No doubt about it: at some point we’re neither semi-retired, findependent or fully retired. We’re out there in a retirement community or retirement home, and maybe for a few years near the end of this incarnation, some time to reflect on it all in a nursing home. Our Longevity & Aging category features our own unique blog posts, as well as blog feeds from Mark Venning’s ChangeRangers.com and other experts.
You’ve always dreamt about it and now it’s happened. Your ship has come in. You’ve found the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Your future is secure. You have found sudden wealth and now the world lies at your feet, just as you’ve always wanted.
And yet, perhaps life isn’t quite what you expected. Perhaps the affluence you’ve found has brought with it as many unanticipated burdens as it has alleviated. Indeed, no matter how you came into your good fortune, the simple truth is that sudden wealth has its own challenges, ones that you must be prepared to address effectively if you want to secure your own future well-being.
The Psychological Toll
Before you came into your money, you probably imagined that if you were only rich, your life would be perfect. To be sure, wealth can solve a lot of problems. You no longer have to worry about how you’re going to keep a roof over your head or food on the table. You don’t have to worry about the car note or your student loans. You’re secure, as is your family.
However, when you’re absolved of financial worries, especially when this relief comes quickly, that can all too often shine a bright spotlight on other issues in your life. The obligation to make a living and pay off your debts might well have served as a distraction, enabling you to avoid confronting challenges in your relationships, your career, or even your own mental health.
With this obligation removed, so too is the distraction it once provided. You may well find yourself overspending in the effort to continue the avoidance. You may panic buy to comfort yourself or to relieve boredom.
You may lavish your friends and loved ones with expensive gifts in an unconscious attempt to buy their affection or to compensate for guilt you may feel over your sudden prosperity. In fact, emotional spending is one of the most significant, and most pernicious, ways people waste money because the pattern is such a difficult one to break.
Whatever the reason, overspending can be one of the first and most important symptoms of psychological distress in your new life. Confronting the source of the issue, the depression, fear, guilt, or trauma that often lies at the root, is essential to overcoming it.
Managing the wealth
When you’ve had a windfall, it can be tempting to think that the hard work is done. It’s often just the beginning. Far more often than not, the greatest challenge lies not in acquiring wealth but in keeping it. Continue Reading…
Markets ended the first part of the year on a particularly sour note. Over the past four months, the MSCI All Country World Stock Index fell 12.9% in USD terms. High quality bonds, which have held up well in past episodes of stock market weakness, have failed to provide any relief, with the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond index falling 11.3%. Given the “nowhere to hide” atmosphere of markets, even a 60%/40% global balanced stock/bond portfolio suffered a loss of 12.3%. Markets have entered a phase which differs from what we have witnessed over the past several years (and arguably over the past 40). In the following, we have done our best to share some of our most closely held beliefs about markets and investing, which we hope can serve as a guidepost for helping investors navigate the current market regime.
It just doesn’t matter … until it does
Most of the time, it doesn’t matter much whether your portfolio is positioned aggressively, defensively, or anywhere in between. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the big money is made or lost during the most violent bull and bear markets.
Defining a “normal” return for any 12-month period as lying between -20% and 20%, the S&P 500 Index behaved normally during 65.7% of all rolling 12-month periods between 1990 and 2021. Of the remaining 34.3% of periods, 29.0% were great (above 20%) and 5.4% were awful (worse than -20%)
Average 12-Month returns during Normal, Great, and Awful periods:
As the table above demonstrates, during normal periods there has not been a significant difference in average returns between the S&P 500 Index, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, and a balanced portfolio consisting of 60% of the former and 40% of the latter. It is another story entirely during the 34.3% of the time when bull and bear markets are in their most dynamic stages. The good news is that there are some key signals and rules of thumb that offer decent probabilities of reaping respectable gains in major bull markets while avoiding the devastation from the worst phases of major bear markets.
Don’t fight the Fed
It is with good reason that the “Don’t fight the Fed” mantra has achieved impressive longevity and popularity. The monetary climate – primarily the trend in interest rates and central bank policies – is the dominant factor in determining both the stock market’s major direction as well as which types of stocks out or underperform (sectors, value vs. growth, etc.). Once established, the trend typically lasts from one to three years. When central banks are cutting rates and monetary conditions become more accommodating, it’s a good bet that it won’t be long before stocks deliver attractive returns. In late 2008/early 2009, central banks responded to the collapse in financial markets by cutting rates aggressively and embarking on quantitative easing programs. This spurred a rapid recovery in asset prices. Similarly, to offset the economic fallout of the Covid pandemic, monetary authorities flooded the global economy with money, which acted as rocket fuel for stocks. Conversely, when central banks are raising rates and tightening the screws on the economy, the effect can range from limiting equity market gains to causing a full-fledged bear market (not an attractive distribution of outcomes). Once the Fed began hiking rates in mid-1999, it wasn’t long before stocks found themselves in the throes of a vicious bear market that cut the S&P 500 Index in half over the next two to three years. Similarly, when the Fed raised its target rate from 1% in mid-2004 to 5.25% by mid-2006, it set the stage for a nasty collapse in debt, equity, and real estate prices. When it comes to stocks, bonds, real estate, or most other asset classes, it’s all fun and games until rates go up, which ultimately causes things to break.
Markets don’t care what you think: NEVER fight the tape
The importance of not fighting major movements in markets cannot be overemphasized. Repeat as necessary: Fighting the tape is an open invitation to disaster. This advice not only applies to the general level of stock prices, but also to the relative performance of different sectors, value vs. growth, etc.
Ignorance, which can cause people to fight market trends, is a valid justification for making mistakes during the earlier stages of one’s investment experience. But after suffering the consequences, there are neither any excuses nor mercy when you fight the tape a third or fourth time. The markets only allow so many mistakes before they obliterate your wallet. The perils of following rather than fighting trends are well summarized by investing legend Marty Zweig, who compared fighting the tape and trying to pick a bottom during a bear market to catching a falling safe. Zweig stated: “If you buy aggressively into a bear market, it is akin to trying to catch a falling safe. Investors are sometimes so eager for its valuable contents that they will ignore the laws of physics and attempt to snatch the safe from the air as if it were a pop fly. You can get hurt doing this: witness the records of the bottom pickers on the street. Not only is this game dangerous, it is pointless as well. It is easier, safer, and, in almost all cases, just as rewarding to wait for the safe to hit the pavement and take a little bounce before grabbing the contents.” To be clear, there is no free lunch in investing. Being on the right side of major market moves necessitates getting whipsawed over the short-term every now and then. Inevitably, you will sometimes be zagging when you should be zigging and zigging when you should be zagging. You can get head faked into cutting risk only to watch in frustration as markets rebound, and you can also get tricked into becoming aggressive just before a decline in stock prices. The stark reality is that only geniuses and/or liars buy at the lows preceding major uptrends and exit the very top before the onset of bear markets. Realistically, you can only hope to catch (or avoid) the bulk of the big moves. Getting whipsawed every now and then is a small price to pay for reaping attractive returns during the good times while avoiding large bear market losses.
You don’t need to be perfect. But you’d better be flexible
It doesn’t matter whether you are an aggressive or conservative investor, so long as you are a flexible one. The problem with most portfolios (even professionally managed ones) is that they are not flexible. Conservative investors tend to stick with defensive portfolios heavily weighted in high grade bonds, utility stocks, etc. They never reap huge gains, but they also never get badly hurt. Aggressive investors, on the other hand, often buy risky stocks or speculate in real estate using high degrees of leverage. They make fortunes in boom times only to lose it all in bad times when the proverbial tide recedes.
Neither approach is sound by itself. Being aggressive is okay, but there are nonetheless times to gear down and be a wallflower. By the same token, there are market environments in which even conservative investors should be somewhat aggressive. Continue Reading…
Recently I met up with a good friend for a much-needed chat. Over the course of a few tasty cans of beer, my friend mentioned that he recently listened to the “Die with Zero” audiobook and really enjoyed the key messages of the book.
Curious, I borrowed the book from the local library and finished reading it in two days.
The book’s author, Bill Perkins, suggested that we should all aim to die with zero dollars in our bank account, or at least as close to zero as possible. He argued that too many people spend unnecessary energy working extra years only to earn money that they wouldn’t be able to spend in later years and die with a large sum of money in their bank accounts. This is definitely different from the traditional belief of saving money during your working career and spending your savings once you’re retired.
Why die with $200k in your bank account, considering it took you an extra five years to save it, when you could have stopped working five years earlier?
Perkins believes that our lives are the sum of our life experiences which can be quantified and optimized. Therefore, we should focus on spending our money when we are younger and obtain as many life experiences and memories as we possibly can.
My friend now believes in spending his money in the most optimal way to obtain memorable experiences for himself and his family while keeping a focus on saving for retirement in the best approach. This is similar to what I’ve been preaching on this blog – find your own personal balance between spending money to enjoy the present moment and saving money for your retirement.
The fallacy of “save-save-save” mentality
For many of us on the financial independence retirement early (FIRE) journey, we think about saving money constantly. We think about what’s the best way to save money and how to boost our savings rate, so we can become financially independent earlier.
But the “save-save–save” mentality isn’t actually healthy. It’s actually giving the FIRE movement a very bad vibe.
I’ll be honest, I was certainly guilty of focusing purely on our savings rate early on our FIRE journey. I wanted to cross the finish line and hit the escape button. Over time, however, I found that I wasn’t enjoying the small things in life. I felt frustrated when we spent money eating out or having a cup of coffee and treats at a cafe; I was having arguments with Mrs. T over these small expenses, because I wanted to save more money to expedite our FIRE journey.
When I stepped back and looked at the bigger picture, I realized that the “save-save-save” mentality wasn’t healthy. It was actually quite detrimental, especially to my relationship with Mrs. T.
The idea of becoming financially independent faster but without my lovely wife was not a price I was willing to pay. I realized there’s a fallacy in the “save-save-save” mentality.
Has market news got you thinking it might be time to rethink your market positions? It’s certainly understandable if the economic uncertainty unfolding in the daily news has left you wondering – or worrying – about what lies ahead. No matter how you feel about the U.S. entering into a trade war with China, it’s hard to deny that the prospect is currently causing considerable market turmoil. It is also hard to avoid the recent financial media obsession with an “inverted yield curve” (a rare situation when short-term bond maturities are yielding more than longer-term maturities).
You might have heard that each U.S. recession since the 1970s has been preceded by an inverted yield curve. However, perhaps for the sake of sensationalism, not all articles correctly report that this relationship does not always hold true. In reality every yield curve inversion does notlead to an imminent recession and/or lower equity prices. Recent analysis by professors Eugene Fama and Ken French tested this very hypothesis. Using data from the U.S. and 11 other developed markets, they found “no evidence that inverted yield curves predict stocks will underperform bills (bonds).”
Regardless of how the coming weeks and months unfold, are you okay with gritting your teeth, and keeping your carefully structured portfolio on track as planned? This probably doesn’t surprise you, but that’s exactly what we would suggest. Unless, of course, new or different personal circumstances warrant revisiting your asset allocation for reasons that have nothing to do with all the tea in China.
That said, the recent news is admittedly unsettling. If you’ve got your doubts, you may be wondering whether you should somehow shift your portfolio to higher ground, until the coast seems clear. In other words, might these stressful times justify a measure of market-timing?
Here are four important reminders on the perils of trying to time the market – at any time. It may offer brief relief, but market-timing ultimately runs counter to your best strategies for building durable, long-term wealth.
1) Market-Timing is Undependable
Granted, it’s almost certainly only a matter of time before we experience another recession. As such, it may periodically feel “obvious” that the next one is nearly here. But is it? It’s possible, but market history has shown us time and again that seemingly sure bets often end up being losing ones instead. Even as recently as year-end 2018, when markets dropped precipitously almost overnight, many investors wondered whether to expect nothing but trouble in 2019. Continue Reading…
Frederick Vettese has written good books for Canadians who are retired or near retirement. His latest, The Rule of 30, is for Canadians still more than a decade from retirement.
He observes that your ability to save for retirement varies over time, so it doesn’t make sense to try to save some fixed percentage of your income throughout your working life. He lays out a set of rules for how much you should save using what he calls “The Rule of 30.”
Vettese’s Rule of 30 is that Canadians should save 30% of their income toward retirement minus mortgage payments or rent and “extraordinary, short-term, necessary expenses, like daycare.” The idea is for young people to save less when they’re under the pressure of child care costs and housing payments. The author goes through a number of simulations to test how his rule would perform in different circumstances. He is careful to base these simulations on reasonable assumptions.
My approach is to count anything as savings if it increases net worth. So, student loan and mortgage payments would count to the extent that they reduce the inflation-adjusted loan balances. I count contributions into employer pensions and savings plans. I like to count CPP contributions and an estimate of OAS contributions made on my behalf as well. The main purpose of counting CPP and OAS is to take into account the fact that lower income people don’t need to save as high a percentage of their income as those with higher incomes because CPP and OAS will cover a higher percentage of their retirement needs. Continue Reading…
Posted By 
