Sequoia Fund Investor Day Transcript

[Liberty]

They sold Danaher and Costco, among other things. Interesting. Thanks for posting.

[Guest]

Does anyone know what Sequoia's returns would have been without berkshire? I'm assuming it has almost always been held (but not certain on that). If you do the annualized 20% with a 20% allocation, there goes the outperformance against the S&P 500.

[spartansaver]

Did anyone save PDFs of Sequoia's old transcripts? It seems as though they deleted all transcripts prior to 2016 from their website.

[rb]

I have 2005-2015

[spartansaver]

I have 2005-2015

 

Hi rb,

Would you mind either posting them or sending them over? It would be greatly appreciated :)

 

[handycap5]

I would second the request for posting (for posterity). Thanks a lot. 

[rb]

Here you go

Sequoia_05-15.zip

[VersaillesinNY]

AR 1999-2004

WSJ 1973-1974 letters excerpts

Ann00.pdf

Ann01.pdf

Ann02.pdf

Ann03.pdf

Ann04.pdf

Ann99.pdf

Sequoia_1973-74_letters_excerpts_WSJ_5-7-01.pdf

[racemize]

Does anyone have the set of ARs that are recent?  I only see the last couple of years on the website.

[thowed]

ARs from 05.  13 and 15 missing.

 

Cheers again for your essays.

Ann11.pdf

Ann14.pdf

Ann12.pdf

Ann10.pdf

Ann09.pdf

Ann08.pdf

Ann07.pdf

Ann06.pdf

Ann05.pdf

[rb]

Here's 13

2013_Q4_Sequoia.pdf

[racemize]

Ok, here's one PDF of everything so far.  Missing AR from '15 and any ARs prior to 1999:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iM_iPSg43o_MyZXr-E3TZPYdbGnTd9lL/view?usp=sharing

[VersaillesinNY]

Ok, here's one PDF of everything so far.  Missing AR from '15 and any ARs prior to 1999:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iM_iPSg43o_MyZXr-E3TZPYdbGnTd9lL/view?usp=sharing

 

Race, here you go.

Ann15.pdf

[racemize]

Ok updated and reordered--1999-current:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iM_iPSg43o_MyZXr-E3TZPYdbGnTd9lL/view?usp=sharing

[VersaillesinNY]

Bonus.

Letter_to_Clients_and_Shareholders.pdf

RCG_Letter_7-12.pdf

Sequoia_clientletter.pdf

[racemize]

added!

[spartansaver]

Thank you so much guys! Greatly appreciated!

 

[mcliu]

Does anyone know what Sequoia's returns would have been without berkshire? I'm assuming it has almost always been held (but not certain on that). If you do the annualized 20% with a 20% allocation, there goes the outperformance against the S&P 500.

 

Interesting question.. I would like to know if someone's done the math here as well..

 

The total out-performance vs S&P since 1970 is 2.65% so if you backed out the 21% annual from BRK, did the rest of the portfolio really add value?

[Guest longinvestor]

Does anyone know what Sequoia's returns would have been without berkshire? I'm assuming it has almost always been held (but not certain on that). If you do the annualized 20% with a 20% allocation, there goes the outperformance against the S&P 500.

 

Interesting question.. I would like to know if someone's done the math here as well..

 

The total out-performance vs S&P since 1970 is 2.65% so if you backed out the 21% annual from BRK, did the rest of the portfolio really add value?

+1

If you were one of the Buffett partners that rolled into Sequoia in 1970,  what did you learn? 2% outperformance over 50 years is good but if Sequoia was carried by Berkshire for all those years?

[fareastwarriors]

Does anyone know what Sequoia's returns would have been without berkshire? I'm assuming it has almost always been held (but not certain on that). If you do the annualized 20% with a 20% allocation, there goes the outperformance against the S&P 500.

 

Interesting question.. I would like to know if someone's done the math here as well..

 

The total out-performance vs S&P since 1970 is 2.65% so if you backed out the 21% annual from BRK, did the rest of the portfolio really add value?

+1

If you were one of the Buffett partners that rolled into Sequoia in 1970,  what did you learn? 2% outperformance over 50 years is good but if Sequoia was carried by Berkshire for all those years?

 

But I give them credit to have the fortitude to hold a major position in Berkshire for such a long period. Other managers could've done the same but they didn't.

 

[Guest]

Does anyone know what Sequoia's returns would have been without berkshire? I'm assuming it has almost always been held (but not certain on that). If you do the annualized 20% with a 20% allocation, there goes the outperformance against the S&P 500.

 

Interesting question.. I would like to know if someone's done the math here as well..

 

The total out-performance vs S&P since 1970 is 2.65% so if you backed out the 21% annual from BRK, did the rest of the portfolio really add value?

+1

If you were one of the Buffett partners that rolled into Sequoia in 1970,  what did you learn? 2% outperformance over 50 years is good but if Sequoia was carried by Berkshire for all those years?

 

But I give them credit to have the fortitude to hold a major position in Berkshire for such a long period. Other managers could've done the same but they didn't.

 

Others managers also didn't have the friendship or capital gain taxes to pay. ;)

[rb]

But I give them credit to have the fortitude to hold a major position in Berkshire for such a long period. Other managers could've done the same but they didn't.

+1. So what if their outperformance mostly came from holding Berkshire? Others had the chance to hold it and they didn't. Berkshire's own outperformance also comes from a small number of sources. Also returns of 2% over S&P is nothing to sneeze at.

[Guest]

Is their holding of berkshire due to skill or the fact that Ruane went to school with Buffett? I'm sure there was a sense of loyalty there. If all of your outperformance (before taxes) is due to one holding, how does one determine if it were skill or luck (especially given the luck of the classroom)? Furthermore, If I had huge capital gains, it's hard to sell - even if you think it's fairly valued or slightly overvalued.

[Brett]

In their 4Q 2016 letter, Sequoia pitched 10-year performance excluding cash and Valeant in the second paragraph of their letter as evidence of their ability to pick stocks.

 

If they're going to use that horseshit logic, it should be fair to use it against them by excluding Berkshire on the upside.

[Guest longinvestor]

So, in the rarified field of managers who have managed to best the index over 50 years, we see that Ruane did it by riding on Berkshire's 10% out performance; Good that he held on for all these years. But who else has beaten the index over 30, 40 or 50 years? A few others Davis, Gardner and lately Meacham have held significant %ages in Berkshire. It is amazing that one man appears to have carried everyone else. And how about all those who have not beaten the index? Well, Johnnie, that's your problem, not theirs.