All posts by Financial Independence Hub

New Decumulation option on the horizon in Canada

By Andrew Gillies

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Employees with a workplace pension plan are part of a lucky minority. In the Canadian private sector, less than 25% of workers currently have an employer pension plan.  Most often, the plan offered is a Defined Contribution (DC) arrangement.

DC plans are appealing to employers because they pose few legal or financial risks. Within a typical DC scenario, both the employee and employer contribute money into the employee’s individual account. Come retirement, the onus is on the employee to figure out how to convert these pension savings into steady income.

Decumulation game not easy to win

The name of this game is “Decumulation.”  It’s not an easy game to win. Retirees of DC plans are at risk of burning through their savings too quickly, leaving them without sufficient income in their later years. Conversely, financially conservative retirees may spend too little of their pension savings at the expense of a comfortable retirement.

One foolproof decumulation option DC retirees have is to buy an annuity from an insurance company. An insured annuity is a financial product that retirees can transfer some or all of their pension savings to in order to receive regular, guaranteed payments until death. The downside? This guarantee doesn’t come cheap. The average retiree who purchases an insured annuity can expect to forfeit as much as 20-30% of their pension savings to pay for the promise of predictable lifetime income with no future upside.

More affordable lifetime annuities

Fortunately, a new more affordable type of lifetime annuity will soon be offered through registered DC plans in Canada, and it’s a game changer. The Variable Payment Life Annuity (VPLA) was recently proclaimed into law and is poised to provide an excellent decumulation option for members of registered DC pension plans.

Within a VPLA framework, investment and mortality risks are pooled amongst many retirees, rather than insured at the individual level. This cooperative approach makes the VPLA significantly less expensive, while still delivering reasonably predictable lifetime retirement income.

The trade off, of course, is the “variable” element of the VPLA as payments may fluctuate due to market volatility or mortality experience within the pool. Still, without an insurance company taking large profits, a VPLA will generally pay out a monthly pension substantially greater (20-30% greater) than a traditional insured annuity while retaining future upside potential. Continue Reading…

Behavioural Economics: People value Gains and Losses differently

By John De Goey, CFP, CIM

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Prospect Theory is a concept that explains how people react when faced with gains and losses in the markets. The early research that went into it was done by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, two prominent social scientists. The latter went on to win the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics and write the runaway international bestseller ‘Thinking Fast and Slow,’ which deals with human quirks in behaviour and decision-making. The broad subject is referred to as Behavioural Economics (BE).

I find it fascinating that many people who give financial advice are unaware of the BE research or, if they are aware, do nothing to incorporate it into the advice they give. The implications of the old saying that those who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them are enormous.

Investors are feeling cocky

That’s especially true with Prospect Theory, which is vitally important in the summer of 2021 because markets have been on an absolute tear. The result is that investors are feeling confident and cocky. One might even say that many have let their guard down. When things go up with so few meaningful interruptions and no specific, readily identifiable storm clouds on the horizon, a dangerous kind of comfortable complacency might set in.

Many people I speak with these days seem unconcerned by the recent run-ups. Despite a series of potential danger signals such as inflation, deflation, the Delta Variant, and implications of climate change, they seem unperturbed.

Kahneman and Tversky showed that, for mostly emotional reasons, people put more weight on perceived gains over perceived losses and that, when presented with a choice offering equal probability of outcome (i. e., a gain of $1,000 vs. a loss of $1,000), most will choose the potential gains.

Advisors as Behavioural Coaches

For that reason, Prospect Theory is also known as the loss-aversion theory, and it offers a simple example of the risk associated with Optimism Bias. Simply put, people like to focus on positive outcomes: often to the minimization or exclusion of other possible ends. Continue Reading…

Amnesia and the Inevitability of Cycles

By Noah Solomon

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Cycles are inevitable. They have persisted since markets have existed and will endure for as long as humans engage in the pursuit of profit. In prolonged up cycles, people are euphoric, bid up prices to unsustainable levels, and sow the seeds for subsequent misery. Similarly, severe price declines result in unsustainably pessimistic sentiment, pushing prices down to bargain levels, thereby sowing the seeds of the next up cycle.

Neither bull nor bear markets continue indefinitely. Despite this incontrovertible truth, every time an up or down cycle persists for an extended period and/or to a great extreme, the “this time it’s different” crowd becomes increasingly pervasive, citing changes in geopolitics, institutions, technology, and behavior that render the old rules obsolete. But then it turns out that the old rules do apply, and the cycle resumes.

The persistence of cycles is in large part the result of the inability of investors to remember the past. According to legendary economist John Kenneth Galbraith:

“Extreme brevity of financial memory…. When the same or closely similar circumstances occur again, sometime in only a few years, they are hailed by a new, often youthful, and always supremely self-confident generation as a brilliantly innovative discovery in the financial and larger economic world. There can be few fields of human endeavor in which history counts for so little as in the world of finance. Past experience, to the extent that it is part of memory at all, is dismissed as the primitive refuge of those who do not have the insight to appreciate the incredible wonders of the present.”

Will the True Driver of Market Cycles Please Stand Up?

Without a doubt, macroeconomic factors such as interest rates, inflation, fiscal policy, GDP growth, unemployment, etc. exert a significant influence on the ebb and flow of markets. However, in our view, fluctuations in psychology have the greatest impact on cycles. More than any other factor, changes in sentiment are what cause shifts between hospitable to treacherous markets, and therefore between gains and losses.

In market cycles, most excesses on the upside and the inevitable reactions to the downside (which also tend to overshoot) are the result of exaggerated swings of the pendulum of psychology. Even the father of value investing and Buffett mentor, Benjamin Graham, acknowledged the tremendous influence of psychology in his allegory about “Mr. Market.” Depending on his volatile mood swings, Mr. Market will buy assets at unrealistically high levels or sell them at bargain basement prices.

The following graph offers a succinct and accurate portrayal of investor psychology at different parts of the cycle.

In bear markets, the dominant psychology in the markets is represented by line C, where investors demand generous risk premiums to compensate them for taking risk. In these environments, valuations are undemanding, prospective returns from bearing risk are high, and chances are good you that will be rewarded for taking risk.

As the cycle progresses and markets begin to rise, the dominant psychology shifts to line B, which represents the “happy medium” where investors are neither overly pessimistic nor blindly optimistic. In such environments, people require adequate compensation for taking risk, valuations are neither depressed nor excessive, and you can expect returns that approximate the long-term historical average.

Lastly, during the latter stages of bull markets when prices have risen significantly over a period of several years, the general mindset of the investing public shifts to line A, where investors become euphoric and adopt a lopsided desire for return with little regard for risk. In such environments, people require scant compensation for bearing risk, valuations become unrealistic, and losses become more likely than gains.

In essence, the pendulum of investor psychology is heavily influenced by the recency bias of what has happened over the past several years, swinging between collecting gold bars in front of a wisp during the bad times (line C) and picking up pennies in front of a steamroller at market tops (line A).

S&P 500 Index: Investor Psychology and Subsequent Returns

The table above demonstrates that the mood shifts of investors can have a dramatic impact on returns. With respect to the current environment, we are more confident about where we are not than where we are. It’s difficult to make the case that market participants are despondent and are demanding huge risk premiums for investing. In our view, market psychology is currently somewhere between lines A and B.

Except for the short lived Covid-induced swoon of early 2020, governments and central banks have been successful in maintaining the bull market that began in March 2009 after the global financial crisis. This has increased confidence in the Fed put and emboldened investors. Although nobody can know for certain whether it is possible to engineer a perpetual party by plying its attendees with ever-increasing stimulus, we wouldn’t bet the farm on it!

The Elusive Happy Medium: Average Doesn’t Mean Normal

In the real world, things generally fluctuate between “pretty good” and “not so hot.” But in the world of investing, investor psychology seems to spend much more time at the extremes (lines A and C) than it does at a “happy medium” (line B). At any given point in time, markets are more likely driven by greed or fear rather than greed and fear. Either “Risk is my friend. I need to buy before I miss out” or “I just don’t want to lose any more. Sell before it goes to zero” are far more likely to dominate markets than equanimity. Continue Reading…

Sustainable Equity Strategies for a Global Recovery

Image iStock/Franklin Templeton

By Mel Bucher, Co-Head of Global Distribution, Martin Currie, Edinburgh, UK

(Sponsor Content)

The investment choices we make can have a profound effect on the world around us. Investing according to sustainable principles allows investors to align their environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals with their investing choices.

Also, we believe sustainability can be a driver of long-term portfolio performance. As global equity markets recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, more Canadians want to invest in opportunities available within a wider sustainable context.

One new option is the sustainability investment expertise that Martin Currie brings to Canada.

Martin Currie may be a new name for many Canadian retail investors. Our firm is a Specialty Investment Manager of Franklin Templeton, based in Edinburgh, UK, and we focus on actively managing portfolios of the listed public equities of companies that generate long-term value from sustainable ESG polices. Our ESG framework helps to identify any material ESG issues related to a company’s cash flow, balance sheet and profit/loss account over time and whether these ESG issues could affect value creation. Having ESG analysis fully embedded in the research process enables our investment teams to uncover material issues.

Martin Currie’s leadership in ESG was recognized with the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment A+ rating for 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020.

This article considers our sustainable investing strategies in global equities and emerging markets equities, both of which are now available to Canadians.

A global equity strategy in a global recovery

We expect the strong comeback of the global equity market to be sustained under fairly benign inflation conditions and with asset prices supported by monetary policy. Our global equity strategy is well positioned in this environment.

The Franklin Martin Currie Global Equity strategy invests in companies with exposure to three established growth megatrends:

1.      Demographic change (e.g., aging population, urbanization, healthcare)

2.      Resource scarcity (e.g., electric vehicles, alternative energy, infrastructure)

3.      The future of technology (e.g., outsourcing, cloud computing, security).

We believe these themes will drive long-term structural growth in the global economy. The portfolio seeks diversified holdings with exposures to the megatrends to capture growth.

Global equities for growth, at the right price

The portfolio holds 20-40 stocks of sustainable, well-managed growth companies that dominate their respective industries and have high barriers to entry. They hold pricing power and face a low risk of disruption. These firms have potential for long-term structural growth and value creation. Companies undergo a systematic assessment of their industry, company, portfolio and governance/sustainability risks.

These equities may not be cheap, so the portfolio managers are highly selective about acquiring companies at the right valuations. The goal is to find equities that combine strong industry, financial and governance attributes at the right price.

This global equity strategy is now available to Canadians through the Franklin Martin Currie Global Equity Fund and Franklin Martin Currie Sustainable Global Equity Active ETF (FGSG). The mutual fund’s U.S. equivalent is a 4-star Morningstar-rated fund* in the International Unconstrained Equity category.  

Unique Approach to Portfolio Analysis and Construction

Martin Currie’s sustainable emerging markets strategy Continue Reading…

The dangers in the “Explore” part of a “Core and Explore” Portfolio

By Michael J. Wiener

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Many people advocate having a portfolio made up of mostly a core of low cost index funds along with a small “explore” part for taking concentrated risks on favourite investments.  This can work well enough if you’re realistic about it, but most investors cross the line to self-delusion.

Ben Carlson does a good job justifying the existence of explore-type investments in his article The Case for Having a Fun Portfolio.  After all, people are entitled to spend their money however they want.  Not every expenditure has to be part of a logical long-term plan.  We can buy a beer, or a motorcycle, or some favourite stock if we want.  So what if the long-term expectation is that the explore part of people’s portfolios will underperform indexes.

All the logic makes sense up to this point.  But just about every stock-picker I know can’t resist taking this a step further.  “Besides, the stock I picked is going to do great.”  In their hearts, they know their stock picks are going to outperform.  Past results don’t seem to deter them.  They wouldn’t bother with the explore part of their portfolios if they truly believed they would lose money over a lifetime of picking stocks.

All the evidence says that professional investors today set good relative prices so that individual investors who choose their own stocks are essentially making random picks.  The odds are against the small guy, but hope springs eternal.  I prefer to find hope in other pursuits.

Michael J. Wiener runs the web site Michael James on Money, where he looks for the right answers to personal finance and investing questions. He’s retired from work as a “math guy in high tech” and has been running his website since 2007.  He’s a former mutual fund investor, former stock picker, now index investor. This blog originally appeared on his site on April 26, 2021 and is republished on the Hub with his permission.  

A sampling of comments from the original post: Continue Reading…