Skip to main content

Bond Investors Misled by Wall Street Journal Article

In an article published today in the Wall Street Journal, entitled "The New Bond Equation," the author attempts to educate readers about the potential risks involved in investing in bond mutual funds, given the current economic environment. He writes:

"As the financial crisis heads into its third year, investors in bond funds are facing some difficult choices. Investors usually turn to these funds for safety. But bond funds are facing a host of pressures that are driving down returns, raising long-term risk—and making it tougher to settle on the right investment strategy."
While I agree with the author's statement above, he makes some statements that mislead bond investors. (Click here to read the full article.) For example, he writes:

"....they’re buying vehicles that invest in intermediate-maturity bonds. These funds also typically hold a mix of government, mortgage and investment-grade corporate bonds, which spreads risk around. Even cautious intermediate-bond funds yield about 4%, handily beating rates available on money-market funds."

This quote above is comparing apples to oranges, as these investments have completely different risk levels. Of course an intermediate term bond fund will yield much more than a money market fund. Investors face the risk of rising interest rates when they hold longer term bonds. The more rates rise, the more their longer term bonds suffer price declines. For this additional risk money market investors don't face, intermediate bond investors expect a higher return over time.

Further, in the article the author initially talked about buying long-term treasuries as a very safe bet. He really misled readers about the risk and corresponding volatility involved, ignoring interest rate risk and price fluctuations. However, the author did later explain how these fluctuations occur and provided a good description of bond duration, which investors or their investment advisors need to understand. In an oversimplified explanation, think of duration as how long it takes to get your money back from the bond. The larger the duration the longer it takes to get your money back and thus the more interest rate risk inherent in the bond or bond fund.

To provide a real-life example, VUSTX (Vanguard Long Term Treasury) has a duration of 11.6 and a standard deviation of 12%, which a measurement of how volatile the investment is. Comparatively, VFISX (Vanguard Short Term Treasury) has a duration of 2.6 and a standard deviation of just more than 2%--a much less volatile and thus a 'safer' bet than it's long-term counterpart. As rates change, there is little lag with the short-term rate bond fund, so the volatility is much, much lower. Longer term rates aren't quick to change and thus their price fluctuates much more, causing increased standard deviation.

A reader posted a comment that makes an argument that individual investors should use individual bonds rather than bond mutual funds. However, investors must be careful in purchasing individual bonds. Transaction costs to purchase bonds on the secondary market are quite high for smaller denomination bonds, making a low cost mutual fund and its institutional purchasing power less costly net of fees. Further, most investors purchasing individual bonds will be resigned to treasuries and AAA-AA municipals, as they can't afford to purchase enough riskier bonds to gain adequate diversification of credit risk. The same isn't true for a low cost bond mutual fund.

In short, keep your bonds 'short and sweet', meaning short duration and high credit quality. A low cost bond fund with these characteristics will serve you just fine, but if you have substantial assets, you could purchase individual bonds and get a bit more control of your bond / income portfolio. However, a mutual fund may still be preferable because of the diversification, liquidity, and simplicity it yields for the investor.

To Your Prosperity ~ Kevin Kroskey

Popular posts from this blog

Don't File Your Taxes Too Soon

I'd like to remind everyone to not be too anxious to file your taxes. Many taxpayers rush to file their tax returns as quickly as possible. Ordinarily, that’s fine. But if you own mutual funds, don’t file your tax return before March 1. In past years, revised 1099s were often issued, reclassifying distributions and/or their amounts. This was a huge headache for the investors who had already filed tax returns based on the original documentation. These hapless consumers found themselves forced to redo their returns and file amended tax returns, adjusting the amount they owed or were due in refunds - and paying their tax preparer additional fees to do the extra work. It looks like 2010 may be the same. Therefore, if you own mutual funds, do not file your tax return before March 1. By then, any amended IRS forms are likely to arrive, potentially helping you avoid the hassle and costs of filing an amended return. Kevin Kroskey, CFP, MBA

Bangladesh Butter Production Predicts U.S. Stock Returns

After reading the title of this post, my hope is that a look of disbelief is cast on your face. Of course butter production in Bangladesh has nothing to do with prediction of US stock market returns. However, through data mining all sorts of 'relationships' can be demonstrated. Many mutual funds, ETFs, and trading strategies are built upon these data mining strategies--most often to the harm of investors that utilize them. As Jason Zweig describes in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, entitled Data Mining Isn't a Good Bet For Stock-Market Predictions , "The stock market generates such vast quantities of information that, if you plow through enough of it for long enough, you can always find some relationship that appears to generate spectacular returns -- by coincidence alone . This sham is known as data mining." I recall in from my business statistics course in grad school, how I was able to show that ice cream consumption was correlated to the murder ra

Paying for College and Getting Your Money's Worth

According to the Student Loan Marketing Association (more commonly known as Sallie Mae Bank), the average tuition, room and board at a private college comes to $43,921. Public tuition for in-state students at state colleges amounted to $19,548 (about half of which is room and board), with out-of-state students paying an average of $34,031. How are parents and students finding the cash to afford this expense? Sallie Mae breaks it down as follows: 34% from scholarships and grants that don’t have to be paid back, coming from the college itself or the state or federal government, often based on need and academic performance. Parents typically pay 29% of the total bill (an average of $7,000) out of savings or income, and other family members (think: grandparents) are paying another 5%. The students themselves are paying for 12% of the cost, on average. The rest, roughly 20% of the total, is made up of loans.  The federal government’s loan program offers up to $5,500 a year fo