“growth” portfolios describe their holdings as companies with “above-average growth potential” or “favorable prospects for earnings growth.”
A company with an ordinary record cannot, without confusing the term, be called a growth company or a “growth stock” merely because its proponent expects it to do better than the average in the future. It is just a “promising company.” Graham is making a subtle but important point: If the definition of a growth stock is a company that will thrive in the future, then that’s not a definition at all, but wishful thinking. It’s like calling a sports team “the champions” before the season is over. This wishful thinking persists today; among mutual funds, “growth” portfolios describe their holdings as companies with “above-average growth potential” or “favorable prospects for earnings growth.” A better definition might be companies whose net earnings per share have increased by an annual average of at least 15% for at least five years running.(Meeting this definition in the past does not ensure that a company will meet it in the future.)
―The Intelligent Investor, Chapter 7, footnotes
最低5年間15%成長する「見込み」があること、がグロース株の定義。この定義がファンド内で定番になっているということは、これを満たさない成長株は上がらない。