2026 Benchmark

 CHANGES FOR THE BENCHMARK 2025/6

Overall, I am fairly satisfied with the benchmark approach that I use. The main point is that it is very broadly based, not dependent on one stock, one sector or influenced unduly one way or the other. Being equally weighted satisfies some of that criterion, and having a spread of sectoral exposure satisfies another. The stocks are almost entirely profitable and are spread in Australian and international markets.

The mix for 2025 was 60% profitable Australian companies, 30% quality growth international companies and 10% Australian speculative companies. All equally weighted. The trouble with this approach is not in benchmark composition or structure, but that, in reality, the likelihood of my investing significant sums in a speculative investment is small.

For 2026, I plan to change the benchmark to be 60% profitable Australian and 40% international quality growth. Almost all of these companies should, in theory and reality, be possible contenders to have a reasonable weight in the portfolio. The overall stocks will still be close to 400.

Over the last few years, the benchmark, due to its composition, has exhibited a smoothed equity return driven by the average return of the stocks in the benchmark. There continues to be skewing due to the ability of stocks to rise by more than 100% but only fall 100%. That has been consistent in bull and bear markets, which we now have data for. That is fair enough and makes a comparison to the average stock, not the median, the correct measure.

As a concession to removing the speculative element in the benchmark, which by the way, the individual stocks always contributed the highest and lowest returns, indicating their inherent riskiness, I am including a larger amount of higher-growth companies in the international benchmark, such as MELI, UBER, ABNB, the cybersecurity firms etc. These firms are of a size and have a franchise that would make a sizeable investment in them much more likely than any speculative company.

Therefore, not many or large changes, increasing the international exposure, and maybe overall decreasing the risk a little. I think those changes suit my investing style more so and are perhaps a slightly better measure.

 An analysis of the benchmark and portfolio returns will occur post FY Y/E.

The stocks in the 2026 benchmark (may be some small changes to come) are listed below.

 

Code

A2M

ABB

AD8

ADH

AEF

AGL

AIA

ALD

ALL

ALQ

ALX

AMC

AMP

ANN

ANZ

AOV

APA

APE

ARB

ARF

ASB

ASX

AUB

AX1

AZJ

BAP

BBN

BEN

BGA

BHP

BKW

BLX

BOQ

BRG

BSL

BVS

BWP

BXB

CAR

CBA

CBO

CCP

CDA

CGF

CHC

CKF

CLW

CMM

COH

COL

CPU

CQR

CSL

CTD

CTT

CUV

CWP

CWY

DBI

DDR

DGL

DHG

DMP

IPL

DOW

DRR

DSK

DTL

DXS

EBO

EDV

ELD

EQT

EVN

EVT

FBU

FID

FLT

FMG

FPH

FPR

GMG

GNC

GOR

GPT

GQG

GWA

GYG

HLS

HMC

HSN

HUB

HVN

IAG

IDX

IEL

IFL

IFM

IFT

IGO

ILU

IMD

IPG

IPH

IRE

JBH

JHX

JIN

JLG

KAR

KGN

KLS

KMD

LIC

LLC

LNW

LOV

LTR

LYC

LYL

MAD

MAF

MAQ

MFG

MGH

MGR

MHJ

MIN

MMS

MND

MPL

MQG

MTO

MTS

NAB

NAN

NCK

NEC

NHC

NHF

NOL

NSR

NST

NUF

NWH

NWL

NXT

OBL

OCL

OFX

OML

ORA

ORG

ORI

PFP

PLS

PME

PMV

PNI

PPS

PTM

PWH

PXA

QAN

QBE

QUB

RDX

RDY

REA

REG

REH

RHC

RIC

RIO

RMC

RMD

RMS

RUL

RWC

S32

SCG

SDF

SEK

SFC

SFR

SGH

SGM

SGP

SHL

SHV

SIG

SIQ

SKC

SM1

SNL

SNZ

SOL

SPK

SSG

SSM

STO

SUL

SUN

SVR

SXL

TAH

TCL

TLC

TLS

TLX

TNE

TPG

TPW

TRS

TUA

TWE

UNI

VCX

VEA

VNT

WBC

WDS

WEB

WES

WHC

WOR

WOW

WPR

WTC

XRO

360

CAT

EOL

KPG

MP1

PNV

SDI

SGI

SPZ

XRF

7974:JP

A:US

AAPL:US

ABBV:US

ABT:US

ACN:US

ADBE:US

ADP:US

ADYEN:NL

AMAT:US

AMD:US

ANET:US

AON:US

APH:US

ASML:US

ATD:CA

AVGO:US

BAH:US

BBY:US

BF/A:US

BLK:US

CARL/A:DK

Coloplast

CDNS:US

CDW:US

CNI:US

COST:US

CPRT:US

CSU:CA

CTAS:US

DGE:GB

DHI:US

DHR:US

DOV:US

ENTG:US

EVO:SE

EW:US

EXPN:GB

FAST:US

FERG:US

FICO:US

FND:US

GGG:US

GIVN:CH

GOOGL:US

GRMN:US

GWW:US

HD:US

HEI:US

HLMA:GB

HON:US

HSY:US

IDXX:US

IEX:US

INTU:US

ISRG:US

JBHT:US

JKHY:US

JNJ:US

KER:FR

KLAC:US

KNIN:CH

KO:US

LLY:US

LOR:DE

LRCX:US

LULU:US

MA:US

MCO:US

MELI:US

META:US

MKTX:US

MMC:US

LVMH

MPWR:US

MSCI:US

MSFT:US

MTD:US

Nestle

NIBEB:CH

NKE:US

NOW:US

NVDA:US

NVO:US

NVR:US

ODFL:US

PAYC:US

PEP:US

PFE:US

PGR:US

PHM:US

POOL:US

PYPL:US

QCOM:US

RACE:US

RGEN:US

RHI:US

RMS:FR

ROCK/A:DK

ROK:US

ROL:US

SHW:US

SNPS:US

SOON:CH

SPX:GB

SRT:DE

SYK:US

TER:US

TGT:US

TMO:US

TSCO:US

TSM:US

TXN:US

UNH:US

UNP:US

V:US

VEEV:US

WKL:NL

WST:US

ZTS:US

NFLX

BKNG

PANW

RELX

LMT

TT

ADSK

PG

ROCHE

CSCO

LINDE

CAT

MELI:US

UBER

PLTR

CRWD

DDOG

ZS

NINETENDO

DIPLOMA

COMPASS

EXPERION

CME

WAST

MO

SPOT

CRM

ABNB

AMZN

SE

NOVARTIS

AZN

GD

CMI

TPL

CHD

AOS

DKS

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Performance Review FY2024--

  REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE fy2024 The numbers are in for 2024. The portfolio generated 20.8% (after costs and some cash taxes [1] ), the benchmark return was 13.4%. I am satisfied with the result, considering all things. What are all things? Was I in the fortunate receipt of much good luck (or bad luck), or did I utilise much higher risk in a rising market? Did style assist me? Does the result differ from what could be considered a random outcome (that is the hardest to assess)? I will attempt to address some of these in the following text. The following post will be divided into several sections addressing various segments. To reiterate my investment philosophy is to buy quality companies when they are reasonably priced. Of course, this sets a conscious boundary on likely results, up and down. I am consciously setting a limit on risk by skewing the portfolio almost totally to quality growth companies with a long history of profitable businesses. The belief is that over the long...
Read more

Post Results--Examining the tail--PXA MIN CKF DMP SHL IEL DDR

  EXAMINING THE TAIL—PXA DMP RMD IEL DDR SHL MIN Almost all of my top 10 holdings are clear of significant issues with maybe valuation being the main point of conjecture. These investments represent a large proportion of the funds deployed. There is also a tail these are small or middling positions as launching pads to potential further investment but with current issues that may preclude investors from becoming overly excited about them. Therefore, they have potential attractive upsides. The underlying business should be sound and the issues short term. These holdings can be upscaled if the issues are indeed ST, however, not all will turn out favourably. How are these going? This is not an in-depth analysis but an overview of the short-term issues, are these issues becoming better or worse? Pexa (PXA) My thesis here rests with the Australian business being a natural monopoly, that appears intact. Secondly, Australian success can be repeated in the UK. Success in the UK rem...
Read more

INVESTMENT CHECKLIST

  CHECKLIST FOR INVESTMENTS Overall I want this to be short enough so that I will use it and long enough to be useful. not War and Peace. In deference to Charlie Munger who continually suggested using a checklist, well I am getting on! Can be built up and on over time. Understandable business Do you understand the positioning of the business versus its competitors, customers and suppliers? What are the critical products, services and relationships? Is the size of the market(s) able to be estimated? Are there existential risks to the business, structural decline, or obsolescence? Operating History EPS growth, consistency/volatility is it forecastable? ROE/GM stability and level. Ability to manage margins. Total asset growth can the business profitably deploy assets. What has the reinvestment rate been? NPM level and stability. Does the business generate FCF, does CF reconcile to earnings? Given the above has the company favourable LT prospects? Management Condu...
Read more