Building Wealth

For the first 30 or so years of working, saving and investing, you’ll be first in the mode of getting out of the hole (paying down debt), and then building your net worth (that’s wealth accumulation.). But don’t forget, wealth accumulation isn’t the ultimate goal. Decumulation is! (a separate category here at the Hub).

Value Investing: Looking beneath the surface

Posted By |
Image from Outcome/QuoteInspector.com.

By Noah Solomon

Special to Financial Independence Hub

It goes without saying that 2022 was a less than stellar year for equity investors. The MSCI All Country World Index of stocks fell 18.4%. There was virtually nowhere to hide, with equities in nearly every country and region suffering significant losses. Canadian stocks were somewhat of a standout, with the TSX Composite Index falling only 5.8% for the year.

Looking below the surface, there was an interesting development underlying these broader market movements, with value stocks far outpacing their growth counterparts. Globally, value stocks suffered a loss of 7.5% as compared to a decline of 28.6% in growth stocks. This substantial outperformance was pervasive across countries and regions, including the U.S., Europe, Asia, and emerging markets. In the U.S., 2022’s outperformance of value stocks was the highest since the collapse of the tech bubble in 2000.

These historically outsized numbers have left investors wondering whether value’s outperformance has any legs left and/or whether they should now be tilting their portfolios in favor of a relative rebound in growth stocks. As the following missive demonstrates, value stocks are far more likely than not to continue outperforming.

Context is everything: Value is the “Dog” that finally has its Day

From a contextual perspective, 2022 followed an unprecedented period of value stock underperformance.

U.S Value vs. U.S. Growth Stocks – Rolling 3 Year Returns: 1982-2022

 

Although there have been (and will be) times when value stocks underperform their growth counterparts, the sheer scale of value’s underperformance in the several years preceding 2022 is almost without precedent in modern history. The extent of value vs. growth underperformance is matched only by that which occurred during growth stocks’ heyday in the internet bubble of the late 1990s.

Shades of Tech Bubble Insanity

The relative performance of growth vs. value stocks cannot be deemed either rational or irrational without analyzing their relative valuations. To the extent that the phenomenal winning streak of growth vs. value stocks in the runup to 2022 can be justified by commensurately superior earnings growth, it can be construed as rational. On the other hand, if the “rubber” of growth’s outperformance never met the “road” of superior profits, then at the very least you need to consider the possibility that crazy (i.e. greed, hope, etc.) had indeed entered the building.

The extreme valuations reached by many growth companies during the height of the pandemic bring to mind a warning that was issued by a market commentator during the tech bubble of the late 1990s, who stated that the prices of many stocks were “not only discounting the future, but also the hereafter.”

U.S. Value Stocks: Valuation Discount to U.S. Growth Stocks: (1995-2022)

 

Based on forward PE ratios, at the end of 2021 U.S. value stocks stood at a 56.3% discount to U.S. growth stocks. From a historical perspective, this discount is over double the average discount of 27.9% since 1995 and is matched only by the 56.6% discount near the height of the tech bubble in early 2000. This valuation anomaly was not just a U.S. phenomenon, with global value stocks hitting a 57.5% discount to global growth stocks, more than twice their average discount of 27.6% since 2002 and even larger than that which prevailed in early 2000 at the peak of the tech mania. Continue Reading…

$1.7 million to retire: doable or out of reach?

Posted By |
Front page of Wednesday’s Financial Post print edition.

Plenty of press this week over a BMO survey that found Canadians now believe they’ll need $1.7 million to retire, compared to just $1.4 million two years ago (C$). The main reason for the higher nest-egg target is of course inflation.

As you’d expect, the headline of the story alone attracted plenty of media attention. I heard about it on the car radio listening to 102.1 FM [The Edge]: there, a female broadcaster who was clearly of Millennial vintage deemed the $1.7 million ludicrously out of reach, personalizing it with her own candid confession that she herself hasn’t even begun to save for Retirement. Nor did she seem greatly fussed about it.

Here’s the Financial Post story which ran in Wednesday’s paper: a pick-up of a Canadian Press feed; a portion is shown to the left. The writer, Amanda Stephenson, quoted BMO Financial Group’s head of wealth distribution and advisory services Caroline Dabu to the effect the $1.7 million number says more about the country’s economic mood than about real-life retirement necessities.

BMO’s own client experience finds that “many overestimate the number that they need to retire,” she told CP, “It really does have to be taken at an individual level, because circumstances are very different … But $1.7 million, I would say, is high.”

Here’s my own take and back-of-the-envelope calculations. Keep in mind most of the figures below are just guesstimates: those who have financial advisors or access to retirement calculators can get more precise numbers and estimates by using those resources. I may update this blog with input from any advisors or retirement experts reading this who care to fill in the blanks by emailing me.

A million isn’t what is used to be

Image via Tenor.com

Back in the old days, a million dollars was considered a lot of money, even if that amount today likely won’t get you a starter home in Toronto or Vancouver. This was highlighted in one of those Austin Powers movies, in which Mike Myers (Dr. Evil) rubs his hands in glee but dates himself by threatening to destroy everything unless he’s given a “MILLL-ion dollars,” as if it were an inconceivably humungous amount.

The quick-and-dirty calculation of how much $1 million would generate in Retirement depends of course on your estimated rate of return. When interest rates were near zero, this resulted in a depressing conclusion: 1% of $1 million is $10,000 a year, or less than $1,000 a month pre-tax. When my generation started working in the late 70s, a typical entry-level job paid around $12,000 a year so you could figure that $1 million plus the usual government pensions would get you over the top in retirement.

Inflation has put paid to that outcome but consider two rays of hope, as I explained in a recent MoneySense Retired Money column. To fight inflation, Ottawa and most central banks around the world have hiked interest rates to more reasonable levels. Right now you can get a GIC paying somewhere between 4% and 5%. Conservatively, 4% of $1 million works out to $40,000 a year. 4% of $1.7 million is $68,000 a year. That certainly seems to be a liveable amount. More so if you have a paid-for home: as I say in my financial novel Findependence Day, “the foundation of Financial Independence is a paid-for home.”

Couples have it easier

If you’re one half of a couple, presumably two nest eggs of $850,000 would generate the same amount: for simplicity we’ll assume a 4% return, whether in the form of interest income or high-yielding dividend stocks paid out by Canadian banks, telecom companies or utilities. I’d guess most average Canadians would use their RRSPs to come up with this money.

This calculation doesn’t even take into consideration CPP and OAS, the two guaranteed (and inflation-indexed) government-provided pensions. CPP can be taken as early as age 60 and OAS at 65, although both pay much more the longer you wait, ideally until age 70. Again, couples have it easier, as two sets of CPP/OAS should add another $20,000 to $40,000 a year to the $68,000, depending how early or late one begins receiving benefits.

This also assumes no employer-pension, generally a good assumption given that private-sector Defined Benefit pensions are becoming rarer than hen’s teeth. I sometimes say to young people in jest that they should try and land a job in either the federal or provincial governments the moment they graduate from college, then hang on for 40 years. Most if not all governments (and many union members) offer lucrative DB pensions that are guaranteed for life with taxpayers as the ultimate backstop, and indexed to inflation. Figure one of these would be worth around $1 million, and certainly $1.7 million if you’re half of a couple who are in such circumstances.

Private-sector workers need to start RRSPs ASAP

But what if you’re bouncing from job to job in the private sector, which I presume will be the fate of our young broadcaster at the Edge? Then we’re back to what our flippant commentator alluded to: if she doesn’t start to take saving for Retirement seriously, then it’s unlikely she’ll ever come up with $1.7 million. In that case, her salvation may have to come either from inheritance, marrying money or winning a lottery.

For those who prefer to have more control over their financial future, recall the old saw that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. In Canada, that step is to maximize your RRSP contributions every year, ideally from the moment you begin your first salaried job. Divide $1.7 million by 40 and you get $42,400 a year that needs to be contributed. OK, I admit I’m shocked by that myself but bear with me. The truth is that no one even is allowed to contribute that much money every year into an RRSP. Normally, the limit is 18% of earned income and the 2023 maximum RRSP contribution limit is $30,780 (and $31,560 for the 2024 taxation year.) Continue Reading…

North American stock portfolio outperforms when it counts

Posted By |

By Dale Roberts, cutthecrapinvesting

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

For U.S. stocks, my wife and I hold 17 Dividend Achievers, plus 3 stock picks. In Canada, I hold the Canadian Wide Moat 7, while my wife holds a Canadian High Dividend ETF – Vanguard’s VDY. There is also a modest position in the TSX 60 – XIU. The U.S. and Canadian stocks both outperform their respective stock market index benchmarks. Working together, the U.S. and Canadian stocks form an all-weather portfolio base.

In this post I’ll offer up charts on our U.S. stock portfolio and the Canadian stock portfolio. And I’ll put them together so that we can see how they work together. The total portfolio was designed to be retirement-ready. The fact that it beats the market benchmarks is a welcome surprise. At the core of the portfolio is wonderful Canadian dividend payers – the U.S. dividend achievers and 3 picks fill in some portfolio holes. We will also take a look at how these stocks can be arranged to provide an all-weather stock portfolio base.

When I write ‘our portfolio,” I am referring to the retirement portfolios for my wife and me. As for ‘backgrounders’ on the portfolios please have a read of our U.S. stock portfolio and the Canadian Wide Moat 7 performance update.

The stock portfolios

In early 2015 I skimmed 15 of the largest-cap dividend achievers. What does skim mean? After extensive research into the portfolio “idea” I simply bought 15 of the largest-cap dividend achievers. For more info on the index, have a look at the U.S. Dividend Appreciation Index ETF (VIG) from Vanguard. That is a U.S. dollar ETF. Canadian investors can also look to Vanguard Canada for Canadian dollar offerings (VGG.TO).

You’ll find the dividend acheivers and Canadian high dividend stocks in the ETF portfolio for retirees post. Both indices are superior for retirement funding, compared to core stock indices.

Dividend growth plus quality

At the core of the index is a meaningful dividend growth history (10 years or more) working in concert with financial health screens. It leads to a high quality skew. Given those parameters the dividend achievers index will certainly hold many dividend aristocrats (NOBL).

The 15 companies that I purchased in early 2015 are 3M (MMM), PepsiCo (PEP), CVS Health Corporation (CVS), Walmart (WMT), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Qualcomm (QCOM), United Technologies, Lowe’s (LOW), Walgreens Boots Alliance (WBA), Medtronic (MDT), Nike (NKE), Abbott Labs (ABT), Colgate-Palmolive (CL), Texas Instruments (TXN) and Microsoft (MSFT).

United Technologies merged with Raytheon (RTX) and then spun off Carrier Global Corporation (CARR) and Otis Worldwide (OTIS). We continue to hold all three and they have been wonderful additions to the portfolio. Given that those stocks are not available for the full period, they are not a part of this evaluation. That said, the United Technologies spin-offs added to the outperformance.

Previous to 2015 we had three picks by way of Apple (AAPL), BlackRock (BLK) and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B). Those stocks are overweighted in the portfolio. As you might expect, Apple has contributed greatly to the portfolio outperformance. Though the achievers also outperform the market with less volatility.

In total it is a portfolio of 20 U.S. stocks.

The Canadians

I hold a concentrated portfolio of Canadian stocks. What I give up in greater diversification, I gain in the business strength and potential for the companies that I own to not fail. They have wide moats or exist in an oligopoly situation. For the majority of the Canadian component of my RRSP account I own 7 companies in the banking, telco and pipeline space. I like to call it the Canadian wide moat portfolio. They also provide very generous and growing dividends. These days, they’d combine to offer a starting yield in the 6% range.

Here are the stocks:

Canadian banking

Royal Bank of Canada (RY), Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD) and Scotiabank (BNS).

Telco space

Bell Canada (BCE) and Telus (T).

Pipelines

Canada’s two big pipelines are Enbridge (ENB) and TC Energy (TRP).

*Total performance would be improved by holding the greater wide moat portfolio that includes grocers and railway stocks. That is a consideration for those in retirment and in the accumulation stage.

The Canadian mix outperforms the market, the TSX Composite. You’ll also find that outperformance in the Beat The TSX Portfolio. That BTSX strategy (like the Wide Moat 7) finds big dividends, strong profitability and value.

Once again, my wife holds an ETF – the Vanguard High Dividend (VDY) and a modest position in XIU. I did not want to expose her portfolio to concentration risk.

The charts

Here’s the returns of the U.S. and Canadian portfolios, plus a 50/50 U.S/CAD mix as the total portfolio. The period is January of 2015 to end of September 2022. Please keep in mind the returns are not adjusted for currency fluctuations. A Canadian investor has received a boost thanks to the strong U.S. dollar. U.S. investors owning Canadian stocks would experience a negative currency experience. Continue Reading…

Resource Stocks provide long-term gains and inflation hedging

Posted By |
Photo from iStock

Including good stocks for long-term investment gains from the Resource section can be especially helpful in times of inflation. Learn more below.

For most investors, resource stocks should make up only a limited portion of their portfolios. That means that while we think you should maintain some exposure to resource stocks, you should still aim to balance your portfolio across most if not all of the five economic sectors.

If you want resource stocks in your diversified portfolio, then you need to know how to find good stocks in that sector for long-term investment gains.

Resource stocks, though volatile, tend to rise with inflation and can be good stocks for long-term investment gains

The resource sector is subject to wide and unpredictable swings in the prices it gets for its products. In the rising phase of the business cycle, when business is booming, resource demand expands faster than resource supply, so resource prices shoot up. This balloons profits at resource companies. When the economy slumps, resource prices fall, and this drags down resource profits and stock prices.

In addition to rising and falling with the business cycle, however, resource stocks have a history of rising along with long-term inflationary trends. This gives them a rare ability: they provide a hedge against inflation.

Back in the inflationary 1970s and 1980s, investors used to see this hedge-against-inflation ability as the main reason for buying resource stocks. But until recently, they rarely thought of it. That’s because inflation had waned for three decades.

Inflation peaked at a yearly rate around 13% in the early 1980s. It fell by two-thirds from that level by the middle of the decade. It went through a series of peaks and valleys, but had been working its way downward ever since.

However, after years of relative stability, inflation has come back to levels not seen in decades.

While the cost of just about everything has gone up, nobody can predict trends in inflation or interest rates with any consistency. And we disagree with investors who think we are on the verge of a huge outburst of never-ending price increases.

Even so, adding top Resource stocks to your portfolio lets prosper two ways: you can profit even without inflation — and these stocks will also provide an added boost in inflationary times.

It’s important to know your risk tolerance when investing in good stocks for long-term investment gains — including Resource stocks

There are several considerations that go into a successful growth investing strategy. Still, many investors overlook a number of important factors that can lower their risk.

In the end, there’s no such thing as risk-free investing. The tips below for lowering your growth investing strategy risk have long been part of the Successful Investor approach.

  • Balance your cyclical risk
  • Be skeptical of companies that mainly grow through acquisitions
  • Don’t overindulge in aggressive investments
  • Keep an eye out on a growth stock’s debt
  • Keep stock market trends in perspective
  • Look for growth stocks that have ownership of strong brand names and an impeccable reputation
  • The best long-term growth stocks should have the ability to profit from secular trends

Meantime, we continue to recommend that you cut your risk in the volatile resource sector by investing mainly in stocks of profitable, well-established mining companies with high-quality reserves. And as mentioned, resource stocks (and this includes oil and gas, of course) should make up only a limited portion of your portfolio. Continue Reading…

Income Needs and Wants in Retirement

Posted By |
Source: The Behavior Gap

By Mark Seed, myownadvisor

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Some time ago on this site I wrote one of the biggest retirement questions is: how much is enough?

What might be our income sources, needs and wants be in retirement?

The answer to such questions are usually: it depends.

This updated post will share those details and outline how such needs and wants might be funded in our upcoming semi-retirement days – planned for sometime in 2024.

Read on and let me know your thoughts, questions or comments!

What are your income needs and wants in retirement?

It largely depends on what you’ll spend in retirement.

That’s always been step #1 in our book.

Whether you’re 35, 45 or 55, I believe it’s essential to figure out what retirement might look like to you.

Here are a few questions we’ve been working through:

1. When do we want to retire or semi-retire?

Math is helpful but I also believe we want to retire to something.

Both of my parents stopped all form of work around age 60. That may or may not work for me – literally. I like to be busy and instead of stopping work cold-turkey per se I would rather glide into semi-retirement/work on own terms and then slowly ease off the gas pedal per se whenever I want. At least that is my thinking now …

Sure, math helps: the later you retire from full time work, the longer you have to accumulate that retirement nest egg. But I believe there is also the work-optional option of part-time work in our 50s when the debt is gone and most of the assets needed for full-on retirement spending have already been accumulated.

Your mileage may vary. :-)

2. Where do we want to live in retirement or semi-retirement?

Likely Ottawa, as a home base still.

Our family is here. Most of our good friends are here or in the immediate area.

We don’t aspire to own a second home in the sunny south – too many liabilities.

We do however want to travel more/live some time abroad.

Our thinking could always change but it will be nice to have our condo bought and paid for without any debt on the books very soon and maintain it as a home base.

This means all income we do intend to make, including during semi-retirement, is for us to spend as we please.

3. What will our expenses be?

The general wisdom is that you will need somewhere between 70-80% of your current salary for living expensses in retirement. That means, if you make $100,000 combined per year, you should plan to have $70,000 to $80,000 in combined retirement income spending, as an example.

This general wisdom includes the logic that you are likely to spend less as a retiree – since you’re not commuting to work, you might have downsized your home, and/or you’re not supporting dependents.

I think these rules of thumb (like the 4% safe withdrawal rate/rule while valuable to a point) don’t make much sense when you dig further into your personal details, needs and wants. Rules of thumb are a starting point – only.

I far prefer to calculate what our fixed expenses will continue to be, during retirement, including inflationary spending, adding in some variable spending needs and wants as well.

Here is a snapshot on the former:

Key expenses Monthly Annually Semi-retirement comments ~ end of 2024???
Mortgage $2,240 $26,880 We anticipate the mortgage “dead” before the end of 2024.
Groceries/food $800 $9,600 Although can vary month-to-month!
Dining/takeout $100 $1,200
Home maintenance/expenses $700 $8,400 Represents 1% home value per year, increasing by inflation.
Home property taxes $500 $6,000 Ottawa is not cheap, increasing by inflation or more.
Home utilities + internet/TV/cell phones, subscriptions, etc. $400 $4,800
Transportation – x1 car (gas, maintenance, licensing) $150 $1,800 May or may not own a car long-term!
Insurance, including term life $250 $3,000 Term life ends in 2030, will self-insure after that without life insurance.
Totals with Mortgage $5,140 $61,680
Totals without Mortgage $2,900 $34,800 As you can see, once the debt is gone, we’ll be in a much better place for financial independence!

Add in other spending/miscellaneous spending to the tune of $1,000 per month and that’s our base budget. Continue Reading…