It can't be coincidence that more than half the winning companies in this year's top 20 are from just two areas of the economy: mining and resources, and retail and consumer.
To see seven winning companies that are miners or closely linked to the resources sector (Mvelaphanda Resources, Impala Platinum, Iscor, Gold Fields, Sasol, Northam Platinum and BHP Billiton) will surprise some who remember the strident and sustained complaints that came from this sector about the strength of the rand. However, these companies were still enjoying some momentum in their results from 2002's much weaker rand, along with a higher gold price and a sustained world boom in commodities.
Two of those companies - Gold Fields and BHP Billiton - are in effect global players and are much less vulnerable to currency fluctuations. Implats, on the other hand, did suffer from the rand, but it also turned in a much better operational performance than the world's biggest producer, Anglo Platinum, which fell off the list from fifth last year. Harmony, with much more exposure to a stronger rand than the other big miners (and having proved less adept in operations outside SA), dropped off the list from seventh last year.
Retail-sector companies or those linked with consumer spending - Pick 'n Pay, Massmart, Italtile, Edcon, MTN - seem to have benefited from lower interest rates and greater credit extension, and therefore more disposable spending.
But the full effects of the rate cuts in 2003 are not reflected in the calculations that produced this year's elite. So we can expect an even better performance from these companies next time, though all of them are in competitive markets.
Last year the present format of Top Companies was adopted and only seven companies from 2003 are in the top 20 list again this time (see box). These are operations that are capable of delivering growth and returns regardless of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune . Rather than complain about the currency, or the policy environment, or interest rates, they are focused but flexible. They build in unpredictability and therefore are generally able to take it in their stride.
Of the newcomers to the list, Mvela's entry is obviously the most spectacular, from outside to top spot - though we did note last year that Mvela would soon be a winner. Speculation now centres on what kind of value Mvela can add to the diverse businesses it is involved in.
Some of the new entrants may find it difficult to stay on the list. In a sector such as construction, where it's often a case of feast or famine, a company like Murray & Roberts is still waiting for the much-heralded spending on infrastructure. But whereas construction has languished, the building materials sector has flourished on lower interest rates and a residential property boom, so we can expect a quality operation such as Italtile to improve its position.
When so many sectors are flourishing, that provokes the question of what the effect will be on the financial services sector. Standard Bank has now moved onto the list (last year there were no banks in the top 20), having made gains in market share and having consolidated an already rock-solid corporate reputation.
It seems likely that companies dependent on consumer spending will do even better next time - to be joined, perhaps, more by those exposed to property than resources.
What is striking about the list is how few of the top 20 have licences to print money. These are companies honed by competition in impatient markets. If they are not potential hostages to various factors beyond their control - commodity prices, interest rate shifts, sudden changes in the regulatory environment - then they have to fight fiercely for dominance in a competitive sector.
One conclusion from this year's ratings is that it's no longer good enough to do well: it's how well you do in relation to your peers that really counts.
