Tag Archives: value

A discussion about Value and Small-cap Factors with Avantis Investors’ CIO Dr. Eduardo Repetto

Posted By |
Avantis Investors’ CIO Dr. Eduardo Repetto (Link to YouTube clip is in text below)

Over the years, I’ve encountered several financial advisors who liked to use the mutual funds of Dimensional Fund Advisors or DFA, which was founded by alumni of the University of Chicago and based on research on the long-term return premiums offered by small-cap and Value stocks around the world. Even today I own a DFA International Equity fund that was a legacy of my time with a fee-only advisor: that’s generally the requirement for accessing DFA funds.

So I was intrigued when certified financial planner Mike Bayer [CFP, CIM, FCSI) asked me to help him interview two senior executives of Avantis Investors (a unit of American Century Investments) which for the past 18 months has been marketing Avantis ETFs, which take a similar approach with small-cap and value factors and are more accessible to do-it-yourself investors who can buy the ETFs at discount brokerages, just like any other ETF.

Regular readers of the MoneySense ETF All-Stars may recognize the name Avantis. As you can see here, the Avantis US Small Cap ETF [AVUV] was a Desert Island pick of PWL Capital’s Ben Felix and Cameron Passmore. We are about to publish the 2021 edition and as mentioned in the video interview also linked below, that pick is back along with another Avantis selection, which you can learn by watching the video.  In addition, Felix has just released a 15-minute video covering Avantis: https://youtu.be/jKWbW7Wgm0w

In the end, possibly influenced by the arrival of Avantis, DFA itself brought out three of its own ETFs: https://us.dimensional.com/etfs

Bios

Dr. Eduardo Repetto is Chief Investment Officer of Avantis Investors. Previously he was Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-Chief Investment Officer of Dimensional Fund Advisors. He earned a Ph.D. degree in Aeronautics from the California Institute of Technology, an MSc degree in Engineering from Brown University, and a Diploma de Honor in Civil Engineering from the Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Phil McInnis is also a DFA alumnus, where he was Head of Portfolio Solutions. Today he is director of investments at Avantis Investors®, responsible for marketing content development surrounding Avantis’ investment approach.

Mike Bayer, CFP, CIM, FCSI, is a Toronto-based financial planner with Strategic Analysis Capital Management and blogger at Free Speech Media.

Highlights from the transcript

So without further ado, here is a link to the full interview, which runs almost an hour. However, you can click on a “transcript” link within YouTube, for those who prefer reading and skimming. Below are some highlights:

Continue Reading…

4 investment strategies every stock investor should consider

Posted By |

By Sia Hasan

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Portfolio managers and analysts believe that no one investment strategy outweighs the rest. Instead, every game plan has its unique strengths and weaknesses. As such, it’s up to investors to choose the tactic that best works for them. It’s worth taking time to learn to develop strategies if you are considering investing in bonds or stocks. Some of the stock and bond investment strategies include quantitative, algorithmic trading, value investing, growth strategy, GARP investing, and collar options strategy.

Quantitative, Algorithmic Trading

Quantitative, algorithmic Trading involves selection of an investment based on mathematical analysis. In fact, investors don’t need to consider other factors such as how a business operates. All they need is to analyze different variables that correlate with each other to create an algorithm that can help predict how stock or bond prices will change over time. Quantitative, algorithmic trading is one of the newest investment strategies that have become popular in the past few years. It allows investors to engage in different investment styles and come up with a thesis, variables and set of data that they can use to identify and exploit market inefficiencies. It’s up to the investors to develop a model, test it with historical data, and implement it to see if it works. Algorithmic trading is ideal for investors with some mathematical and computer programming background.

Value Investing

Value investing is a strategy where an investor buys stocks that are grossly undervalued. Buying stocks that trade for less value than their net assets and cash profits allows the investor to limit the amount of money he or she could lose on an investment. The strategy is ideal for investors who believe that the market overreacts to emerging trends, resulting in a price decline that doesn’t correspond with an investor’s long-term fundamentals. The stock price could decline beyond its fair value when a market overreacts to bad news. As such, an investor can take advantage and buy stock, and wait for its value to return to its optimal level.

Growth Investing

Growth investing is a more aggressive investment strategy that focuses on capital appreciation. It involves investment in stocks or bonds that exhibit signs of growth even if their current share price seems high. Investors are anticipating that stocks and bonds will grow in value and offset the premium they will pay for the investment. However, this is an aggressive investment approach that investors regard as both highly rewarding and highly risky. Investors have to be confident about the growth and competitive strength of a company to justify that its share value will grow in the future. Growth investing strategy is ideal for futurists who are confident that stocks or bonds will increase in value over time.

Growth at Reasonable Price Investing (GARP)

GARP (Growth at a Reasonable Price) is a hybrid of growth and value investing strategies. However, analysts have often stated that value and growth-based investment strategies are joined at the hip. In fact, there is little difference between growth and value-based investment strategies. The growth of a company will always impact its fair value. It is far better to buy highly valued shares at a fair price than to buy undervalued shares at a lower price. GARP strategies enable investors to identify stocks and bonds that are priced reasonably. As such, they can benefit from the stock’s growth potential as well as enjoy protection against price deviation.

It’s important to note there is no one investment strategy that is best for everyone. What matters is whether the investment tactic is a good fit for your company or not. However, nothing is worse than being inconsistent with each of your investment strategies. You can hardly find the source of error that could be increasing your costs if you invest in different philosophy each time. However, it is vital to minimize your trading costs irrespective of the investment strategy you adopt.

Sia Hasan is a tech entrepreneur by day, and a freelance writer by night. Her passion lies in business technology, efficient and sleek programming, and customer relationship management. When she doesn’t have her nose pressed against her computer screen, you can find her spending time with the loves of her life, her two dogs, Pixel and Vector.

Quality is the Factor ETF investors should emphasize in today’s Market

Posted By |
By the WisdomTree ETFs team
Special to the Financial Independence Hub
 

Investing is hard. Trying to time the market is harder. Timing return factors at the right time? Forget about it.

The past few years have seen some of the industry’s brightest minds publish papers concerning the feasibility of timing return factors. The conclusions have varied slightly, but most generally agree that when investing in factors, trying to determine which ones to invest in at a given time is an incredibly difficult undertaking.

However, most of these papers analyze factor timing from the lens of the valuations of these factors. What if we take a different approach and see if we can estimate which factors could outperform from the context of where we are in the market cycle?

Where are we now?

The U.S. equity bull market started on March 9, 2009. In the almost nine years since then, the S&P 500 has rallied nearly 400%.1 We are certainly not calling for an end to the bull run — in fact, the market environment still appears benign, and corporate earnings have remained strong — but it is certainly not a stretch to claim that we are closer to the end of the cycle than we are to the beginning of it.

As of this writing [mid-February], we are in the midst of the longest period without a 3% pullback in the history of the S&P 500.2 With implied and realized volatility hovering near their all-time lows, it seems reasonable to expect more choppiness — if not an outright correction — coming in the next few months. Based on what we know from history, what factors tend to outperform in the late stages of market cycles?

Factor performance prior to market corrections

Factor Performance Prior to Market Corrections

Late-Stage Outperformers: Momentum, Quality

Dating back to 1990, there have been ten distinct 10% corrections in the S&P 500,3 with bifurcated results in the months preceding the correction. In the lead-up to the downturns, momentum and quality stocks have seen consistent excess performance compared to the market, whereas the size and value factors have generally underperformed.

These results provide an interesting backdrop for today’s market. If we are indeed late in the cycle, and the market dropped 10% tomorrow, this trend would hold true once again. The MSCI Momentum Index and MSCI Quality Index have outperformed the S&P 500 over the last 12 months (by 1,700 and 320 basis points (bps), respectively), whereas the Russell 2000 Index and Russell 1000 Value Index (well-known small-cap and value indexes) have both lagged by more than 700 bps.4

While it is interesting to look at what factors worked well, we think it is also important to analyze what didn’t. If size and value lagged, one can conclude that their complements — large caps and growth companies — outperformed as a result.

Factor performance during market corrections

Factor Performance during Market Corrections

Quality: The best of Factors in the worst of times

Shifting our focus to the market corrections themselves, when the S&P 500 fell at least 10%, it is clear that quality was the most desirable factor by a relatively wide margin. Intuitively, that makes sense—when there is stress in the markets, high-quality companies should help protect investors during market downturns. Encouragingly, the factor excess performance was largest in the most severe market sell-offs (with the quality factor having captured only 74% of the market downside during the tech bubble and 81% during the financial crisis).

Again, value underperforms here, with size and momentum each having relatively more mixed results during market corrections.

What are Size and Value good for? Continue Reading…

Sizing up the Size Factor

Posted By |

 

Small-Cap Growth & Small-Cap Value begin to diverge in 2015

By Chris Ganatti, Wisdomtree Investments

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

It seems like everywhere across the investment landscape in these days there is talk about “factors.” While this isn’t necessarily a new discussion (research has been done for decades regarding the drivers of excess returns within equities), it is easier than ever to pick and choose the factors to which you would prefer exposure.

Size: popular but volatile

When people get excited about changes — changes in policy, changes in growth expectations, changes in political leadership — we’ve tended to see this excitement show up in the behavior of small-cap stocks. We saw this most recently during the “Trump trade,” with the bulk of the performance response coming between the November 8, 2016, election victory and the January 20, 2017, inauguration.

  • In 2012 and 2014, the Russell 2000 Value Index and the Russell 2000 Growth Index performed very similarly. Even the approximate 9% difference between these indexes in 2013 wasn’t particularly noteworthy because U.S. equity market indexes across the board tended to be up 30% to 40% that year.
  • The most recent “tough” year for small caps was 2015, and it was clear that the Russell 2000 Value Index was the laggard, as the Russell 2000 Growth Index was nearly flat. But 2016 saw greater than 20% outperformance of the Russell 2000 Value Index vs. the Russell 2000 Growth Index. In 2017 through July 14, these indexes have reversed again, with the Russell 2000 Growth Index now outperforming the Russell 2000 Value Index by 1,000 basis points (bps).

Value, Growth, Core…What’s the “Right” Choice?

Based on what we’re seeing in more recent index behavior, trying to time the shift between value and growth could carry with it a significant opportunity cost and the risk of being incorrect. Intuitively, one might say, “why not just own all the stocks?,” which could then lead to the Russell 2000 Index: very much the status quo choice. But as we mentioned before, it has never been easier to fine-tune exposure to a market segment through the use of factors.

Over the long term, did Size or “Size-Plus” lead to outperformance?

Continue Reading…

What Is the Income Factor in U.S. Equities?

Posted By |

blog-see-more-dividendschris_gannatti_crop-bwBy Christopher Gannatti, Associate Director of Research, WisdomTree

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

The factor discussion is gaining popularity in the world of smart beta indexing. Size, value, momentum, minimum volatility, quality—these are all factors in the current discussion, and for the initiated they are becoming part of the common index lexicon.

But are investors really looking for these specific factors by name? We explore how these factors relate to real-world investment goals.

Translating Factors into Investment Goals

Some commonly referenced investment goals are:

• Keeping principal stable for unexpected expenses and emergencies

• Generating a certain average annual return to meet future goals in retirement

• Drawing income in order to meet planned expenses

We focus on income, as WisdomTree was the first to create a suite of U.S. equity Indexes weighted by cash dividends.

Defining the Income Factor

Continue Reading…