Differences Between Private Equity Firms and Berkshire Hathaway
Private equity firms and Berkshire Hathaway fundamentally differ in their investment approaches, operational focus, and cultural philosophies.
Private equity (PE) firms and Berkshire Hathaway represent two distinct models of investment and management. While both seek to generate significant returns, their approaches to acquiring, managing, and growing businesses differ profoundly. Additionally, we delve into Berkshire’s role of activism.
This post explores the key differences between these two investment giants, highlighting their contrasting strategies, operational methods, and underlying philosophies. By understanding these differences, you will learn about the unique investment approaches, operational focuses, and cultural philosophies of PE firms and Berkshire Hathaway.
TL; DR
Investment Approach: PE firms use debt-financed funds for short-term acquisitions, while Berkshire Hathaway invests its own capital for long-term ownership without significant borrowing.
Operational Changes: PE firms often enforce aggressive cost-cutting and management changes post-acquisition to boost short-term profits, contrasting with Berkshire's hands-off management style that fosters sustainable growth.
Short-term vs Long-term Focus: PE firms prioritize immediate financial gains and frequent divestitures, whereas Berkshire values long-term stability and aims to hold businesses indefinitely.
Cultural Differences: PE firms impose stringent financial controls and prioritize shareholder returns, while Berkshire's trust-based culture aligns interests of shareholders, employees, and customers.
Business Model: PE firms operate as a series of limited partnerships with finite lifespans, unlike Berkshire, which is a corporate entity owning hundreds of businesses with a commitment to long-term value creation.
Investment Approach and Structure
PE firms and Berkshire Hathaway differ fundamentally in their investment approaches and structures. PE firms operate by creating separate funds for acquiring, managing, and selling companies, relying heavily on debt financing—typically around 70% of the acquisition cost. These funds are raised from external investors such as pension plans, university endowments, and sovereign wealth funds, making the PE firms more like intermediaries than direct investors. They charge various fees, including management fees and carried interest, and aim for a short-term exit strategy to maximize returns quickly. In contrast, Berkshire Hathaway stakes all its capital directly into acquisitions, offering a permanent home for the companies it buys. It avoids significant borrowing and focuses on long-term ownership, free from the pressures of short-term performance.
The differences between Berkshire and PE firms reflect fundamental cultural contrasts. In the PE model, heavy debt levels and associated covenants not only boost immediate returns but “impose . . . a stringent discipline on management, forcing executives not only to keep costs down, but also to divest any business that might fetch a price higher than the value they had placed on it.”
— LAWRENCE CUNNINGHAM
Operational Focus and Management
PE firms often implement aggressive operational changes post-acquisition, including cost reductions, layoffs, and restructuring, to boost short-term profitability. They may replace existing management and impose stringent financial controls to ensure rapid returns on investment. This approach can lead to significant immediate gains but may undermine the long-term health of the acquired companies. Conversely, Berkshire Hathaway maintains a hands-off approach, allowing the existing management to continue running their businesses with a high degree of autonomy. Berkshire values trust and decentralized management, providing support and resources without interfering heavily in day-to-day operations. This fosters a stable environment conducive to sustainable long-term growth.
Cultural and Philosophical Differences
The cultural and philosophical differences between PE firms and Berkshire Hathaway are stark. PE firms prioritize short-term shareholder returns above all else, often at the expense of other stakeholders, including employees and customers. Their use of high leverage and stringent covenants imposes a discipline aimed at immediate financial gains, often leading to frequent divestitures. In contrast, Berkshire Hathaway’s model is built on trust, long-term relationships, and an owner-oriented culture. It aligns the interests of shareholders with those of other stakeholders, such as employees and customers, promoting a win-win situation. The emphasis on permanence and minimal interference reflects Berkshire’s commitment to sustainable value creation rather than short-term profits.
Berkshire culture requires no such external stringency: trust is an inherent fundamental value. It induces cost minimization without need for covenants to impose discipline. The idea of selling a business is antithetical to the sense of permanence intended to hold Berkshire together in perpetuity. In contrast to the thick corporate culture that pervades Berkshire’s subsidiaries, PE companies have no common corporate culture.
PE firms are not even companies in the same sense that Berkshire is. Berkshire is a corporate entity owned by its shareholders and comprising hundreds of operating businesses and other investments to be held indefinitely. PE firms, in contrast, consist of a series of distinct limited partnerships organized as equity funds with finite lives rarely more than a decade. Unlike conglomerates, which seek to retain the businesses they acquire, PE firms want to divest them as rapidly as it is profitable to do so.
— LAWRENCE CUNNINGHAM
Activism
Buffett, who took control of Berkshire Hathaway in 1965, has always opposed hostile takeovers, heavy borrowing, and asset flipping. Instead, he favors long-term investments, preferring cash to debt, and defending trustworthy management against short-term pressures. This philosophy has shaped his reputation as a high-quality, loyal shareholder who offers hands-off, long-term capital.
Buffett’s reputation for offering hands-off long-term capital dates back to 1973 when Berkshire accumulated a stake in Washington Post Company. Buffett vowed loyalty to CEO Katharine Graham, who soon asked him to join the board. In 1986, Buffett extended his loyalty further when Berkshire took a large position in Capital Cities/ABC, giving its managers, Daniel B. Burke and Thomas S. Murphy, proxy power to vote Berkshire’s shares as they saw fit.
— LAWRENCE CUNNINGHAM
Buffett's method of activism is characterized by corporate diplomacy rather than public confrontation. For example, in 2014, when activist David Winters challenged Coca-Cola’s executive compensation plan, Buffett engaged in private discussions with the company’s CEO and board members instead of supporting the public campaign. Similarly, when approached by activist Jeffrey Ubben about American Express in 2016, Buffett chose to consult directly with the CEO rather than push for public changes. This approach emphasizes trust, long-term relationships, and behind-the-scenes influence.
Buffett’s strategy often involves divesting Berkshire's stake if he fundamentally disagrees with a company's direction, as seen when Berkshire sold its Disney shares post-acquisition of Capital Cities/ABC. This preference for private negotiation over public dispute maintains a respectful relationship with company management and avoids the antagonism typical of activist campaigns. Even when he assumed the chairmanship of Salomon Brothers amid a crisis, Buffett did so with a focus on resolving issues diplomatically rather than publicly criticizing individuals.
Summary
PE firms and Berkshire Hathaway fundamentally differ in their investment approaches, operational focus, and cultural philosophies. PE firms create separate funds financed heavily by debt, prioritize short-term returns through aggressive management changes, and aim to sell acquired businesses quickly for profit. This approach often involves high leverage, stringent financial controls, and frequent divestitures, which can undermine long-term business health.
Conversely, Berkshire Hathaway uses its own capital for acquisitions, avoids significant borrowing, and fosters long-term ownership by maintaining a hands-off approach that values trust and autonomy in management. Berkshire's model promotes sustainable value creation, aligning shareholder interests with those of employees and customers, and emphasizes permanence and minimal interference. This cultural and philosophical distinction underscores Berkshire's focus on long-term stability and growth, contrasting sharply with PE firms' short-term, profit-driven strategies.
Download this post 👇
Got a burning question or a topic you're curious about? I'd love to hear from you! Please drop a comment 💬 below or shoot me an email 📧 at grahamqualityinvestor@gmail.com