Skip to main content

Predicting The Future of Future Expectations

“I'm fascinated with the problem of why really smart people have such a hard time predicting the future. It is mostly because the future is more random than we think. But it's also because future performance (like earnings and economic growth) doesn't tell you half of what you need to know to predict future outcomes.”

The above was taken from a recent and insightful article entitled Performance Vs Outcomes (Morgan Housel, The Motley Fool). The author described and provides examples in the world of investing that successfully picking what will do well requires not only predicting what may happen in the future, but also out predicting what everyone else’s expectation of what the future will be as well.

In other words, to be successful with investing, it’s not only necessary to predict what may happen in the future, but also to evaluate whether the rest of the market is already pricing in that same expectation, or not. For instance, we’ve long known that soda consumption is on the decline (for 12 years now), but Coca-Cola stock is at an all-time high, even as optimism about the growth potential of Walmart has proven true with net income tripling since 2000… but its stock is down 1.5% since then. Similarly, Apple fans for years have been “right” about the company as its earned almost a quarter of a trillion dollars in profit since 2012… but its stock has barely budged, even as Amazon’s profits have rounded down to zero since 2012 but its stock has tripled as the markets just see more and more opportunity for the company going forward (even if it’s not profiting yet).

What this reveals is that the further complication for investment outcomes is that in the future, stocks are then priced based on what future expectations are at that time – the future-future expectations! – which means it’s not only necessary to evaluate the future (which may be feasible for some who analyze the trends), and expectations about the future, but what expectations about the future-future will be in the future. This has proven to be almost impossible (as noted in the examples above of Apple vs Amazon and Coca-Cola vs Walmart), and similarly who could possibly know what the mood of 7 billion investors will be in April of 2021, even though that may overwhelmingly determine where market levels will be by then.

Ultimately, then, the reality is that when we try to go from just predicting trends of the future, to making investment decisions on that basis, we increasingly must recognize that we’re not just trying to predict the future, but are trying to predict future-future emotions and expectations, which is the real determinant of the outcome.

On the other hand, perhaps this helps us realize that trying to predict the future or future of future expectations is largely a waste of time.

To Your Prosperity,

Kevin Kroskey

 

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. ...

2013 Key Tax Proposals

On February 13, President Obama's Fiscal Year 2013 budget was released. Follow this link to get a full copy of the   2013 Budget . The   Treasury's Green Book   containing general explanations of the Administration's revenue proposals can be found here. Robert Keebler, a leading professional in the area of tax and estate planning, highlighted some of the key proposals potentially affecting taxpayers below: Extend Bush tax cuts for all but the top two brackets. The only change would be to have the 33% and 35% rates go back to their pre-2001 levels of 36% and 39.6%. Taxpayers in the top two marginal brackets would still benefit from reduced rates on the portion of their income taxed in the lower brackets. Raise the long-term capital gains rate to 20% for single taxpayers making more than $200,000 per year, $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly and $125,000 for married taxpayers filing separately. Tax rate on qualified dividends would revert to ordinary income t...

Should We Go Back on the Gold Standard?

If you watched the Republican presidential debates, you might have noticed that a number of  candidates yearn for a return to the gold standard—that is, that every dollar issued by the government would be backed by a comparable value in gold bars that were stashed away in a government vault. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas argued that the dollar should have a fixed value in gold, and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky added that printing money without backing in the precious metal destroys the value of our currency. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, thinks that if not gold, then the dollar could be pegged to a basket of commodities. All are mostly concerned that printing money will cause runaway inflation.   But there may be several problems with this return to the fiscal system of the late 1800s and early 1900s. One is that inflation has barely budged even as the Federal Reserve Board was piling one QE stimulus on top of another, and the government was adding records amoun...