If you are an investor, you are most likely familiar with the term “bubble” as it pertains to investing. Twenty years ago this was not the case, but today we are all too familiar with the term. The problem we now face is that everyone is hyper-aware of bubbles to a point where there is a bubble boogeyman around every corner.
I’m sure everyone as experienced the internal struggle between short-term pleasures and long-term benefits, which is why it is so difficult to save for retirement. Even though our long-term, logical brain understands the merits and importance of saving for retirement, it must constantly do battle with our short-term emotional brain which is hell bent on immediate gratification.
Over the past six years the US stock market has dominated the rest of the globe, with the S&P 500 outpacing the MSCI All Country World ex US index by over 10%...annualized. In our highly correlated, highly globalized world this amount of out-performance from the largest developed component of the global index is nothing short of mind-blowing.
The Running of the Bulls can be a dangerous event, and it is not uncommon for a number of participants to be injured or sometimes even killed. There are similar parallels to be made to a bull run in the stock market.
Last week we wrote about how fees and expenses have been driven lower across our industry. Firms are being forced to consider how they get paid and what value they truly provide, which is, of course, a fantastic thing for consumers. But not all fees are created equal, and there are some costs that are still worth incurring.
The word “vanguard” is defined as a group of people leading the way in new development or ideas. Over the past forty years The Vanguard Group has been just that. Now one of the strongest brands in global finance, the company’s name has become virtually interchangeable with low fees and expenses.
We make predictions about the future in order to calm our fears by giving us a false sense of control over something that is by nature highly uncertain. The problem in doing so is that it has the potential to short circuit the self-correcting nature of human creativity and ingenuity which enables us to solve present day problems and build a brighter future.
A few weeks ago we wrote a post entitled The Economics of Loss discussing the importance of reducing volatility and managing exposure to large draw downs in your portfolio.. Not only are large swings in investment value hard to deal with emotionally, but they can be detrimental to the mathematical sustainability of a long-term retirement plan.
Our obsession with insulating our client portfolios from the risk of a significant drawdown permeates every aspect of our investment approach. Growing capital over time is about striking an appropriate balance between preserving capital in turbulent times and capturing growth in good times.
Sometimes we get asked the question of whether “trend following is a form of market timing.” In this week’s post we will explore this question and unpack why there are subtle, yet very import differences between a trend following investment discipline and a market timing strategy.
We field many questions about the potential value-add of a tactical allocation strategy over a more static buy-and-hold approach. Ultimately, there are a number of different ways to solve the retirement puzzle. Buy-and-hold investing is one perfectly legitimate strategy, but it is not a one-size-fits-all solution that every investor should follow.
The word “post-truth” was recently named the word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries as its use skyrocketed 2,000% this year. At its core, post-truth is the act of influencing people by appealing to their emotions at the expense of facts and truth. In a post-truth world, the end always justifies the means.