October 20, 2015

Normal Investors - Familiarity

Credit: Suat Eman at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Imagine you are just getting home after a very busy and stressful day at work. You just closed the door to the garage, dropped your bag on the couch, and are making your way up the stairs towards something you value deeply - comfortable clothes. Yep, there’s that old pair of jeans you wore yesterday. You know the ones with the slightly worn knee and the stretched out belt loop from where you like to rest your thumb? Best of all, they’re everso slightly stretched out from your wearing them yesterday. Don’t worry, I won’t tell anyone!

Of course there’s a similar feeling when you return home after travelling, whether for business or for pleasure. That moment after you’ve filled the laundry bin, returned your toothbrush to its normal spot, and have finally put up the suitcase. Oh it’s nice to see your shower, your couch, and most of all, your pillow! Wouldn’t you agree?

As you’ve undoubtedly gathered, I’m talking about familiarity. Whether a pair of comfortably worn jeans or your old friend of a pillow, familiarity feels good. It’s what you know. It’s what feels right. It’s what feels safe. Familiarity is also the third tendency that I present to you as a trait many normal investors have.

I would offer that many people go with what they know, especially when they are unsure of what is best. Consider some research done by Vanguard back in 2010 that found that Canadian investors were 65% invested in Canadian stocks, U.S. investors were 72% invested in U.S. stocks, and Australian investors were 74% invested in Australian stocks. Canadians, Americans, and Australians certainly have their differences, but do you really think the before mentioned investment allocations coincidentally showed that degree of “home bias?” I don’t. Investors were investing in what they felt they knew.

To take this a step further, let’s spend a moment on company stock. Regardless of the company, most people I come in contact with who work for publicly traded companies tend to own stock in their employers. Why? Do they think their company’s stock is going to really pop? Sometimes. And sometimes, they’re right, but sometimes they’re not. I’ve met many successful employees and successful investors who have a significant portion of their wealth in “their” company stock, and they desire to continue holding that stock even when they are no longer actively working for the company. Why? I think it’s because it’s easier for someone to feel safe investing in a company that they know a little about rather than the broader market which they may not know as well. Employers are aware of this, too, and that’s one reason employees are often incentivized with company stock in an attempt to align the employee’s financial success with the company’s future financial success and encourage hard and good work from employees.

(As an aside, I attended a lecture given by a professor from the Wharton Business School earlier this year, and he shared that a study was currently being done on what stocks were the hardest to get investors to diversify out of based on their location. #2 was supposedly getting a Seattle resident to sell some Microsoft stock (Microsoft is based in Seattle). Guess what #1 was? Getting stock in The Coca-Cola Company out of an Atlanta resident’s hands! Do any of my local readers here have any Coca-Cola stock? If you don’t, I bet you have friends and family who do!)

Familiarity feels good. Investing in companies that are based in your country is normal. Investing in the company you work for is normal. Investing in companies that are near and dear to your city or state is normal. However, you have to be careful when considering the investment risks of being overly concentrated in a single stock, a single sector, a single asset class, or a single country’s stocks. The risk-adjusted returns of a diversified portfolio are often still king. Going with what you know, what feels right, and what feels safe can be a crutch and a safety blanket, but what if your crutch was named Enron? What if you’re a Greek citizen and Greek companies are what you know? What if your paycheck was coming from Lehman Brothers, the pension benefit you were working for was guaranteed by Lehman Brothers, and most of the stock you owned was invested in Lehman Brothers stock? It’s normal to invest based on familiarity, but that may not always be best.

There’s nothing I hate more than when a grocery store I frequently visit decides to remodel. It’s frustrating. It doesn’t feel like it used to, I don’t understand the layout, and I don’t know where anything is, but I will get used to it. Eventually the new layout will feel familiar. Sort of like an investment portfolio that has recently been adequately and prudently diversified, eventually the new layout will feel familiar.

-Tom

Next up: overconfidence

October 06, 2015

Normal Investors – Overreaction and Underreaction

The second tendency that I would suggest many normal investors have would be the tendency to overreact and underreact. (If you missed out on the first part of my behavioral finance series on five of the characteristics most “normal” investors seem to have, you can catch up right here!) Of course, before I dive into how investors can, and often do, overreact, I must consider my own behavior this past weekend…

As many of you know, my wife and I are fairly avid UGA fans. Fine, fine, we’re full-fledged Georgia Bulldog fanatics! I mean I got up at 3:30 a.m., left my home at 4:00 a.m., and arrived in Athens at 5:38 a.m. to claim a small piece of generally lucky land between two curbs that my family, friends, and I have tailgated at for the last six years for a game that kicked off at 3:30 p.m. Who would do that? Well evidently me and several thousand more of my closest Georgia brethren considering “our spot” was already taken by someone even crazier than me! Oh the genuine rage I felt as my low beams displayed his silhouette on my very own game day island! That didn’t keep my group down though as we continued with our pregame festivities in the middle of what must have been a monsoon; festivities that included steak, seafood, a houndstooth cake and elephant ears (so we could eat the opposing mascot), and a crimson punch (so we could drink the opposing mascot). Then there was the wretched game where our beloved and favored Bulldogs were supposed to avenge our painful championship game defeat a few years ago only to be shellacked, annihilated, and otherwise dismantled by one of our hated rivals from the West.

A lot of pretty normal people are college football fans, but there is a good portion of that last paragraph that might lead you to believe that I'm a little bonkers. My point is that sports fans often overreact. They react with way more pride and celebration after victories and way more dismay and disgust after losses than they probably should. Many investors do the same thing. Investors can have a good experience with a product or service, and then they suddenly want to buy some stock in the company that made the product or delivered the service based solely on their positive experience. Investors can enjoy some decent growth and gains in a stock they have previously bought a little bit of, and they can develop an insatiable and blind appetite for more and more of that very same (and already appreciated) stock. Investors can get more and more excited about a roaring bull market (think the Dotcom Bubble) and want more and more stock exposure in their portfolios even though the investment return party has been going on quite a while. Of course, investors can also panic more than a Southerner in a snowstorm and completely sell out of a position based on the rampage of some talk show host who is trying to get ratings. A chain email about tax rates going up or a presidential or congressional proposal can also get an investor to sell out of everything just as if they’d seen a mouse, snake, or spider.

Overreacting as an investor can be dangerous. It can lead to one-way bets. It can lead to frequent trades which are costly and tax-inefficient. It can lead to dangerous concentration in one stock. It can lead to dangerous concentration in cash. There are certainly times as an investor where swift and substantial action is needed, but if you are investing prudently, that shouldn’t be very often. Part of my job is being the voice of reason, being the voice that isn’t that worried about the scary financial spider that man on the radio was yelling about, and being the voice that isn’t so sure that someone has really found that Fountain of Youth your neighbor confided in you about. Overreacting about football is one thing - it’s a game. Overreacting as an investor is another - it costs real dollars and cents.

The second part about normal investors reacting is actually underreacting. I like to illustrate this by considering Western Union’s lack of interest in Mr. Bell’s telephone patent, IBM’s lack of interest in the Xerox machine, and Kodak’s lack of concern with digital technology. In my own experience, I have found that investors rarely underreact when it comes to their investment portfolios, but instead they underreact when it comes to their own financial trajectory. I stand by that spending all that you are making is not a terribly successful retirement strategy, going into retirement with a large mortgage remaining is not a positive for your retirement cash flow, and that recurring credit card debt is one of the worst things since Brussels sprouts, but not everyone adequately reacts to those messages. Similar to ignoring a scratchy throat a few mornings in a row or that ant you saw in your kitchen the other day, underreacting to financial matters that could be nipped in the bud now can lead to some real serious financial problems in the future.

It’s normal and human to not always react in the optimum way, but financially, it’s important to try to. Maybe it’s all the children’s books I find myself reading now, but I kind of think of Goldilocks. Don’t overreact, don’t underreact, try to react juuuuuust right!

-Tom

Next up: familiarity

September 08, 2015

Normal Investors - Loss Aversion

Credit: David Castillo Dominici at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
As I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, I'm now going to do a series of posts on what makes normal investors “normal.” You see, a vast majority of traditional investment theory is based on the assumption that all investors are always rational. Essentially the people who completely believe in the Efficient Market Hypothesis believe that if investors have access to enough information, they will always act rationally and choose the investment portfolio best suited to their needs. They also believe that if investors always act rationally, then the market will always behave rationally. Maybe it’s me, but I don’t feel like the market always behaves rationally, and neither do some other very smart people.

In 1956, Mr. Vernon Smith introduced the concept of behavioral finance. In the 1960s, psychologist Mr. Peter Slovic began analyzing investor’s behavioral biases. In 1974, psychologists Mr. Amos Tversky and Mr. Daniel Kahneman introduced heuristics - the study of how people make decisions or solve problems, often using their experiences and biases. Since then, academics, brokers, and financial advisors have continued to try to understand the difference between a “completely rational investor” and the actions a lot of people take when investing their own money. Behavioral finance attempts to explain the difference between what traditional investment theory says should happen in the market and actual market behavior. Please don’t get me wrong, behavioral finance does not assume that investors are irrational; it assumes investors are normal human beings. I find behavioral finance to be a fascinating field of study that helps me better understand my clients, and that’s why I’d like to share five biases many normal investors seem to have, beginning with loss aversion.
  1. Let’s pretend you’re on a game show, and I’m the host. I’ve given you $1,000. You have two choices: A) you can choose to walk away with a sure gain of an additional $500, or B) you can choose to take your chances with the flip of a coin. Heads, you’ll gain another $1,000. Tails, you’ll gain nothing. What do you choose A or B?
  2. Alright, let’s once again pretend you’re on a game show, and I’m the host. I’ve given you $2,000 this time. You have two choices: A) you can chose to walk away with a sure loss of $500, or B) you can choose to take your chances with the flip of a coin. Heads, you’ll lose nothing. Tails, you’ll lose $1,000. What do you choose A or B?
Now if you are a completely rational person trying to do what is in your best interest, wouldn’t you choose A both times and walk away with $1,500? I mean, if you choose B in either example, you could end up walking away with only $1,000 when you could have had $1,500 by simply choosing A with no coin flip involved whatsoever. What if I told you these two questions were real questions from a study written by Tversky and Kahneman, and the results of the study showed most people chose A for the first example, but most people chose B for the second one? Why would anyone do that? Because of the way the questions are worded! I, and many people who have conducted similar studies, would submit because people are willing to do anything to avoid the pain of loss. Some call this phenomenon the Prospect Theory and quantitatively suggest that losses are twice as painful to investors as gains are pleasurable. Shown on a graph, this might look like:
 
 
 
This loss aversion associated with many investors is financially dangerous because it can lead people to sell profitable investments too early (because they don’t want to lose their modest gains) and unprofitable investments too late (because they don’t want to actually recognize their losses, and they’d rather keep hoping they can regain their initial investment than acknowledge what has happened). Coupled with our nation’s unfavorable capital gain taxes on profitable investments that are sold that were held for less than a year, and you could have a double whammy!
 
I can tell you from my experiences fielding calls and replying to emails over the past couple of volatile weeks in the market, a 2% daily loss is not equal to a 2% daily gain in the eyes of some investors. Maybe it should be, but it’s not. I even had a gentleman on one of those days where the market was down a few percentage points apologetically acknowledge that he knew he didn’t call me when the market was up 2% in one day. We shared a laugh, and I told him I’d call him the next time it was up 2%. I can’t blame him though, he’s just being a normal investor who has a double aversion for loss.
 
-Tom
 
Next up: overreaction and underreaction.

August 27, 2015

The Lightning Round: Round 4

Credit: FreeDigitalPhotos.net
 
Thanks to all of you who submitted a question. Now, without further ado, here are my responses to five of your questions...

1.) I am looking at getting a new car, but I can’t decide how much I should spend. Do you have any tips?                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                           - Hayley

How much to spend on a car or how much not to spend on a car, that is your question, and it’s a good one! Strictly financially speaking, I’d recommend you take a close look at your monthly income and your monthly expenses, and see how much extra cash flow you usually have on hand at the end of each month. Let’s say you find that number to be around $500. Then I would recommend you make sure you buy a car that allows you to have a monthly loan payment of less than $500. You should talk to the dealership or your local bank to see what kind of car loans and interest rates you could qualify for. That will help you calculate how much car you can probably afford to buy and still make financial progress month to month. If you are one of those people who saves up to buy a car and doesn’t need a loan, I’d recommend that you make sure you will have enough cash in the bank after your purchase to cover somewhere around three to six months’ worth of your living expenses.
 
Outside of the financial nuts and bolts, I would like to share a couple of other thoughts. First, it may not make sense to get a certain brand or a certain model if it costs a lot more than a very similar brand’s equivalent or the next best model. For example, my Jeep is a souped-up less expensive model that has almost everything the more expensive model has on it except the model name. Second, it may not make sense to go with a lesser brand or lesser model than you really want if you can afford it and the savings are only a few thousand dollars. A few thousand dollars is nothing to sneeze at, but if you will be driving your car for the next 10 years (like most people are these days) it might be nice to drive something you are excited about and proud of!
 
Please let me know if you would like to discuss this further or talk about your specific situation.
 
2. Other than a will, what are some other things someone can do to be prepared if they pass away?
                                                                                                                                        - M. Tyler


So often when someone passes away they leave behind a very large and time-consuming mess for their loved ones. This is not intentional, but throw in a few surprise accounts or insurance policies, a few calls to Social Security, and a house full of possessions, and a monumental task is often what heirs, and certainly the executor, inherit first!

Outside of a current and well-drafted will, there are a few things you can do. One, you can make sure you have your primary and contingent beneficiaries in place for any insurance policies, annuities, and retirement accounts you may have. Remember, this is critical, as beneficiary designations trump a will, and if there is no beneficiary designation in place, assets might not be distributed how you want or intend. Second, you can give away special possessions/heirlooms that are below the annual gift exemption ($14,000 for 2015) while you’re still alive to make sure they end up where you want them. You could also potentially direct the distribution of certain special possessions in writing after death as long as your will allows it (consult with your estate attorney to make sure you have the proper language). This can help reduce the chance that two sisters will be fighting over a plate “mother wanted them to have.” Third, having a list of who you want as pallbearers, who you want to officiate your services, what hymns you want sung, and what you would like your obituary to say can also be of great benefit and relief to your grieving survivors. Fourth, having a list of important people to contact in the event of your death with their applicable information can really help your family, too. Finally, selecting and prepaying for your burial/cremation arrangements can also ensure that you get what you want and you don’t create an immediate financial burden on your loved ones at the time of your passing.

I hope this is what you were looking for. Not a happy topic, but certainly one worth considering.

3. What do you think about what’s going on in Greece? Will the European Union last?
                                                                                                                                               - John


I’ll be happy to share some thoughts on this, but this is obviously just my opinion.

I forget exactly what I was reading or where I was, but someone once explained the Eurozone problems to me with a very powerful example that I’d like to now share with you. Essentially think about the United States, a union of states, versus the European Union (EU), a union of nations. If you were to stop and ask a stranger from Georgia and a stranger from North Carolina what they are, what would they tell you? They would probably both say they were Americans; not Georgians or North Carolinians. If you were to stop and ask a stranger from Germany and a stranger from France what they are, what would they tell you? The German would tell you he is a German, and the Frenchman would tell you he is French. See the difference? This is why I think the EU may always have some serious problems.

I think the situation with Greece is too far gone to be worked out unless the rest of the Eurozone just flat out forgives their debts. The Greeks are tired of the austerity measures, and the Germans are tired of loaning money to the Greeks. Greek and German politicians know this. They keep kicking the can down the road and putting band aid after band aid on the problem, but eventually I think there will be a “Grexit,” a humorous and witty term that many have already come up with for Greece’s eventual exit from the EU. I guess we'll have to wait and see what this next round of called Greek elections holds.

As far as the EU, there are a lot of powerful people and countries that really want this to work, so it may continue to exist for quite a while. Personally, as I read about the unemployment and economic contractions going on in other counties such as Spain, Italy, and Portugal, Greece looks a little like the first domino to me. I think Great Britain may have been very wise to have joined the political union, but to have stayed out of the currency union when they joined the EU. There are simply too many little economies and country-specific industries in play. That said, there are still high-quality and thriving companies in Europe, and some countries such as Germany are still doing very well. My best guess, however, is more political, economic, and currency storms are on the horizon. Stay tuned!

4. Are you worried about robo-advisors?               
                                                                                                                                   - Anonymous

A timely question, and one being discussed by many in my industry. For those of you not familiar with the term “robo-advisor,” a robo-advisor is an investment platform that allows an investor to have their portfolio managed online with little to no human intervention. Robo-advisor platforms, such as Betterment or Wealthfront, have made a splash in the brokerage industry by being less expensive, more user-friendly, and more interactive than most of the traditional investment management platforms offered by human advisors.

Am I worried about robo-advisors? Not really. I think their popularity may cause human advisors to step up their game, but as braggadocios as this may sound, I really don’t think a computer can do all that I do. Investment allocation is just a piece of what I help clients with (there’s also tax planning, cash flow planning, estate planning, insurance planning, scenario analysis, and lots of decisions where both finances and emotions both need to be considered), so I really don’t feel that threatened. I’m also very curious to see how robo-advisors do when we get a cyclical market downturn, and investors want to be reassured that the sky is not falling. I want to see what robo-advisors say when a client needs to decide whether to save for their children’s education or retirement. I want to see what robo-advisors say to a son trying to gain control of his late father’s account. If the robo-advisors’ support staffs start taking client calls – and I think they will have to – they will have to raise their prices, and suddenly, they won’t be so robo anymore!

I am also skeptical of robo-advisors because I’ve already seen some of their shortfalls first hand. For example, I had an individual bring me an account that they had elected to rebalance after every deposit. Well, with a little bit from each paycheck going into their account, that meant they rebalanced 24 times in a year, resulting in a lot of tiny, annoying, and tax-inefficient short-term capital gains having to be recognized at ordinary income tax rates. By selecting a friendly looking box to rebalance offered by the robo-advisor, this investor incurred additional trading fees, higher taxes, and a much more complicated tax return than was likely necessary. The investor meant well and knew it was prudent to rebalance his portfolio periodically, but any decent human advisor wouldn’t have allowed a portfolio to be rebalanced twice a month!

I may be in the minority of financial advisors out there who think this, but I’m sort of excited about robo-advisors. I think they can be a helpful tool so people invest sooner rather than later. I think they can make basic analytics more available to more people. I think their gadgets and apps will help modernize some of the ancient and confusing monthly statements being generated by large investment custodians. As a CPA who lived in the world of Turbo Tax and now a CFP in the world of robo-advisors, I welcome the technology and I encourage you to carefully try it, but my caring, easy-to-understand, and customized-to-working-with-you human self will still be ready to take your call when you need me!

5. What about you? What are you most worried about as far as your finances?                
                                                                                                                                    -Kristin

Hey now! I’ll be the one asking questions around here. Just kidding! Thanks for the question!

I’m worried about a lot of things. I’m worried about the new expenses my son just brought into my monthly budget. I’m worried about the mortgage my wife and I took on when we moved. I’m worried if we’re saving enough for retirement considering neither one of us has a job that offers a pension, and I’m less than bullish on the chance of us receiving any meaningful Social Security income by the time we qualify.

How do I sleep with those worries? We spend less than we make. We save as much as we can. By growing our family and buying a house we’ve made a bet on ourselves, and I have faith we can do it.
Sure, there will be hard times and bumps in the road, but I believe we can do it. And I might or might not have a pretty sophisticated financial progress spreadsheet somewhere...

If you build up an adequate rainy day fund, you adequately insure your family should there be an unexpected death, disability, long-term illness, or liability, and you have an adequate estate plan in place to execute your wishes and desires, there’s really not much left to do. Do the best you can, live below (or at least within) your means while still making memories and enjoying experiences, and carry on. Monitor your progress and adjust your strategy as necessary. That’s what I tell clients, and that’s what I do myself.

Still, I do savor diaper coupons, I can’t wait to be debt-free, and I’m not above picking up pennies in the parking lot (heads or tails).

Thanks again for all the questions. Remember, our series on “Normal Investors” starts next week. I hope you’ll check it out because I’d be willing to bet that there is a pretty good chance you aren’t as normal as you might think. Just saying!

-Tom

August 11, 2015

2 Much Cents Update

 
It’s been quite a year. We’ve moved, we’ve had a baby, and so much more. I’d originally planned on doing another Lightning Round about half way through the year, but what can I say? Time flies when you are having fun, you’re busy, and sleep is a bit of a luxury! I still can’t believe it’s already August, so before we get any closer to 2016, it’s time for The Lighting Round: Round 4. Many of you probably remember past “Lightning Rounds,” but let me take a moment to back up for newer readers.

The Lightning Round is designed to be an interactive post where I ask you to submit any financial question you may have. Between now and midnight, August 16th, I will accept questions, and I promise that I will eventually answer every single one of them. However, the first five topics that I receive (that I think would be of interest to a large portion of my readers) I will answer publicly as my next post!

If you’re fine with me using your first name and you want to be a part of a 2MuchCents post, go ahead and submit your question. If you’d prefer to use an alias or to be listed as “anonymous,” or if you would prefer I just get back to you privately, please let me know that as well. Please feel free to contact me via Facebook, email, LinkedIn, my cell, or by asking a question directly on this post.

After The Lightning Round, I will begin a series called “Normal Investors.” My plan is to ask you questions about yourself, how you think about money, financial choices you have made, and your investment strategy. Then, I’ll share with you what I’ve learned about that particular fact pattern or scenario from studying behavioral finance. You, like I was, may be surprised to find out that a normal investor may not always be a rational investor. That’s fine. Actually, it’s a good thing because if you know how most normal investors are going to act, you can sometimes adjust your behavior and benefit financially. If you are also aware of some situations where individuals may be prone to act irrationally when it comes to their finances, you may be able to save yourself should you ever face one of those scenarios. I find the evolving field of behavioral finance very interesting and incredibly useful. It is my hope you will as well.

The phone lines are now open. I want to hear from you!

-Tom