Jump to content

WFC - Wells Fargo


Viking

Recommended Posts

He actually googled that for you. It is the standard annual interview with CNBC the Monday after the annual letter.  I'm sure the complete video will eventually be in the searchable archive if you want to wait.  You can just search wells fargo and get everything he and Charlie have said about it in the videos on the site.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Or - he loves all his bank children equally, just some are more of his favorites.

 

IMHO the interpretation with WB has always been the same: ignore what he says, look at what he does.

 

"What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say."

 

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's interesting how quick narratives change. Back in 2016 with BAC at 10-12 - and long before - most thought it was very inferior to WFC. Up 200 pct and Wells flat/down and tables have turned. No idea who is or was right, but hard to accept things should have fundamentally changed all that much (perhaps BAC just severy undervalued while WFC fairly valued then and today).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric,

 

what are your thoughts on Wells here?

 

I don't have any. 

 

On May 6, 2019, Charlie Munger said "Well I think it is a fine company, and so they made one bad decision about an incentive plan.  I regard it as an honest mistake, not as some deep moral failure".

 

When asked if the problem is fixed now, Charlie answered "I think so".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my view. If you look at Wells the stock price is definitely not right. Either they screwed up the franchise and then the stock is worth around 30. Or they didn't, in which case it's worth in the 70s. Depending on your view it could go either way. But it's surely not worth 46. If you like options this is one stock fit for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my view. If you look at Wells the stock price is definitely not right. Either they screwed up the franchise and then the stock is worth around 30. Or they didn't, in which case it's worth in the 70s. Depending on your view it could go either way. But it's surely not worth 46. If you like options this is one stock fit for them.

 

I think it need not be so binary.

 

I do not think there is a need to assume that the franchise has been damaged. Say the legal issues, asset cap, etc. cause earnings to flat line for another 3 years and then increase say at about 7% for next 4 years to about $6 at end of year 7. At a PE of 14 and about $14 in dividends, it would be worth about $100 in 7 years. It would be worth about $55 to $60 currently in that case.

 

I just pulled these numbers out of thin air but just saying a reasonable case could be made that it is not nearly as undervalued even if the franchise is intact. FWIW I do not think franchise is impacted much.

 

We have seen with many of the financial companies that once they run into issues especially when politicians and regulators get involved, it takes 5-6 years for them to come out of it. So what WFC is going through is pretty typical.

 

Vinod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally lay out my earnings estimates for 7 years and looking at my estimates for BAC, WFC and USB from about 5 years back

 

1. BAC is right on the line with my expectations.

 

2. USB is slightly below expectations.

 

3. WFC significantly below expectations. I mean earnings have hardly kept up with inflation.

 

Stock performance is right in line with how those earnings have performed over the past 5 years. So I do not think using the past few years stock performance is of much help in making any inferences about valuations of these companies.

 

Vinod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it need not be so binary.

 

I do not think there is a need to assume that the franchise has been damaged. Say the legal issues, asset cap, etc. cause earnings to flat line for another 3 years and then increase say at about 7% for next 4 years to about $6 at end of year 7. At a PE of 14 and about $14 in dividends, it would be worth about $100 in 7 years. It would be worth about $55 to $60 currently in that case.

 

I just pulled these numbers out of thin air but just saying a reasonable case could be made that it is not nearly as undervalued even if the franchise is intact. FWIW I do not think franchise is impacted much.

 

We have seen with many of the financial companies that once they run into issues especially when politicians and regulators get involved, it takes 5-6 years for them to come out of it. So what WFC is going through is pretty typical.

 

Vinod

 

Are you accounting for buybacks? Because if EPS is flat for 3 years despite the massive buybacks, that would imply a big hit to earnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw the Buffett interview and wow it looks like he's soured on the company. I own a ton of WFC and this is very disappointing me. I agree with above sentiment his comments are very IBMish. I have discounted his opinion past few years given a number of big recent mistakes both real and of omission (IBM, JPM, BRK buyback, KHC) but this guy knows WFC well for the last almost 30 years. Selling down while owning $130 billion in cash is not insignificant. Time will tell what he's thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it need not be so binary.

 

I do not think there is a need to assume that the franchise has been damaged. Say the legal issues, asset cap, etc. cause earnings to flat line for another 3 years and then increase say at about 7% for next 4 years to about $6 at end of year 7. At a PE of 14 and about $14 in dividends, it would be worth about $100 in 7 years. It would be worth about $55 to $60 currently in that case.

 

I just pulled these numbers out of thin air but just saying a reasonable case could be made that it is not nearly as undervalued even if the franchise is intact. FWIW I do not think franchise is impacted much.

 

We have seen with many of the financial companies that once they run into issues especially when politicians and regulators get involved, it takes 5-6 years for them to come out of it. So what WFC is going through is pretty typical.

 

Vinod

 

Are you accounting for buybacks? Because if EPS is flat for 3 years despite the massive buybacks, that would imply a big hit to earnings.

 

Just laying out a plausible scenario. Not a forecast. Just taking a ruler to the past 5 years and extending it for 3 more years.

 

In the past, think BAC, C, AIG and what not, they had regulatory issues but most of the opportunity is self-help and I was able to get a lot more confident and prices are a heck of a lot cheaper as well.

 

Now at WFC a lot of next few years performance is going to be dependent on regulatory/political winds. Now if asset cap is removed tomorrow and regulatory pressures ease, it would be worth a lot more, but if they persist for a few more years, it would be worth less. At some point these are not going to be an issue, the key is can we estimate it? If we assume say 3 years, what I am saying is current price is not that cheap.

 

Vinod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 3 year flat line is obviously conjecture. But you can expect certain things in these cases

 

1. Cross selling is a good idea both for the consumer and the company and for a long time they did it right. Now, WFC is going to bend over backwards not to be in violation and stay far clear of any thing that might not look good.

 

2. They would be a lot of bureaucratic processes and red tape for next few years as they try to be in good graces of regulators.

 

Both the above are going to be headwinds that other competitors are not going to face. So you need to take this into account as they have an impact on IV.

 

Vinod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw the Buffett interview and wow it looks like he's soured on the company. I own a ton of WFC and this is very disappointing me. I agree with above sentiment his comments are very IBMish. I have discounted his opinion past few years given a number of big recent mistakes both real and of omission (IBM, JPM, BRK buyback, KHC) but this guy knows WFC well for the last almost 30 years. Selling down while owning $130 billion in cash is not insignificant. Time will tell what he's thinking.

 

Most striking to me was totally evading the chance to kiss up to a new CEO.  I really wish she followed up on that, his views of Scharf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there’s way to tell if WEB had sold more WFC since 12/31 (13f holding date)? Maybe from the info in the 10k/annual letter?

Seems he sold wfc and bought bac, keeping his bank exposure the same. Almost like a tax loss harvest sales although he doesn’t have any tax loss on wfc.

 

Perhaps he's accumulating a stake in JPM unless he can't because Todd sits on JPM's BOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...