Just read through the new CEO's shareholder letter and something caught my attention. Greg Abel laid out four companies he sees as long-term core holdings for Berkshire's massive portfolio: Apple, American Express, Coca-Cola, and Moody's. Pretty solid lineup, right? But here's where it gets interesting—he conspicuously left out two of Berkshire's current top-five positions. That's a pretty loud signal.

Let me break down what he actually said first. Abel made it clear these four positions will "compound over decades" with "limited activity" unless something fundamental changes. That's basically the Berkshire playbook in a nutshell—buy great businesses and let them work for you. Makes sense on the surface.

But the omissions are what really tell the story. Bank of America sits at 8.1% of the portfolio, making it the fourth-largest holding. Yet Abel didn't mention it as core. That's worth paying attention to. Berkshire loaded up on BAC during the pandemic while ditching other bank stocks, but they've actually cut the position in half over the past few years. Back in 2011, Berkshire injected $5 billion into Bank of America and got preferred stock plus warrants. Solid investment at the time. The problem? The banking sector has been underperforming since the financial crisis. If Berkshire's hoarding cash and sitting on the sidelines like everyone thinks, that probably means they're bracing for a downturn. Banks tend to be first in the crosshairs when that happens. BAC is trading around 175% of tangible book value—higher end of its range. The fact that Abel didn't name it as core and Berkshire's been trimming? Yeah, it's probably on the chopping block.

Then there's Chevron at 6.5% of the portfolio. This one surprised me more, especially considering Abel actually ran Berkshire Hathaway Energy. You'd think energy would be a natural core holding for him. Berkshire loaded up on U.S. energy assets in recent years, and they've been buying Chevron consistently since mid-2023. The company's doing a lot right—solid balance sheet, net debt-to-cash flow at 1x, $12 billion in stock buybacks last year, and a trailing dividend yield around 3.8%. The Hess acquisition gives them an elite upstream portfolio. Plus, Chevron's positioned perfectly to benefit from Venezuela geopolitics given their existing infrastructure there.

Here's my take: I think Chevron's a different story than Bank of America. Sure, Abel didn't call it out as core, but that might just be about being selective with language rather than a red flag. The company's fundamentals are solid, the dividend's strong, and it hedges against Middle East tensions. Bank of America though? That feels more like it's genuinely on thin ice.

The new CEO's letter basically drew a line in the sand about what Berkshire sees as truly long-term wealth creators versus what might be tactical holdings or eventual exits. Not naming Bank of America is pretty telling.