Skip to main content

Did You Do as Well as Your Mutual Fund?

It's common practice to look at a fund's total return number for a snapshot of what performance to expect, but that won't give you the full picture. Morningstar studies have shown that investors' actual gains frequently pale in comparison to reported total return numbers. This phenomenon frequently plays out among funds that attract assets after streaks of hot performance, only to see some investors get skittish at the first signs of underperformance. After a moment's though, even a novice investor will realize that this behavior is just the opposite of the mantra -- buy low and sell high.

This practice can be more broadly attributed to bad behavior and lack of a plan or philosophy when it comes to investing. Investors are human and humans are emotional. As much as the logician in me would like to believe my left brain is working to drive my decision making, logic comes in after emotions are experienced to provide context for how we are feeling and not the other way around. To borrow from the existentialists, we as humans have limits to our rational ability.

It is these emotions that cause bad behaviors that then lead to poor investor returns. However, by being consciously aware of how we are feeling (emotions) and how these emotions relate to our thinking (logic), investors can empower themselves to make better decisions. The primary manifestations of investor bad behavior come in the form of market timing, picking stocks, and using past performance or a track record to pick investments that will (hopefully) provide superior performance in the future. These are topics for discussion on another day, but at least be aware of them for now.

Using past performance as a tool for investment selection simply doesn't work. This is counter intuitive for most people and in direct conflict with other areas of our life. For example, if an all-pro NFL quarterback leaves one team for another, it is not unreasonable to expect the quarterback will excel with his new team. Stated another way, the quarterback's performance will persist. However, this is not so in investing. In fact recent stellar past performance by a fund manager may be an indication that you don't want to own that fund.

There is no academic study that I am aware of that has shown that a manager's superior performance is likely to persist into the future. (There are mountains of studies that show just the opposite.) And more importantly, there is no reliable way for an investor to predict what fund manager will have future superior performance in advance or before the fund manager does outperform. Yet hindsight is always 20/20 and investors are emotional. It's a virtual spinning wheel investors tend to run on but one that can be gotten off of by being consciously aware of these behavioral traps.

Click here to read more about investor returns and to see some real life examples of how investors actually fared in funds with strong recent past performance.

To Your Prosperity ~ Kevin Kroskey


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. ...

What Does $100 Buy You in Your Home State?

A new map released by the Tax Foundation shows exactly how far $100 would go in all 50 states. Using recently released data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Tax Foundation was able to show how the varying prices of goods, housing and income taxes in each state can impact consumers’ purchasing power. Southerners and Midwesterners have a serious edge over those along the East and West Coasts. A hundred bucks goes the furthest in Mississippi, where $100 will buy you what would cost $115.74 in another state that's closer to the national average. The next low-price states are Arkansas, Missouri, and Alabama. Ohio comes in at an encouraging $112.11 Meanwhile, $100 would only be worth $84.60 in the District of Columbia, the priciest state, $85.32 in Hawaii and $86.66 in New York. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-much--100-is-worth-in-your-state-152310027.html Click the Map Read More

Medals Per Million

By now, you've seen the final medal count at the London Olympics, and no doubt felt a stirring of national pride.   American athletes took home 104 total gold, silver and bronze medals, comfortably ahead of China (87), Russia (82), Great Britain (65), Germany (44), Japan (38), Australia (35), France (34), South Korea (28) and Italy (28).   Does that mean that we Americans--so often accused of being a nation of couch potatoes--are the most athletic people in the world?   Total medal count is one way to measure, but it may not be the best.   Another measurement would take into account the relative number of medals compared to a country's total population: Olympic medals per capita, or (to avoid many decimal places) the number of medals each nation took home per million people in its population. Medals per million gives us a very different ranking.   By this measure, citizens of the Caribbean island of Granada are by far the most athletic, with 9.5 Ol...