Barron\'s - 09.03.2020

(National Geographic (Little) Kids) #1

30 BARRON’S March9,2020


FUND PROFILE


Talking With Bill Nolinand Tom Rozycki,


Managers, Principal Blue Chip


think long-term and have significant insider ownership.


“Most of corporate America is not run that way,” he says.


“Especially, mid-cap and large-cap companies are run by


what we call cash-paid-for CEOs: people who don’t have a


large ownership stake and are mostly paid employees. At


such companies there is a strong pressure from Wall Street


to get results immediately.” Such short-termism leads to


executive decisions “that aren’t good for the business, but


good for the CEO” who is seeking a quarterly bonus.


But Nolin’s results are unquestionable. Blue Chip’s 14.8%


five-year annualized return beats 94% of its peers in Morn-


ingstar’s Large Growth category, as well as the 13.3% return


of its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Growth Index. And it


has done this with less volatility than both. Nolin also runs


the olderPrincipal MidCap(PEMGX), now closed to new


investors, which has trounced 97% of its peers in the past


Photograph byBARRETT EMKE


W


hen Bill Nolin was in elementary school,


his father quit his job to start a steel-fabri-


cation business. “This business was in our


lives daily, whether it was my mom run-


ning the accounts, or my dad coming


home at 5:30 p.m. with the pickup truck


loaded with boxes to ship or me helping


him put on the labels that my mom had prepared and


going to the UPS store,” says the manager ofPrincipal


Blue Chip(ticker: PBLAX). The business wasn’t just a


job to his parents. “It was something they loved; a pas-


sion or calling,” he says. “And they worked on it 24-7.”


Nolin, 51, seeks that kind of “owner-operator” pas-


sion from the executives of the companies in his fund.


He invests in businesses still run by their founders, or at


least where executives behave like founders—those who


By LEWIS BRAHAM


Managers


Who Act


Like Owners


March9,2020 BARRON’S 31


decade. (Although Blue Chip carries a 5.50%


load, large brokers such as Fidelity and TD


Ameritrade often waive that commission.)


Nolin is chief investment officer of an


11-member boutique subsidiary of Principal


called Aligned Investors, which manages


around $32 billion, including Blue Chip’s


$5.3 billion. He and co-manager Tom Rozy-


cki, 40, are supported by six investment


analysts devoted exclusively to the Aligned


subsidiary. Blue Chip was launched in 2012


as an offshoot of the boutique’s mid-cap


fund. “Our successful mid-cap companies


eventually became too large to own in our


mid-cap strategy,” Nolin says. “It made sense


to start a strategy where we could invest in


these larger companies.” Some of the “grad-


uates” from the mid-cap fund to Blue Chip


have included supermarket company


Costco Wholesale(COST), fast food res-


taurateurYum! Brands(YUM), and cell-


phone-tower giantAmerican Tower


(AMT), Nolin says.


One graduate, which MidCap sold after


16 years but Blue Chip purchased last No-


vember, is tax-software companyIntuit


(INTU). Its QuickBooks and TurboTax soft-


ware “are both so dominant,” Nolin says.


“People are trained in [the software] and


don’t want to switch.” The rise of the so-


called gig economy is increasing the number


of self-employed Uber drivers, etc., who


need QuickBooks to itemize their mileage


and depreciation expenses, he adds. “There’s


a long runway for QuickBooks,” he says,


noting there are 48 million small businesses


and self-employed Americans, and only a


7% penetration of that market for the online


software. Intuit has begun providing more


hands-on service via live video-chat advice


from its accountants, in a bid to take market


share fromH&R Block(HRB).


Nolin attributes much of Intuit’s success


to its dynamic founder Scott Cook, who re-


mains chairman of its executive committee.


“He still works with the people at Intuit be-


cause he’s a fanatic about making it easier


for people to use their products,” Nolin says.


“That’s how you end up being 15 times larger


than your nearest competitor.”


One metric Nolin employs to analyze


whether a company’s executives are truly


owner-operators is an “aligned ratio,” com-


paring their stock ownership to their annual


salary and other benefits. “At the typical


public company, the ratio is in the range of


three to six times, so maybe a CEO owns $6


million worth of stock and gets paid $2 mil-


lion a year—three times,” says Nolin. “A lot


of our companies, the ratio is 20 to 1, and we


have several that are 50 or 100 to 1, and


some that are 2,000 to 1.”


Then there’sAmazon.com(AMZN), the


fund’s largest holding at 8.5% of its portfolio


as of the end of 2019. According to the latest


Securities and Exchange Commission fil-


ings, founder and CEO Jeff Bezos has an


almost 56 million-share stake—worth $105


billion at a recent $1,884 share price. His


total compensation in 2019 was $1.7 mil-


lion—a 62,226-to-1 ratio.


But a high ratio isn’t enough. Aside from


Amazon’s retail and cloud-computing domi-


nance, co-manager Rozycki says the com-


pany’s more recent forays into internet ad-


vertising are being undervalued by the


market. “Amazon has this built-out advan-


tage in its retail business and now the ability


to layer on something that produces royal-


ties on top of that retail business in the form


of advertising,” he says. “That’s extremely


profitable.” He likes royalty structures that


allow companies to collect fees with little


additional operating costs. For instance,


Hilton Worldwide Holdings(HLT), an-


other fund holding, charges 5% fees to hotel


franchisees using the Hilton name.


Nolin doesn’t just expect insider owner-


ship from his investments’ CEOs; he prac-


tices what he preaches. In the latest adden-


dum to Blue Chip’s prospectus, you’ll find he


and Rozycki each have over $1 million in-


vested in the fund, the highest investment


amount disclosable by SEC rules. “I person-


ally don’t want to say how much over a mil-


lion, but it’s much, much more than a mil-


lion,” Nolin says. “In addition to owning it


personally, I own it through my 401(k) and a


co-investment [vehicle] here at work. Tom


does the same.” As do all of the fund’s ana-


lysts. That way, the team at Aligned Inves-


tors not only seeks owner-operators, they


think like owners, too.B


Principal Blue Chip........................

Total Return


1-Yr 3-Yr 5-Yr


PBLAX 23.9% 19.9% 14.8%


Large Growth
14.3 14.7 10.7
Category

Top 10 Holdings


Company / Ticker % of Assets


Amazon.com / AMZN 8.5%


Alphabet / GOOG 7.3


Berkshire Hathaway / BRK.B 5.6


Microsoft / MSFT 4.8


Visa/V 4.8


American Tower / AMT 4.7


Brookfield Asset


Management / BAM 4.6


Charter Communications / CHTR 4.5


Mastercard / MA 4.3


Facebook / FB 4.1


Total 53.2%


Note: Holdings as of Dec. 31. Returns through March 2; three-
and five-year returns are annualized.
Sources: Morningstar; Principal Financial Group

What’s in a Name?


Funds Have to Shape Up


T


he next time you buy a fund,


consider whether its name is


fiction or reality. Does it reflect


what’s in the fund? Or is it like


a Hollywood movie—beckoning you,


even if the story and title don’t match?


This isn’t just a thought experiment. It


reflects growing concern that fund names


may be misleading, confusing, or both.


The issue came up this week when the


Securities and Exchange Commission


issued a request for public comment on


potential changes to its Names Rule: the


framework for “registered investment


companies” such as mutual funds and


exchange-traded funds. The SEC wants


to make sure that fund names “do not


mislead investors,” SEC chairman Jay


Clayton said in a statement, and it’s seek-


ing comments on whether to change the


rules or guidance.


Funds are prohibited from using


“materially deceptive or misleading”


names under the Investment Company


Act of 1940. Funds with a name suggest-


ing an investment, industry, or geographic


focus also must hold at least 80% of their


assets in securities indicated by the name.


A “technology” fund, for example, must


invest almost entirely in tech stocks.


Seems straightforward. But the rules


leave gray zones; they don’t cover


strategies—a fund can add the word


“growth” without regulatory pushback


on its name. And the rules are being


tested by thematic ETFs targeting new


technologies and funds focused on envi-


ronmental, social, or governance factors,


known as ESG—two areas of concern the


SEC highlighted in its request for com-


ment. The SEC also singled out index


funds, partly because indexes themselves


aren’t covered by the rules and could be


misleading if they’re part of a fund name.


The rules could use a refresh. About


2,000 ETFs and 1,000 mutual funds


have launched since the current rules


were adopted in 2001, covering all sorts


of areas. Yet naming regulations haven’t


kept pace. Is ESG a strategy or type of


investment? Fund companies want to call


it a strategy, exempting them from asset


tests, but the SEC has pushed back, argu-


ing that funds using ESG or similar


words should abide by the 80% rule, says


Thomas Hiller, a partner with law firm


Ropes & Gray. “The SEC has pushed


funds to adopt name policies even if it’s


not clear where the rule applies,” he says.


“ESG is the big issue of the day.”


Another problem area: derivatives. A


fund using swap contracts for exposure


to the S&P 500 index, for instance, might


indicate that most of its assets are held in


Treasuries, since the notional value of the


swaps is small, says Rajib Chanda, a


partner at law firm Simpson Thacher.


That underestimates the market expo-


sure and economic impact of the swaps,


though, and it could prevent a fund from


passing the 80% asset test. “The rule has


historically elevated the nature of your


assets over the nature of your exposure,”


he says. “It’s crying out for a fix.”


Regulators have expressed some resis-


tance to names that stretch the rules. They


have denied multiple requests by ETF


sponsors to launch “Bitcoin” ETFs. But the


SEC’s Republican majority, led by Clayton,


has shown little appetite for sweeping rule


changes that would impose more burdens


on the industry. Chanda says regulators


may issue guidelines in niches such as


derivatives, tech, and ESG, rather than


rewriting the entire Names Rule. The in-


dustry would also favor a more harmoni-


ous set of rules that reduce ambiguities


and levels the playing field for everyone.


Regulators are well aware that a


catchy name can help a fund stand out in


a crowded market, and they’re likely to


keep giving fund companies some cre-


ative license. Don’t expect regulators to


draw a bright line between fiction and


reality—that's a distinction that investors


will still have to draw themselves.B


By Daren Fonda


FUNDS

Free download pdf