How many of us here think BRK is somewhat undervalued at current levels? I was thinking it’s not cheap at these levels, and I recently sold a bit for living expenses, but I’m often wrong!

I think it comes down to a firm distinction between price and value.

It seems the current valuation level is a fair bit above the average in the last 15 years. Consequently, if valuation multiples hover around the same range in the next few years, the short term outlook for the price is not that great. Emphasis on "if" and "short term", but I don't see any reason to have a central expectation of a positive real price return in the next year.

But I think the actual fair value is a fair bit above the average observed market value. It's entirely possible for the stock to be trading at a price that is both above average valuation but below actual fair value.

To me, fair value for any financial asset is what will get me Siegel's constant: around inflation plus 6.5%/year without relying on an exit point at an above-average valuation level.
Berkshire has mostly returned a fair bit more than that without getting more expensive, so it has mostly been underpriced. By extension, the *average* price is a lot less than the *fair* price.

Jim