Category: General Investing

There are no guarantees in the world of investing… or are there? Here are six things about investing that I’m certain will happen in 2020.

1. There will be something huge to worry about in the financial markets.

Peter Lynch is the legendary manager of the Fidelity Magellan Fund who earned a 29% annual return during his 13-year tenure from 1977 to 1990. He once said:

“There is always something to worry about. Avoid weekend thinking and ignore the latest dire predictions of the newscasters. Sell a stock because the company’s fundamentals deteriorate, not because the sky is falling.”

Imagine a year in which all the following happened: (1) The US enters a recession; (2) the US goes to war in the Middle East; and (3) the price of oil doubles in three months. Scary? Well, there’s no need to imagine: They all happened in 1990. And what about the S&P 500? It has increased by nearly 800% from the start of 1990 to today, even without counting dividends.

There will always be things to worry about. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest.

2. Individual stocks will be volatile.

From 1997 to 2018, the maximum peak-to-trough decline in each year for Amazon.com’s stock price ranged from 12.6% to 83.0%. In other words, Amazon’s stock price had suffered a double-digit fall every single year. Meanwhile, the same Amazon stock price had climbed by 76,000% (from US$1.96 to more than US$1,500) over the same period.

If you’re investing in individual stocks, be prepared for a wild ride. Volatility is a feature of the stock market – it’s not a sign that things are broken. 

3. The US-China trade war will either remain status quo, intensify, or blow over.

“Seriously!?” I can hear your thoughts. But I’m stating the obvious for a good reason: We should not let our views on geopolitical events dictate our investment actions. Don’t just take my words for it. Warren Buffett himself said so. In his 1994 Berkshire Hathaway shareholders’ letter, Buffett wrote (emphases are mine):

“We will continue to ignore political and economic forecasts, which are an expensive distraction for many investors and businessmen.

Thirty years ago, no one could have foreseen the huge expansion of the Vietnam War, wage and price controls, two oil shocks, the resignation of a president, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, a one-day drop in the Dow of 508 points, or treasury bill yields fluctuating between 2.8% and 17.4%.

But, surprise – none of these blockbuster events made the slightest dent in Ben Graham’s investment principles. Nor did they render unsound the negotiated purchases of fine businesses at sensible prices.

Imagine the cost to us, then, if we had let a fear of unknowns cause us to defer or alter the deployment of capital. Indeed, we have usually made our best purchases when apprehensions about some macro event were at a peak. Fear is the foe of the faddist, but the friend of the fundamentalist.

A different set of major shocks is sure to occur in the next 30 years. We will neither try to predict these nor to profit from them. If we can identify businesses similar to those we have purchased in the past, external surprises will have little effect on our long-term results.”

From 1994 to 2018, Berkshire Hathaway’s book value per share, a proxy for the company’s value, grew by 13.5% annually. Buffett’s disciplined focus on long-term business fundamentals – while ignoring the distractions of political and economic forecasts – has worked out just fine.

4. Interest rates will move in one of three ways: Sideways, up, or down.

“Again, Captain Obvious!?” Please bear with me. There is a good reason why I’m stating the obvious again.

Much ado has been made about what central banks have been doing, and would do, with their respective economies’ benchmark interest rates. This is because of the theoretical link between interest rates and stock prices.

Stocks and other asset classes (bonds, cash, real estate etc.) are constantly competing for capital. In theory, when interest rates are high, the valuation of stocks should be low, since the alternative to stocks – bonds – are providing a good return. On the other hand, when interest rates are low, the valuation of stocks should be high, since the alternative – again, bonds – are providing a poor return.

But if we’re long-term investors in the stock market, I think we really do not need to pay much attention to what central banks are doing with interest rates.

There’s an amazing free repository of long-term US financial market data that is maintained by Robert Shiller. He is a professor of economics and the winner of a Nobel Prize in economics in 2013. 

His data includes long-term interest rates in the US, as well as US stock market valuations, going back to the 1870s. The S&P 500 index is used as the representation for US stocks while the cyclically adjusted price earnings (CAPE) ratio is the valuation measure. The CAPE ratio divides a stock’s price by its inflation-adjusted average earnings over a 10-year period.

The chart below shows US long-term interest rates and the CAPE ratio of the S&P 500 since 1920:

Contrary to theory, there was a 30-plus year period that started in the early 1930s when interest rates and the S&P 500’s CAPE ratio both grew. It was only in the early 1980s when falling interest rates were met with rising valuations. 

To me, Shiller’s data shows how changes in interest rates alone can’t tell us much about the movement of stocks. In fact, relationships in finance are seldom clear-cut. “If A happens, then B will occur” is rarely seen.

Time that’s spent watching central banks’ decisions regarding interest rates will be better spent studying business fundamentals. The quality of a company’s business and the growth opportunities it has matter far more to its stock price over the long run than interest rates. 

Sears is a case in point. In the 1980s, the US-based company was the dominant retailer in the country. Morgan Housel wrote in his recent blog post, Common Plots of Economic History :

“Sears was the largest retailer in the world, housed in the tallest building in the world, employing one of the largest workforces.

“No one has to tell you you’ve come to the right place. The look of merchandising authority is complete and unmistakable,” The New York Times wrote of Sears in 1983.

Sears was so good at retailing that in the 1970s and ‘80s it ventured into other areas, like finance. It owned Allstate Insurance, Discover credit card, the Dean Witter brokerage for your stocks and Coldwell Banker brokerage for your house.”

US long-term interest rates fell dramatically from around 15% in the early-to-mid 1980s to 3% or so in 2018. But Sears filed for bankruptcy in October 2018, leaving its shareholders with an empty bag. In his blog post mentioned earlier, Housel also wrote:

“Growing income inequality pushed consumers to either bargain or luxury goods, leaving Sears in the shrinking middle. Competition from Wal-Mart and Target – younger and hungrier – took off.

By the late 2000s Sears was a shell of its former self. “YES, WE ARE OPEN” a sign outside my local Sears read – a reminder to customers who had all but written it off.” 

If you’re investing for the long run, there are far more important things to watch than interest rates.

5. There will be investors who are itching to make wholesale changes to their investment portfolios for 2020.

Ofer Azar is a behavioural economist. He once studied more than 300 penalty kicks in professional football (or soccer) games. The goalkeepers who jumped left made a save 14.2% of the time while those who jumped right had a 12.6% success rate. Those who stayed in the centre of the goal saved a penalty 33.3% of the time.

Interestingly, only 6% of the keepers whom Azar studied chose to stay put in the centre. Azar concluded that the keepers’ moves highlight the action bias in us, where we think doing something is better than doing nothing. 

The bias can manifest in investing too, where we develop the urge to do something to our portfolios, especially during periods of volatility. We should guard against the action bias. This is because doing nothing to our portfolios is often better than doing something. I have two great examples. 

The first is a paper published by finance professors Brad Barber and Terry Odean in 2000. They analysed the trading records of more than 66,000 US households over a five-year period from 1991 to 1996. They found that the most frequent traders generated the lowest returns – and the difference is stark. The average household earned 16.4% per year for the timeframe under study but the active traders only made 11.4% per year.

Second, finance professor Jeremy Siegel discovered something fascinating in the mid-2000s. In an interview with Wharton, Siegel said:

“If you bought the original S&P 500 stocks, and held them until today—simple buy and hold, reinvesting dividends—you outpaced the S&P 500 index itself, which adds about 20 new stocks every year and has added almost 1,000 new stocks since its inception in 1957.”

Doing nothing beats doing something. 

6. There are 7.7 billion individuals in the world today, and the vast majority of us will wake up every morning wanting to improve the world and our own lot in life.

This motivation is ultimately what fuels the global economy and financial markets. There are miscreants who appear occasionally to mess things up, but we should have faith in the collective positivity of humankind. We should have faith in us. The idiots’ mess will be temporary.

To me, investing in stocks is the same as having the long-term view that we humans are always striving collectively to improve the world. What about you?

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

John Huber is one of the top-performing fund managers of the decade. His Saber Investment fund has achieved a gross annualised return of 20.66% since 2014. That puts his fund well ahead of the S&P 500 which has annualised at 10.89%.

I spent my weekend studying some of Huber’s letters to shareholders and blog posts. Here are three investing lessons from his writings.

Time is a valuable edge

Fund managers often get asked the question, “what is your edge”? The two main responses that institutional investors look for are some sort of “information” or “analytical” edge.

However, Huber believes that in an era of easily-accessible information, both these edges do not exist anymore. Huber explains:

“I’ve observed over the years that whatever information an investor believes to be unique is almost always understood by many other market participants, and thus is not valuable.

The mispricing is not in the stock itself, but in the investor’s own perception of the value of information: it’s worth far less than they believe it is. Information is now a commodity, and like the unit price of computing power that provides it, the value has steadily fallen as the supply and access to it has skyrocketed.”

But the absence of an “informational” or “analytical” edge does not mean stock pickers cannot outperform the market. Huber believes that the “time horizon” edge is still alive and kicking.

The “time horizon” edge is formed because today’s market participants are more interested in short-term gains over the long-term. Huber notes that many investment firms today make investing decisions based entirely on short-term stock price movements. These decisions have nothing to do with long-term value. 

This creates a huge pricing mismatch between a stock’s long-term value and the current stock price. In turn, it creates a massive opportunity for long-term investors to outperform the market.

But the “time horizon” edge does come with its price. Huber explains:

“The price of gaining this edge is the volatility that could occur in the near term. You have to be willing to accept the possibility that your stock will go down before it goes up. Very few investors are willing to pay that price, which is why even large-cap stocks can become disconnected from their long term fair values.”

Don’t be afraid to say, “I don’t know”

Huber wrote a great article on one of Warren Buffett’s underrated investment attributes: His ability to recognize when a situation is outside of his well-defined circle of competence.

Buffett has been able to do extremely well in the stock market simply by focusing on more-certain bets and resisting everything else.

The ability to say “no” has enabled Buffett to have very few major mistakes on his record.

More impressively, Buffett is also humble enough to admit when he is wrong. For example, his ability to realise his mistakes led him to make smart investment exits in IBM, Tesco, and Freddie Mac. Huber wrote:

“I think the vast majority of investment mistakes can be traced back to the inability to be honest about your own knowledge or level of understanding about a subject matter.

It’s hard for smart people who have spent their lives being right far more often than they are wrong to admit to themselves that something is too challenging.

It is even harder to admit that their original assessment was completely wrong. So I think intellectual honesty can be a source of a powerful edge for those who can harness it to their advantage.”

Individual thought is essential

Huber also explains that one of the biggest risks in investing is allowing others to indirectly make your investment decisions.

Too often investors rely on outside advisors to make an investment decision. But the advice may be based on different economic interests, investment horizons, or goals. 

Investors also tend to copy high-profile investors. However, high-profile investors can also occasionally make mistakes. 

Theranos, one of the most high profile fraud cases of the decade, managed to secure billions in funding before it was eventually found out. Its early investors were some of the most respected business people of our time. They included the likes of Carlos Slim, Robert Kraft, Larry Ellison, Rupert Murdoch, and the Walton family. Huber notes:

“My observation is that independent thought is extremely rare, which makes it very valuable.

On the other hand, outsourced thinking appears to be pervasive in the investment community, and because of how we’re wired, this dynamic is unlikely to change. Regardless of how convincing the facts are, we are just more comfortable if we can mold our opinion around the opinion of others.

Understanding this reality and being aware of our own human tendencies is probably a necessary condition to investment success in the long run.”

Ser Jing and I started The Good Investors as a platform to raise awareness on how investors can invest well for themselves while doing good for the world. These two objectives are by no means mutually exclusive. 

Driving growth

In his book Sapiens: a Brief History of Humankind, Yuval Noah Harari devoted a whole chapter to how capitalism contributed to the modernisation and growth of the world’s economy. He wrote:

“Capitalism distinguishes ‘capital’ from mere ‘wealth’. Capital consists of money, goods, and resources that are invested in production. Wealth, on the other hand, is buried in the ground or wasted on unproductive activities.”

Capitalism is, hence, one of the driving forces of real economic growth over the last five centuries.

But free markets that are solely after profits can be detrimental to society. The slave trade, for example, was the product of free-market capitalism. Harrari wrote, “When growth becomes a supreme good, unrestricted by any other ethical considerations, it can easily lead to catastrophe.”

To prevent this, investors should focus on ethical investing, rather than simply chasing after profits. Investing responsibly can not only fuel economic growth but can also help drive innovation, promote good practices, and reverse climate change, among others.

Investors today are much more conscious of how they can do well while doing good. With that said, I have compiled a list of five ways investors can invest for the greater good.

1. Avoiding sin stocks

Tim Nash, the founder of Good Investing, describes negative screening as doing less evil. By avoiding sin stocks, capital allocators force companies to rethink their strategy and discourage entrepreneurs from moving into the controversial sector in the first place.

Each of us may have a different definition of sin stocks depending on our personal values. However, some commonly cited “sin stocks” include weapons, fossil fuels, and cigarette companies.

2. Investing in green technology

We can also actively invest in companies that are striving to make the world a better place.

Climate change is one of the biggest challenges of the world today. It is, therefore, no surprise that investors are now prioritising green technology more than ever. But the success of green technology can only be achieved if both investors and consumers are willing to back it.

Some examples of green technology include solar power, electric vehicles, water purification, and LED lights. 

Thankfully, it seems that the world is moving in the right direction when it comes to green technology. In November 2019, the Singapore government announced that it will invest US$2 billion in funds that have a strong green focus. 

3. Investing in necessities

In Singapore, we take clean water for granted. However, unsafe sanitation is still a massive problem in Africa. Unsanitary water contributes to more than 1,200 deaths of children under five years old per day.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has taken massive steps to alleviate the problem, through education and waste treatment technology. 

Investors can contribute too. We can play our part by funneling our capital to companies that are helping to alleviate the sanitisation problem.

Besides water, investors can also consider supporting companies that champion basic human rights, promote education, enable sustainable farming, and others.

4. Innovative companies

Some companies are improving the lives of millions of people simply through innovative technologies.

Take Alphabet Inc, for example. The parent company of Google has increased its focus away from merely “organising information”. Today, the tech conglomerate has investments in healthcare and autonomous vehicles, and even provides the world with faster Internet access through fiber networks.

Many of us also probably also use some of Google’s other applications that make our lives much easier, like Google Maps, Gmail, Google Photos, and even Google Translate.

Alphabet is certainly not the only company making a difference to the world. Today, there are more tech companies than ever that are coming up with innovative solutions that are not only financially feasible but improving the lives of millions.

5. Healthcare

Another way we can invest for the greater good is by investing in healthcare companies. The pharmaceutical sector, for instance, is responsible for the innovation of numerous drugs that have saved the lives of millions.

However, pharmaceutical companies require bucketloads of cash to fund research and clinical trials.

While the biggest pharmaceutical companies are self-sustainable through the money earned from earlier blockbuster drugs, many are still in their infant stages. Such firms are desperately in need of capital.

Investors can help to fund research by investing in these companies. There is also the potential of profit should one of the pipeline drugs get commercialised.

Doing well while doing good

Contrary to popular belief, investing need not be solely for enriching yourself. By selectively investing in companies that are doing good for the world, we not only stand to profit but can also improve the world in the process.

My hope is that more investors use their capital not only as a means to enrich themselves but also for the greater good of the world.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Being greedy when others are fearful is easier said than done. Most investors may say they would do it but few actually practice it.

In the last downturn, how many of us actually had the courage to buy stocks when everyone else was selling? So why is it so hard to act against the grain?

Fundamentals change too

When we think of market downturns, we usually imagine a world where nothing changes except for stock valuations. The reality, however, is nothing like that. Morgan Housel from the Collaborative Fund explains:

“The reason you may embrace ideas and goals you once thought unthinkable during a downturn is because more changes during downturns than just asset prices.”

Take 2008 for example. Stock prices fell hard, but not without reason. The subprime mortgage crisis in the United States developed into a full-blown international banking crisis. Previously sound banks failed, companies went broke and consumer spending plunged.

These are fundamental changes that caused a decline in company earnings, huge layoffs and reduced consumer wealth.

In such times, it is easy to see why investor confidence was sapped.

People need positive reinforcement

Even when we do think differently from the crowd, most of us are not able to act on it. People require positive reinforcement to take action. 

For instance, when we are bullish on a stock, we need encouragement from external sources. We seek out positive reinforcement in the mode of brokers’ opinions, analysts reports, or even friend’s approval.

However, in a time when everyone is fearful, positive reinforcement is hard to come by.

Fear is hard to ignore

Emotions also play a huge part in our investment decisions. When we start investing, we often tell ourselves to ignore emotions and to focus on facts. But, unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to tune out emotions completely.

In his book The Little Book of Behavioral Investing: How Not to Be Your Own Worst Enemy, investor James Montier said, “It turns out there are numerous human traits that push us toward conformity and away from individual thinking.”

He explains that neuroscientists have found that when individuals take the road-less-travelled, they experience fear. Fear is there for a reason. It is a defense mechanism that is built to protect us. Acting against our fears, is thus, innately difficult.

As such, it is no wonder that fear plays a big part in our investing decisions. When the stock market is raging, investors have a fear of missing out (FOMO), while the fear of losing money makes people sell in a bear market.

Contrarian Thinking

“ …don’t be led astray by Wall Street’s fashions, illusions and its constant chase after the fast dollar. Let me emphasize that it does not take genius to be a successful value analyst, what it needs is, first, reasonably good intelligence; second, sound principles of operation; and third, and most important, firmness of character.”

Benjamin Graham

It is not difficult to see why contrarian investing is so challenging. If it were easy, it wouldn’t be called “contrarian” in the first place. But on the other end of the spectrum, simply being contrarian for the sake of it, is also extremely detrimental. We need to seek the right balance.

For us to be a successful contrarian investor, we need three key characteristics: The ability to digest and analyst facts; individual thinking; and the courage to overcome fear. If you master these three traits, you will likely reap the rewards in the future.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

With the improvement in artificial intelligence, it was only a matter of time before robots started managing money. Today, robo advisors are becoming commonplace among retail investors. Even traditional banks such as DBS are beginning to embrace the power of artificial intelligence as a wealth management platform.

But should you trust a “robot” to manage your hard-earned money? With that in mind, I map some of the advantages and downsides of using a robot-assisted wealth management tool.

What really are robo advisors?

Robo advisors are digital platforms that personalise the investor’s portfolio using an algorithmic-driven approach with little human supervision. 

The process is really quite simple. Investors register for an account on the robo advisor’s platform. They then answer a few questions that help the robo advisor understand the individual’s financial goals and risk tolerance. 

Using an algorithm, the robo advisor then advises the clients on a suitable portfolio for them.

Usually, robo advisors have a fixed list of Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) or funds that it can choose from to build the client’s portfolio. These funds, in turn, invest in a variety of assets, such as stocks, bonds, or real estate. One thing to note, these funds are actually mostly managed by humans! So robo advisors simply help to allocate your wealth to the funds that it thinks suits your needs and goals.

What are the fees involved?

Robo advisors usually charge just a basic annual advisory fee that is a small percentage of the total assets under management.

For instance, Morgan Stanley’s Access Investing charges a fee of 0.35% per annum, while DBS digiPortfolio charges an annual fee of between 0.75% and 0.85%.

But to be clear, this does not include the fees related to owning shares of mutual funds and exchange-traded funds. I will explain more on this later.

The table below shows the fees charged by the prominent robo advisors in Singapore.

Why invest with robo advisors?

The beauty of robo advisors is that it removes emotional misjudgments and other possible conflicts of interest from the decision-making process.

The robo advisors use a methodological process that is immune to emotion and is not influenced by commission-related fees.

They are also really simple to use. The set up is usually a seamless process and the minimum outlay to invest can be fairly small.

They also offer regular statements that will give investors up-to-date information on how their investments are performing and keep track of all additional cash flows.

In addition, robo advisors can automate the rebalancing of the portfolio for the client. This removes the hassle of actively managing your portfolio and reallocating it manually every few quarters. Importantly, there is also no additional transaction cost for rebalancing, unlike a do-it-yourself portfolio.

Potential pain points

But as with any product, there are also things not to like about robo advisors. 

Robo advisors only offer a few different fixed portfolios. It is not possible to deviate from these fixed portfolios. After answering a few questions, the robo advisor will recommend one of the fixed portfolios that they have built. Investors cannot deviate from these fixed portfolios and are not able to access funds that are not offered on the platform.

On top of that, the robo advisor’s advisory fee is an additional cost. As mentioned earlier, investors have to pay the advisory fee, on top of the total expense ratio of the funds that they invest in through the robo advisor.

Although the robo advisory fee is usually less than a percentage point, it quickly adds up over the years.

Is it right for you?

Ultimately, the fewer potential conflicts of interest and the fee-based structures make robo advisors a robust wealth management tool that has the client’s interest at the forefront.

However, they still have their limitations. If you want a more personalised portfolio, the limited number of portfolio constructions in a robo advisor platform may not be sufficient.

Many of the robo advisors also only offer ETFs on their platform. As a result, it may not be useful for investors who want exposure to more aggressively-managed active funds, which have the potential for higher returns.

All things considered, I believe investors who want a simple stress-free passive investment strategy can consider using robo advisors. More savvy investors who are willing to do some research on funds should have a more hands-on approach to save costs and gain access to better-performing funds in the market.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Professional financial advisors prescribe diversifying one’s investment portfolio across multiple asset classes. This means spreading your investments into each of the four major asset classes- stocks, bonds, real estate, and commodities. In theory, this helps to smoothen returns and reduces the “risk” in the portfolio.

So having a portfolio that is composed entirely of stocks is unconventional, to say the least. However, before you close this article and call me a nut job, let me explain the reasoning behind my asset-allocation strategy.

Stocks: the best-performing asset class

Stocks are unlike any asset class. Eddy Elfenbein, portfolio manager of the AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF, explains in his blog:

“All other assets are things. They just sit there. If you buy some gold and leave it alone, in 50 years it will still be there, just sitting there. There are income-producing assets like bonds and real estate, which makes them a little better than commodities. But still, they’re just things. They can neither think nor create.

Equity, on the other hand, is wholly different. It’s a legal entity by which people can come together and employ said assets to make goods and services for people… The business works to make a profit, and it keeps investing those profits in the business to make still more profits.”

When you invest in stocks, you are really investing in the power of human ingenuity.

It is, therefore, not surprising to note that over the long term, stocks are by far the top-performing asset class. In fact, according to data from the University of Chicago, in the 100 years from 1915 to 2014, stocks had an average real return (after removing inflation) of 8.3% per year, while bonds returned just 1.1% per year. A $1000 investment in bonds in 1915 would have a “real worth” of $2,992 in 2014, while $1000 invested in stocks would have been worth $2,301,134.

Other studies also consistently show that over the long-term stocks always come up on top, followed by bonds, real estate, and commodities.

The power of time

But performance alone is not the only reason to invest solely in stocks. I also need to be able to ride out the inevitable market swings in the stock market. Thankfully, I have time on my side. As a young investor, I have the holding power to see out the downturns of the market. I do not foresee needing the money from my investments anytime soon, nor do I depend on cash flow from my investments. 

On top of that, my investment objective is really to grow my retirement fund as fast as possible, rather than simply preserving wealth. This makes stocks the ideal investment asset for me.

I can also still be sufficiently-diversified even if I solely invest in stocks. Investing in a range of different companies that operate in different geographies and sectors help to diversify my risk. I can even gain exposure to real estate, by investing in real estate investment trusts (REITs), which are also traded on stock markets.

Building your portfolio

Legendary investor, Peter Lynch, once said, “Gentlemen who prefer bonds don’t know what they’re missing.”

If you are a young investor and have a long investment horizon like I do, having a more aggressive investment portfolio might be the right way to go. However, investing solely in stocks does come with caveats. Investors need to be able to stomach inevitable market swings and steep drawdowns. Having a disciplined long-term approach and sticking to your principles is key to success in the market.

Over the long-term, I take heart that despite the volatile nature of stocks, if history is anything to go by, my stock-heavy portfolio will likely provide better returns than if I diversify across multiple other asset classes.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, are rising in popularity. According to ETF.com, assets under management by US ETFs crossed the US$4 trillion mark earlier this year. That’s huge, to say the least.

It’s not hard to see why the investment vehicle is appealing. You can get wide diversification instantly with most ETFs. Expense ratios are typically low as well, enabling you to keep most of the returns generated.

But not all ETFs are the same. Before you invest in any ETF, you may want to take note of these eight key points.

1. What is an ETF

An ETF is a fund that is traded on a stock exchange, and it can be bought and sold just like any other stock on a stock exchange. An ETF can invest in all kinds of shares depending on the purpose of the fund, and there are many ETFs that aim to track the performance of a stock market index.

Singapore’s main stock market index is the Straits Times Index. There are two ETFs that track its performance, namely, the SPDR Straits Times Index ETF, and the Nikko AM Singapore STI ETF.

2. Mind the gap

The gap between a positive macro-economic trend and stock price returns can be a mile wide.

For example, gold was worth A$620 per ounce at the end of September 2005 and the price climbed by 10% annually for nearly 10 years to reach A$1,550 per ounce on 15 September 2015. But an index of gold mining stocks in Australia’s market, the S&P / ASX All Ordinaries Gold Index, fell by 4% per year from 3,372 points to 2,245 in the same timeframe.

In another example, you can refer to the chart below on the disparity between the stock market returns and economic growth for China and Mexico from 1992 to 2013. Despite stunning 15% annual GDP growth in that period for China, Chinese stocks actually fell by 2% per year. Mexico on the other hand, saw its stocks gain 18% annually, despite its economy growing at a pedestrian rate of just 2% per year.

So when finding themes to invest in via ETFs, make sure that the macro-economic theme you’re betting on can translate into commensurate stock market gains.

3. Replication method

ETFs can mimic the performance of a stock market index through two broad ways: Synthetic replication, or direct replication.

Synthetic replication involves the use of derivatives without directly investing in the underlying assets. It is the less ideal way to build an index-tracking ETF, in my view, because there is more complexity involved and hence a higher risk that a large proportion of the underlying index’s performance can’t be captured.

Direct replication has two sub-categories: (a) Representative sampling, where the ETF holds only a sample of the stocks within an index; and (b) full replication, which involves an ETF buying the same stocks in nearly identical proportions as the weights of all the stocks that make up an index.

You should try to invest in ETFs that use full replication if possible.

4. Reputation matters

Look for an ETF that is managed by a reputable fund management company. Vanguard, SPDR, iSHAREs, and Blackrock are just some examples of reputable ETF managers.

5. Track record

An ETF should ideally have a listing history of at least a few years, so that we can see how the ETF has actually done, instead of relying on the performance of the underlying index.

6. Watch your costs

The expense ratio (essentially all of the fees that you have to pay to the ETF’s manager and service providers) should be low. There’s no iron-clad rule on what “low” is, but I think anything less than 0.3% for the expense ratio deserves a thumbs-up.

Having a low expense ratio puts an ETF on the right side of the trend of investment dollars flowing toward low-cost index-tracking funds. This lowers the risk of an ETF’s manager closing the ETF down for commercial reasons.

7. The assets that are managed

An ETF’s assets under management (AUM) should be high – ideally more than US$1 billion. Having sizable AUM would also lower the chance that an ETF will close in the future. It’s not uncommon for ETFs to close. When a closure happens, it creates hassle on our part to find new ETFs to invest in.

8. Performance tracking

Lastly, you should look for a low tracking error. An ETF’s returns should closely match the returns of its underlying index. If the tracking error has been high in the past, there’s a higher chance that the ETF can’t adequately capture the performance of its underlying index in the future.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Established in 2010, Fundsmith is the largest mutual fund in the United Kingdom with £18bn assets under management.

Led by its founder, Terry Smith, the fund has more than doubled the market since its inception nine years ago. Investors who invested with Fundsmith from the get-go have earned a total return of 353.2%, or an annualised return of 18.3%, as of 31 October 2019. Comparatively, global equities in general “only” returned a cumulative total of 171.1% over the same time frame, or 11.7% annualised.

Its impressive performance makes FundSmith the number one performing fund in the UK. From its inception to the end of 2018, Fundsmith had a cumulative margin of 13% over the second-best fund and 188% over the average for the sector, which delivered a market-lagging 81.9% cumulative return.

Although I am not invested in the fund, I am extremely impressed by the way Fundsmith is managed. Terry Smith’s annual letter to shareholders is also filled with insightful comments and timeless lessons that we can apply in our own investing. With that, here are some of the key takeaways from Fund Smith’s latest annual report.

Stop trying to time the market!

We are all too familiar with market commentators warning of an impending bear market. Smith says:

“I can now trace back six years of market commentary that has warned that shares of the sort we invest in, our strategy and our Fund would underperform.

During that time the Fund has risen in value by over 185%. The fact that you would have forgone this gain if you had followed their advice will, of course, be forgotten by them if, or when, their predictions pay off for a period. I suggest you don’t forget it.”

Legendary investor Peter Lynch once said that “far more money has been lost by investors preparing for corrections than has been lost in corrections themselves.”

If you find yourself worried that the bull market has run its course, it will be wise to remember these words of advice.

Growth versus Value

Fundsmith’s investment strategy involves buying and holding fast-growing companies. This strategy has outperformed value investing over the last decade. However, with growth stocks reaching rich valuations, some market commentators believe that value investing may come back in favour.

In his annual shareholder letter, Smith outlines two main handicaps he sees in the value investing strategy:

“One is that whilst the value investor waits for the event(s) which will crystallise a rise in the share price to the intrinsic value that has been identified, the company is unlikely to be compounding in value in the same way as the stocks we seek. In fact, it is quite likely to be destroying value.

Moreover, it is a much more active strategy. Even when the value investor succeeds in reaping gains from a rise in the share price to reflect the intrinsic value he identified, he or she needs to find a replacement value stock, and as events of the past few years have demonstrated, this is far from easy. Moreover, this activity has a transaction cost.”

Let time work its magic

FundSmith has a simple three-step investment strategy: (1) Buy good companies, (2) Don’t overpay, and (3) Do nothing.

While some actively managed fund managers may scoff at the idea of the third point, it is actually one of the key reasons why Fundsmith has done so well since its inception. Smith explains:

“Minimising portfolio turnover remains one of our objectives and this was again achieved with a portfolio turnover of 13.4% during the period. This is the highest level of annual turnover which we have undertaken to date, but it is still tiny in comparison with most funds.”

He adds:

“Why is this important? It helps to minimise costs and minimising the costs of investment is a vital contribution to achieving a satisfactory outcome as an investor.”

The low portfolio turnover ratio resulted in FundSmith having by far the lowest transaction costs among the 15 largest active equity funds in the UK.

In fact, Smith attached a table of the returns of the 15 funds over a 3-year and 5-year period and compared them to their transaction costs. There was, unsurprisingly, a strong correlation between funds with lower transaction costs and higher returns (With FundSmith sitting at the top of the pile).

Final Thoughts

Terry Smith has become one of the most successful fund managers of his generation. He has even been compared to the legendary Warren Buffett. From his investing principles above, it is easy to see why Smith has found so much success in an industry that has traditionally underperformed low-cost index funds. His guiding investment principals can also help retail investors invest better. If you want to read more of Terry Smith’s letters to shareholders, you can head here.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.