Posts Tagged ‘portfolio diversification’

Doom and Gloom vs. Irrational Exuberance

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

For starters, it’s been a while since my last post as I had some minor “fix me up” shoulder surgery a few weeks back.  The mobility limitation has kept my computer time to a minimum and reserved almost solely for client needs.  I’m happy to report however, all is healing nicely and I should have a normal shoulder in a few months.  While it was a tough decision to make (having the surgery), it was an easy one as it’s little league season, and one thing I truly love is playing ball with my boys.  The shoulder was preventing me from enjoying it – so it will be well worth it when all is said and done!

Which brings me to the purpose of my post.  In 15 years as a financial advisor, and 5 years owning and serving client needs through my own registered investment advisor firm Red Rock Wealth Management, I’ve never seen or heard so many varying views on where we go from here in the markets.

Typically, the majority of clients and prospective clients will feel somewhat strongly one way or the other – either doom and gloom or irrational exuberance (as Bernanke’s predecessor Greenspan liked to call it!).  It’s unusual this go around however.  It’s a very mixed, almost confused bag of bull vs. bear sentiment.

In my Q1 and Q2 financial planning and investment reviews I’ve found that just like the talking heads on CNBC, NO ONE KNOWS!  For every client that’s a bull, there’s a prospective client that’s a bear and a few scattered in between.  Everyone has a guess, or a gut feel, but are you willing to bank on it?

As I’ve said consistently throughout every related post – there is NO telling where the markets go in the short term.  Trying to outguess the markets is what I consider to be a fool’s game with no good possible outcomes other than statistical luck!

What I do feel confident in saying is the planning, combined with a low-cost low-turnover properly diversified, passively managed and consistently re-balanced portfolio is the only path to consistency in financial planning over long periods of time.  In every study I’ve done over the years, the re-balancing procedures add value by reducing portfolio volatility and increasing returns through a forced program of selling outperforming assets little by little and buying under-performing assets little by little.  Isn’t it great to know that your planning forces you to consistently buy low and sell high over long periods of time?

So, now may be the time to put the blinders on.  The markets have had an AMAZING, in fact nothing short of STELLAR run for over a year now without so much as a reasonably noticeable pullback.  Markets don’t go straight up, and don’t go straight down.  We’ll see pullbacks, and it will provide opportunities to re-balance.

So if the 200 pt. market drops make you nervous, remember – YOU DON’T OWN the Dow Jones, or the S&P.  You own (or should own if you’re not a Red Rock client) a broadly diversified portfolio of highly non-correlative assets (for example gold is up today while equities are down).  You also own bonds to provide a measure of conservative investing and income generation in your portfolio.

So if it’s nerve wracking to watch, put the blinders on and remember your plan is well constructed for long term success – not short term speculation!  If your concerns are relative to a change in your financial situation – give me a call and we’ll schedule a meeting to discuss and review any adjustments which need to be made.

Investment Portfolio Risk – Systematic vs. Specific Risk

Wednesday, June 17th, 2009

Most individual investors (and unfortunately many financial advisors) haphazardly throw together bits and pieces of stocks, bonds, mutual funds and annuity products in an attempt to diversify their financial holdings and reduce investment risk. Incorrectly they assume that “more” holdings is automatically “better”, when in fact more may mean little more than a false sense of security.

In the context of creating a truly diversified investment portfolio, there are two primary types of risk associated with individual investment securities – specific risk and systematic risk. The creation of an “efficient investment portfolio” is based on several factors, including eliminating all “specific risk” or “non-systematic risk” (also called diversifiable, unique, unsystematic or idiosyncratic risk).

Specific risk is a completely unnecessary risk. Most investment portfolios are exposed specific risk, yet most investors aren’t compensated with corresponding investment return because of the nature of specific risk.

Specific risk is the risk associated with individual investment securities. It’s unnecessary because it can be diversified away by adding more similar securities to the portfolio. The more securities added (similar in nature), the more the specific risk of an investment is reduced until you reach a point of diminishing returns (where added securities have no added risk reducing effect).

If you own shares of IBM, there is specific risk associated with that security. It fluctuates in value based on its own set of business circumstances like profitability, financial strength, product innovations and future prospects. IBM also fluctuates in value based on how its market sector (a grouping of other large technology companies) is performing.

If you owned 10 large technology companies, you’d begin to diversify away the specific risk associated with IBM. If you diversified into enough positions (many experts say 15 to 20 at a minimum), you would have an “asset class”.

An asset class is a group of similar securities – for example large companies, small companies or international companies. Asset classes do not have specific risk as it has been effectively eliminated through diversification. An asset class does however have “systematic risk”.

Systematic risk is the risk associated with an entire asset class once all specific risk has been eliminated. It cannot be diversified away (with the exception of long/short strategies which is beyond the scope of this article). Each asset class has it’s own systematic risk that one must endure to achieve the expected long-term returns of the asset class.

Each asset class has a historical “correlation” to another asset class, meaning some investment securities perform differently at different periods in our economic cycle. For example, in 2008 commodities like gold and oil fluctuated wildly both up and down in value. United States equity holdings floundered through the third quarter, then sank dramatically in the fourth quarter as commodities stabilized. Treasury bond prices tended to trend upward throughout the year as interest rates came down.

These are excellent examples of “non-correlation”. Asset class investments performed good or bad relative to each other, and although most asset classes ended lower in value in 2008, there were varying degrees of investment loss for each asset class. Consequently a well diversified portfolio including multiple asset classes and bond holdings performed better on average than their 100% equity counterparts.

To create a truly diversified investment portfolio, an investor must first remove all unnecessary (specific) risk associated with their investment holdings. This means ONLY accepting the systematic risk associated with an investment, and embracing it as a means to an end.

To further reduce portfolio risk through diversification, an investor must combine several asset class investments with non-correlative qualities in a portfolio balanced to the investors desired risk tolerance. This concept is based on Modern Portfolio Theory – or an effectively proportioned mix of non-correlative asset class investments. Modern Portfolio Theory serves as an industry wide accepted model for rational investment portfolio decision making.

Generally speaking, a minimum of 6 asset classes could be combined into a statistically significant diversified portfolio. 6 asset classes each holding 20 securities (minimum) makes for a LONG portfolio statement from your custodian! That’s 120 securities in your portfolio, and it’s quite unnecessary with the advent of no-load mutual funds and exchange traded funds. You could hold 120 positions and monitor them – fumbling around a re-balancing program, or hold 6 positions (8 to 12 is more preferable) making re-balancing your diversified portfolio allocation much simpler, and invariably more precise.

Once the specific risk is removed and non-correlative asset classes are combined into a balanced portfolio, an investors desired long term return level should in theory be purely correlated with each unit of risk they’re willing to accept. When only systematic risk remains, and full diversification among several asset class investments has been accomplished – the saying “the greater the risk, the greater the reward!” should hypothetically hold true over long periods of time.

So before beginning any investment program, consider carefully the types of risk you’re exposing your portfolio to. There’s no need to take unnecessary risks with your investments. It is your financial future after all!