Skip to main content

More Mutual Funds 'Time' Market

Through my experience as a Certified Financial Planner(r) in counseling clients and in staying abreast of changes of the financial product companies, it has become quite evident time and again that it is a lot easier to sell consumers what they think they want rather than to educate them on what they need. From insurance carriers and financial sales people selling 'guaranteed products' at exorbitant costs to mutual fund companies seeding multiple new funds and then promoting the ones that do well while silently closing the unsuccessful funds before they receive their Morningstar ratings, consumers are preyed upon and have to side step a mine field of damaging advice and products if they're to be successful and reach their life's goals.

The Wall Street machine certainly isn't slowing down. Rather than educating consumers on market history, so they can learn why the negative returns from The Great Recession--while not pleasant nor frequent--are in fact a part of investing, Wall Street is instead now more actively pushing products that prey upon consumers' recent and deep fears. Mutual funds that are aggressively trying to get in and out of the market, called market timing, are the new fad. A recent article from the Wall Street Journal, entitled More Mutual Funds 'Time' Market, describes why this is such a risky strategy.
"But academic research raises doubts that the typical fund manager can successfully time the market over the long haul. Anders Ekholm, adjunct professor at Hanken School of Economics in Helsinki, recently analyzed more than 4,000 U.S. stock funds' returns between 2000 and 2007. Managers helped their performance through stock-picking, he found, but hurt their returns by market-timing.


There are a couple of reasons why the deck is stacked against market-timers, Mr. Ekholm says. Market-timing requires more trading, and transaction costs hurt performance. What's more, while a manager may relatively easily dig up some unique information that gives him an edge in selecting an individual stock, it's difficult to get such superior information about the overall market."
In my opinion the article is somewhat more favorable to market timing and stock picking than it should be, given the overwhelming academic evidence against them. There will always be money managers that get lucky and outperform, especially in the short run. However, to consistently guess right on both the prediction made and the timing involved in executing the investment strategy is virtually impossible to do.

Here's a prediction: looking back five years from today, a majority of the market-timing funds in existence today will underperform their benchmark--much more so than what one would expect from blind, random luck.  A small minority of the funds will outperform their benchmark--much less than what one would expect from blind, random luck. Yet these darlings will be touted in the financial media and will receive large inflows from investors chasing returns.

Then over the subsequent five year period, these investors will be disappointed as their chosen guru no long has the 'gu' or the 'ru' (aka 'luck') that enabled them previously outperform. This is the continual dance that Wall Street does with consumers and the consumers are consistently dazzled by Wall Street darlings only later to find the emperor has no clothes.

If investors truly realized there were no silver bullet and took the harder road of educating themselves or working with a financial planner that can guide them, I have no doubt they would be in better financial shape and have much greater peace of mind.

Click here to read the full Wall Street Journal article.


Bookmark and Share

Popular posts from this blog

Diversification: Disciplinarian of Disciplinarians

Disciplined diversification works when you do and even when you don't want it to. Diversification in effect forces you to sell the thing that has been doing so well in your portfolio and to buy the thing that hasn't. While this makes rational sense, it is emotionally difficult to execute. Think back to the tail end of 2008--were you selling bonds and cash to buy stocks? Most likely you weren't unless your advisor or some sort of automatic trigger did it for you. Carl Richards of www.behaviorgap.com provided a good reminder of how diversification works in a recent NY Times blog post. The diversification he discusses here is more so related to equity asset-class diversification but also touches on the three basic building blocks--equities, bonds, and cash. He doesn't discuss alternative asset classes -- an asset class that doesn't fit neatly into the three basic categories -- being used to further diversification, but that's a detailed topic for another day.

The Value of Double-Checking & Monitoring Your Retirement Strategy

Motivational speaker Denis Waitley once remarked, “You must stick to your conviction, but be ready to abandon your assumptions.” That statement certainly applies to retirement planning. Your effort must not waver, yet you must also examine it from time to time. 1       Perhaps you may realize that you under-estimated your health insurance costs and will need more retirement income than previously assumed. Or perhaps, with today's low interest rates you are not getting the level of investment returns you counted on. With those factors and others in mind, here are some signs that you may need to double-check your retirement strategy.     Your portfolio lacks significant diversification. Many baby boomers are approaching retirement with portfolios heavily weighted in U.S. equities. As many of them will have long retirements and a sustained need for growth investing, you could argue that this is entirely appropriate. Yet, U.S. equities by some measures may be over-valued by

65-80 Year Olds … A New and Exciting Demography

Should today’s 70-year-old American be considered “old?” How do you define that term these days? Statistically, your average 70-year-old has just a 2% chance of dying within a year. The estimated upper limits of average life expectancy is now 97, and a rapidly growing number of 70-year-olds will live past age 100. Perhaps more importantly, today’s 70-year-olds are in much better shape than their grandparents were at the same age. In most developed countries, healthy life expectancy from age 50 is growing faster than life expectancy itself, suggesting that the period of diminished vigor and ill health towards the end of life is being compressed. A recent series of articles in the Economist magazine suggest that we need a new term for people age 65 to 80, who are generally healthy and hearty, capable of knowledge-based work on an equal footing with 25-year-olds, and who are increasingly being shunted out of the workforce as if they were invalids or, well, “old.” Indeed, the a