Contrary to popular belief, earnings growth has a very low correlation with decadal stock returns. The primary driver is the change in the valuation multiple (e.g., P/E ratio expansion or contraction). The correlation between 10-year real returns and 10-year valuation changes is a staggering 0.9, while it is tiny for earnings growth.

Despite the common focus on bottom-up fundamental analysis, statistical evidence shows two-thirds of an investment manager's relative performance is determined by macro factors, such as whether growth or value stocks are in favor. Ignoring top-down signals like Fed policy is a significant mistake, as it means overlooking the largest driver of returns.

Counter to conventional value investing wisdom, a low Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratio is often a "value trap" that exists for a valid, negative reason. A high P/E, conversely, is a more reliable indicator that a stock may be overvalued and worth selling. This suggests avoiding cheap stocks is more important than simply finding them.

The 0-12 month market is hyper-competitive, while quantitative models lose predictive power beyond five years. The 2-5 year timeframe is ideal for value strategies like special situations and mean reversion, offering a balance of predictability and reduced competition.

Investors often mistakenly equate strong economic growth with strong stock market performance. Historical data, particularly China's market performance versus its GDP since 1992, shows no reliable correlation. Starting valuation is a far better predictor of long-term returns.

Historical analysis of investors like Ben Graham and Charlie Munger reveals a consistent pattern: significant, multi-year periods of lagging the market are not an anomaly but a necessary part of a successful long-term strategy. This reality demands structuring your firm and mindset for inevitable pain.

For the first time in a decade, European equities have broken out of their long-term trend of a widening valuation discount versus the US. Historically, such breakouts signal the beginning of a sustained, multi-year period where this valuation gap narrows significantly from its current 23%.

Timing is more critical than talent. An investor who beat the market by 5% annually from 1960-1980 made less than an investor who underperformed by 5% from 1980-2000. This illustrates how the macro environment and the starting point of an investment journey can have a far greater impact on absolute returns than individual stock-picking skill.

Contrary to a common myth, high equity valuations do not reliably revert to a historical mean. An analysis of 32 different valuation scenarios found only one case of statistically significant mean reversion. Structural economic shifts, like reduced GDP volatility since the 1990s, justify higher sustained valuation levels.