattered by credit loss provision reversals.

Strip provisions out from both periods & net income declined.

CET1 ratio = 13.1% (capital ratio)

They returned $7.1bn to shareholders = 1.5% of mkt cap.

Goldman more than doubled revenue as most divisions generated “record” (said 20x in conf call) numbers.

Credit losses didn’t move the needle either year – not as exposed to consumers.

ROE was a “record” 31%

CET1 14%

#1 rankings in M&A & equity offerings, Assets under supervision up $60bn in the quarter! to $2.2trillion.

Returned $3bn = 2.5% of mkt cap

There’s no competition – those smart folk at Goldman Sachs smashed it on every metric – growing faster, less geared to the economy, better capitalised, returning more.

Archegos didn’t even hurt them.

So JPM at 2.3x tangible book / 12x earnings

Or

GS at 1.3x tangible book / 7x earn

Because the Passive People have 4x as much in JPM than GS

Why?

It’s larger & most Passives are size weighted.

Does that make financial sense?

This website is directed only at, and contains information about products and services only available to, those who are Professional Clients or Eligible Counterparties as defined by the UK Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA"). Please read our disclaimer carefully before entering the website as it explains certain legal and regulatory restrictions applicable to the investment services Ranmore Fund Management provides.

Read Disclaimer here