Scaling into a position in equal tranches, reading a whole-book expected-return sheet against the weights, checking a model's inputs are like-for-like, and holding a portfolio through a style drawdown.
1. Open a new position at half size, then complete it with an identical second order
The repeatable method
- Decide the full target weight before the first purchase, then buy half of it.
- Write down the conditions for the second half: time held, further work done, and the thesis unchanged.
- Place the second order on the same terms as the first (same share count, same limit), so the add is not a reaction to price.
- Announce the add as the completion of a plan, and point back to where the plan was made.
Here: FFH.TO was opened on
16 August with 30 shares at a CAD 2,300 limit. It was named for an increase on
1 September, and this issue adds 30 more at CAD 2,300, taking the weight from ~2.7% to ~5.3%.
Watch for
- Whether the other two 1 September "up" names get the same treatment. SPGI sits at ~2.85%, and a plan carried out for only one of three names is closer to a single trade than a policy.
- An unchanged limit after the price has moved well away from it: that means the order may not fill, and the post should say so.
2. Put the expected-return sheet next to the weights, and explain every mismatch
The repeatable method
- Rank the holdings by modelled expected return, and separately by current weight.
- Flag the large positions with low expected returns and the small positions with high ones.
- For each flag, write one line: why the size is right despite the number (quality, certainty, liquidity, tax), or why it should change.
- Direct new money to the high-return, small-weight positions first, unless a flag's written reason says otherwise.
Here: new money goes to FFH.TO, top of the sheet (18.6%) and 19th of 20 by weight. The mismatches left unexplained: EVO.ST is 3rd-largest (~7.95%) at 8.6%, GAW.L is 10th (~5.5%) at the book's lowest 6.7%, and III.L (18.1%, ~3.4%) and KPG.AX (30.5%, ~5.95%) are not added to.
Watch for
- Low-return positions that stay large issue after issue. At that point the weights reflect past gains, not current conviction.
- Outlier inputs at the top of the sheet: KPG's 122% three-year NPATA growth is a single forecast that can dominate the average.
3. Check that every row of a comparative model uses the same metric
The repeatable method
- Read the footnotes on any model table before reading the ranking.
- List every row that uses a substitute metric (NPATA, revenue, book value, distributable earnings).
- For each substitute, ask whether it grows at the same rate as per-share earnings for that business. If not, take the row out of the ranking.
- Look for identical values across unrelated rows, which usually means a plug value rather than a forecast.
Here: "** For Fairfax Revenue was used." The top real-money idea (18.57%) is ranked on revenue growth, 26,825 → 43,708 (+63% in three years), while the neighbouring rows use EPS. Fairfax's own target is 15% growth in book value per share. CSU.TO, BN, III.L and KKR all show exactly 52.09% three-year growth.
Watch for
- The substituted row being the one that drives a transaction. That is when a like-for-like check matters most.
- A change in the book-level average from one issue to the next with no stated cause (17.1% on 1 September, 13.9% here).
4. Treat heavy buybacks as a management valuation signal, but check the size and the price paid
The repeatable method
- Pull the share-count history: the multi-year CAGR plus the most recent month or quarter.
- Read an acceleration in buybacks as management saying the shares are cheap. Confirm it by comparing the average price paid with book value or intrinsic value.
- Check the buyback is funded by surplus capital, not by leverage or at the cost of the core business (for an insurer, reserve strength).
Here: Fairfax's share count fell from 28.6m (2017) to 21.4m (LTM), −25% or 3.4% a year, and 2.4% of shares were retired in June 2026 alone. "Fairfax is currently cheap (management believes this too as they are heavily buying back shares)."
Watch for
- The average repurchase price relative to book value per share. The post does not give it.
- Buybacks slowing: if management stops buying at similar prices, one of the three stated reasons weakens.
5. In a style drawdown, report the cash yield and restate conviction instead of changing style
The repeatable method
- Say plainly that results are below expectations.
- Replace the price chart with a cash measure: the portfolio's FCF yield against its own history.
- Only buy names you could explain yourself. Conviction you have borrowed from someone else will not last through a drawdown.
Here: "The current results are below our expectations. Quality has had a rough time recently." The book's FCF yield is ~5.9% "right now", against ~3.3% at the 2021 low and ~4.2% in 2015. "You can borrow someone's stock idea, but you can never borrow their conviction."
Watch for
- A rising FCF yield caused by falling prices rather than rising cash flow. The chart alone cannot tell the two apart, so check absolute look-through FCF (reported as $106,119/yr on 1 September).
Methods distilled from the archived Compounding Quality post for personal study. Not investment advice.