Archive for the 'Constructing a Portfolio' Category

Recent Investment Company Institute statistics: what they show

Yesterday I wrote about the mutual fund cash position data that the Investment Company Institute (ICI), the mutual fund trade association, provides on its website.  Today’s post is about the general market situation that the overall ICI data portray.

A continuing (and mistaken, I think) quest for safety

The data show very clearly the effects of the market downturn, and the differing impacts of the financial crisis on stocks and bonds.  They demonstrate that fund holders are very focused (closing the barn door long after the livestock have escaped, in my opinion) on preserving the value of their capital rather than thinking about enhancing their wealth or achieving capital gains.

Stock funds

Investors began to take money out of stock funds in June 2008 and continued to do so every month–except for January 2009–through the bottom of the market in March of last year.  Redemptions were the largest in September-October 2008.  Aside from those two months, the heaviest withdrawals occurred at the absolute bottom in February-March 2009.  This, unfortunately, is the usual pattern for many individuals: in at the top, out at the bottom.

Five months of net inflows followed, almost replacing the dollar amount taken out in February-March.  Since then, the pattern has been one of mild redemptions, again excepting January, a month when many retirement plans make significant contributions.

domestic vs. foreign

Since the market turn, the pattern of money flows has been very different for domestic and foreign stock funds.  Foreign funds have had ten straight months of money inflow (February looks to be #11, but final data aren’t in as I write this).  US-only funds, on the other hand, had inflows through July but have seen pretty steady redemptions since then.

Bond funds

The bond fund story makes much better reading, for fund management companies at least.  Bond funds, too, had redemptions in 2008.  But they lasted only four months, from September through December.  Only one of them, October, saw large outflows.  And even during this month, outflows were far less than withdrawals from stocks.

Since then, bond funds, both taxable and municipal, have enjoyed large inflows every month.

The dynamics of stock fund flows

ICI also provides information on the gross movements of money in and out of stock fund, in addition to the net data I’ve written about above (similar data aren’t available for bond funds, though.).

This under-the-hood look shows that the stock fund situation is more complex than the net data suggest.

In December 2009, for example, stock funds had net outflows of $3.5 billion.  But this was comprised of $95.6 billion of inflows and $97.9 billion of outflows.  There were also $13 billion of exchanges into stock funds from other types of investments under the umbrella of the same mutual fund organization, and $14.1 billion of exchanges out.

My take on what’s happening

There aren’t enough data from the ICI to have a lot of confidence in any interpretation.  We know three things for certain, however:

–there’s a substantial shift by investors away from domestic-oriented stock funds toward foreign or global (US + foreign) funds,

–there’s also a shift going on away from mutual funds toward ETFs,  and

–there’s immense churn by investors of their stock mutual fund assets.  At the moment, stock fund gross redemptions are running at a yearly rate of about a quarter of the total assets.  That’s about twice the rate I would regard as normal.

Why is that?

I think we’re going through a period of major disillusionment with mutual funds and mutual fund companies.  This may be an event parallel to what happened after the crash of the stock market in October 1987, after which investors made a substantial shift in preference away from individual stocks and toward mutual funds.

What prompted this was that in the aftermath of the decline, NYSE “specialists” (that is, monopoly market makers) seemingly abandoned their obligation to promote market liquidity and started making much less attractive bid-asked spreads.  Individuals placing market orders would receive executions that could easily be 5% away—invariably in an unfavorable direction–from the last trade they saw before placing the order.  People blamed their brokers for these trading losses.  I think the resulting atmosphere of distrust triggered a decades-long shift away from investing in broker-recommended individual stocks–and toward mutual funds.  Of course, there were other reasons along the way–high fees, poor service, conflicts of interest–but I think the essential break came after Black Monday.

Today’s disillusionment is a bit more benign–not that mutual funds and mutual fund advisors aimed to do harm, but that they didn’t make money for their clients, or protect them from losses, like they were supposed to.  This realization is at least partly behind the high level of redemptions and the shift to ETFs.

I also think Baby Boomers are just starting to come to grips with the fact that they haven’t been paying much attention to their retirement planning.  The recent market decline has brought home to Boomers the fact, unlike our parents, we do not have the support of defined benefit retirement plans, so what our 401ks and IRAs earn really count for a lot.

We have not only taken on the risk of funding our own retirements, but are also responsible for how our retirement assets are invested.  Few of us know the first thing about what to do.  All we as a demographic have figured out so far is that we don’t want the status quo.  So we’re changing what we own.

That’s not much of a strategy.  The next step is to take responsibility for your own investment outcomes and start educating yourself about stocks and bonds.  In other words, I guess, read my blog.

2.  A more technical note:  I’ve been hired a couple of times to turn around mutual funds that have had substantial periods of underperformance.  One of the major things I’ve learned from these experiences is that when investors in a stock fund are deeply under water, they are so traumatized by the experience that they invariably redeem their shares.

Some do so quickly, to make use of the resulting tax loss, and reinvest in similar assets.  Most, however, will hold on doggedly until they return to breakeven.  Then they’re gone forever.  Yes, this latter behavior makes no economic or financial sense.  But it’s what people do.   And that’s what I suspect is also partly behind the churn in stock mutual fund purchases and sales—a 70% rise in stocks over the past twelve months has brought investors who bought in 2004 or 2005 back to breakeven and they’re cashing in their chips.  Where are they going?  if the aggregate numbers are a good guide, to bond funds–a move whose logic escapes me.

white and black knights: the dynamics of M&A

black knight, white knight

In retellings of the Arthur legends, many times the heroes wore light-colored armor and the villains black.  Sometimes, though, the black knight was a good guy in disguise or just someone who didn’t have a steady job at the moment.

The “white hat = hero, black hat = villain” convention was much more rigorously applied in the cowboy movies that dominated film and TV a generation or more ago.

The visual cues continue today.  But since people don’t wear hats as often as they used to, and because product placement has become more important as a revenue source, the metaphor has changed.  In the TV adventure show 24, for instance, the heroes use Apple laptops, the bad guys use generic PCs (with logos that could be either Dell or HP).

still used in mergers an acquisitions

In mergers and acquisitions, the terminology remains the tried and true.  A black knight is a company that makes an unsolicited, unfriendly (i.e., against the wishes of the target) bid for another company.  A white knight defends the target by making a higher bid, with the approval–and often the encouragement–of the target’s management.  Why does this make any difference? Continue reading ‘white and black knights: the dynamics of M&A’

I’ve just updated Current Market Tactics

Here’s the link–or you can just click the tab at the top of the page.

I’ve updated Keeping Score for January

Here’s the link–or you can just click the tab at the top of the page.

Trading: how valuable is it to do?

For professionals, very…

The short answer:  my experience is that competent professional trading supporting an equity portfolio manager can add one percentage point to annual returns.  Conversely, poor trading can subtract about the same amount.  Good trading, then, can take a third-quartile manager and put him in the second quartile; bad trading can do the opposite.

…for us, not so much

What about for you and me, though?

I think the key question for any individual investor is how much time is he willing to devote to investing.  A typical professional spends fifty hard–that is, not counting chatting in the coffee room with colleagues–at-the-desk working hours a week on his craft.  Even so, that’s not enough to keep pace with professional competition.  So the job of investing is usually split into three parts, one of which each professional in a firm will concentrate on.  The three are:  research, trading and portfolio management.

Realistically, we’re not going to work as hard as that, no matter what we tell ourselves.  So it’s essential for us to simplify and prioritize our activity so that we can do one or two things well, rather than do a half-baked job on several.

Committing our time to investing

As far as time commitment goes, I think the three parts break out as follows:

1.  portfolio management. Learning how to formulate a strategy takes the most time initially.  Once you actually create one, you’re thinking of it in odd moments most of the time, but your real work of testing, evaluating, trying to figure out what will come up next, is only done for short periods once or twice a month.  In terms of everyday effort, this most important part of managing your money takes the least time.

2.  securities analysis. Selecting the individual stocks, if any, for your portfolio requires a considerable initial effort to learn about he companies, their histories and their prospects.  Monitoring company developments and the stock’s price action takes daily attention if you want to do things right.

3.  trading. Trading can absorb your entire day, if you want it to.  After all, investment managers pay their traders hundreds of thousands of dollars yearly to do just that–to watch the markets, from overseas and pre-market activity to after-hours trading.    The question for us is whether, if we’re going to devote, say, 15 hours a week to our investments, becoming expert in this area is the most valuable use of our time.

(I probably should mention that I do have a  trading experience.  For about five years I ran a global fund where I was the manager and also did all the trading.  I won’t claim to be a really proficient trader, but I’m not that bad.)

Trading takes up a lot of time

An example:  one of my sons, a twenty-something, asked me recently to sell the (small amount of) PALM that he owned and put the proceeds into ATVI.  He had bought PALM, which I consider a really speculative stock (too much so for me), after a Bono-related investment vehicle had given the company an infusion of cash that would allow it to complete and launch the Pre. My son later became convinced that the Pre was going to be upstaged by the raft of Android phones now being released–which is why he wanted to sell.

Anyway, my son gave me a limit of $12 for PALM and none for ATVI.  I placed two limit orders online, one for PALM at $12 and another for ATVI about 2% below the previous close.  I thought the market was going sideways and both stocks were volatile enough intraday that the limits would likely hit.  I then did other things.

On day one, nothing happened.  On day two, prior to the open an analyst released a buy recommendation on PALM that pushed the stock up to $12.27 in early trade.  The stock faded as the day went on and closed at about $11.65.  Of course, I had sold at $12.  on day three, ATVI fell about $.05 below my limit intraday, before closing slightly above it.

Could I have done better?  Yes.  Speaking strictly about trading PALM, I could have spent all of day one and the first couple of hours of day two watching the market.  When I saw the new buy report on day two, I hopefully would have let the stock run and sold at, maybe, $12.20.

For us, it’s too much

But that would have meant spending eight or nine hours monitoring trading in PALM to get another 2%.  As one of my first bosses told me when I was talking about making a trade that might get me 10%–our job is to look for the 30%s and the 50%;  105 is too little to waste time and energy on.

To that, I’d add that if we’re going to allocate ten hours a week to investing, it’s better to spend that time trying to find the next AAPL rather than blowing a week’s worth of time looking for a 2% that may or may not be there for the taking.

Why do all the discount broker ads talk about trading, then?

Three reasons:

1.  The obvious one.  Trading is the service a discount broker offers.  The more you trade, the more money the broker makes from your account.  (See my posts on how your broker gets paid.)  The broker will also benefit if your account grows, but he will gain more from high turnover in an underperforming portfolio than from a low turnover one that outperforms.

2.  Trading tools are easy to provide.  You can even get them for free from Yahoo or Google.

3.  Offering trading advice is much simpler than offering investment advice.  Giving investment advice to a broad range of customers isn’t cheap or easy.  The broker opens himself to the risk of litigation if the investment advice proves unsound or if it is unsuitable for the economic circumstances of a given client.  So the discount broker has to have a research staff (which will end up costing the firm a lot of money) and representatives who will do risk tolerance and other suitability analysis.  Suddenly, the firm that does this not a discount broker any more.  It’s an old-fashioned “full service” broker.

Besides, discount brokers already offer back office services to independent financial planners.  So they would be competing against their own customers.

Next Page »


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Subscribe to my RSS feed–Click on line 3

SiteMeter

practicalinvest