주식을 ‘비싸게’ 만들지만 여전히 좋은 매수 기회가 될 수 있는 5가지 요인(2024.11.14)

2024.11.14

5 factors that can make a stock ‘expensive,’ but still a good buy

주식을 ‘비싸게’ 만들지만 여전히 좋은 매수 기회가 될 수 있는 5가지 요인

When talking to investors, one of the things we do not like to hear is, “That stock has gone up too much, I’m not going to buy it,” or, “That stock is too expensive on valuation.” We think automatically giving up on a stock because it is “expensive” does investors a disservice. We think a much better question is, “Why is that stock expensive?,” or, “What do the buyers of that stock see that I don’t?”

 

투자자와 대화할 때 우리가 듣고 싶지 않은 말 중 하나는 “그 주식은 너무 많이 올랐으니 사지 않을 거야” 또는 “그 주식은 평가상 너무 비싸”라는 말입니다. 단순히 “비싸다”는 이유로 주식을 포기하는 것은 투자자에게 불이익을 준다고 생각합니다. 훨씬 더 좋은 질문은 “왜 그 주식이 비싼가?” 혹은 “그 주식을 사는 사람들이 내가 보지 못하는 무엇을 보고 있는가?”라고 묻는 것입니다.

 

A stock, of course, does not know it is expensive. Its valuation is simply what investors are willing to pay.

Stock A might trade for seven times earnings, or price-to-earnings ratio (P/E). Stock B might trade at 65 times earnings. Many investors might instantly assume that Stock A is “better” since it is cheaper. But in many, many instances they would be wrong. We have had far more investment success buying “expensive” companies than we ever have had by buying “cheap” companies.

 

물론 주식 자체는 자신이 비싸다는 것을 알지 못합니다. 그 가치 평가는 단순히 투자자들이 기꺼이 지불하려는 금액일 뿐입니다.

예를 들어, 주식 A는 수익 대비 7배, 즉 주가수익비율(P/E)이 7배로 거래될 수 있고, 주식 B는 수익 대비 65배로 거래될 수 있습니다. 많은 투자자들이 주식 A가 더 저렴하기 때문에 “더 좋다”고 즉시 가정할지도 모릅니다. 그러나 많은 경우 그들은 틀립니다. 우리는 “저렴한” 회사보다 “비싼” 회사를 사서 투자 성공을 거둔 경우가 훨씬 더 많았습니다.

 

Often, stocks are expensive for very valid reasons. Stocks that are cheap often have lots of problems. In a future column we will discuss some reasons why stocks might be cheap. But today, let’s focus on five factors that might make a stock seem expensive, but where it might still be a good buy.

 

종종 주식이 비싼 데에는 매우 타당한 이유가 있습니다. 반면, 저렴한 주식은 문제가 많은 경우가 많습니다. 앞으로의 칼럼에서는 주식이 저렴한 이유에 대해 살펴보겠지만, 오늘은 주식이 비싸 보일 수 있는 다섯 가지 요인에 대해 집중해 보겠습니다. 이 요인들 때문에 주식이 비싸게 보일지라도 여전히 좋은 매수 기회가 될 수 있습니다.

 

Accelerating earnings

Sometimes stocks get an expensive valuation because of high growth. A stock might be up 100 per cent in a year. Many this year are. But investors can also see situations where earnings at a company are moving up faster than the share price. In this case, a stock up 100 per cent might be cheaper than it was last year because of these rapidly rising earnings.

 

가속화되는 수익

때로는 높은 성장률로 인해 주식의 평가가 비싸질 수 있습니다. 어떤 주식은 1년 동안 100% 상승할 수도 있습니다. 올해에는 그런 주식이 많습니다. 그러나 투자자들은 회사의 수익이 주가보다 더 빠르게 증가하는 상황도 볼 수 있습니다. 이러한 경우, 급속히 상승하는 수익 덕분에 100% 오른 주식이 오히려 작년보다 저렴할 수 있습니다.

 

This is why it is so important to look at the fundamentals and not just the share price. We might as well look at Nvidia Corp. as an example, since it is such a well-known stock now. Its share price is up more than 185 per cent this year. Its price-earnings multiple based on January 2025 fiscal year earnings is 52 times. But that multiple is below the stock’s 10-year average, which has been, at times, above 100 times earnings. Based on that metric alone, the market is valuing Nvidia cheaper than its recent history, even after the stock’s big gains.

 

이것이 바로 주가만 보지 않고 기업의 기본적인 펀더멘털을 살펴보는 것이 중요한 이유입니다. 예시로 잘 알려진 엔비디아(Nvidia Corp.)를 살펴보겠습니다. 올해 엔비디아의 주가는 185% 이상 상승했습니다. 2025 회계연도 기준 주가수익비율(P/E)은 52배입니다. 하지만 이 배수는 10년 평균보다 낮으며, 때때로 100배 이상의 수익률을 기록하기도 했습니다. 이 지표만으로 보면, 주가가 크게 상승했음에도 불구하고 시장은 최근 역사와 비교하여 엔비디아를 더 저렴하게 평가하고 있습니다.

 

Defensible moat

Stocks can get expensive if they have a competitive moat or protectable business. This can sometimes be hard to spot, but the numbers can provide some clues. A company that grows faster than its competitors, year after year after year, is certainly doing something right. A company that serves customers who are very reluctant to change (think health care) has an advantage over newer companies trying to break into the industry. A company with dominant market share has an advantage because customers need to be convinced to go elsewhere and it is a high-risk decision for them. A good example here is IBM in the 1970s. Its computer hardware dominance was massive. Any customer going to a competitor took a very big risk, as IBM was considered the gold standard and worth paying for. Going to “Bob’s Computers” was too risky a business decision for a purchasing manager.

 

방어 가능한 해자

경쟁적 해자(방어 장벽)나 보호할 수 있는 사업을 가진 주식은 비싸질 수 있습니다. 이것을 알아차리기 어려울 때도 있지만, 숫자에서 몇 가지 단서를 찾을 수 있습니다. 경쟁사보다 매년 빠르게 성장하는 회사는 분명히 무언가를 제대로 하고 있는 것입니다. 고객이 변화를 꺼리는 산업(예: 헬스케어)에서 고객을 대상으로 하는 회사는 업계에 새롭게 진입하려는 기업에 비해 유리한 위치에 있습니다. 시장 점유율이 높은 회사도 고객이 다른 곳으로 옮기도록 설득해야 하고, 그 결정에는 큰 위험이 따르기 때문에 우위를 가집니다. 1970년대 IBM이 좋은 예입니다. 당시 IBM의 컴퓨터 하드웨어 지배력은 막강했습니다. 경쟁사로 옮기는 고객은 큰 위험을 감수해야 했으며, IBM은 최고 표준으로 여겨져 그만한 가치가 있었습니다. “밥스 컴퓨터”로 가는 것은 구매 관리자에게 너무 위험한 비즈니스 결정이었습니다.

 

Management quality

Often, stocks can be expensive because of quality management. A reliable management team, in our view, is worth paying up for. A team that has created, grown and sold companies before is worth paying attention to. This is especially true for an acquisitive company. If a company can get a premium stock valuation because of its management, then it has an advantage in the market, where it can use its “expensive” stock to make acquisitions at attractive prices. Many “roll up” companies (which are in an acquisition phase) take advantage of this and see high growth in their early years. Investors are willing to pay premium valuations as long as the company continues to make good deals. And good management teams typically do.

 

경영진의 품질

종종 주식이 비싼 이유는 경영진의 품질 때문입니다. 신뢰할 수 있는 경영진은 그만한 가치를 지불할 만하다고 생각합니다. 과거에 회사를 창업하고 성장시키고 매각한 경험이 있는 경영진은 주목할 만한 가치가 있습니다. 이는 특히 인수 중심의 회사에 해당됩니다. 만약 회사가 경영진 덕분에 프리미엄 평가를 받을 수 있다면, 이는 시장에서 “비싼” 주식을 사용하여 매력적인 가격에 인수를 할 수 있는 이점을 제공합니다. 많은 “롤업” 회사들(인수 단계에 있는 회사)은 이를 활용해 초기 몇 년 동안 높은 성장을 이룹니다. 투자자들은 회사가 좋은 거래를 지속하는 한 프리미엄 평가를 기꺼이 지불하려고 합니다. 그리고 우수한 경영진은 일반적으로 그렇게 합니다.

 

Fast growing sector

Stocks can get expensive if the company is in a very fast-growing business. The company may not be that great, but if the sector is seeing huge growth then investors will hop on board. A rising tide, of course, can lift all boats. The easiest examples today are the crypto currency sector and the artificial intelligence sector. We are seeing lots and lots of very expensive stocks because these sectors are growing so fast and attracting huge investor capital. Not all of the stocks in these sectors are good, of course, and this is where we think investors need to be a bit more careful when looking at valuations.

 

빠르게 성장하는 분야

회사가 매우 빠르게 성장하는 분야에 속해 있다면 주식이 비싸질 수 있습니다. 회사 자체는 그리 뛰어나지 않을 수 있지만, 해당 분야가 큰 성장을 보이고 있다면 투자자들이 몰리게 됩니다. 상승하는 조류가 모든 배를 띄우는 것과 같습니다. 요즘 가장 쉬운 예로는 암호화폐와 인공지능 분야를 들 수 있습니다. 이 분야들은 빠르게 성장하고 있어 막대한 투자 자금을 유치하며 매우 비싼 주식들이 많이 나타나고 있습니다. 물론 이 분야의 모든 주식이 좋은 것은 아니며, 이러한 경우에는 투자자들이 평가를 볼 때 좀 더 신중할 필요가 있다고 생각합니다.

 

Special circumstances

We will be brief here, as special circumstances could mean just about anything, but at times can make a stock expensive on typical valuation metrics. A company could be a takeover target. It could be a potential winner of a lucrative lawsuit. It might be a drug company developing a multibillion-dollar product that has seen good early clinical trials. It might be a small company that has just won some giant contracts. Any of these could make a stock expensive. The key for investors in such a case is deciding whether that premium valuation is sustainable or will the premium vanish once the news is out about the special circumstances.

 

특수 상황

특수 상황은 거의 모든 것을 의미할 수 있으므로 간략히 설명하자면, 때때로 이러한 상황은 주식을 전형적인 평가 기준에서 비싸게 만들 수 있습니다. 예를 들어, 회사가 인수 대상이 될 수 있습니다. 수익성 높은 소송에서 승소할 가능성이 있을 수도 있습니다. 초기 임상 시험에서 좋은 결과를 보인 수십억 달러 규모의 제품을 개발 중인 제약 회사일 수도 있습니다. 혹은 거대 계약을 방금 따낸 작은 회사일 수도 있습니다. 이러한 상황 중 어느 것이든 주식을 비싸게 만들 수 있습니다. 투자자에게 중요한 점은 이러한 프리미엄 평가가 지속 가능한지, 혹은 이러한 특수 상황에 대한 소식이 알려지면 프리미엄이 사라질지 결정하는 것입니다.

 

In summary, we think it is very unwise to dismiss a stock on valuation alone. Sometimes, that premium valuation can be completely justified and sustainable, and investors can miss out on big gains by focusing too much on a single metric.

요약하자면, 우리는 주식을 단순히 평가 기준만으로 기피하는 것은 매우 현명하지 않다고 생각합니다. 때로는 그러한 프리미엄 평가가 완전히 정당하고 지속 가능할 수 있으며, 하나의 지표에만 지나치게 집중하다 보면 큰 수익을 놓칠 수 있습니다.