Personal Finance

2 Types of Stock I Never Plan to Buy

APOL Total Return Price Chart
APOL Total Return Price Chart

APOL Total Return Price data by YCharts .

It's worth noting that the worst offender of the bunch, Corinthian Colleges, couldn't be included because it was forced into bankruptcy in 2015, leaving investors with nothing.

With such a horrific downfall, you might think that the industry is rife with deals, but I don't believe that's the case.

First and foremost, any investor in this industry is at the whim of the federal government. That's because the tuition bills are paid largely through Title IV student loans. In fact, at many of these schools, Title IV loans -- when combined with military loans -- account for well over 75% of overall revenue.

Furthermore, the results from for-profit players are questionable at best. Though tighter regulation under the Obama administration has led healthier practices (i.e., college counselors are no longer paid by commission on the number of students they bring in), for-profit students still have less favorable outcomes than their not-for-profit peers. They tend to drop out of school more regularly and have a tougher time finding a job even if they do graduate.

But perhaps the biggest threat is that what set for-profit schools apart -- online courses and flexible schedules -- is now becoming commonplace at traditional institutions of higher education. Because many of these institutions rely on state-run tax revenues and are not for profit, they offer far better tuition rates than for-profit rivals.

Add those factors together and you have a recipe for bad returns, even with these stocks having fallen so far from grace already.

Technology component makers

I'm not against all technology stocks. In fact, tech stalwarts Alphabet , Baidu , and Facebook make up over one-third of my real-life holdings. Instead, I eschew investing in any technology company with the following three traits:

  1. It provides component parts that allow the guts of popular consumer devices, like smartphones, to run.
  2. A few customers account for a huge percentage of revenue.
  3. The moat is provided primarily through intellectual property rights.
  4. Valued at less than $5 billion, with less than $1 billion in cash.

There are lots of companies that fit this bill, the most well-known being companies like InvenSense (NYSE: INVN) , Cirruc Logic (NASDAQ: CRUS) , and Ambarella (NASDAQ: AMBA) .

Company Primary Customers % of Revenue From Primary Customers Market Cap Cash
InvenSense Apple , Samsung 30% $550 million $285 million
Cirrus Logic Apple 72% $2.3 billion $230 million
Ambarella Wintech, Chicony 88% $1.3 billion $308 million

Data sources: Yahoo! Finance, SEC filings. Percent of revenue from primary customers reflects numbers from most recent company annual report.

If those two customers for Ambarella don't look familiar, it's worth noting that a huge percentage of those sales flow through to action-camera maker GoPro .

In essence, any company that shares these traits has two major risks that aren't, in my humble opinion, worth taking.

First, by relying on one of two customers for such a huge percentage of revenues, all it takes is a decision by a single person at a single company to switch suppliers and these companies are in serious trouble. And even if such a decision is never made, if the end products that use this technology suffer (see GoPro cameras), demand for the underlying technology will dry up.

Also, the technology offered up by these companies can quickly become commoditized. Intellectual property patents can only provide so much of a moat. If deeper-pocketed rivals can offer a similar, in-house technology that's cheaper, then end users like Apple and GoPro are more likely to switch providers.

Already, Qualcomm and Intel are threatening Ambarella's turf, while STMicroelectronics offers up technology similar to InvenSense's.

While those with deep knowledge in this industry might find component suppliers with a reliable competitive advantage beyond intellectual property, individual investors would be wise to steer clear of such stocks.

Something big just happened

I don't know about you, but I always pay attention when one of the best growth investors in the world gives me a stock tip. Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner (whose growth-stock newsletter was the best performing in the U.S. as reported by The Wall Street Journal)* and his brother, Motley Fool CEO Tom Gardner, just revealed two brand new stock recommendations. Together, they've tripled the stock market's return over the last 13 years. And while timing isn't everything, the history of Tom and David's stock picks shows that it pays to get in early on their ideas.

Click here to be among the first people to hear about David and Tom's newest stock recommendations.

*"Look Who's on Top Now" appeared in The Wall Street Journal in Aug. 2013, which references Hulbert's rankings of the best performing stock picking newsletters over a 5-year period from 2008-2013.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.


The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

In This Story

AMBA CRUS

Other Topics

Stocks

The Motley Fool

Founded in 1993 in Alexandria, VA., by brothers David and Tom Gardner, The Motley Fool is a multimedia financial-services company dedicated to building the world's greatest investment community. Reaching millions of people each month through its website, books, newspaper column, radio show, television appearances, and subscription newsletter services, The Motley Fool champions shareholder values and advocates tirelessly for the individual investor. The company's name was taken from Shakespeare, whose wise fools both instructed and amused, and could speak the truth to the king -- without getting their heads lopped off.

Learn More