Articles About Investments

Financial advicers are intimately familiar with the phrase, "Past results are not indicative of future performance." Every document that considers the facts around any particular asset class will invariably include that disclaimer, but constructing a portfolio consisting of a mix of equities, fixed income, and other assets requires investors and advicers to make some fundamental assumptions around long-term expected returns and correlations between assets. 3 common assumptions that have driven asset allocation decisions for decades are that 1) equities have historically outperformed fixed income over the long-term, 2) bonds act as an effective diversifier in a portfolio since they are negatively correlated to stocks, and 3) various combinations of non-correlated assets improve a portfolio's expected return per unit of risk. However, as investors learned in 2022, when the S&P 500 and 20-year Treasury Bonds fell 18.1% and 26.1%, respectively, historical "tendencies" don't always hold over shorter timeframes, prompting the question: How reliable are our assumptions around the long-term performance of stocks and bonds?

On the one hand, in an analysis of data going back to 1802 in his seminal book, "Stocks For The Long Run", Jeremy Siegel concluded that stocks outperformed bonds over long periods. However, Edward McQuarrie, author of the 2023 study "Stocks for the Long Run? Sometimes Yes, Sometimes No," reached back even further to 1793 and expanded the data set to include 3–5X more stocks and 5–10X more bonds. Accordingly, McQuarrie found that, while stocks did indeed far outperform bonds between 1942–1981, not only did stocks and bonds produce about the same wealth accumulation during the 150-year period before 1942, but the same held true from 1982–2019 as well. 

So, although the entire 227-year span of McQuarrie's analysis from 1793 to 2019 was weakly supportive of Siegel's conclusions, there were subperiods where bonds actually outperformed stocks, leading McQuarrie to conclude that there was no consistent relationship between asset outperformance and length of holding period to which values must revert. Instead, McQuarrie argued that the changes over various periods depend solely upon the 'regime' in place, where a regime is defined as "a temporary pattern of asset returns" characterized by "ceaseless variation" over time. 

Meanwhile, McQuarrie also found that stock-bond correlations have also been "highly variable over 20-year intervals, ranging all the way from about −0.70 to 0.90", suggesting that, in addition to performance, correlations are also subject to regime changes and that bonds don't always effectively diversify risk. In fact, they can even magnify risk, as was the case for the 7 decades between 1926–1999, when the stock-bond correlation was a positive 0.18. 

Finally, over time, regime changes have also lowered the overall risk of equity investing. For example, the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and the SEC in 1934 have helped to reduce economic volatility and increase corporate transparency. These changes, along with lower trading costs, have made the world a much safer (and less expensive) place for investors, who, as a result of reduced investment risks, may experience lower future returns. 

There are several takeaways for advicers as they serve their clients. First is the fact that stocks (specifically because they carry a higher risk level) have not always outperformed bonds, and while stocks should carry a risk premium, advicers can turn to Monte Carlo simulations to consider a wider dispersion of outcomes, versus relying on 'expected' returns when developing investment plans. Second, the stock-bond performance-correlation relationships are regime-dependent, and those regimes are neither time-dependent nor mean-reverting. 

As a result, an advicer's primary consideration when developing asset allocation plans should be the diversification of risk, while accounting for the fact that bonds won't always be an effective tool to achieve such diversification. Moreover, advicers might consider incorporating alternative investments into client portfolios, including things such as long-short factor strategies, private equity debt, reinsurance, consumer and small-business lending, among other assets. Ultimately, the key point is that there are asset classes outside the traditional stock-bond universe that can be used to create portfolios that are more diversified and that may be better suited to address a particular client's ability, willingness, and need to take risk!

Read More...

With a plethora of interdependent and ever-changing parts, gaining a clear (or even not-terribly-fuzzy) understanding of where the economy stands at any given moment is a daunting task, to say the least. Even more difficult is using data based on samples and surveys (and subject to constant revision!) to develop some idea about which of the myriad possible outcomes might be more likely to occur. Yet, by taking a measured look at factors driving economic activity and influencing behavior, advisors can help clients face risks they can't control and (hopefully) position themselves to take advantage of opportunities as they develop.  

In this guest post, Larry Swedroe, Head of Financial and Economic Research at Buckingham Wealth Partners, reviews key aspects of economic activity in the 1st quarter of 2024, examines what the behaviors in the various financial markets might be suggesting about investor expectations, and offers insight into how advisors might help clients prepare moving forward.

As has been the case for the past several quarters, the prevailing characteristic of the economy is one of bifurcation, with interest rate-sensitive sectors remaining in a recession (as evidenced by the manufacturing sector's 16-month-long contraction), while the services sector (which accounts for nearly 80% of U.S. GDP) continues to expand. Importantly, headline inflation has continued to trend lower, but with persistent upward pressure on wages in the services sector, a rebound in housing prices, and no relief in sight for skyrocketing auto insurance, home insurance, and home repairs (as well as trade-route disruptions arising from turmoil in the Red Sea), the Fed may have little choice but to keep rates elevated as they pursue their elusive 2% inflation target.

Meanwhile, a smorgasbord of potential risks threatens economic growth's "soft landing" narrative. Notably, the work-from-home movement has resulted in a dramatic drop in office valuations that could lead to a whole host of issues, including lending constraints in the banking sector, which is already sitting on a mountain of unrealized losses on Treasuries and mortgages. Lower office valuations may also squeeze tax receipts in municipalities, particularly large cities that are already experiencing financial strains due to the surge in illegal immigration and the flight of high-income individuals and companies to states with lower taxes. 

The equity market is experiencing its own bifurcation, with a wide dispersion in (extremely elevated) valuations across the "Magnificent 7" and the rest of the market, which is much closer to historical averages. At the same time, value and international stocks continue to lag, trading as if the economy is already in the depths of a serious recession. Looking forward, equity analysts predict earnings growth in 2024 of 11.5%, which stands in stark contrast to the Philly Fed's Survey of Professional Forecasters expectations of total GDP growth of 'just' 3.8%. Given that corporate profits have historically tracked GDP growth, this inconsistency creates an interesting enigma.

Ultimately, the key point is that advisors can prepare clients for the possibility of increased volatility as the year develops, along with lower equity returns due to lower potential economic growth, high valuations in leading stocks, persistent inflation, higher-for-longer interest rates, and rising fiscal debt. Some strategies can include adjusting assumptions for future equity returns and increasing allocations to fixed-income assets that are less sensitive to inflation shocks (particularly shorter-term bonds with low credit risk, including TIPS and floating rate debt). Additionally, advisors may look to increase diversification with assets that have historically low correlation with economic cycles, including reinsurance, private lending, consumer credit, commodities, and long-short factor funds. The bottom line is that by assessing the broader economic landscape, advisors can help clients weather the potential risks on the horizon, position themselves to take advantage of possible opportunities, and (most importantly) remain focused on their long-term goals! 

Read More...

People often talk about "the economy" as a single entity whose parts move in unison, with a small number of key indicators (such as GDP, the unemployment rate, and inflation) moving reliably in relation to each other. In reality, though, the economy is a complex web of interdependent factors where events often make sense only in hindsight – and sometimes, not at all. This has perhaps never been more true in many financial advisors' careers than at the current moment where, depending on which numbers you look at, the economy could be either growing steadily, leveling off, or already in a recession. And when conditions are this uncertain, it often makes sense to dive deeper into the factors driving the economy to better understand the risks – and opportunities – that clients may face.

At a high level, we're currently seeing a 'tale of 2 economies': While the market for services has expanded steadily since the beginning of the year (with both employment and the price of services growing in kind), the U.S. manufacturing sector, by the measures of employment and service prices, has been in a recession for nearly 12 months. And even though numerous signs are pointing to the looming possibility of a more widespread economic downturn – including the reduction of household savings, reduced lending, and the resumption of student loan payments for many borrowers – the job market remains strong. Furthermore, inflation, though down from its peak in early 2022, remains above the Federal Reserve's long-term target of 2% despite the bank's attempts to tamp it down.

What's driving many of the economic conditions today are higher interest rates resulting from the Fed's efforts to fight inflation. But while these high rates might be enough to tip the country into a recession if we were in 'normal' times, there has been so much liquidity in the economy – both as a residual effect of the economic stimulus programs of the COVID-19 pandemic and the more recent Inflation Reduction Act and legislation subsidizing green energy and semiconductor manufacturing – that it's possible the Fed may need to hike rates even further (and keep them high for longer than expected) to achieve its inflationary goals.

The expectations for the future economic outlook also appear in the valuations of equities, which tend to reflect how markets anticipate that corporate earnings will grow in the future. Yet again, the numbers tell a different story depending on where you look: While growth stocks (particularly for large companies) are trading at historically high valuations, value stocks are trading as if we were already in a serious recession. And even though U.S. equities have been able to weather a wide variety of economic conditions over the last 30 years (thanks to broader trends of both declining interest rates and corporate tax rates), it's reasonable to wonder whether that era is coming to a close given the Fed's raising interest rates to fight inflation and the Federal government's need to raise tax revenue to address its ballooning budget deficit. There's also the question of whether long-term equity returns could be significantly lower than we've experienced during the post-WWII era without the boost of lower interest and tax rates.

The key point is that, with so much uncertainty in the economic outlook, it becomes all the more important to recognize and manage the risks inherent in the current environment, perhaps by shifting more assets into shorter-term, less-volatile assets like short-term Treasury bills or even cash (which, thanks to higher interest rates, are yielding significantly more than they did up until recently) or diversifying into assets that are less correlated with other parts of the portfolio (such as reinsurance or secured private debt). Since ultimately, while neither advisors nor their clients may be able to control the more considerable forces that shape economic conditions today, they can recognize and (at least to some extent) control which risks they're exposed to and manage those risks to stay protected and on track for the long term!

Read More...