Posts tagged ‘long term’

Re-Questioning the Death of Buy & Hold Investing

Article originally posted September 17, 2010: At the time this original article was written, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was hovering around 11,500. Last week, the Dow closed at 20,624. Sure there have been plenty of ups and downs since 2010, but as I suggested seven years ago, perhaps “buy and hold” still is not dead today?

In the midst of the so-called “Lost Decade,” pundits continue to talk about the death of “buy and hold” (B&H) investing. I guess it probably makes sense to define B&H first before discussing it, but like most amorphous financial concepts, there is no clear cut definition. According to some strict B&H interpreters, B&H means buy and hold forever (i.e., buy today and carry to your grave). For other more forgiving Wall Street lexicon analysts, B&H could mean a multi-year timeframe. However, with the advent of high frequency trading (HFT) and supercomputers, the speed of trading has only accelerated further to milliseconds, microseconds, and even nanoseconds. Pretty soon B&H will be considered buying a stock and holding it for a day! Average mutual fund turnover (holding periods) has already declined from about 6 years in the 1950s to about 11 months in the 2000s according to John Bogle.

Technology and the lower costs associated with trading advancements arre obviously a key driver to shortened investment horizons, but even after these developments, professionals success in beating the market is less clear. Passive gurus Burton Malkiel and John Bogle have consistently asserted that 75% or more of professional money managers underperform benchmarks and passive investment vehicles (e.g., index funds and exchange traded funds).

This is not the first time that B&H has been held for dead. For example, BusinessWeek ran an article in August 1979 entitled The Death of Equities (see Magazine Cover article), which aimed to eradicate any stock market believers off the face of the planet. Sure enough, just a few years later, the market went on to advance on one of the greatest, if not the greatest, multi-decade bull market run in history. People repudiated themselves from B&H back then, and while B&H was in vogue during the 1980s and 1990s it is back to becoming the whipping boy today.

Excuse Me, But What About Bonds?

With all this talk about the demise of B&H and the rise of the HFT machines, I can’t help but wonder why B&H is dead in equities but alive and screaming in the bond market? Am I not mistaken, but has this not been the largest (or darn near largest) thirty-year bull market in bonds? The Federal Funds Rate has gone from 20% in 1981 to 0% thirty years later. Not a bad period to buy and hold, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say the Fed Funds won’t go from 0% to a negative -20% over the next thirty years.

Better Looking Corpse

There’s no denying the fact that equities have been a lousy place to be for the last ten years, and I have no clue what stocks will do for the next twelve months, but what I do know is that stocks offer a completely different value proposition today. At the beginning of the 2000, the market P/E (Price Earnings) valued earnings at a 29x multiple with the 10-year Treasury Note trading with a yield of about 6%. Today, the market trades at 13.5 x’s 2010 earnings estimates (12x’s 2011) and the 10-Year is trading at a level less than half the 2000 rate (2.75% today). Maybe stocks go nowhere for a while, but it’s difficult to dispute now that equities are at least much more attractive (less ugly) than the prices ten years ago. If B&H is dead, at least the corpse is looking a little better now.

As is usually the case, most generalizations are too simplistic in making a point. So in fully reviewing B&H, perhaps it’s not a bad idea of clarifying the two core beliefs underpinning the diehard buy and holders:

1)      Buying and holding stocks is only wise if you are buying and holding good stocks.

2)      Buying and holding stocks is not wise if you are buying and holding bad stocks.

Even in the face of a disastrous market environment, here are a few stocks that have met B&H rule #1:

Maybe buy and hold is not dead after all? Certainly, there have been plenty of stinking losing stocks to offset these winners. Regardless of the environment, if proper homework is completed, there is plenty of room to profitably resurrect stocks that are left for a buy and hold death by the so-called pundits.

Investment Questions Border

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®  

Plan. Invest. Prosper. 

www.Sidoxia.com

DISCLOSURE: At the time the article was originally written, Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients owned certain exchange traded funds and AAPL, AMZN, ARMH, and NFLX, but at the time of publishing SCM had no direct position in GGP, APKT, KRO, AKAM, FFIV, OPEN, RVBD, BIDU, PCLN, CRM, FLS, GMCR, HANS, BYI, SWN (*2,901% is correct %), CTSH, CMI, ISRG, ESRX, or any other security referenced in this article. As of 2/19/17 – Sidoxia owned AAPL, AMZN, and was short NFLX. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

February 19, 2017 at 4:46 pm Leave a comment

The Political Art of Investment Commentators

There are approximately 2 billion people surfing the internet globally and over 150 million bloggers (source: blogpulse.com) spewing their thoughts out into cyberspace. Throw in economists, strategists, columnists, and the talking heads on television, and you can sleep comfortably knowing there will never be a shortage of opinions for investors to sift through. The real question regarding the infinite number of ideas floating around from the “market commentators” is how useful or harmful is all this information? These diverse points of view, like guns, can be useful or dangerous – depending on an investor’s experience and knowledge level. Deciphering the nuances and variances of investment opinions can be very challenging for an untrained investing eye or ear. While there are plenty of diamonds in the rough to be discovered in the investment advice buffet, there are also a plethora of landmines and booby traps that could explode investment portfolios – especially if these volatile opinions are not handled with care.

No Credentials Required

Unlike dentists, lawyers, accountants, or doctors, becoming a market commentator requires little more than a pulse. All a writer, squawker, or blogger really needs is an internet connection, a keyboard, and something interesting or provocative to talk about. Are any credentials required to blast toxic gibberish to the millions among the masses? Unfortunately there are no qualifications required…scary thought indeed.

In order to successfully navigate the choppy investment opinion waters, investors need to be self-aware enough to answer the following key questions:

• What is your investment time horizon?
• What is your risk tolerance? (see also Sleeping like a Baby)

With these answers in hand, you can now begin to evaluate the credibility and track record of the market commentators and match your personal time horizon and risk profile appropriately. Ideally, investors would seek out prudent long-term counsel, but in this instant gratification society we live in, immediate fear and greed sells advertisements and attracts viewers. Even if media producers and editors of all stripes believed focusing on multi-year time horizons is most beneficial for investors, some serious challenges arise. The brutal reality is that concentrating on the lackluster long-term does not generate a lot of advertisement revenue or traffic. The topics of dollar-cost averaging, asset allocation, diversification, and rebalancing are about as exciting as watching an infomercial marathon (OK, actually this is quite funny) or paint dry. More interesting than the sleepy, uninspiring topics of long-term value creation are stories about terrorist threats, DSK sex scandals, Bernie Madoff Ponzi schemes, currency crises, hacking misconduct, bailouts, tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, 50-day moving averages…OK, you get the idea.

Focus on Long-Term and Do Not Succumb to Short-Termism

Regrettably, there is a massive disconnect between the nano-second time horizons of market commentators and the time horizons of most investors. Moreover, this short-termism dispersed instantaneously via Facebook, Google (GOOG), Twitter, and traditional media channels, has sadly infected the psyches and investment habits of ordinary investors. If you don’t believe me, then check out some of the John Bogle’s work, which shows how dramatically investors underperform the benchmark thanks to emotionally charged reactions (see Fees, Exploitation, and Confusion Hammer Investors).

Although myopic short-termism is not the solution, extending time horizons too long does no good for investors either. As economist John Maynard Keynes astutely noted, “In the long run we are all dead.” But surely bloggers and pundits alike could provide perspectives in multiple year timeframes, rather than in multiple hours. Investors would be served best by turning off the TV, PC, or cell phone, and using the resulting free time to read a good book about the virtues of patient investing from successful long-term investors. Stuffing cash under the mattress, parking it in a 0.5% CD, or panicking into sub-2% Treasuries probably is not going to get the job done for your whole portfolio when inflation, longer life expectancies, and the unsustainable trajectory of entitlements destroy the value of your hard-earned nest egg.

Investment Commentators Look into Politician Mirror

Heading into a heated election year with volatility reaching historic heights in the financial markets, both politicians and investment commentators have garnered a great deal of the media spotlight. With the recent heightened interest in the two fields, some common characteristics between politicians and investment commentators have surfaced. Here are some of the similarities:

  • Politicians have a short-term incentives to get re-elected and not get fired, even if there is an inherent conflict with the long-term interest of their constituents; Investment commentators have a short-term incentives to follow the herd and not get fired, even if there is an inherent conflict with the long-term interest of their constituents;
  • Many politicians have extreme views that conflict with peers because blandness does not get votes; Many investment commentators have extreme views that conflict with peers because blandness does not get votes;
  • Many politicians lack practical experience that could benefit their followers, but the politicians have the gift of charisma to mask their inexperience; Many investment commentators lack practical experience that could benefit their followers, but the commentators have the gift of charisma to mask their inexperience;

Investing has never been so difficult, and also has never been so important, which behooves investors to carefully consider portfolio actions taken based on a very volatile and inconsistent opinions from a group of bloggers, economists, strategists, columnists, and various other media commentators. Investors are bombarded with an avalanche of ever-changing daily data, much of which is irrelevant and should be ignored by long-term investors. As you weigh the precious value of your political votes in the upcoming election season, I urge you to back the candidates that represent your long-term interests. With regard to the financial markets, I also urge you to back the investment commentators that support your long-term interests – the success of your financial future depends on it.

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®

Plan. Invest. Prosper.

www.Sidoxia.com

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds, and GOOG, but at the time of publishing SCM had no direct position in Facebook, Twitter, or any other security referenced in this article. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page

September 10, 2011 at 9:34 am 1 comment

Questioning the Death of Buy & Hold Investing

In the midst of the so-called “Lost Decade,” pundits continue to talk about the death of “buy and hold” (B&H) investing. I guess it probably makes sense to define B&H first before discussing it, but like most amorphous financial concepts, there is no clear cut definition. According to some strict B&H interpreters, B&H means buy and hold forever (i.e., buy today and carry to your grave). For other more forgiving Wall Street lexicon analysts, B&H could mean a multi-year timeframe. However, with the advent of high frequency trading (HFT) and supercomputers, the speed of trading has only accelerated further to milliseconds, microseconds, and even nanoseconds. Pretty soon B&H will be considered buying a stock and holding it for a day! Average mutual fund turnover (holding periods) has already declined from about 6 years in the 1950s to about 11 months in the 2000s according to John Bogle.

Technology and the lower costs associated with trading advancements is obviously a key driver to shortened investment horizons, but even after these developments, professionals success in beating the market is less clear. Passive gurus Burton Malkiel and John Bogle have consistently asserted that 75% or more of professional money managers underperform benchmarks and passive investment vehicles (e.g., index funds and exchange traded funds).

This is not the first time that B&H has been held for dead. For example, BusinessWeek ran an article in August 1979 entitled The Death of Equities (see Magazine Cover article), which aimed to eradicate any stock market believers off the face of the planet. Sure enough, just a few years later, the market went on to advance on one of the greatest, if not the greatest, multi-decade bull market run in history. People repudiated themselves from B&H back then, and while B&H was in vogue during the 1980s and 1990s it is back to becoming the whipping boy today.

Excuse Me, But What About Bonds?

With all this talk about the demise of B&H and the rise of the HFT machines, I can’t help but wonder why B&H is dead in equities but alive and screaming in the bond market? Am I not mistaken, but has this not been the largest (or darn near largest) thirty year bull market in bonds? The Federal Funds Rate has gone from 20% in 1981 to 0% thirty years later. Not a bad period to buy and hold, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say the Fed Funds won’t go from 0% to a negative -20% over the next thirty years.

Better Looking Corpse

There’s no denying the fact that equities have been a lousy place to be for the last ten years, and I have no clue what stocks will do for the next twelve months, but what I do know is that stocks offer a completely different value proposition today. At the beginning of the 2000, the market P/E (Price Earnings) valued earnings at a 29x multiple with the 10-year Treasury Note trading with a yield of about 6%. Today, the market trades at 13.5 x’s 2010 earnings estimates (12x’s 2011) and the 10-Year is trading at a level less than half the 2000 rate (2.75% today). Maybe stocks go nowhere for a while, but it’s difficult to dispute now that equities are at least much more attractive (less ugly) than the prices ten years ago. If B&H is dead, at least the corpse is looking a little better now.

As is usually the case, most generalizations are too simplistic in making a point. So in fully reviewing B&H, perhaps it’s not a bad idea of clarifying the two core beliefs underpinning the diehard buy and holders:

1)      Buying and holding stocks is only wise if you are buying and holding good stocks.

2)      Buying and holding stocks is not wise if you are buying and holding bad stocks.

Even in the face of a disastrous market environment, here are a few stocks that have met B&H rule #1:

Maybe buy and hold is not dead after all? Certainly there have been plenty of stinking losing stocks to offset these winners. Regardless of the environment, if proper homework is completed, there is plenty of room to profitably resurrect stocks that are left for a buy and hold death by the so-called pundits.

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®  

Plan. Invest. Prosper. 

www.Sidoxia.com

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds and AAPL, AMZN, ARMH, and NFLX, but at the time of publishing SCM had no direct position in GGP, APKT, KRO, AKAM, FFIV, OPEN, RVBD, BIDU, PCLN, CRM, FLS, GMCR, HANS, BYI, SWN (*2,901% is correct %), CTSH, CMI, ISRG, ESRX, or any other security referenced in this article. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

September 17, 2010 at 1:26 am 1 comment

Running with the Bulls

Guest Contributing Writer: Bruce Wimberly

No matter where you turn some “expert” is espousing his or her view on the direction of the market. The reality is none of them know. My advice to anyone is avoid the fallacy of experts. Those that purport to know, donʼt. It is a mere exercise in futility to justify charging higher fees. Letʼs be honest if anyone knew the future direction of asset prices they would be beyond rich (Iʼm talking John Paulson – Trade of the Century rich!). Nice job John who would have thought you could make that much money betting against mortgages.

As investors our best bet is to accept that fact that market timing is a losing strategy. Timing the market is similar to a coin flip. Pure and simple, the cost of getting it wrong wipes out the occasional gain of getting it right. Remember, every time you listen to the perma-bears and try to time the market, there is big time investment professional on the other side of that trade who is by definition taking the opposite view.

Good investors expand their timeframes. They do not get sucked into the news of the day. Let the perma-bears worry about Dubai, currency devaluation, or whatever else is todayʼs fear. Keep in mind there is always something to worry about. For long term investors the greatest fear is not being in the market. For example, if inflation were to average 3% and you are sitting in cash earning nothing your money will be cut in half by 2033. Grandmaʼs mattress is not an option for most people.

Now back to the question of bulls versus bears and the direction of the markets. Who is right? The simplest way to think about this comes from Oracle of Omaha himself, Warren Buffett. Buffett thinks of the market as a reflection of total market cap relative to US GNP (gross national product). After all, in the long run the market should approximate some measure of overall corporate profitability or in this case overall economic growth. If you accept Buffettʼs argument then the market is neither overly expensive or cheap. As of yesterday the total market index is at $11,296.2 billion which is about 79% of the last reported GDP. (I know the perma-bulls will find some reason to bash the reported GDP number). Nevertheless, this simple formula provides a good long term context on which to gage the relative attractiveness of the overall market. To put todayʼs number in context (79%) at the peak of the market bubble in 1999, the ratio of total market cap/GDP was 150% or almost double todayʼs reading. Yes, the market has made a major move from depressed levels earlier in the year but that is irrelevant. Donʼt anchor on that number or you will never get off the sidelines.

 My advice is simple, ignore the perma-bears and avoid market timing like the plague for it is a suckers bet (see also article on passive vs. active investing). If the market does pull back (and it will at some point) this is great news for the long term investor. Anytime you can buy a stock on sale – this is a good thing! So enjoy the Christmas holidays, donʼt believe the hyped up bears and as always:

Plan. Invest. Prosper. 

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management (SCM) and some of its clients own certain exchange traded funds and equity securities in client and personal portfolios at the time of publishing, but had no direct position in BRKA/B. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

December 18, 2009 at 2:00 am Leave a comment


Receive Investing Caffeine blog posts by email.

Join 1,813 other followers

Meet Wade Slome, CFA, CFP®

More on Sidoxia Services

Recognition

Top Financial Advisor Blogs And Bloggers – Rankings From Nerd’s Eye View | Kitces.com

Wade on Twitter…

Share this blog

Bookmark and Share

Subscribe to Blog RSS

Monthly Archives