Dynamic

Thanks, Jurgis. I've now included FWONK so the sheets work again.

Just to mention that LMCK - Liberty Media Group Class C - is no longer showing a price on Google Finance or any other platform, which threw up an error on the look-through market price totals. I think this is a matter of restructuring various classes of share, probably relating to the Formula 1 deal. I'm not inclined to delve into the minutiae now as we'll be getting the 2016Q4 list of investments in a few weeks which will account for such changes, and quite possibly many more significant changes and save a lot of effort. To get round this I've simply set the LMCK price to a fixed $3.42 and set that line of the speadsheet to RED. This makes of the order of 0.1%, so isn't materially wrong. After 27 Feb 2017, the new portfolio should soon be available and I'll update it properly. QUICK LINKS: The version only I can edit (but you can copy it into your own Google Sheet - see above): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ok3bOO4z_2Itbta6FguKbuFA1HvcQvzisspPBN6IpZY/edit?usp=sharing The version anyone on the internet can see and edit (so it could get corrupted, but you can enter your own currency and number of shares): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10gMfyZOFCW1-KrY_P8SGRf3pTstspdAGw_DuKSQxO8s/edit?usp=sharing Restricted editing - for this version you can request Edit Access and I'll grant it. It sends me an email from your Google account: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Um4ENkSz4tppynxqKAMVLrUcuNqn2JaVBBRu4CEVvGQ/edit?usp=sharing In all case, anyone on the internet can view them so be wary of entering private information. If you want a private copy, copy the sheet to your own private Google Sheet using the instructions in post 3 of this thread at http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/berkshire-hathaway/look-through-portfolio-google-sheets-with-live-prices/msg272206/#msg272206

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1510DF

Being able to invest float in whatever they want for many years is great. I wonder how well they actually do invest it, though. Could be worth looking into. It sounds like the sort of business where ownership by a skilled investor like Buffett could pay off handsomely if the ongoing operating costs are not too high and competition from tax advantaged churches does not encroach on the pre paid part of their business.

I'd agree that prices in the $136-$140 range for BRK.B today would be as attractive as $124-$128 was last February when I bought big below $125 and went 100% into BRK.B in my main UK tax-free account and my wife's also, which probably came to about 90% exposure across all discretionary shareholdings. Back in Feb 2016 I projected 2015Q4's BV to be 4-5% up on 2015Q3's, meaning it was effectively 1.2x BV, meaning that I'd get a pretty good floor under my investment once the Annual Report came out given the announced buy-back threshold. This proved to be the case. Given the Q4 rally in 2016, I'd imagine the reported 2016Q4 BV will again be meaningfully above 2016Q3's figure. We're now positioned at 61% BRK.B and have brought a lot of taxable holdings' proceeds into our tax-free accounts and added more savings and trimmed BRK.B at $142 in May 2016 to put 25% of the portfolio in AAPL at $95, so if BRK.B were to reach $135-$140 over the next few months I would be happy to invest the whole tax-free portfolio in BRK.B taking it to 98.5% of our current discretionary holdings at that price. That's assuming nothing else is a screaming buy at the time, and I'd be especially keen to switch if our other holdings remained more fully-valued allowing me to significantly trade up the amount of intrinsic value in our portfolio.

Interesting speculation. A brief read through Forbes' descriptions of the top 11 or 12 seemed to indicate no Tobacco producers - it's just that Forbes defines Food, Drink and Tobacco as one industry classification, so Mars, for example, has 6 divisions, none of which include tobacco, but all of which are in food and drink. I think Berkshire's aversion to tobacco is in the potential legal liability for producing a product that is known to be addictive and to kill many of its customers and the potential for reputational damage, especially given the tobacco companies conspiracy to obfuscate and confuse the public about the scientific evidence in the 1970s (see "Merchants of Doubt" for example). The latter may be a reason to be wary of close associations with the Koch brothers too. At no 12, Reyes Holdings superficially looks like it might be a nice fit. Food and beverage distribution like McLane, logistics services similarly, real estate holdings I'm not sure about, but Coca-Cola bottling in about 6 or 7 production facilities sounds pretty attractive and of enduring value. Mars, or course, would also be attractive with many strong consumer brands. Dell is one of the best managed firms in its sector, but it's just bought EMC² and possibly the efficiency of other PC makers has narrowed the gap, so does it have an enduring advantage or other means of generating consistently strong returns as IBM or Apple could be argued to have (I own positions in both of those)? I'd suggest that Berkshire would probably pass on Dell and it's more likely to float publicly when market sentiment is positive than be sold to BRK at a price BRK would find attractive. There's an employee-owner supermarket chain in there - effectively a mutual society or social enterprise - which I wouldn't imagine putting itself up for sale unless they made a big blunder and needed capital to restructure and survive. But in all these cases, Berkshire would only buy in a friendly take-over, if the current owners chose to sell or was forced to sell by getting themselves in difficulties. I don't see Mars selling the whole company, but it could spin out certain divisions or brands or seek future financing from Berkshire. There may be way for Berkshire to swap an interest-bearing security for a unit such as Wrigley, say, in much the same way that Berkshire acquired Duracell as a tax-efficient swap for its equity stake in P&G. Likewise, Berkshire might acquire certain assets within others in this private companies list or from public companies of similar size, either directly or as an indirect result of being a ready source of capital (and a valuable vote of confidence in a troubled firm) during the next crisis. Anyhow, I enjoy the speculation, but I imagine the next big acquisition could well be a surprise to us all.

I don't know if there's anything special about 401K plans as I'm not US based, but general fund managers are surely investing funds (AUM) for the benefit of their clients and not holding cash for a period prior to using it that they can invest for their own benefit. However, I did notice an interesting use of fund assets in one of the funds available within my wife's UK pension scheme. It's a FT All Share Index Fund in which they loan out some of the holdings to short sellers and receive interest for doing so. About 2/3rd of this income goes to reducing the fund's total expense ratio and the remaining 1/3rd is paid to the fund manager who administers it. The 1/3rd is effectively a sort of income on AUM and the 2/3rd potentially attracts more capital by keeping their effective TER highly competitive. From memory their reported TER was reduced to about 0.06% instead of perhaps 0.25%.

For me, I like to buy quality companies with the ability to compound reliably at a low price. My discipline about the low price is now greater than it was before, but I still think I'm paying a fair price for a great company when it's priced like a fairly average company, rather than a dirt cheap price for a fairly average company. I'm also happy to concentrate my portfolio in such quality companies. I was comfortable with holding for the long term with benign neglect since about 2003, but I'm now adding more capital and managing a little more actively, though still with caution, especially as I've returned to adding funds to my portfolio, which had previously been tied up in business. It's too early to tell if I've been lucky or smart with my trades. Also I try to price my trades rather than time my trades, though it might look like the same if I'm disciplined enough about price/value. As for selling, I have three selling strategies in mind: Type 1. To sell if I think I was wrong about my initial investment thesis and the company's long-term prospects. I've done this in good time in a couple of cases in the early 2000s and made a modest profit before reinvesting in BRK.B, but I was far too late in the case of Johnston Press (JPR in London), a local newspapers group where I lost most of my original investment when the picture changed for good. Type 2. To sell or trim back on quality companies and switch to cash only when they're enormously overvalued and require perfect execution to obtain even a sub-10% return or they form an uncomfortably large portion of my portfolio (e.g. 50% in most cases, though I'm happy to hold Berkshire to 100%). I have never actually done this sort of trade, but I might if I felt valuations were too extremely high, though this could be 3 or 4 times my buy price. Type 3. To sell a rather fully-valued share to buy (or buy more of) a cheap share at or below my buy threshold. I've done a few such trades recently where I believe I'm trading up the amount of intrinsic value in my portfolio and thereby increasing the low-end valuation of my portfolio to be nearer the market valuation (low-end valuation is my opinion of a soft approximate price floor where I'd expect value investors to purchase sufficiently to prop-up the price). This would hopefully improve its resilience against market declines, though I've yet to really have this notion put to the test. Type 3, Example 1: I sold a 10-15% weighted position in Halma plc (HLMA in London) that had earned me over 14% compound since buying in Oct 2001 at a P/E around 29 (3.4% earnings yield) which I felt was rather high, though not ludicrous enough to make me sell to cash. With the proceeds, plus cash accumulated partly from its dividends, I immediately purchased Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B) in February 2016 at £85.121 GBP (~$124.26 USD, Price/3Q15 Book Value=1.234, which I correctly predicted was below 1.2x year-end BVPS). I only did this because HLMA was pretty highly priced at the same time that BRK.B was at by buy threshold. Halma offered the potential for some gains but perhaps 50% or more declines, while BRK.B was probably close to its price floor. I also bought more BRK.B from cash in my wife's new portfolio later that month at around the same price. Although Halma continued to rise, Berkshire did too, so Halma occasionally took a lead of as much as 4 or 5%, and although Brexit boosted Halma's foreign earnings expressed in GBP, Berkshire has now gone 33% ahead of HLMA (less about 1% for HLMA dividends) with a gain of 49% expressed in GBP or 29% in USD. Berkshire had been about 90% of our total portfolio at the time I made these trades. Type 3, Example 2: I sold some Agilent (A) shares from an old employee scheme at $41.64 with no tax hit to move the proceeds into my tax-sheltered account. I bought Wells Fargo (WFC) at $47.72 once the proceeds were in my account. WFC rose a little but languished for a while while Agilent surged ahead to even higher multiples. Agilent is now only about 7% above my sale price, while WFC is 15% above my buy price, so I'm 8% ahead plus a little more for higher dividend yield on WFC. I dare say this could reverse as markets gyrate. WFC is only about a 5% position although BRK's look-through holding raises that to 9%. I'm not sure I understand Agilent's value well enough to continue to hold it, whereas I'm more confident of WFC's. Type 3, Example 3: I reduced my Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B) at $142.00 (still relatively cheap) to take a 25% position in Apple (AAPL) at $95.00 (which I felt was significantly more discounted than BRK.B was, with potential for a 1-2 year rapid upside and otherwise probably capable of earning me a fair annualized return from the buy price in the long term thanks to dividends and buybacks even without any revenue growth). I'd feel quite uneasy if AAPL grew to become 40 or 50% of my portfolio given I have only moderate certainty in its long term prospects and predictability compared to BRK.B (where I'd happily hold 100%), so I'd look to reduce my holding substantially if it were to hit $170-$200 per share in the next couple of years or at lower prices if I could trade for something as good but much cheaper. AAPL is up 15% and BRK.B is up 13% since then, though this has varied a great deal, most often in Apple's favor. At time of purchase I also listed a few warning signs that would be sell signals for AAPL almost regardless of stock price, such as losing its premium pricing in phones thereby devaluing the brand, or allowing another manufacturer's phones to run iOS, so they could lead to a Type 1 sale if they occur. I should point out that Example 1 is boosted by my getting out of GBP before Brexit, something I cannot repeat and did not predict. In fact my entire portfolio was in USD at the time, so I truly lucked out this year and preserved my purchasing power as if the pound were still as strong! I do think this will bear out as objectively a sensible trade in the long run, even 5 or 10 years out, and even discounting currency effects. Examples 2 and 3 are still so close that it's very unclear whether or not I made the right choice, objectively. These purchases do diversify my portfolio a little, increase its perceived intrinsic value in my mind, and put a higher floor on my portfolio's low-end value (again in my mind, and completely untested) but it's not clear-cut from the market prices that my choice will look better in months or years time. All these trades averaged commissions below 0.1% and were tax-free (except for US witholding tax on dividends), but I may have been very wrong in my appraisal and have made a mistake in the long term. I think I'm fairly confident in Example 2, but Example 3 is probably a smaller difference in my perceived intrinsic value between BRK and AAPL than the other two examples where the one I sold was more obviously quite richly valued while the one I bought was quite obviously fairly cheap, and I was probably more persuaded by the potential rapid upside in AAPL if iPhone 7 or iPhone 8 or even a surprise product should become a roaring success and lead to expansion of both EPS and P/E, than by a no-growth appraisal where buybacks and dividends provide a more modest per share growth. One way I have that I could benchmark my portfolio performance is against the number of BRK.B I could own with its total value at any time. If this goes up over long periods, I might deem my trading to be a successful addition to my buy-and-hold discipline. I believe this has gone up significantly over the past year beyond the extra sums we've invested, but one year with a handful of trades is not enough to prove I can sustain it long term. The beauty of BRK.B as a yardstick for me is that it has no dividend payout to complicate things and is a stock I'm happy to hold my entire portfolio in for the long term.

A non-paywalled press-release version: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20161201006567/en/Fruit-Loom-Names-Melissa-Burgess-Taylor-Chairman-CEO

Sure do. See cells W7 W8 W9 for the earnings Yields in question. You just need to shift the decimal point two places to the right to express it as a percentage. The implied Earnings Yield of the look through portfolio is 5.91% at current prices and reported Earnings, the Earnings being obtained via Google where available including negative contributions from loss makers and zero where an error code is returned. The implied price if the operating company is $103.0908 with Earnings/Share of $7.9516, and the implied earnings yield in cell W8 is 7.71%. The total of BRK.B has combined earnings of $11.1829 and current price of $157.75 so Earnings Yield in cell W9 is 7.09% based on total operating and look through earnings per share.

These Low, Typ, High valuations are just a crude estimate that I've baked into my stock-tracking spreadsheets. In the columns Y, Z, AA I define the multiple used for the Low, Typ and High respectively. These are multiples of the figure in column V, which is mostly EPS, but occasionally I use an alternative metric such as Book Value Per Share (as I do with BRK in rows 1 and 2). For the full BRK.B valuation, I use BVPS in column V and set Low to 1.2 (the Buy-Back threshold), Typ to 1.5 and High to 2.0, which I estimate as a typical trading range that might be seen at various times during the course of a few years. For other companies, I figure that a quality company with stable earnings that are similar to Free Cash Flow might be good value at an earnings yield of 8.5% (P/E = 11.76) which may represent a soft floor to the usual trading range, might typically trade at a P/E of 18 and might be richly valued at the High P/E of 30. Thus, applying the multiples of 11.76, 18 and 30 to the look-through EPS of the investments per share, we obtain $38, $58 and $97 respectively in cells N7, O7 and P7. These values are then used to color-code the actual look-through market price of the investments per BRK.B-share which as I type this is shown as $54.6592 in cell D7. This is just below the $58 corresponding to bright yellow, so is very slightly darker and greener than bright yellow. Incidentally, W7 is the inverse of P/E so it's the Earnings Yield at the current Market Price expressed as a ratio rather than a percentage, currently 0.0591 which could be expressed as 5.91%. Similarly, the same multiples are applied to the Operating Company earnings of BRK.B (net of dividends) to provide the Low, Typ, High values in cells N8, O8, P8 and these are used to color-code the cell D7 'effective market value of the operation company' which is currently $103.0908 (calculated as the current market price of BRK.B $157.75 minus the look-through market price of the investments per share in cell D7 $54.6592). Row 9 adds up row 7 (look-through) and row 8 (operating). D9 shows that the market-values of these two add up to the market value of BRK.B. The effective EPS per BRK.B share (operating + look-through) is in cell S9 (and cell V9) at $11.1829. This is multiplied by 11.76, 18 and 30 for the Low, Typ and High estimated valuations/trading range. The effective Earnings Yield as a ratio is in cell W9, currently 0.0709 or 7.09%. You will note that these valuations differ from the Book Value Per Share valuations on row 4 (or row 5) which come out lower, but these do allow a certain like-for-like valuation method so the degree of over-valuation of under-valuation can crudely be compared to other shares that can be valued on a multiple of earnings basis. This might help to some extent in deciding whether to sell some BRK.B to buy something else that's much more undervalued, for example. By laying everything out on a per-row basis, I seem to have turned the two-column method into a two-row method. By changing the valuation metrics for the operating part of BRK.B or the look-through shares, you could come up with a custom valuation of your own choosing. If you wish to share your own estimate of placing a Low, Typical or High valuation on the operating part of BRK.B, I could implement that in another tab of the spreadsheet. Also, you could add a third element by choosing to value cash per share at a certain multiple (e.g. 0.9, 1.0, 1.1 corresponding to a cash drag discount at 0.9, valuing it as risk-free at 1.0 and applying an optionality premium at 1.1) then apply a different valuation of your choice to the operating company net of cash. For example, if you have an estimate of IV calculated based on a rate you'd like to plug in, perhaps use that IV with a multiple of 1.0 as the High, use 0.75 for Typical and 0.5 as Low multiple. Typical is a 25% discount to IV and Low is a 50% discount to IV. Variations of the two-column method seem to be: 1. Use the market value of the look-through shares and add a sensible valuation of the operating company 2. Use a non-market valuation of the look-through shares and add a sensible valuation of the operating company I hope that the above clarifies how these figures came about and how crude they are - albeit that they're probably more 'consistent and objective' than the fluctuating market price of the portfolio constituents.

I don't think I can understand what you're asking as I cannot find 38,58,96/share or a number that looks like it in my spreadsheet or on the class A equivalent values. 38,58,96 per share isn't formatted like a typical number of dollars so I'm not sure what it ought to be.

Hi, Slightly delayed by a short vacation in the sun, I've updated the Spreadsheets above based on the latest 13-F and updated the Book Value based on the 30th Sep 2016 10-Q (I'd calculated a slightly different value of BVPS myself than Yahoo Finance shows, so I switched to theirs, which differs in about the 4th significant figure). I'm glad to see from the revision history and changes that a few people have played around with the numbers of shares and native currency in the Publicly editable version at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10gMfyZOFCW1-KrY_P8SGRf3pTstspdAGw_DuKSQxO8s/edit?usp=sharing ...so I hope it remains useful to some of you. By copying over my new version and deleting the old one, I've undone the most recent change by a member of the public. And don't forget there are instructions earlier in this thread to copy the latest sheet to your own Google Drive spreadsheets. If you copy it, use the version only I can edit: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ok3bOO4z_2Itbta6FguKbuFA1HvcQvzisspPBN6IpZY/edit?usp=sharing Assumptions made include that the BYD holding remains unchanged since its original report. I assume that as a foreign holding it doesn't get included in the 13-F but is still held. I note that three airlines have been added to the portfolio - AAL, DAL, UAL and that two companies seem to have been removed - MEG, SU I usually make a note of my latest update in the green cell Q6, which now reads: Latest major change: 2016-11-19. 13-F on 15 Sep 16. Add AAL, DAL, UAL. Remove MEG, SU. BV as at 30 Sep Various other positions have changed size, such as a reduction in Walmart and various Liberty Media adjustments. You can compare the previous version of the spreadsheet with the current one as I retained the old version as a separate tab in the Resticted Editing version: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Um4ENkSz4tppynxqKAMVLrUcuNqn2JaVBBRu4CEVvGQ/edit?usp=sharing

Well said, longinvestor. Patience in waiting for the fat pitch is key to value-oriented capital allocation.

I've long had a high exposure to BRK.B (13 years, I think) and at times such as between about Feb and May 2016 I've been about 90% to 95% BRK.B in my discretionary portfolio and slept well. (I also have index trackers in defined contributions pension schemes and could even consider my home equity to further reduce that percentage exposure to nearer 45-50% of my net worth and we are still saving hard). Currently after buying a big chunk of AAPL in May my discretionary port is about 61% exposed to BRK.B (or around 40% exposed to the operating part of BRK.B on a look-through basis) and I think it's so well diversified in terms of wholly owned earnings streams and dividends and has so much cash and a liquid stock portfolio that I feel it's very secure. If it had any net debt that the holding company was on the hook for, I wouldn't be so confident, but the utilities and railroad both have debts secured only against their own assets. I don't think there's another company I'm so confident of preserving value. In my current phase of investing with at least a 10-20 year horizon I'm quite willing to accept the risk of a temporary loss of market price in the event of Warren Buffett's death or retirement and would see that a steep decline in price would provide the opportunity for substantial buybacks to ultimately enhance Intrinsic Value per share. I think the culture will survive for quite some time in terms of value oriented capital allocation. Also, I don't expect Warren's exit to come soon, probalisticly, so there's a probably a good deal of compounding before that happens that I'd miss if I waited on the sidelines for that possible buying opportunity. I recognize that I'm more willing to take on volatility and concentration than most, so most people wouldn't be happy to take on so much BRK.B exposure.

If you don't subscribe to WSJ, ValueWalk also had this story the other day: http://www.valuewalk.com/2016/10/interview-ted-weschler-says-likes-apples-subscription-element/ Re-reading my purchase notes (bought at $95, mostly by selling BRK.B at $142), I pretty much concur with Ted's views on the customer loyalty and lock-in and the consistent services revenue which should remain healthy even if the device upgrade cycle slows down. I have almost 30% of my concentrated portfolio in Apple right now. I was slightly nervous of having the stake get too high. While it still COULD "do a Nokia" and be supplanted by something new, I believe it's less risky than that, but 25% of my portfolio was a pretty big bet for this kind of company (whereas I'd be comfortable with 100% in BRK.B) and I'd be tempted to trim my position if it rose to nearer 50% of my portfolio, and/or if the price/value margin of safety was very much reduced.

That sounds like a good question for the AGM: "You frequently criticized the US trade deficit in the past but have not done so to my knowledge for the last few years. Has your view changed or softened in recent years, and if so, what factors have affected it?"

I noticed an error in converting the Market Values and EPS of foreign holdings like BYD into USD, so the Total Market Value of the Look-Through Holdings was about $4 per B-share too high, and thus the implied market valuation of the operating part of BRK.B was about $4 too low. I've now corrected this on all versions.

I agree. My wife and I are both frugal and like the value of savings, living below our means and some spare liquidity, which helps make a harmonious relationship, but we' still take plenty of trips and vacations each year, eat out, go to shows and have plenty of fun, but we don't tend to overpay for things or buy much stuff that doesn't add much value to our lives, nor do we live in a place much larger than we need. We also try to be generous with friends, family and guests. When we've lost a smartphone or had a bike stolen or suffered some damage to our car, we've been surprisingly blasé about it and didn't even let it ruin our day. (I was surprised how we weren't worried, and actually that was a really great day when we found we'd had the bike stolen overnight). We're now waiting for an opportunity to buy a replacement at a good discount. I think there are cheapskates who take it too far, but frugal and seeking value can be very rewarding and remove stress.

Maybe one day when I feel I understand Fairfax Financial enough. Right now, I'm not even sure what the different Fairfax tickers on various markets represent exactly, though I keep a loose eye on a couple. I certainly feel happy about the Fairfax approach in general, Intrinsic Value and capital allocation. Not sure about how it actually plays out. It seems like they're currently forced to hedge against falling markets and look at macro trends because of needing to be able to pay out insurance claims and don't have the capital buffer and earnings gusher that Berkshire does, but I'm wondering if this hedging comes at a significant cost to their investment returns. Hedging is not something I'm especially comfortable in my understanding of, and neither is forecasting macro trends. Is Fairfax managing for lower downside risk at the expense of upside gains? They certainly did wonderfully in spotting and profiting from the 2008-ish credit crunch and counterparty/credit-rating risks there, and they clearly have some great minds at work and recognised the madness. Then again, Berkshire, while it didn't profit from the decline in credit-ratings or the downward move in the market directly, also grasped opportunities to put vast sums to work at attractive returns that have helped grow Intrinsic Value and the subsidiaries continued pumping out cash for investment.

My wife and I are both working full time, have no kids, are investing for retirement and roughly living off one income while investing the other. We have quite some time to go, unless we're very lucky with our future returns (though I try to temper my optimism from what looks like an unusually great year). Tax Free (UK Self Select ISAs): Cash (GBP) 3.3% BRK.B 61% (37% operating company market value, 24% look-through market value of BRK portfolio) AAPL 27% (28% look-through exposure) WFC 4.6% (8.5% look-through exposure) IBM 1.3% (3.6% look-through exposure) Taxable but gains/losses well below UK Capital Gains Tax threshold HPQ 0.7% (taxable, via employment & divestitures but not yet reinvested) HPE 1.1% (taxable, via employment & divestitures but not yet reinvested) KEYS 1.5% (taxable, via employment & divestitures but not yet reinvested) Additionally I have a pension invested in UK FT All Share Tracker which should be worth about one third as much again at present, adding some diversification to allow me to be more aggressive, plus a new pension starting now for my wife and another for me in a few months - again to be invested in cheap trackers. With my wife included, we hope to be able to invest about an additional 10-15% of today's market value into our retirement funds each year for the next few years (including some in the form of future pensions invested in trackers), so we are not so risk averse as the already retired. I feel BRK.B is sufficiently high quality and diversified I'd be happy to hold 100% from time to time especially when it seems undervalued. I went heavily into BRK.B (over 90%) in February at about $125, selling HLMA (London) which I felt was pricey. Currently BRK trails HLMA by 1.74% (in GBP) excluding dividends so this looks poor, though I could argue that I sold most of the extra BRK exposure for a 13% profit when I... ...made a big bet on AAPL at $95.00 when it suffered bad year-on-year comparisons but I felt iPhone 7 and iStore sales would see some recovery, reducing my heavy BRK.B exposure by about one-third at $142.00 to fund most of it, but limited my initial exposure to about 25% due to the single company risks and moderate but real risk of Apple going the way of Nokia (despite customer lock-in, brand cachet and ongoing Apple Store sales). Since then AAPL is up almost 18% versus BRK (excl dividends) as BRK has only gained 2%. My wife doesn't like AAPL and neither of us has any of their products, but I recognise value there for the investor. We've also added new money to the portfolio this year. Also I lucked out big-time by being almost entirely USD denominated when the Brexit vote hit, so my portfolio looks like it gained enormously in GBP thanks to my home currency being greatly devalued! So despite the gains, I don't feel anything in my portfolio is overvalued, but I'm prepared that my gains might be wiped out in part if GBP strengthens versus USD.

Thanks, I hope to watch that later. That looks like an interesting YouTube channel that could add some insights to my view of BRK and investing, so I've subscribed.

All three versions now updated to include increased holding in Phillips 66 (PSX) as at 15 Sep 2016

All versions of the look-through spreadsheet are now updated to include the holding in BYD Company Limited which had been omitted from the original version. This holding was purchased by MidAmerican Energy which was since renamed to Berkshire Hathaway Energy. The version only I can edit (but you can copy it into your own Google Sheet - see above): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ok3bOO4z_2Itbta6FguKbuFA1HvcQvzisspPBN6IpZY/edit?usp=sharing The version anyone on the internet can see and edit (so it could get corrupted, but you can enter your own currency and number of shares): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10gMfyZOFCW1-KrY_P8SGRf3pTstspdAGw_DuKSQxO8s/edit?usp=sharing Restricted editing - for this version you can request Edit Access and I'll grant it. It sends me an email from your Google account: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Um4ENkSz4tppynxqKAMVLrUcuNqn2JaVBBRu4CEVvGQ/edit?usp=sharing In all case, anyone on the internet can view them so be wary of entering private information. If you want a private copy, copy the sheet to your own private Google Sheet using the instructions in post 3 of this thread at http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/berkshire-hathaway/look-through-portfolio-google-sheets-with-live-prices/msg272206/#msg272206

Perfect - thanks redhots. I'll add it to the look-through portfolios.