Tag Archives: investing

This is Easy Street for Canadian investors

Posted By |

By Dale Roberts

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Investing is simple. We are all familiar with the KISS acronym. Simplicity is the key to successful investing. I have been reading and studying investing and investment strategies for decades and came to the conclusion that for the most part “nobody knows nothing.”

Great. All that research and tens of thousands of hours of study and I came back to the fact that I don’t need to know much at all. What a complete waste of time? No not at all. The thousands of hours of study showed me why I, we, don’t need to know much. We do not need to be experts when it comes to investing. As I like to write: It ain’t rocket surgery. Here’s how you find Easy Street.

What is an investment portfolio? In its basic form we can think of a portfolio as having two components: great companies for greater growth potential and bonds to manage the risk. Those bonds work like shock absorbers on the portfolio to reduce the risk or volatility. The more bonds in the portfolio, the lower the risk level of the portfolio.

A typical portfolio will hold great blue-chip companies (stocks) such as Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Johnson & Johnson, Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett’s company), Coca-Cola and on and on. On the Canadian side we’ll hold Tim Hortons, the big Canadian banks, the telco companies such as Bell, Rogers and Telus, plus railroad companies such as CN and CP Rail and major energy players such as Suncor and Enbridge and on and on.

The rich are business owners

We know that the richest people on earth are usually business owners. We’re going to join them. We’re going to own a piece of those businesses. When enough of those companies do well, you do well. And certainly not every business is going to do well: that’s why you own a bunch of ’em. And that’s why you’ll own great companies in Canada, US and around the globe. And we don’t have to know how to analyze those companies, we can simply go and buy the ‘entire’ stock market. Here’s What is Index Investing and why it’s simply a superior form of investing. It’s so easy we call it Couch Potato Investing.

And back to risk or volatility. Certainly stock markets mostly go up over time, but they do correct or go down with regularity; it’s a normal and expected part of investing. For the potential of those 9-10% annual returns from stocks we need to accept some risk. Keep in mind that stocks can go down by 50% in major stock market corrections. That’s not everyone’s cup of tea to watch their investment portfolio get cut in half. That’s why many or most investors will need some bonds in the portfolio. Bonds are fixed-income investments and are typically less risky than stocks. A bond pays you a fixed payment on a regular basis and bonds can also go up in value when stocks go down – think teeter totter.

A portfolio with a very generous amount of bonds would have only decreased by about 10%-15% in the last major market correction. For the period of 2008 to end of 2009, here’s a comparison of the US stock market (S&P 500) as Portfolio 1, and a Balanced Portfolio as Portfolio 2.

We see that the all-stock portfolio declined by 50% while the Balanced Portfolio with a 70% bond component declined by just over 15%. By the end of 2009 that conservative Balanced Portfolio is almost back in positive territory while the all-stock portfolio still has more of that hill to climb.

Percentage in Bonds a critical decision

The most important decision that will be made, or the most important question answered will be “What percentage of bonds do you need?” What is your risk tolerance level? What roller coaster do you want to ride? You get to decide. Continue Reading…

The Future is not quite now: A calm perspective on gloomy predictions

Posted By |

Here are a couple of conversations I’ve been involved in recently. Does any of it sound familiar?

Conversation with a retired engineer. He asked, “What do you think about this driver-less cars business? Has anybody even considered how many people this will throw out of work? We have to do something about this! Otherwise, joblessness will go so high that it will cause a depression.”

Conversation with a middle-aged family doctor/real-estate investor. He said, with complete confidence, “I’m cutting back on my medical career and moving into real-estate development. Long before I want to retire, I expect my job to disappear due to competition from AI (artificial intelligence).”

When listening to predictions, especially gloomy ones like these, keep in mind that nobody can consistently predict the future. Also remember that the most widely accepted gloomy predictions are especially prone to fail. That’s because people, as individuals, react to and prepare for predictions of doom. They work on the problem before its predicted arrival time. Sometimes they offset it entirely.

Y2K was the ultimate example

The ultimate example came on the first day of this century, with the non-arrival of the so-called “millennial bug,” or Y2K for short.

In the late 1990s, computer consultants warned that at the stroke of midnight on December 31, 1999, computers around the world would freeze up because of a problem with their data-storage limits. Computers used to use just two digits to designate a year. So they wouldn’t be able to tell what came after 1999; ‘00’ could mean 1900 or 2000. The problem had a simple fix, however. By the last day of 1999, most computer owners had attended to it. Damage from the predicted crisis was negligible.

Today’s predictions — gloomy and hopeful — revolve around the expectation that computer speeds will continue to rise, and computer costs to drop, at much the same rate as they have for the past half century.

This trend has led to exponential growth in the processing power of computer chips, coupled with an exponential drop in their cost. This leads to casual-conversation predictions like the two I mention above: artificial intelligence will soon lead to legions of unemployed taxi, truck and bus drivers; and legions of unemployed family doctors will follow soon after.

The logical flaw here is that exploding computer power at shrinking cost is a technological advance. But there are social, legal and practical limits to how quickly business can translate these technological gains into real-world progress (or problems, depending on how you look at it).

Computer makers don’t need government permission to raise the speed of their chips. In contrast, makers of driverless cars face all sorts of problems, long before they make any money.

The shift to driverless vehicles will happen gradually, over a period of decades. After all, driving in traffic involves far more surprises than a champion Go player faces on the playing board. Drivers have to deal with changing weather, full sunlight and deep shadow, unpredictable human drivers with varying skills, unpredictable pedestrian web surfers, potholes, snow-covered street markings and so on.

The shift from human to AI doctors will occur at an even slower pace — in line with how long it takes to earn a driver’s license on the one hand, and a medical license on the other. AI will replace family doctors some time after it replaces the voice and chat help lines that people use when they have a problem with a computer, a cell phone or a utility bill.

Assume technological process leads to economic progress

People have a long record of guessing wrong about the impact of new technology, and on how long it will take for the new technology to become part of daily life. You’ll guess right much more often if you just assume that technological progress eventually leads to economic progress. Continue Reading…

Sh*it my advisor says

Posted By |

Some investors eventually leave their commission-based advisors and opt to set up a simple portfolio of index funds or ETFs on their own. There are plenty of compelling reasons to do so; the reduction in fees alone can save investors thousands of dollars a year, and academic research shows that the lower your costs, the greater your share of an investment’s return.

Related: Steak Knives, Yes. Financial Advice, Maybe Not

In my fee-only planning service, many clients end up doing exactly that. I always enjoy hearing the rebuttals from bank and investment firm advisors whenever they hear their clients want to move to a lower-cost portfolio. Here I’ve tried to capture some of that conversation with sh*t my advisor says:

Sexism: When my husband told him we’re choosing simple index investing and that I handle the family finances he smirked and said to my husband, “What credentials does your wife have to manage money?”

The real enemy: Our investment company is being vilified when the true villains are credit card companies with their interest rates.

Proof of concept: I have tons of clients with assets over $500,000 so I must be doing something right.

Working for free: My advisor told me she basically worked for me for free for the past eight years and accused me of dumping her just as my assets were growing.

It takes a professional: People think they can trade mutual funds or ETFs on their own but it’s not as easy as you think. Plus, you don’t have anyone like me to call up and ask if you’re doing the right thing. Re-balancing a portfolio is easy if you have the background, but doing it like you’re thinking about (indexing) is very tough without the training and knowledge.

What’s in a fee?: The fees are at 2 per cent (Ed. Note: actually, 2.76 per cent) because this isn’t just about buying and selling. We created a complete portfolio with you for your tolerance in the market and deal in actively traded mutual funds that most of the time outperform the market.

Nortel: ETFs aren’t all that great. When you buy an ETF you buy the whole fund. In the late 90s when Nortel owned 30 per cent of the TSX it crashed. If you purchased that ETF you’d be down 30 per cent too! But with a mutual fund you can’t buy that much. You are only able to purchase up to 10 per cent of any one company. So you would have been fairly safe with the crash of Nortel.

Downside protection: If the market goes down 20 per cent your ETFs will too. You are much more protected with mutual funds.

Apples-to-apples: All of our fees are wrapped up together in our MER. We do not charge account fees, transaction fees, advisory fees, admin fees or fees for our service. It is just the MER.

Clairvoyance: The bond market has likely reached its peak and appears to moving in a different direction. The equity markets are very risky at this time. In my mind the only safe place left is guaranteed deposits. Continue Reading…

Simple investing isn’t easy

Posted By |

By Steve Lowrie, CFA

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

In my last post I covered why simplicity often beats complexity, especially when investing.  To quote myself:  “Simplicity is … the art of designing good, simple habits you can effectively implement and readily sustain.”  This keeps you on track toward your personal financial goals, with minimum fuss and maximum cost-management.

So why doesn’t everyone invest simply?  Because it isn’t easy.  We’re often done in by a host of human habits like fear, greed, loss aversion and herd mentality.  These and many other instinct-driven biases trick us into abandoning our good, simple plans whenever the next “all you need to do …” trend comes along.

“All you need to do is buy some dividend-paying stocks and you’ll have the income you need.”

“All you need to do is buy a few ETFs and you’ll be all set.”

“All you need to do is buy a couple hours of financial advice to get you up and running.”

While dividend-paying stocks, ETFs and hourly advice might still have valid roles to play in your plans, these sorts of “how to invest” fads shouldn’t override why you’re investing to begin with.  Plain and simple, your “why” should be guided by your long-term financial goals, like how much wealth you’d like to create or preserve over what period of time.  Your “how” should be grounded in robust academic evidence and time-tested solutions.

Unfortunately, the data tells us investors are often unable to take it easy on hyperactive trading.  For example, a 2017 Vanguard white paper, “Principles for Investing Success,” found that investors would move in and out of mutual funds and ETFs alike in reaction to market mood swings.  They’d also pile into and out of funds according to recent Morningstar ratings.  Instead of patiently embracing an efficient, long-term discipline, they were buying hot, high-priced funds and selling them low, after they’d cooled off.

Vanguard concluded (emphasis ours): “Investors should employ their time and effort up front, on the plan, rather than in evaluating each new idea that hits the headlines.  This simple step can pay off tremendouslyin helping them stay on the path toward their financial goals.”

Simple?  You bet.  Easy?  The evidence suggests otherwise.  That’s why I prefer to work with families upfront and ongoing with respect to their planning and investing.  That’s the only true way I know to ease their way over the long haul.

Steve Lowrie holds the CFA designation and has 25 years of experience dealing with individual investors. Before creating Lowrie Financial in 2009, he worked at various Bay Street brokerage firms both as an advisor and in management. “I help investors ignore the Wall and Bay Street hype and hysteria, and focus on what’s best for themselves.” This blog originally appeared on his site on June 5, 2018 and is republished here with permission. 

If an investment sounds too good to be true, check these four things

Posted By |
We recommend that investors follow an “evidence-based approach” with their investments.  What does the evidence tell us?  Investors should maintain globally diversified portfolios, keep costs low and select a mix of risky and safe investments that is suitable for their risk tolerance and financial goals.

Once a sensible portfolio is in place, holding on through the roller coaster ride of the market’s ups and downs is key to having a positive long-term investment experience.  One of the biggest reasons investors underperform market benchmarks or even the funds in which they invest is their inability to control the emotional urges which can easily lead to bad investment decisions which knock them off course.

Too good to be true

One temptation to which we often see investors succumbing is the “too good to be true” investment product pitch.  For example, many investments are sold as “equity-like returns with bond-like safety.” Upon closer examination a better explanation for such products is often “equity-like or higher risk with very uncertain returns.”

There are four key criteria that you can use to assess every investment opportunity that comes across your path:

  1. Expected Return
  2. Costs and Fees 
  3. Risks
  4. Liquidity (how quickly you can get your money back when you want it)

The only reason we invest is to earn a rate of return.  The rate of return compensates us for letting someone else have use of our capital rather than just leaving it in a high-interest savings account in the bank.  What type of return is reasonable?  Well, you shouldn’t be surprised to hear that the answer is “it depends!” And what it depends on is the other three criteria: the more risk, the higher the costs and fees and the more locked-up your money is, the higher rate of return you should expect. Continue Reading…