Search
Get in touch!
Linkedin X-twitter Envelope

Michael Mauboussin: Drawdowns Are The Unavoidable Cost of Long-Term Investing

Michael Mauboussin from Morgan Stanley Investment Management have published a comprehensive analysis examining stock market drawdowns and recovery patterns from 1985 to 2024. The research reveals that even the most successful investments experience severe price declines, with the median stock suffering an 85% drawdown that takes 2.5 years from peak to trough.

The study analyzed over 6,500 companies and found that more than half never recover to their previous highs. Michael’s work demonstrates that large drawdowns are an inevitable feature of equity investing, affecting individual stocks, mutual funds, and even portfolios with perfect foresight.

He provides case studies of NVIDIA and Foot Locker to illustrate how similar magnitude drawdowns can lead to vastly different long-term outcomes. Their analysis includes practical guidelines for evaluating whether a deeply discounted stock might recover, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between cyclical and secular business challenges.

Here are the key takeaways:

  • Drawdowns are inevitable and severe: The median stock experiences an 85% decline from peak to trough, taking 2.5 years to reach bottom, with over 54% never recovering to their prior highs.
  • Bigger drops often mean bigger bounces: Stocks with maximum drawdowns of 95-100% show median annual returns of 295% in the first year after hitting bottom, compared to 47% for stocks with smaller declines.
  • Perfect foresight doesn’t eliminate pain: Even a portfolio constructed with godlike knowledge of future winners would still experience a 76% maximum drawdown, highlighting how difficult drawdowns are to manage psychologically and professionally.
  • Context matters more than magnitude: NVIDIA and Foot Locker both suffered ~90% drawdowns, but NVIDIA recovered due to cyclical industry factors while Foot Locker faced secular retail decline, leading to vastly different outcomes.
  • Recovery evaluation framework: Investors should assess whether fundamental issues are cyclical vs. secular, examine the basic business unit economics, evaluate financial strength and capital access, and determine if management acknowledges challenges honestly.

One of the hardest aspects of being a long-term investor is that even the best investments, or investment portfolios, suffer large drawdowns. A drawdown is the price decline from peak to trough.

Click here to go to the external source.

Share the news

Disclaimer of liability

The above has been prepared by Børsgade ApS for information purposes and cannot be regarded as a solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security. Nor can the information etc. be regarded as recommendations or advice of a legal, accounting or tax nature. Børsgade cannot be held liable for losses caused by customers’/users’ actions – or lack thereof – based on the information in the above. We have made every effort to ensure that the information in the above is complete and accurate, but cannot guarantee this and accept no liability for errors or omissions.

Readers are advised that investing may involve a risk of loss that cannot be determined in advance, and that past performance and price development cannot be used as a reliable indicator of future performance and price development. For further information please contact info@borsgade.dk

You might also find this interesting:

Thomas Shrager: Superior Value Outside the U.S

July 3, 2025

In a comprehensive interview, Thomas Shrager and Jay Hill from the renowned New York value investing boutique Tweedy, Browne articulate their belief that the most compelling investment opportunities currently lie outside the United States. The veteran fund managers, who oversee portfolios for the 104-year-old firm, explain that international markets offer dramatically better value propositions than the overvalued U.S. equity market, which they describe as “priced for perfection” at 24 times earnings.

Aswath Damodaran: The Uncertain Payoff from Alternative Investments

June 18, 2025

Professor Aswath Damodaran’s latest analysis challenges the conventional wisdom surrounding alternative investments, revealing significant gaps between marketing promises and actual performance. Aswath examines how institutional and individual investors have increasingly embraced alternatives like hedge funds, private equity, and venture capital, often with disappointing results despite decades of compelling sales pitches.

Alternative investments have gained mainstream acceptance over the past two decades, moving beyond their traditional institutional confines to target individual investors. The core argument for these investments rests on two pillars: their supposedly low correlation with traditional stocks and bonds, and their potential to generate excess returns through superior management and market inefficiencies. However, Damodaran’s analysis suggests these benefits may be largely illusory when subjected to rigorous scrutiny.

Michael Mauboussin: How to Handle Intangibles in Modern Value Investing

June 18, 2025

Michael Mauboussin, Head of Consilient Research at Morgan Stanley, delivered a compelling keynote presentation at the Ben Graham Centre for Value Investing’s 2025 conference, addressing how the rise of intangible assets has fundamentally altered the landscape of value investing.

Drawing from nearly a century of investment wisdom while adapting to modern realities, Mauboussin argues that traditional accounting methods have become increasingly inadequate for evaluating companies in today’s intangible-heavy economy. His presentation reveals that intangible investments now represent 1.7 times tangible investments in the U.S. economy, a complete reversal from 1977 when tangible investments dominated by a factor of 1.4.

Cliff Asness: Missing the Best Days Isn’t the Real Problem

June 12, 2025

Clifford Asness of AQR Capital Management revisits his 1999 rejected paper that challenged one of the most common arguments against market timing. The widespread belief that missing just a few of the market’s best days destroys long-term returns is fundamentally flawed, according to Asness.

His analysis shows that while missing the best performing days does hurt returns, missing the worst performing days provides symmetrical benefits. The author demonstrates through both historical data and simulations that this “evidence” against market timing is mathematically obvious and essentially useless for investment decision-making.

Asness argues that legitimate criticisms of market timing should focus on investors’ lack of skill rather than cherry-picked scenarios of perfect incompetence. His 25+ years of out-of-sample data confirms these findings, showing the argument remains as flawed today as it was when first proposed.