Hi Shock,With a performance like that illustrated below, it is...

Hi Shock,

With a performance like that illustrated below, it is hard to credit anyone suggesting Exxon is "the best capital allocator".

The chart below plots Exxon stock price performance vs the S&P 500 and vs Chevron. The laggard is Exxon with 168%. Chevron delivered 255% in the same period. The S&P 500 delivered 347%.





But wait you might say what about dividends? The full return over 25 years including dividends is:
Exxon was about 400%, Chevron was about 500% and the S&P 500 was about 600%.

So Exxon is still the laggard by a considerable margin. Hard to see the full benefits of their alleged "best capital allocator" acumen on display I would say.

For what it is worth I completely ignore what any analysts have to say. Even the self-promoting ones. As near as I can tell their ability to correctly predict winning stocks is slightly less than the man on the moon or a monkey randomly plucked from a barrel of monkeys.

I cannot ignore the awful Exxon decision to buy XTO, which resulted in more than a $20B loss. Frankly I have often seen the "smart" capital allocators at large companies make TERRIBLE capital decisions over time. Anytime one of my investee companies announces that they will make a takeover I cringe... and look first for evidence of a bad decision.

So for me seeing Exxon make some bad decisions over time, and HZN make some good decisions is directly relevant...

Cheers.