Tag Archives: taking profits

Don’t be afraid to take profits

 

By Dale Roberts, cutthecrapinvesting

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Hit that sell button. It’s not hard. It is likely a good portfolio move whether you are in the accumulation stage, nearing retirement or currently enjoying retirement. Of course, to rebalance your portfolio you have sell and you have to buy. Diversification is the only free lunch when it comes to investing. To remain sensibly diversified we usually have to rebalance to bring our portfolio weights back in line. That means we sell out performing assets and buy the laggards, or at least move those profits to safety. Buy low, sell high right? That is usually the event going on under the hood when we rebalance. Don’t be afraid to take profits, on the Sunday Reads.

Canadian stocks are hitting new all-time highs. Dividends are not included in the chart, below. Remember the dividends paid out will reduce the share price, equal to the value removed to create those dividends.

And it seems like every other week I’m writing about roaring U.S. stocks …

The best year-to-date for U.S. stocks, in decades.

Followed up by this two weeks ago …

U.S. stocks have the best week of the year.

Those who create individual stock portfolios are likely watching some of their stocks go on an incredible run, while others flounder. Seeking Alpha offers some wonderful portfolio trackers that you can customize. Here’s our top winners over the last year.

Rebalancing your stocks

I don’t believe in being too strict with stock weightings, I’ve mostly let my stocks run without rebalancing. But when a stock gets to a certain weight in the portfolio, I will look to trim. Royal Bank of Canada (RBC.TO) and Apple (AAPL) are each near 8% of my RRSP. Sell limit trades have been set for Apple at $240, $250, $260, $270 etc.

I will trim RBC if the stock keeps moving higher. A few shares will be sold next week and I will set a ladder of sell orders as well. Will Apple and RBC hit those targets over the next few months? I have no idea. But if they do, I’m happy to lock in some profits that will go to ultra short term bonds (cash like) or to underweight stocks. As I’m in semi-retirement, any profits held in the ultra short bonds are ready for spending. It’s easy and enjoyable to create retirement income from share sales.

Some will suggest that we should not let individual stocks get above a 5% portfolio weighting. It’s a personal choice and I will leave that up to you. In my wife’s spousal RRSP Berkshire Hathaway is over 35% of the portfolio. I have no plans to sell, quite the opposite, given that the stock is a conglomerate and more like ‘balanced’ fund compared to a typical individual stock. Plus, Berkshire holds about $325 billion in cash, it’s more like a balanced growth portfolio. There can be special situations, and you might have a very strong conviction for an individual stock. That said, understand the concentration risks.

More on – When should we rebalance our portfolio.

Who knew that Canada’s ‘safe’ telco sector would come under attack. I have been hurt by decent weights in Telus and Bell. I sold half of my Bell stock, and then I sold the rest.

Rebalancing your ETF Portfolio

If you hold a core ETF portfolio you might simply rebalance one a year. The need to rebalance could be that your stock to bond ratio (risk level) is out of whack. We’re then selling stocks and buying bonds. And given the meteoric rise of U.S. stocks over everything else, your portfolio geographic map is likely tilted towards one country. We’re selling U.S. and buying Canada or International.

You might choose to rebalance based on bands. For example, if the U.S. stock target is 40% and it has moved to 45%, find that sell button. You may choose 50% as a band target (or other) once again, that’s up to you, but have a plan and execute.

In the accumulation stage you have the opportunity to rebalance on the fly. New monies and portfolio income can be used to buy underperforming assets. Those ongoing investments might be able keep things in line, or at least reduce the portfolio drift.

Managing your capital gains and losses

Yes, for those with taxable accounts it’s time to ‘take advantage’ of your portfolio dogs – goodbye Bell Canada and Algonquin. Feel free to discuss your losers in the comment section of this post. Think of it as stock therapy 😉 It’s tax loss harvesting season. Continue Reading…

The Greatest Paradox

Image Outcome/Public domain CC0 photo

By Noah Solomon

Special to Financial Independence Hub

In his role as head of research at Merrill Lynch, Bob Farrell established a reputation as one of the leading market analysts on Wall Street. In his famous “10 Market Rules to Remember,” Farrell summarized his insights on market tendencies.

One of Farrell’s rules states, “When all the experts and forecasts agree — something else is going to happen,” which embodies the essence of contrarianism.

In this month’s missive, I explore the roots and causal factors underlying Farrell’s warning, drawing on historical examples. I also illustrate the potential benefits and pitfalls of going against the crowd. Additionally, I demonstrate that market sentiment is currently approaching levels that have historically preceded broad market declines. Lastly, I suggest that there are specific areas where investors should consider trimming exposure, realizing gains, and paying the taxman.

There is no shortage of historical examples of “sure things” ending badly. In the late 1990s, following two decades of above-average returns, both institutional investors and consultants broadly embraced the dangerous consensus that future stock market returns would be about 11%. Dissenters and naysayers were few and far between.

The basis for these forecasts was the extrapolation of recent results. Stocks had been delivering average annualized returns of 11%, therefore it was assumed they would do so going forward – simple. Few investors contemplated the possibility that the past 15 years were anomalous from a longer-term perspective. More importantly, there was little concern that an extended period of above-average returns might have been borrowed from future returns by pushing up valuations to unsustainable levels.

The sad ending to this ebullience was the first three-year decline in equities since 1930. For the seven years ending March 31, 2007, following the market’s peak in early 2000, the annualized return of the S&P 500 was 0.9%. Importantly, these subpar returns encompassed a bitter and painful peak-trough loss of about 50%.

A similar occurrence of widespread adulation ending badly occurred only a half-decade later in 2005, when everyone “knew” residential real estate was a “surefire” way to amass wealth. Zealots justified unsustainable values with oft-cited mantras such as “They’re not making any more land,” “You can live in it,” etc. This blind optimism pushed real estate prices to unsustainable levels which all but guaranteed the subsequent collapse and some painful experiences for the “it can only go up” crowd.

Sorry, Beatles – All You Need is NOT Love

More often than not, what is obvious to the masses is wrong. There are valid explanations, both financial and behavioral, that cause the things which everyone believes to be true to turn out to be untrue.

In July 1967, the Beatles released their famous single All You Need Is Love. With all due respect to John, Paul, George, and Ringo, nothing could be further from the truth in the world of investing. Specifically, the more popular a particular investment becomes, the less its profit potential, if for no other reason than if everyone likes something, such adulation is likely to be reflected in its price.

In what is referred to as the bandwagon effect, investors often become enthusiastic about a particular investment or asset class after it has already produced strong returns. Believing that past outperformance is a sign of strong future returns, the herd then hops en masse on the proverbial bandwagon. This widespread fervor then causes prices to overshoot any rational approximation of value, thereby setting the stage for inevitable disappointment.

In the world of investing, “everyone knows” should come with a “buyer beware” warning. Investments that are heralded as sure things are bound to be fairly priced at best and often become dangerously overvalued. Great opportunities lead to great prices, which by definition means their greatness has been paid for in full, stripping them of their greatness. Conversely, it’s only when people disagree that opportunities to achieve above-average returns exist.

Risk: Reality vs. Perception

Managing risk is at least as important as (and inextricable from) achieving decent returns. Not only do irrational sentiment and expectations result in poor returns, but also give rise to elevated risk. Risk evolves in the same paradoxical manner as returns. As an asset follows the journey from normal to over-owned and overpriced, not only does its potential return deteriorate, but its risk increases.

When everybody becomes convinced that something will produce spectacular returns, then by extension they also believe that it involves little or no risk. This perception often leads investors to bid it up to the point where it becomes excessively risky. In contrast, when broadly negative opinion drives all the optimism out of an asset’s price, its risk profile becomes relatively small. Put another way, investment risk tends to reside most where it is least perceived, and vice versa.

In the world of investments, Bob Farrell trumps the Fab Four. Good investments are generally associated with skepticism, indifference, and even neglect, which sets the stage for high returns with lower risk. Inversely, widespread acceptance and adulation sow the seeds of high-risk and poor returns.

No Good Deed shall go Unpunished

As is the case with many aspects of markets, both timing and patience play an important role in contrarian investing.

Investment trends regularly go to extremes. It is this very tendency that results in calamities and opportunities. Unfortunately, life for managers is not as simple as buying cheap assets and selling their overvalued counterparts. As John Maynard Keynes stated, “The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”

Not only can overvalued assets remain stubbornly so for extended periods of time but can become even more overvalued before they ultimately come back down to earth. By the same token, undervalued assets can remain cheap and become even cheaper before any payoff materializes. Sentiment can be a self-fulfilling prophecy for an indeterminable amount of time before reversing, turning previously favored investments into assets non grata, and the subjects of yesterday’s scorn into tomorrow’s darlings. Continue Reading…