Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition highlights an intriguing analysis from Morningstar's new number crunching on investor returns, finding that investors may not actually be chasing hot mutual funds nearly as much as previously believed, along with the latest contribution by Miccolis and Goodman to the Journal of Financial Planning, this time focused on the problems with measuring correlation. From there, we look at a few industry articles, from the possibility that FINRA may open up BrokerCheck data to private vendors to better get information to investors, to Mark Tibergien suggesting how to determine which parts of your firm you should or should not outsource. On the investment side, the focus turns to PIMCO's launch of an actively-managed ETF version of their flagship PIMCO Total Return fund, a primer on how the Euro breakup might go (it's not as bad as the media makes it out to be), and the latest quarterly letter from Grantham. We also look at two interesting recent articles from the New York Times, one by Robert Shiller on how high IQ investors actually invest differently, and another discussing how companies study shopper habits to market more effectively, and conclude with a quick review of the latest US News and World Report "Best Jobs in 2012" ranking which lists Financial Adviser at #23. Enjoy the reading!
Archives for March 2012
Is The Retirement Plan With The Lowest "Risk of Failure" Really The Best Choice?
One of the primary virtues of using Monte Carlo analysis for evaluating a retirement plan is that it frames the conversation in terms of the probability of success and the risk of failure, rather than simply looking at how much wealth is left at the end of the plan. As a result, the focus of planning shifts from maximizing wealth, to maximizing the likelihood of success and minimizing the risk of failure.
Yet the reality is that while "failure" from the Monte Carlo perspective means the client ran out of money before the end of the time horizon, in truth most clients will not simply continue to spend on an unsustainable path right to the bitter end. Instead, if the plan is clearly heading for ruin, clients begin to make adjustments. Some failures may be more severe than others, and consequently some plans may require more severe adjustments than others.
But the bottom line is that a "risk of failure" is probably better termed a "risk of adjustment" instead. However, when viewed from that perspective, it turns out that the plan with the lowest risk of adjustment may not be the ideal plan for the client to choose!Read More...