National Instruments

• The Bottom Line: National Instruments was a high-quality “picks and shovels” engineering company with a formidable economic moat, whose 2023 acquisition by Emerson serves as a masterclass in the difference between fleeting market price and durable intrinsic value.
• Key Takeaways:
• What it is: A leading creator of software and hardware used by engineers and scientists to build automated test, measurement, and control systems.
• Why it matters: It is a textbook example of a business protected by a deep economic_moat built on powerful switching_costs, making its story essential for understanding long-term competitive advantages.
• How to use it: By studying the history of National Instruments (NI) and its eventual acquisition, investors can learn how to identify businesses with sticky customer relationships and analyze how a company's true worth can be unlocked.

Imagine you're an engineer at a top automaker, designing the next generation of electric vehicles. Before a single car is sold, you need to test every single component relentlessly: the battery's charge cycle, the motor's durability, the response time of the brakes, the software controlling the infotainment system. You need to run millions of simulations and measurements, and they all need to be precise, automated, and reliable. Do you build all these complex testing tools from scratch? No. For decades, you would have called a company like National Instruments. In simple terms, National Instruments (often called NI) didn't build the final product; they built the essential tools that allowed other smart people to build and test their own amazing products. They were the ultimate “picks and shovels” provider for the world's research and development labs. Their business stood on two core pillars:

• The Brain (Software): Their flagship product was LabVIEW, a graphical programming language. Instead of writing lines of code, engineers could connect virtual blocks and icons on a screen to design a test. It was intuitive for visual thinkers and became the industry standard for many applications.
• The Senses and Muscles (Hardware): NI created a vast range of modular hardware—cards, sensors, and chassis—that could be plugged together like high-tech Lego bricks. These modules could measure temperature, voltage, sound, or pressure, and then control motors, valves, and other physical systems.

The magic was how these two pillars worked together. An engineer could use LabVIEW (the brain) to control NI's hardware (the senses and muscles) to create a completely customized testing system for anything from a new smartphone chip to a rocket engine. This created a powerful ecosystem. Once a company standardized its labs on NI's platform and its engineers spent years mastering LabVIEW, the cost and hassle of switching to a competitor were enormous. In 2023, after nearly 50 years as an independent public company, National Instruments was acquired by the industrial giant Emerson Electric for $8.2 billion, marking the end of an era but providing a powerful final lesson for investors.

“It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.” - Warren Buffett
¹⁾

To a value investor, the story of National Instruments isn't just about cool technology; it's a profound illustration of several core investment principles. It's not the “what” they did that is most important, but “why” their business was so durable and profitable for so long. 1. The Economic Moat of High Switching Costs: This is the single most important lesson from NI. A value investor, following the teachings of benjamin_graham and Warren Buffett, hunts for businesses with a durable competitive advantage, an economic_moat that protects them from competitors. NI's moat was a textbook example of high switching costs.

• Financial Cost: Ripping out all of NI's hardware and replacing it would cost millions.
• Training Cost: Engineers and technicians spent entire careers mastering LabVIEW. Their knowledge was a valuable corporate asset. Switching would mean retraining a whole workforce.
• Workflow Disruption: Entire product development and manufacturing quality control processes were built around NI's systems. Changing platforms would mean redesigning these critical workflows, introducing risk and massive delays.

This powerful moat meant NI could enjoy predictable revenue streams, maintain strong pricing power, and generate high profit margins year after year. 2. The Disconnect Between Price and Value: The stock market is often a popularity contest in the short term, but a weighing machine in the long term. Even great companies like NI go through periods where the market is pessimistic, perhaps due to a temporary slowdown in a key industry or a broader economic downturn. During these times, its stock price might fall, even if the underlying long-term value of the business and its moat remain intact. The Emerson acquisition is the ultimate proof of this. Emerson, a sophisticated industrial buyer, looked past any short-term noise and saw the immense long-term value in NI's business, ultimately paying a price of $60 per share—a significant premium over where the stock had been trading. This event forced the market “price” to finally catch up with the “intrinsic value”. 3. The Importance of Patience and a Long-Term View: A value investor who analyzed NI correctly would have seen the moat and the steady cash flow generation. They would have understood that its business was cyclical—tied to R&D budgets of other companies—and would have used a period of market pessimism to acquire shares with a margin_of_safety. The Emerson acquisition was the catalyst that rewarded this long-term, business-focused perspective. It's a reminder that value is often realized not in a matter of weeks or months, but over a period of years.

Let's step into the shoes of a value investor in, say, 2021 or 2022, before the acquisition talk heated up. How would they have approached analyzing National Instruments as a potential investment? They would have followed a systematic process, focusing on business fundamentals, not stock charts.

The first step is always qualitative. Before looking at a single number, the investor must be able to answer simple questions:

• How does this company make money? They sell an integrated platform of software and hardware for automated testing.
• What prevents a competitor from stealing its customers? The investor would identify the extremely high switching costs associated with the LabVIEW ecosystem as the primary defense. They would read industry reports, talk to engineers if possible, and confirm just how deeply embedded NI's products are in their customers' operations.
• Is this business within my circle_of_competence? The investor must decide if they can understand the technological risks and the needs of NI's customer base. If the business is too complex, they would pass, no matter how good it seems.

With a solid understanding of the business, the investor would turn to the numbers to verify the story of the moat. They wouldn't be looking for yesterday's stock performance, but for a decade-long track record of financial strength.

• Gross Margins: A strong moat often leads to pricing power, which shows up in high gross margins. NI consistently sported gross margins above 70%. This is a huge green flag, indicating that customers were willing to pay a premium for their products and that the company wasn't just competing on price.
• Return on Invested Capital (ROIC): This key metric shows how efficiently a company is using its money to generate profits. A consistently high ROIC (ideally above 15%) is often the clearest quantitative sign of a great business with a strong moat.
• Research & Development (R&D) Spending: For a tech company, R&D is not just an expense; it's a lifeblood. The investor would check to see if NI was consistently reinvesting a healthy percentage of its revenue back into R&D to maintain its technological lead. Sporadic or declining R&D could be a red flag.
• Free Cash Flow: Is the business a cash-generating machine? The investor would focus on free_cash_flow because it represents the actual cash profits an owner could, in theory, take out of the business. This is the ultimate source of intrinsic_value.

This is the heart of the value investing process. The investor isn't trying to guess where the stock price will go next week. They are trying to calculate what the entire business is worth today.

• Valuation: A common method would be a discounted_cash_flow (DCF) analysis. The investor would project NI's future free cash flows for the next 10 years and then “discount” them back to the present to arrive at a per-share estimate of intrinsic value. This is not about getting a perfect number, but a reasonable range. Let's say their analysis suggested NI was worth approximately $55 per share.
• Margin of Safety: This is the investor's seatbelt. Even with a great company, the future is uncertain. To protect against errors in judgment or bad luck, the value investor demands a discount. If they calculated the value at $55, they would not buy at $54. They might set a target purchase price of $40 or less, providing a 27% margin of safety ($15 discount / $55 value).

Let's bring this to life with a simplified scenario. Imagine an investor named Anna. In late 2022, the global economy is showing signs of weakness. Tech stocks have been hit hard, and fears of a recession are making companies cautious about their spending on new equipment. National Instruments' stock, trading under the ticker NATI, has drifted down to $40 per share. Many market commentators are pessimistic, focusing on the potential for a short-term dip in orders. But Anna is a value investor. She has done the four steps of analysis described above.

1. She sees the incredibly sticky LabVIEW ecosystem and the powerful moat.
2. She looks at the 10-year financial history and sees a resilient, high-margin, cash-generative business.
3. She assesses management and their consistent reinvestment in R&D.
4. Her own DCF analysis leads her to believe the business has a conservative intrinsic value of around $55 per share.

Buying at $40 gives her a significant margin of safety. She knows the coming year might be tough, but she believes that over the next 5-10 years, the company's earning power is intact. She buys the stock. Fast forward a few months to early 2023. Emerson Electric, a massive and savvy industrial conglomerate, has been watching NI for years. They see the same thing Anna does: a wonderful business with an unassailable position in a niche market. They recognize that owning NI would be a huge strategic advantage for their own automation business. Emerson makes an offer. After some back and forth, they agree to acquire 100% of National Instruments for $60 per share in cash. The deal closes later in the year. Anna's investment at $40 per share is now worth $60, a 50% return in less than a year. The Lesson: Anna didn't have a crystal ball. She didn't predict the acquisition. Instead, she focused on one thing: buying a wonderful business at a significant discount to its intrinsic value. The acquisition was simply a catalyst that forced the market price to rapidly close the gap with the underlying business value she had already identified. This is the value investing process in action.

Even a wonderful company has its strengths and weaknesses that an investor must weigh. For National Instruments, these were clear.

• Extreme Switching Costs: As detailed, the LabVIEW software and hardware ecosystem created a “vendor lock-in” that was the envy of the industrial world. This was the primary source of its long-term profitability.
• Strong Brand & Reputation: For decades, the “NI” brand was synonymous with quality, reliability, and precision in the engineering community. This reputation allowed them to command premium prices and win contracts where failure was not an option (e.g., aerospace and defense).
• Diversified Customer Base: NI served a huge range of industries: automotive, telecommunications, semiconductors, academia, energy, etc. This diversification meant that a downturn in one sector (like automotive) could be offset by growth in another (like 5G development), making its revenues more resilient than those of a single-industry supplier.

• Economic Cyclicality: NI's sales were directly tied to the capital expenditure and R&D budgets of its customers. During economic recessions, these budgets are often the first to be cut, leading to slowdowns in NI's growth. An investor had to be prepared to weather these inevitable downcycles.
• Technological Disruption: While LabVIEW has been dominant, technology is never static. The biggest long-term risk was always that a competitor could develop a new, open-source, or fundamentally cheaper/easier programming paradigm for test and measurement that could slowly erode LabVIEW's dominance.
• Complexity and the “Circle of Competence”: NI's business was deeply technical. For an investor without an engineering background, it could be difficult to truly understand the nuances of their products and the competitive landscape. This placed it outside the circle_of_competence for many, making it a riskier proposition if not thoroughly researched.

• economic_moat
• switching_costs
• intrinsic_value
• margin_of_safety
• circle_of_competence
• return_on_invested_capital
• discounted_cash_flow