There are only two books you will ever need to read to become a good investor. One of them is Graham's "The Intelligent Investor" (or better, Graham and Dodd's "Security Analysis"). The other is Philip Fisher's "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits".
It is telling that the man who combines the investment philosophies of both Graham and Fisher is widely acclaimed as the most brilliant investor alive today, Warren Buffet.
This is a book that you shouldn't just read once. It's a book you should read again and again. This is a book that you should read in cycles. Once you finish, you should read it again. It's short enough that you can read a chapter each night. This is a book that you should read until you can recite it word for word.
If you understand the principles in this book, and adhere stringently to Fisher's 15-point checklist for buying stocks, avoid his 10 don'ts, and purchase stocks at the right time, as he suggested how to do, you will almost certainly be investing in good companies.
If you then apply Graham's tests of value, you can avoid paying too much for those good companies. It is possible to have a good company but a bad stock (IBM is a great company today, and passes all of Fisher's criteria, but could you really justify buying it say $1,000 per share?).
When you do find companies that are good companies, but have bad stocks, keep an eye on them. What I mean by "bad stock" is that the stock -- in your opinion -- is priced too highly, even considering the company's excellent growth prospects (in other words, there is euphoria about it on Wallstreet that goes beyond reason). Eventually, the market will realize that, even for that great company, it was paying too much. The stock price will drop, and then, whenever everyone else is running from the company in fear of doom, you can scoop it up (assuming that it i still a good company).
Just as it is possible to have a good company but a bad stock, it is also possible to have a bad company but a good stock. You should not buy a stock just because it is cheap in PE, PEG, PS, or Price:book ratio. It is possible that the management may be so terrible that the company, in a few years time, may very well justify such current undervaluation. Even if the management is competent, it is still possible that the company' performance may justify that low price in a few year's time. When a stock is greatly undervalued by these measures, and has passed most of Fisher's criteria, then it is a great buy, because the market will eventually realize that management is brilliant and the stock should be priced higher.
Now, many have objected that Fisher's methods take a lot of time. Clearly, they do. So do Graham's. Certainly, using both methods in combination with one another will take a lot of time (you can use Graham's criteria first, or Fisher's, then apply the other set of criteria). If you don't have the interest or time to pursue this, then you should not be investing in invidiaul stocks yourself. Rather, you should find an advisor who does utilize these rules, or a mutual fund manager who does, and have him manage your money, if you want those kind of exceptional returns. In this case, you will still have to investigate the person managing your money, to make sure they're up to you're criteria, and stay on top of it, to make sure they continue to be. If you don't want to do that -- if you don't want to put in that effort -- then you should settle for ordinary returns, as Graham says. Invest in an index fund.
However, you should consider that there are not many stocks that will meet both Graham's stringent criteria, and Fisher's extremely stringent criteria. Of the tens of thousands of stocks, maybe 1,000 of them meet Graham's criteria. Of Those 1,000, maybe 50-100 meet Fisher's criteria. But, consider that you should only have to do this once, and thereafter only have to keep tabs on the companies (because you should have done it right the first time). Isn't several hours worth of work each night -- even for months -- worth finding a stock that will experience many hundreds of percent increase over 10 years?
To save yourself time, apply Graham's criteria first to eliminate fad stocks (dot-com), and other stocks that are priced too high. This will greatly cut down on your candidates. Then look at what's left and categorize it. Discard stocks from industries which you -- based on sound analysis -- believe aren't promising. Also discard those from industries which you don't understand. Of the remaining stocks, apply Fisher's criteria. To operate efficiently, apply his 15th criteria first: If there is any serious questions as to the management's trustworthiness to investors, don't even consider buying stock of the company, and don't waste any more time on it.
After reading these two books, you should know what criteria a company is to meet if it is a good investment, both Fisher's qualitative, and Graham's quantitative, criteria. You should apply the criteria that are easiest and quickest to filter through first. Then go through the criteria, progressively from more to less stringent. There's no point in wasting your time finding out about how great a company fairs on Fisher's first 14 criteria, only to find that it flatlines on the criteria of absolute importance (the integrity of management).
