Value vs Growth Investing Isn't So Simple

Warren Buffett likes to say that price is what you pay, value is what you get. But that doesn't mean blindly indexing to value stocks is a path to long-term success.

After all, value stocks have broadly lagged growth stocks for more than a decade and there's no telling when they'll catch back up.

Besides, value is in the eye of the beholder. It's not for nothing that, on average, about 30% of the stocks in the benchmark Russell 1000 Value Index are also found in the Russell 1000 Growth Index.

Subscribe to Kiplinger’s Personal Finance

Be a smarter, better informed investor.

Save up to 74%

Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters

Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.

Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.

Sign up

"The remaining 70% are assigned to be either all growth or all value," per FTSE Russell.

Passive investors in a broad market index that tracks the S&P 500 needn't worry about the style differences between value and growth. Such distinctions are of more concern to tacticians and traders.

Nevertheless, there is something unusual about value's long-term slump.

First, a quick recap on value stocks vs growth stocks: Value stocks are equities that are perceived to be trading at a discount based on metrics such as price-to-book ratios, price-to-earnings ratios, dividend payout ratios and the like.

Growth stocks tend to trade at premiums to these metrics, as investors are willing to pony up for accelerating future free cash flows.

It's important to know that classifying stocks as growth or value is not a straightforward matter.

Russell assigns a growth and value weight based on its valuation criteria, which is how so many stocks find themselves represented in both benchmark indexes.

As FTSE Russell notes, what started out as a way for active managers to benchmark their performance based on their investment styles became a tool for professionals to make "unbalanced allocations based on their strategic or tactical views."

In other words, the benchmark growth and value indexes are not pure plays, and haven't been for decades.

"Pre-conceived notions of 'growth' and 'value' aren't always reflected in indexes labeled growth and value," writes Liz Ann Sonders, chief investment strategist at Charles Schwab. "That has been both exacerbated and emphasized in the post-pandemic era, especially for a sector like technology, which is traditionally thought of as dominating the growth sphere but now has a hefty weight in some value indexes."

Is value investing dead?

"Value investing is based on the premise that paying less for a set of future cash flows is associated with a higher expected return," writes the equity investing team at Dimensional Fund Advisors. "That's one of the most fundamental tenets of investing."

Over the long haul, value stocks have indeed outperformed growth stocks in the U.S., often by wide margins.

"Data covering nearly a century backs up the notion that value stocks — those with lower relative prices — have higher expected returns," Dimensional adds. "While disappointing periods emerge from time to time, the principle that lower relative prices lead to higher expected returns remains the same."

Given that mean reversion is a thing in both life and investing, value investors may be forgiven for expecting their stylistic preference to come back vs growth.

But it hasn't happened yet.

Have a look at the chart below to see the performance of the iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF (IWD) vs the iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF (IWF) over the past decade to see how far the gap has widened on a total return basis (price change plus dividends).

Using these benchmark ETFs as proxies, we can see that growth returned more than 360% over the past 10 years vs less than 140% for value. That bucks historical trends in a big way. Since 1927, value stocks outperformed growth stocks by 4.4% annually in the U.S.

This doesn't mean value investing is dead. However, it might suggest that value investing via a broad index like the Russell 1000 Value Index isn't the best way to find value stocks. It isn't necessarily a good proxy for retail investors looking for cheap diversification to true value names.

Finding true value stocks is hard – just ask Warren Buffett. That said, value investors do have history on their side.

As Hartford Funds notes, "the performance of growth stocks and value stocks has been cyclical. This cyclical behavior highlights the benefits of having both types of investments in a portfolio."

Getting the balance and timing of such tactical allocations is generally best left to the pros.

Related Content

• What Will the Fed Do at Its Next Meeting?
• If You'd Put $1,000 Into Berkshire Hathaway Stock 20 Years Ago, Here's What You'd Have Today
• The 10 'Real' Richest Counties in the U.S.