Category Archives: asset allocation

Passive Investing: The Choice of More Investors

Posted on November 5, 2009 | Leave a comment

Passive generally refers to investing in index mutual funds or exchange traded funds rather than active managed mutual funds.  The rivalry between the approaches has raged for years, but evidence is mounting for passive funds.  And investors are listening.

In 1999, $12 billion of exchange traded funds (ETFs) were issued.  Net issuance of ETF shares rose to $177 billion in 2008.  From year end 1998 through 2008 ETFs issued $661 billion in new shares.   The rise in demand came from both institutional and individual investors, according to the Investment Company Fact Book. (www.ici.org) 

Why the passive approach?

Passive investment vehicles include index mutual funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs).  Both track the performance of a basket of securities included in an index.

For instance, the Russell 3000 Index measures the performance of the broad U.S. equity market.  The Ishares Russell 3000 Fund (IWV) is an exchange traded fund that holds a representative sampling of the securities in the Russell 3000 index.  The sample has an investment profile similar to the index, and may or may not include all of the securities that are included in the index.

As of 10/31/2009 the Russell 3000 index included 2,968 securities.  The Russell 3000 Fund (IWV) held 2,964 of the securities included in the Russell 3000 index. (source:Morningstar)

An index does not invest in the securities, it simply tracks their performance.  Therefore there are no fees included in the index returns. 

Funds, however, invest in the securities and the performance is reduced by transaction costs and other ongoing costs, such as management fees and other fund expenses. The net annual expenses, ongoing costs, for the Russell 3000 Fund are .20% (1/5 of 1%), according to the 2009 annual report.

A fundamental reason investors choose a passive approach is because they are aware that the majority of actively managed mutual funds are not able to out perform their benchmark index over an extended period of time.  The high expenses associated with active management such as transaction and ongoing costs,  reduces the fund’s performance by an average of about 1.5% per year, according to http://www.icifactbook.org/fb_sec5.html

That means if the index posts an 8% return, the average active managed fund would have to achieve a 9.5% return in order to net 8% after costs. If the fund’s returns are less than 9.5%,  it under performs the index. 

Relatively efficient pricing of stocks and bonds along with costs associated with active management makes beating the index a daunting task.  According to a Standard and Poors study, Indices Versus Active Funds Scorecard, Year End 2008, less than 50% of active managers beat their indices over a 5-year period.

An analysis of two – five-year periods of performance; 2004 to 2008 and 1999 to 2003 revealed the following for…

…Large-Cap Active Managed Funds: 72% under performed their S&P 500 index in 2003 to 2008 period, 53 % under performed in 1999 to 2003. 

…Mid-Cap Active Managed Funds: 79% under performed the S&P MidCap 400 benchmark in 2004 to 2008 period, and 91% under performed in 1999 to 2003.

…Small-Cap Active Managed Funds: 86% under performed the S&P SmallCap 600 benchmark in the 2004 to 2008 period, 69% under performed in 1999 to 2003.

According to the study, one consistent investment myth has been that active managers have an advantage in bear markets due to the ability to move quickly into cash or defensive securities.  The study analyzed the performance of active managers during the past two bear markets, 2008 and 2000-2002.   The report illustrated over 50% of the active Large-Cap funds under performed their benchmark, over 70% of the Mid-Cap and Small-Cap funds under performed their respective indices. 

The under performance of active managed international equities and bond funds were similar to U.S.  stock funds. 

To view this study you may have to copy and paste this url  http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/pdf/index/SPIVA_Rerpot_Year-End_2008 

In conclusion

Exchange Traded Funds and Index Funds offer low cost ownership of both stocks and bonds.  The high cost of active management is one stumbling block that is difficult to overcome for most active managed funds.  Even in bear markets, the majority of active managers fail to beat their benchmark index.

Golden Hills Financial Group is an independent investment advisory firm utilizing exchange traded funds and index funds in portfolio construction.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in asset allocation, fees, investment fees, investments

How to Hang Tough in a Tough Market

Posted on October 9, 2008 | 4 Comments

These are tough times to be an investor. The stock market’s long-term return of 11-13% fades in relevance as the value of your portfolio declines. Investors begin to doubt their decision to invest in this wild, volatile, crazy, anxiety-creating market. I’m not writing this article to say you shouldn’t feel that way. I’m writing to suggest you grasp the lessons an ugly market teaches us, and evaluate whether you have the correct plan for your portfolio.

Striking the Right Balance

The most important decision an investor makes is the allocation of their money between stocks, bonds, and cash. Some research has shown that 90% of your long-term return comes from this asset allocation decision. Many, maybe most, people jump right into buying stocks and mutual funds before they have crafted their stock/bond/cash strategy. They end up with too much in the stock market, making them susceptible to larger losses than they can tolerate.

The stock market over the long term has provided higher returns than bonds because investors demand a premium for accepting the higher risk in stocks.  Why do stocks pose more risk to investors? The brief answer is when you buy shares of a company, you become part-owner in the firm. There are no guarantees of dividends or that you will ever get your money back. If you buy a bond issued by the government or a corporation, you become a creditor. You have lent them money. They in turn will pay you interest over the life of the bond. Upon maturity you get your principal back. Regular payments and your money back. Not much risk in that. Oh, if a company you lent money to goes broke, you get paid before stockholders get a dime. Common stockholders get paid if there’s any money left after bond holders and preferred stock holders are satisfied.  It’s not unusual in bankruptcy cases for common stockholders to receive $0.   

Points to consider.

There are three major considerations when deciding on how much to invest in stocks. How comfortable you are with market ups and downs, called risk tolerance, how long your money needs to last, called time horizon, and the size of your financial base relative to your financial needs.

Risk tolerance. Investors familiar with the stock market have a better idea of how they’ll react if the market drops. If you have been in the market the past few weeks, you may have decided you want less risk than you have. This market is putting every investor through a risk tolerance test. But if you aren’t sure how much risk you will be comfortable with, you can take a smaller bite of the stock market than would be recommended based on your time horizon. You can always add to that position as you learn through experience.

Time horizon. Too often individuals consider the years up to retirement as their time horizon. Not so. You could be in retirement for 15-30 years. Let’s say you are 45 years old with plans to retire at age 65. You are healthy and expect to live to be 90. Your time horizon is 45 years. The goal is to accumulate enough funds by retirement, the pre-retirement years, that will last throughout retirement, the retirement years. Generally, it is recommended that about five years before retirement the investment in stocks is reduced and bonds and cash are increased. But your money needs to last a long time, and it’s the stock portion of the portfolio that provides growth.

Financial base. The larger the difference between your portfolio size now and where you want it to be at retirement, the larger the allocation to stocks. Stocks are the growth engine of a portfolio. Bonds and cash protect the downside risk and provide income.

Let’s say Madeline wants to have $750,000 in her 401k when she retires in 20 years. She has $50,000 today with plans to add $6,000 per year. To achieve her goal, Madeline needs to earn 11% annually. Stock market returns over the long term have averaged 12%. Therefore, Madeline would need to have a 90 – 100% allocation to stocks to achieve a 11% return.

If Madeline had $100,000 in her 401k, instead of $50,000, she could reduce her allocation to stocks because she only needs an 8% annual return to achieve her goal of $750,000.

Sample Portfolios

Here are some examples of portfolio allocations during different stages of life according to Richard A. Ferri, author of the book All About Asset Allocation.

Mid-life Allocation Range

  Aggressive Moderate Conservative
Equity + REIT  70% 55% 40%
Fixed Income 30% 45% 60%
Cash    0% 0% 0%

 Pre-retiree and Active Retiree Allocation Range

  Aggressive Moderate Conservative
Equity + REIT  60% 50% 35%
Fixed Income 38% 48% 63%
Cash    2% 2% 2%

REIT = Real Estate Investment Trust
Fixed Income = Bonds

Each investor has an allocation that is unique to his or her situation.  The above examples may or may not be appropriate for you. 

A risk of NOT investing a portion of your portfolio in the stock market is that you will outlive your money.

A risk of investing TOO MUCH in the stock market is you will not have time to recover large losses. In addition, fear may cause you to sell in a panic when stocks are at their lowest prices.

Now is the time for rational decisions. “This time is different” is the phrase that pops up each time the stock market takes a precipitous fall. It may or may not be true this time. What we do know is what has occurred in the past. History demonstrates that markets recover and eventually move up.

An exodus to cash will leave you with the daunting decision of when to re-enter the market.  Investors who run to the side-lines often wait too long to buy back in, missing some of the best days’ in the stock market. This is one of the reasons the average investor significantly underperforms the S&P 500. The other reason is that investors chase performance, buying last years’ winners. For most people the best action is no action for now.  You may want to consider making adjustments to your portfolio later, after the market had recovered.

→ 4 Comments

Posted in asset allocation, investments, life changing events, retirement, risk tolerance

Three Reasons to Include Bonds In Your Retirement Portfolio

Posted on June 30, 2008 | Leave a comment

1) Bonds reduce portfolio risk by reducing volatility.

Creating a portfolio is like putting the pieces of a puzzle together.  Portfolios are built by assembling pieces of stocks, bonds, and cash, with possible additions of real estate, commodities, & alternative investments.  Modern portfolio theory taught us that by combining securities that don’t follow each other, when one leans left the other right, we are likely to achieve a more stable return.  Bonds tend not to move in tandem with stocks.  In finance terms, they have a low correlation to stocks.  So if stocks drop 15%, bonds may decline but less than 15% or they may even rise.  Bonds are the pieces that reduce short-term, gut wrenching swings in the portfolio’s value. 

A recent example.  From October, 2007 to March, 2008, the S&P 500 had lost around 16%.  The Lehman Aggregate Bond Fund, used to represent the broad U.S. bond market, was up about 4%. A portfolio split 50/50 between the S&P 500 & the Lehman Bond Fund, would have returned -6%.  

2) Bonds protect the downside.

While similar to #1, protecting the portfolio’s value is of special importance to retirees who are withdrawing funds regularly to supplement their income.  When cash is withdrawn from a 100% stock portfolio during down markets, the distribution takes a larger piece of the portfolio than if the markets were up, and that piece is gone so it can’t come back when the markets climb.  

For simplicity let’s consider a portfolio made up 2,000 shares of an exchange traded fund, IWV, that represents the U.S. stock market.  The price per share has plummeted to $78.  Each month the retiree withdraws $1,000 for living expenses.  13 shares are sold at $78 to provide this month’s withdrawal.  Next month IWV has risen to $95 per share.  Only 11 shares have to be liquidated in order to withdraw $1,000.  The two additional shares that had to be sold at $78 are no longer in the portfolio and able to come back with the market.

In a declining stock market, cash and bonds can provide the income needed.  When the stock market comes back, (yes it will rise again) the stock portfolio will not have been depleted so will take full advantage of the rising prices.

3) Bonds provide income.

Bonds pay interest, which makes up most of their return.  The other portion of the return comes from the change in the price.  Individual bonds typically make interest payments every 6 months.  Bond funds generally distribute interest monthly.  The interest payments provide stability to a portfolio, and dependable cash distributions to investors.  When the markets are performing poorly, during a bear market, interest payments are a stable source of income.

If you rely on distributions from your investments to supplement income.  If you do not have other income streams to use when the stock market is declining.  If your financial position is such that you are concerned you may outlive your money.  Then investing a portion of your portfolio in bonds is wise.

The portion you allocate to bonds could vary from 15% for the aggressive investor with a time horizon over 20 years, to 85% for an investor more concerned with preserving their portfolio and has a life expectancy less than 5 years.

 

 

 

→ Leave a comment

Posted in asset allocation, bonds, investments, retirement

Markets Come Back in April: How Did You Do?

Posted on May 7, 2008 | Leave a comment

The April comeback after a 1st quarter retreat brought some relief to investors.  Let’s take a look at index returns in the month of April and where the returns are year-to-date as of April 30, 2008.  Remember, Index returns are for illustrative purposes only. Index performance returns do not reflect any management fees, transaction costs or expenses. Indexes are unmanaged and one cannot invest directly in an index. We rely on index returns as a benchmark to compare our portfolio’s returns. However, even if you bought each security in the index, reinvested all the dividends, and held them the exact length of time as the index return period, you would not be able to achieve those returns because you have to pay transaction costs each time you buy and sell a security.  The index reflects only the dividends and price changes of the securities it holds.

                                                              April 2008                YTD 4/30/2008

U.S. large stocks                                       5.1%                             -4.9% 

U.S. small & mid-sized stocks                 4.2%                              -6.1%

Foreign developed country stocks           5.4%                              -4.0%

Foreign emerging country stocks             8.1%                             -3.8%

U.S. broad bonds                                      -.2%                               2.0%

U.S. municipal bonds                                1.5%                                .3%

We’ll look at the broad equity (stock) and fixed income (bond) markets. 

The U.S. Stock Market:  The Russell 3000 Index represents approximately 99% of the U.S. stock market.  The largest 1,000 stocks make up the Russell 1000 Index.  The next 2,000 stocks make up the Russell 2000 Index.

The Russell 1000 Index, large U.S. companies, achieved a positive total return (dividends plus price change) of 5.1% in April.  That wasn’t enough to erase the losses in the 1st quarter.  Year-to-date April 30 returns still posted a negative 4.9%.     

The Russell 2000 Index, small & mid-sized U.S. companies, posted a return of 4.2% in April with a negative 6.1% return year-to-date.

Foreign stock markets did better than their U.S. counterparts.  The MSCI EAFE Index, representing developed countries, returned 5.4% in April with a negative YTD return of 4.0%.  Countries characterized as emerging economies posted 8.1% return in April but still lost 3.8% YTD.

If you had an allocation to bonds in your portfolio they helped buffer the losses experienced in the U.S. and Foreign stock markets in the 1st quarter.  

Bonds

The Lehman Aggregate Bond Index represents the U.S. investment grade bond market.  It includes U.S. government bonds, corporate bonds, mortgage pass-through securities, and asset-backed securities.  Returns for April were -.2%, achieving a 1.95% return YTD. 

For investors in a higher tax bracket who may have municipal bonds in their portfolio the S&P National Municipal Bond Index posted April returns of 1.5% and YTD returns of .3%. 

2008 has been a challenge to investors.  For those with an allocation between stocks, bonds, and cash that is suited to their risk tolerance and goals, it has been less stressful.  If you have found yourself waking up during the night with your heart palpitating wishing it was morning so you could see how the markets are doing, I suggest you revisit your asset allocation because you could be too heavily invested in stocks. 

If you want me to talk about how to determine an asset allocation that is right for you in a future blog, let me know.  Or, if there is another topic of interest, send a comment to me.

Good investing!

 

 

→ Leave a comment

Posted in asset allocation, investments, risk tolerance

Tagged , ,

Investment Management Coach Blog Launch

Posted on March 28, 2008 | 4 Comments

Hi, I’m Rita Janaky, an investment management coach located in Colorado Springs, Colorado. I work with intelligent women who want to take control of their financial futures. They are typically women who either earned it, inherited it or received it through divorce, and found themselves suddenly facing important investment decisions. I am not a financial planner – I am an investment manager.  And, I consult with people who are looking to buy a business or sell their current business. 

Why do I do this work? Because I enjoy helping women remove stress from their lives by showing them how to make financial decisions that are aligned with their values or beliefs and ultimately helps them meet their goals. Basically, I want them to feel comfortable with the information so they can make more informed choices.

I have been an advisor since 2001.  In February 2004, I started Golden Hills Financial Group, LLC, a Colorado registered investment advisory firm.  This is an independent fee-only advisory firm. 

Portfolios we create for clients can be moved without disrupting the portfolio because the securities we buy are not proprietary.  For instance, if an advisor represents a firm whose securities are sold only through their advisor network, when a client becomes dissatisfied or heirs want to use a different advisor, the assets must either be sold, creating potentially large cap gains tax liabilities or an advisor within that same network must be utilized.    If our clients or their heirs elect to move, their entire portfolio can be transferred to another advisor with no penalty.

We believe that the markets are generally quite efficient.  That means we rely on exchange-traded funds, index funds, and low cost mutual funds when building client portfolios.  These are low-cost, tax efficient securities that keep more of our clients money working for them.

I am a Licensed International Financial Analyst, hold an M.B.A. and a B.S. in Business Administration, emphasizing finance with a minor in economics.  I have taught finance and investments at 2 universities, for the American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) Colorado Chapters, as well as public seminars.  

The goal of this blog is to educate.    In particular, to educate women who want to become better investment managers or those women who want to learn more about ’how to sell their business’ or ‘how to buy a new business’.

→ 4 Comments

Posted in asset allocation, buying a business, fees, investments, life changing events, mergers and acquisitions, risk tolerance, selling a business

Tagged , , , ,