Great growth investing isn’t always about finding companies growing revenue the fastest. Some of the best opportunities come from businesses that can grow free cash flow through different paths. Here are the 3 setups I look for 👇 1️⃣ Slow Revenue Growth → Faster FCF Growth 💰 Companies with modest revenue growth but plenty of room to expand margins can deliver outsized free cash flow growth without needing a major acceleration in sales. 👀 Watchlist: $Intercontinental Exchange(ICE)$ $Broadridge Financial Solutions(BR)$ 2️⃣ High Returns on Capital → Buyback-Driven FCF Growth 🔄 Businesses that generate strong returns on capital can use excess cash to repurchase shares, increasing FCF per share over time while sh

Some businesses don't need to win every customer. They just need to control something everyone else depends on. From chipmaking equipment and payment networks to cloud infrastructure and credit ratings, these companies operate in markets where competition is limited, switching costs are high, and challengers face enormous barriers to entry. Here’s a look at some of the most powerful monopolies, duopolies, and oligopolies in the global economy. 🏰 Monopolies (near-total control of a critical bottleneck) • $ASML Holding NV(ASML)$ — EUV lithography (100%) • $Verizon(VZ)$ — .com domain registry • $CoStar(CSGP)$ — US commercial real estate data •

How do you know if a company is actually high quality? 🤔 You don’t look at it in isolation. You compare it. Against its peers. Against competitors. Against suppliers and customers. And even against businesses that have almost nothing to do with it. Comparison is what separates the companies that look good from the companies that actually stand out. 📊 For me, one of the biggest things I look for is what happens to free cash flow as a business grows. Can revenue growth turn into faster FCF growth? 💰 Can FCF growth turn into faster FCF per share growth? 📈 That’s where things get really interesting. Margin expansion can increase FCF. Buybacks can reduce the share count and push FCF per share even higher. And if the market eventually assigns a higher multiple, shareholders can benefit again. So

I like companies that can turn revenue growth into even faster FCF growth — and then turn that FCF growth into even stronger FCF per share. That’s where the real compounding starts. 🔥 Three things can make the engine work even harder: 📈 Margin expansion means more cash from every dollar of revenue. 💵 Share buybacks spread that growing cash flow across fewer shares. 🚀 Multiple expansion can add another layer of upside when the market starts paying more for that growth. The result is powerful: Revenue ↑ → FCF ↑↑ → FCF/share ↑↑↑ The companies in this list are showing exactly that kind of progression over the next decade. A few standouts from the screen: Comfort Systems USA 21% revenue CAGR → 41% FCF CAGR → 42% FCF/share CAGR e.l.f. Beauty 24% revenue CAGR → 30% FCF CAGR → 30% FCF/share CAGR I

One of the best things about the stock market? There are thousands of great businesses you’ve probably never heard of. Take $First Cash(FCFS)$ . I only came across it recently, and it’s a perfect reminder of why investors should keep digging beyond the usual mega-cap names. 📈 Dividend growth has been remarkably consistent 💰 Earnings have continued to compound 🚀 The share price has delivered strong long-term appreciation And the business is still executing. FirstCash reported 29% revenue growth and 58% GAAP EPS growth in Q2 2026, while also raising capital returns through a new $150M buyback authorization. This is why I love researching stocks. You don’t need to find the next $NVDA. Sometimes the best opportunities are hiding in companies most of t

When I look at $MSCI Inc(MSCI)$ , three things stand out. First, it’s a great company with strong financial metrics. Second, the valuation looks attractive. And third, the stock price has basically gone nowhere for five years. 🤔 That combination is what makes $MSCI interesting. Because if the business looks good and the valuation looks reasonable, why hasn’t the stock gone anywhere? There are really two possibilities. 👉 The market is right. Future profitability and business quality could deteriorate, and the current valuation is already pricing in what looks like an attractive setup. 👉 The market is wrong. Investors may be underestimating how strong MSCI’s profitability and business quality can remain in the future. If it’s the second one, there’s

Revenue growth is only the first step. The real compounding happens when a company can turn higher revenue into even faster FCF growth, and then turn that FCF growth into even faster FCF per share growth. 📈 That is where three powerful forces come together: Margin expansion + Buybacks + Multiple contraction A company doesn't necessarily need explosive revenue growth to generate strong long-term shareholder returns. If margins keep expanding, cash flow can grow faster than revenue. If management keeps buying back shares, FCF per share can grow even faster. And if the valuation multiple doesn't expand — or even contracts — the underlying business can still deliver strong returns. 🔥 The companies that stand out The following 24 companies show the characteristics of this kind of compounding mo

$Apple(AAPL)$ has delivered a staggering 2,860% gain 📈, but its impressive track record does not mean the stock is without risk. 🔊 Pricing Power vs. Mega Client Apple controls an estimated 40–50% of the smartphone audio market, yet more than 85% of revenue comes from a single mega-client. That concentration creates a structural risk that investors cannot ignore, even with strong market share. 💰 Capital Efficiency Its asset-light, fabless model keeps capital requirements low while generating roughly 28% cash return on capital. Steady buybacks add another layer of shareholder support. 📊 Valuation Matters Our conservative two-year forecast looks at whether a 9%+ FCF yield provides enough margin of safety at current levels. 🔎 The key question is no lo

During 13F season, one of the most useful exercises is comparing the holdings of several high-quality growth funds to see where their portfolios overlap. $MasterCard(MA)$ and $Visa(V)$ sit at the top of the list, with all six funds holding both names. But the more interesting opportunities may come from the companies with less consensus, where fewer investors are paying attention. $Moody's(MCO)$ $Fair Isaac(FICO)$ $Alphabet(GOOGL)$ $Microsoft(MSFT)$ $Amazon.com(AMZN)$

There are three drives of share price appreciation: ● Multiple expansion - turning revenue growth into even higher FCF growth ● Buybacks - turning FCF growth into even higher FCF per share growth ● Multiple expansion - turning FCF per share growth into even higher share price growth Here are the $S&P 500(.SPX)$ and S&P 400 companies that are leading the charge. Take a look at $Cintas(CTAS)$ ● Margin expansion turned 9% revenue growth into 26% FCF growth ● Buybacks turned 26% FCF growth into 27% FCFps growth ● Multiple contraction meant that the 27% FCFps growth only produced 22% share price growth, suggesting that this cash generating machine is now undervalued. Other examples on the list are: - <

Terry Smith's Early Investments Fundsmith's change in strategy Terry Smith is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer of the UK-based fund $Fundsmith Equity ETF(ETFT)$ . Earlier this month, a letter published by Terry caused a subsequent flurry of commentary concerning a deviation in his investment style. Terry is a quality-focused investor. His strategy is to run a concentrated and low-turnover portfolio of quality companies trading at a reasonable valuation. In his most recent letter, he announced that he's going to make a slight tweak to this approach: We will take more account of momentum — both fundamental and share price — in our investment decisions. In particular, we will be much less willing to deploy the time-honoured technique of buyin

These companies have something unusual and rare in common. Their FCF has high and predictable growth (2nd and 3rd column), while their FCF yield remains fairly constant (4th column). In other words, their share price appreciation has been through FCF going up, not a re-rating leading to FCF yield contracting. $Republic(RSG)$ $Nordson(NDSN)$ $Allegion PLC(ALLE)$ $Travelers(TRV)$ $Medpace(MEDP)$ $Intercontinental Exchange(ICE)$ $Primerica(PRI)$ $Hartford Insuranc

When I look at $MSCI Inc(MSCI)$ I see three things: 1. A great company with strong financial metrics 2. An attractive valuation 3. A share price that hasn’t done anything for 5 years To me this could means one of two things: 1. The market is right and in the future profitability and business quality will deteriorate 2. The market is wrong and is underestimating future profitability and business quality If it’s the latter, a catalyst will be needed to convince the market that MSCI deserves a higher share price. I agree it’s subjective. But two objective points are (1) its FCF yield is now at a long term high. And (2) other companies of this quality are trading at lower FCF yields.

Passive investors love the $S&P 500(.SPX)$ . What they don’t realise is that the criteria for entering and exiting the index isn’t quite as passive as you would expect. The distinction between the S&P 500 large caps and the S&P 400 mid caps isn't always clear. Here I plot market cap vs revenue. It’s interesting to see that there are S&P 400 companies that have a larger cap and greater revenue than some S&P 500 companies.

The outperformance of semiconductor $VanEck Semiconductor ETF(SMH)$ companies isn’t a new thing. However, 2-3 years of outperformance are normally met with a mild correction afterwards. 2026 could be the fourth year in a row of outperformance, suggesting 2027 could see a correction - not that markets listen to historic trends! PS: Here’s my framework for determining whether a company is investable: 1. Financials - I look for consistently high returns on capital, high FCFps growth, margin expansion, and affordable debt. 2. Qualitative - Here I look for high market share, a mission critical product, a business not overly reliant on raw materials and expensive to maintain physical assets. 3. Valuation - I infer how much growth the market is pricing in

Over the last few years, $AutoZone(AZO)$ and $O'Reilly(ORLY)$ have always consistently appeared fairly high up on my screens. It’s not a sector I would personally invest in, but their levels of compounding have been impressive. Here’s my framework for determining whether a company is investable: 1. Financials - I look for consistently high returns on capital, high FCFps growth, margin expansion, and affordable debt. 2. Qualitative - Here I look for high market share, a mission critical product, a business not overly reliant on raw materials and expensive to maintain physical assets. 3. Valuation - I infer how much growth the market is pricing in, I then analyse whether that’s realistic or not. Most investo