What Explains the Difference?

May 28, 2010

What explains the difference between the calm investor and the scared investor?

With the market correction of the last month has come dramatically rising fear levels among individual investors. Case in point, the 5/27 AAII Sentiment Survey reveals that over 50% of individual investors are now bearish. There are only a small number of times in the 23-year history of this particular sentiment survey when there has been more bearish sentiment than now. Surely, a large part of the fear comes from the realization that many have not adequately prepared for the possibility of bear markets. Proper preparation comes from constructing an asset allocation with an appropriate amount of the portfolio dedicated to strategies with strong risk management characteristics. Historically, only about twenty-five percent of 10 percent corrections turn into a 20+ percent bear market so it is quite possible that what we are experiencing now is simply a correction. However, that doesn’t change the fact that investors need to have that strong risk management component of their asset allocation in order to be able to have the intestinal fortitude to stay in the game through all the 10 percent corrections.

Seeking to be adequately prepared for the worst is the very reason that we have included inverse equities in the investment universe for our Global Macro portfolio.

It is with this same logic that Ronald Reagan argued in 1984 for a strong national defense. Consider his famous “Bear in the woods” commercial. Click here to view. The text of the commercial is as follows:

There’s a bear in the woods. For some people, the bear is easy to see. Others don’t see it at all. Some people say the bear is tame. Others say it’s vicious and dangerous. Since no one can really be sure who’s right, isn’t it smart to be as strong as the bear? If there is a bear….

To watch a 15-minute presentation on how we incorporate inverse equities into our Global Macro strategy, click here and then click on “Global Macro Presentation” (Financial Professionals Only.)

What explains the difference between the calm investor and the scared investor? The level of preparation.

Click here to visit www.arrowfunds.com for a prospectus & disclosures. Click here for disclosures from Dorsey Wright Money Management. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Posted by:


Sector and Capitalization Performance

May 28, 2010

The chart below shows performance of US sectors and capitalizations over the trailing 12, 6, and 1 month(s). Relative strength strategies buy securities that have strong intermediate-term relative strength and hold them as long as they remain strong. Performance updated through 5/27/2010.

Posted by:


Fund Flows

May 27, 2010

The Investment Company Institute is the national association of U.S. investment companies, including mutual funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and unit investment trusts (UITs). Members of ICI manage total assets of $11.82 trillion and serve nearly 90 million shareholders. Flow estimates are derived from data collected covering more than 95 percent of industry assets and are adjusted to represent industry totals.

The market correction over the last month sent retail equity fund investors to the exits. Even taxable bonds saw minor outflows in the week ending 5/19/10.

Posted by:


Anatomy of a Bubble

May 26, 2010

One characteristic of bubbles that lends itself to being exploited by trend-following methodologies is that bubbles generally unfold over the span of several years or more. This can be seen in the charts below of bubbles in various stock, currency, and commodity markets. These dynamic moves gain speed and often spike higher in the final year or two of the move before they begin their descent. Trend-following strategies, like relative strength, are designed to start participating early enough in the move that the money made during the ascent more than compensates for the losses experienced during the trend deterioration phase. Once the change in trend has become sufficiently apparent, trend-following strategies exit the trade and begin the search for the next dynamic move.

(Click to Enlarge)

Source: James Montier, GMO Asset Management

The advantage of a global tactical asset allocation strategy is its ability to seek out dynamic trends in a wide variety of asset classes and thereby increasing the probabilities of more consistent returns.

Posted by:


$140 Billion Tax Increase is a Done Deal

May 26, 2010

Opportunity cost is just as real as capital loss-it’s just sneakier and harder to see. Laura Rowley’s column on Yahoo! Finance had this gem in an article discussing the low rates available for savers:

“The Fed is determined to keep rates very low, and while it’s painted as fiscal stimulus I think it’s really a stealth bailout of the banks,” says Richard Barrington, a certified financial analyst and expert with the bank comparison site Money-Rates.com. U.S. savers have lost $140 billion in purchasing power to inflation over the 12 months ending in March, according to a Money-Rates study released last month.

“If you tried to raise $140 billion in taxes there would be massive outrage and protests but they’ve taken the equivalent of that out of the pockets of depositors by keeping rates below inflation,” Barrington says. “Depositors are really getting the shaft in this environment and it’s something that’s not really talked about. There’s sympathy for borrowers who are overextended, but they contributed to the financial problem. The sympathy should be with people who did the right thing and saved their money, and are getting teeny tiny interest rates.”

I’ve added the underlining to make the point about opportunity costs; Mr. Barrington is on to something. Savers have had $140 billion in purchasing power evaporate, but because there has been no visible capital loss, it doesn’t necessarily occur to them what has happened. In effect, savers have been taxed $140 billion as their purchasing power has been transferred to someone else.

What can you do about opportunity cost? It helps if you think of things in terms of beanbag economics: if you mush a beanbag down in one spot, it just poofs out somewhere else. What incentive is created by pushing savings rates effectively to zero? It simply causes investors to move their cash elsewhere in the quest for yield or capital gains. The risk level may be different, but money will start to flow nonetheless.

This is the primary attraction of using relative strength for tactical asset allocation. It is able to identify shifts in supply and demand by measuring what assets are strong and what assets are weak. Opportunity cost may be hidden from view, but its effects on the capital markets are laid bare.

Posted by:


Hobo Investing

May 26, 2010

Investing, at its core, is a simple process. You need to determine if the train is going north or south, or just sitting on a track siding doing nothing. Once you’ve found a train going north, you need only to hop aboard. If the train starts to go south, you need to jump off.

The concept is simple, but sometimes investors make the execution more complicated. For us, relative strength and trend following provide the tools and methodology to find the northbound trains. The same tools and methodology can be used to tell you when the switch engine has come along and started to move the train south.

The problems happen when investors deviate from the simple goal-directed hobo mentality and get too clever for their own good. Can you imagine how irrational some investor behavior must look to a hobo? Here are the top six dysfunctional hobo sayings:

1. I wanted to go north, so I hopped on an out-of-favor southbound train, hoping it would go north eventually. (value hobo)

2. I got on a northbound train, but it only went north a few miles. A switch engine came along and started to take my boxcar south. How embarrassing! This train owes me. I’m not getting off. (ego-attached hobo)

3. There are so many trains going north. I want to hop on one eventually, but I’m afraid it will go south right after I get on it. (failure to launch hobo)

4. This northbound train is picking up speed. I’d better get off. (premature ejection hobo)

5. I want to go north, but my train pulled on to a siding and stopped. Maybe I’ll just sit here and see what happens. (buy-and-hold hobo)

6. There are so many trains going north without me. Eventually they will all have to go south, and then I’ll have my revenge! (bitter hobo with economics background)

If you want to go north, get on a northbound train. KISS really applies here. On our good days, we all know this, but it’s so easy to forget.

Posted by:


High RS Diffusion Index

May 26, 2010

The chart below measures the percentage of high relative strength stocks that are trading above their 50-day moving average (universe of mid and large cap stocks.) As of 5/25/10.

The 10-day moving average of this indicator is 34% and the one-day reading is 14%. Just one month ago, this diffusion index was in the high 90′s. It has been a rapid move to oversold conditions. Dips in this indicator have often provided good opportunities to add to relative strength strategies.

Posted by:


One Thing You Can Count On

May 25, 2010

One of the very few things you can count on in the investment world is that everything will change. Timeless investment truths will become relics. Guidelines that were infallible in the past will suddenly go wrong. Human nature may not change much, but the market itself is a constantly evolving organism. One of the biggest casualties of change is correlation. There are really two problems with correlation.

1. Correlation is often confused with causality. Big mistake. Just because something is related does not mean it has anything to do with the cause. For example, drinking milk is not the cause of heroin addiction, even if you can prove that all heroin addicts drank milk as children.

2. Correlations are unstable. This causes all sorts of problems in mean optimization and strategic asset allocation. The best example I have seen of this recently is a fantastic chart from Bespoke Investment Group that shows a rolling 6-month correlation between the dollar and the S&P 500. Over a ten-year period, the correlation moves from virtually +1.0 to -1.0, not to mention everywhere in between!

Courtesy: Bespoke Investment Group

Shocking isn’t it? Yet this is the one thing you can count on-that everything will change. To me, this is one of the strongest arguments for an adaptive method that adjusts systematically to new conditions. Although it is probably not the only way to go about it, relative strength is a good engine to use for models because it is highly adaptive, robust, and deals well with multi-asset portfolios, which are more and more becoming the norm.

Posted by:


Two Approaches to Retirement Income

May 25, 2010

Research Magazine has a nice piece on building retirement income portfolios. If you have clients that are aging baby boomers-and most of you do-or you are, like me, an aging baby boomer yourself, you’ll recognize that lots of people are suddenly thinking about this topic.

The two approaches to retirement income that are discussed are the total return approach and the investment pool approach, sometimes called the bucket approach.

Courtesy: Research Magazine

The graphic highlights the differences between the two approaches, although the article points out that advisors are trying to achieve the same end result:

While advisors may differ in the philosophy they follow for retirement clients, there are consistent elements among best-practice advisors that cut across both approaches. These common elements include:

- Generating an annual income or cash flow target of between 3 percent and 6 percent;

- Managing portfolios to support spending on essential needs such as housing, healthcare and other daily living expenses while also looking to maintain long-term purchasing power in light of potential inflationary pressures;

- Seeking to produce competitive returns for the client within agreed-upon risk parameters, but not striving for consistent above-average returns or outperforming market benchmarks;

- Focusing on broad diversification in asset classes, relying on vehicles they are highly familiar with, such as mutual funds, ETFs, individual securities, separately managed accounts and annuities;

- Emphasizing the process of constructing portfolios rather than the products or solutions available.

So which approach is best? The article doesn’t take a position on that question, but I think two things should be kept in mind when trying to decide.

1. There is no necessary functional difference at all between the two approaches. In other words, an investment pool approach with six equal 5-year buckets allocated progressively to Treasury bills, short-term bonds, intermediate-term bonds, large-cap value stocks, large-cap growth stocks, and emerging market equities is absolutely the same thing as a 50/50 balanced portfolio that uses the same asset classes.

2. As a result, the only thing that matters is which approach works best psychologically for the client. If the portfolios are functionally the same, ideally we should gravitate to whatever will help the client achieve their income and investment growth goals. Twenty years ago, the total return approach was dominant-and it still makes perfect sense from a financial point of view. However, over the last decade or so, the rise of behavioral finance has generated research that focuses on ways to nudge clients into more productive investment behaviors. There seems to be an innate tendency of humans to compartmentalize their finances; whether it is rational or not is beside the point. Even though we can all agree that the two leading retirement income approaches are functionally the same, if the client is more comfortable breaking an account into buckets-and will therefore have less emotional anxiety when the growth buckets bounce around in choppy markets-that’s the way it should be handled. Lousy emotional asset allocation is the root of most portfolio problems and anything that can improve results by alleviating emotional strain on clients should be encouraged.

Posted by:


Relative Strength Spread

May 25, 2010

The chart below is the spread between the relative strength leaders and relative strength laggards (universe of mid and large cap stocks). When the chart is rising, relative strength leaders are performing better than relative strength laggards. As of 5/24/2010:

The RS Spread has flattened out after the laggard rally of much of 2009. I suspect that this base-building period may be followed by an even more favorable environment for relative strength investing.

Posted by:


What Investors Want

May 24, 2010

According to SEI, investors in the U.S. and Europe are looking for alternatives to mainstream management:

…a restless and empowered investor base is demanding greater transparency and liquidity from managers, while focusing on absolute returns and uncorrelated investment strategies. This combination of factors is driving convergence of traditional and alternative investment products, with investors pouring more than $110 billion into alternative mutual funds in the U.S. and Europe in 2009 alone.

Alternative strategies can come in a lot of flavors, but according to the SEI study:

A diverse group of strategies and managers are already experiencing success with these products in the U.S. and Europe. Successful strategies include long/short, global tactical asset allocation, volatility arbitrage, and managed futures.

Apparently we are part of a diverse group of managers experiencing success! Clients have certainly embraced our global tactical asset allocation solutions like our Global Macro separate accounts, the Arrow DWA Balanced Fund, and the Arrow DWA Tactical Fund.

Posted by:


You Call It a Bubble, I Call It Ringing the Register

May 24, 2010

—-attributed to Dave Steckler, former president of AAPTA

Over the weekend I read Michael Lewis’s new book, The Big Short. This is not going to be a book review, although the book is a lot of fun. It is the story of a few offbeat money managers who identified subprime CDOs as a good shorting opportunity and went on to make a lot of money. Lots of people, of course, could tell housing was overheated, but didn’t get the timing right or couldn’t find the right vehicles to execute the short position properly. In fact, one of the success stories in the book identified the overheated subprime market in 2005, took his short position, and then suffered massive redemptions and threats of investor lawsuits as he waited for the position to pay off. For the few success stories, how many other investors trying to short the market got gored?

Trend following strategies don’t attempt to predict bubbles. Instead, they are happy to play along with the trend until it shows signs of reversing. It doesn’t require prediction and you don’t run the risk of blowing up waiting for your (hopefully) correct forecast to pay off.

Now some academics have tackled this question. Is it better to play the bubble or to short it? CXO Advisory helpfully has a nice summary of their results. They write:

In summary, evidence indicates that riding industry asset bubbles (guided only by information on returns and fundamentals from the past ten years) may be an attractive investing strategy. Evidence does not support shorting bubbles.

In short, the trend is still your friend. While you sound much more intelligent discussing all of the reasons behind the bubble and what will happen when it pops, you will make more money going with the trend.

Posted by:


DWA 100,000 — New Highs!

May 24, 2010

 DWA 100,000    New Highs!

No, this isn’t the price level on some new-fangled unweighted index. It’s the number of views we’ve had of our blog over the past year or so. In the meantime, we have garnered positive reviews from Barron’s and numerous referrals from other respected websites like Abnormal Returns and World Beta. We appreciate that you and thousands of other investors have made our blog into one of your financial sites of choice and one of the thought leaders in relative strength investing. We will try to continue to provide you with original content, articles, and news pertaining to relative strength and global trends, and to continue to give you our unique spin on the relative strength style of investing.

When I wrote a similar post, DWA 25,000, I mentioned that we wanted to deliver even more value down the road in the form of audiovisual presentations. We’ve done that with new podcasts and on-screen presentations. Check them out! Another valuable and educational feature has been our white papers on important topics like asset class rotation. In everything we do, our intent is to inform, entertain, and provoke thought and discussion. We think we are succeeding, but if you have constructive feedback, we’d love to hear from you. Success is never final and we’re always looking for ways to improve.

Posted by:


Weekly RS Recap

May 24, 2010

The table below shows the performance of a universe of mid and large cap U.S. equities, broken down by relative strength decile and quartile and then compared to the universe return. Those at the top of the ranks are those stocks which have the best intermediate-term relative strength. Relative strength strategies buy securities that have strong intermediate-term relative strength and hold them as long as they remain strong.

Last week’s performance (5/17/10 – 5/21/10) is as follows:

High RS stocks underperformed the universe during the sharp sell-off last week.

Posted by:


Now What?

May 21, 2010

Jim O’Shaughnessy included the following insightful story in his recent market commentary:

In the study, originally reported in a Wall Street Journal article entitled “Lessons from the Brain-Damaged Investor” and led by researcher Baba Shiv of Stanford University, a group of 41 participants played an investment game where each was given $20 to start and asked to make 20 rounds of one dollar investment decisions based on a coin toss. They would choose either “invest” or “don’t invest.” If they chose “don’t invest,” they kept their dollar. If they chose “invest,” the researcher took the one dollar and flipped a coin. If it came up heads, the dollar was lost but if it came up tails, the investor was rewarded with $2.50. Clearly the most profitable strategy would be to play every round, as the expected value of each one dollar “invested” is $1.25 The twist in the study was that one group of participants had suffered brain damage which affected key emotional centers in the brain such as the orbitofrontal cortex, the amygdala, or the insula. The other participants had either no brain damage at all or brain damage that affected non-emotional centers of the brain.

Those without any emotional brain damage invested just 58 percent of the time ended with $22.80 on average. Those participants with brain damage outperformed their healthy counterparts by 14.5 percent investing 84 percent of the time and ending with an average of $25.70. The main reason participants with normal brains did so poorly was because of their behavior after a loss. Instead of recognizing the very simple positive expected value of choosing “invest”, the normal group was scared of losing twice in a row and as a result invested just 41% of the time after a loss. The damaged group maintained their overall percentage after a loss, investing 85% of the time. This study illustrates that fear, loss, and risk avoidance act as a tax on our portfolios if we do not take action to circumvent their influence.

Real life investors have even better odds of winning than the participants in the study. A coin toss is 50/50, but the stock market goes up 72 percent of the time (based on U.S. market data since the founding of the U.S. stock exchange.)

(The bold is our emphasis.)

At times like now, many people probably read the story above and say to themselves, “Yea, but this market is going to drop another 50% from here.” Maybe, but based on history, probably not. (I would not use this logic to advocate avoiding any risk management techniques.)

However, it is common practice for investors to dedicate a portion of their overall allocation to always being in the market. Such exposure may even come in the form of a position in a flexible (not risk-free) strategy, like our Global Macro portfolio. Perhaps that is 20 percent of the overall portfolio for some investors-maybe it is 80 percent for others. For that portion of an investors’ portfolio dedicated to being in the market, the story above absolutely applies. Choosing to quit playing every time a correction in the portfolio occurs will lead to selling low and buying high, ultimately achieving very poor investment results over time.

Posted by:


Dorsey, Wright Sentiment Survey - 5/21/10

May 21, 2010

Last survey was our biggest one yet! Let’s keep the momentum going!

Here we have Round Six of the Dorsey, Wright Sentiment Survey, the first third-party sentiment poll. As you know, when individuals self-report, they are always taller and more beautiful than when outside observers report their perceptions! Instead of asking individual investors to self-report whether they are bullish or bearish, we’d like financial advisors to weigh in and report on the actual behavior of clients. It’s two simple questions and will take no more than 20 seconds of your time. We’ll construct indicators from the data and report the results regularly on our blog–but we need your help to get a large statistical sample!

Contribute to the greater good! You WILL NOT be directed to another page by clicking the survey. It’s painless, we promise.

Posted by:


Sector and Capitalization Performance

May 21, 2010

The chart below shows performance of US sectors and capitalizations over the trailing 12, 6, and 1 month(s). Relative strength strategies buy securities that have strong intermediate-term relative strength and hold them as long as they remain strong. Performance updated through 5/20/2010.

Posted by:


Before There was David Swensen, There was Harry Browne

May 20, 2010

Kudos to Mark Hulbert for his interesting historical article on MarketWatch entitled “A Portfolio for All Seasons.” It was a nice discussion of what I think was one of the intellectual precursors of the Yale endowment portfolio. Harry Browne was a newsletter writer in the 1970s and 1980s. He proposed a permanent portfolio that would never need to be changed, except maybe for periodic rebalancing.

Browne’s idea was to invest in a basket of asset classes, each one of which has a low correlation with the others. As a result, when any one of the asset classes is performing poorly, there is a good chance that the others will at least be holding their own — if not actually appreciating in value.

Hmmm…investing in a basket of uncorrelated asset classes. This sounds familiar from both modern portfolio theory and David Swensen’s work at Yale. Browne had a particular portfolio mix in mind:

The basket that Browne recommended was equally divided between stocks, long-term Treasury bonds, gold and Treasury bills. In his 1987 book, he reported that, over the prior 17 years, back to 1970, this portfolio had produced as 12.0% annualized return. This was better than a buy-and-hold in either stocks or bonds, though behind gold.

Essentially, Browne proposed a mix of stocks, bonds, cash, and alternative investments. In 1987, this was pretty unusual. Most newsletter writers recommending gold were either gold bugs (buy gold and live in a bunker) or strategic asset allocationists (have a 5-10% portfolio allocation to gold as a concession to inflation or global catastrophe). The end-of-the-world crowd would never want to own stocks of corrupt corporations or bonds of currency-debasing governments. The 60/40 policy mix group would blanch at having such a large allocation to alternatives. Yale’s endowment model today is an interesting modification because it is equity-oriented, but also willing to hold significant allocations to unusual asset classes. One of the unique things I learned from the article is that Browne’s approach actually spawned a mutual fund. Hulbert writes:

Browne’s approach in the decades since has continued to perform as advertised. Consider the Permanent Portfolio fund /quotes/comstock/10r!prpfx (PRPFX 39.88, -0.38, -0.94%) , which was created in large part out of Browne’s work. Its current target allocations are 25% in gold and silver, 35% in U.S. Treasurys, 15% in aggressive growth stocks, 15% in real-estate and natural resource stocks, and 10% in Swiss-franc denominated assets.

…You might therefore want to remember Browne’s investment approach as you suffer through yet more of the markets’ frightening volatility. His permanent portfolio serves as a reminder that we don’t have to be constantly betting on the markets’ short-term gyrations, nor suffer from huge losses along the way, in order to produce decent long-term returns.

It sounds like the mutual fund hasn’t quite stuck to Browne’s original guidelines, but it’s clearly in the same spirit. The real point is that an endowment-type portfolio, while perhaps not very sexy, can generate nice long-term returns-and it might be able to keep clients from jumping out of the window. The endowment-type portfolio that we manage, the Arrow DWA Balanced Fund (DWAFX), is built in the same spirit. There are sleeves for domestic and international equities, fixed income, and alternative assets. Unlike Mr. Browne’s approach which called for equal-weighting, the size of our sleeves varies by relative strength-within boundaries-so that the portfolio can adapt to different environments. The fixed income position tends to act as a volatility buffer, with growth typically coming from the equity portion of the account. The alternative assets often provide an uncorrelated growth component. The approach was sound when Mr. Browne proposed it, sound when Mr. Swensen modified it, and seems to be working today-and there aren’t very many investment approaches that can make that claim.

Posted by:


Next Best Thing to a Crystal Ball

May 20, 2010

Ezra Klein’s recent interview with uber-economist Ken Rogoff included the following interesting exchange:

You said that there are indicators we can watch to predict when we’re vulnerable to a financial crisis, but in general, the problem is that policymakers explain the indicators away. Information, in other words, is not enough, because people create stories to explain the information away.

Start with a really important point: It’s very hard to call the timing of a crisis. You can see that an economy is vulnerable, and maybe even fairly reliably say you’ll have a crisis in 5 to10 years, but until it’s upon you, it’s hard to narrow the window down with any precision. Many of the people who say they predicted the crisis in a precise way had actually been predicting a crisis for years. There’s irreducible uncertainty coming from fragile confidence and political factors. The analogy is someone who’s vulnerable to a heart attack. You can go to the doctor and they can see your cholesterol is high and you have a number of risk factors, but you might go on for 20 years without anything happening. Or it might be 20 hours.

Because the timing is hard to call, policymakers have trouble getting seized by it. Why worry if it is not going to hit on my watch? And if you’re an investor and you’re making great money for five more years and then you have a bad year, you still have a good decade. But policymakers, especially, need to have a longer vision because of the human cost of financial crises, particularly in the hugely elevated level of long-term unemployment.

Investing is always disconcerting because of the real and perceived risks to the capital markets and to the global economy. Professor Rogoff’s point about timing a financial crisis based on known fundamental data is an important one. Risks may be in place to cause a crisis, but if the likely window of time for those risks to actually result in crisis range from the next couple months to the next several decades the investor is left with the decision of how to incorporate those known risks into an investment plan. It is one thing to be aware of great fundamental risks and it is another to be able to translate that knowledge into profitable investment returns.

Again, we see why pragmatists gravitate to tactical asset allocation. The tactical asset allocator accepts the reality that timing market moves based on fundamental data is nearly impossible. Therefore, the tactical asset allocator embraces the concept of reacting to trends in a disciplined fashion. It is the next best thing to having a crystal ball.

Posted by:


Fund Flows

May 20, 2010

The Investment Company Institute is the national association of U.S. investment companies, including mutual funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and unit investment trusts (UITs). Members of ICI manage total assets of $11.82 trillion and serve nearly 90 million shareholders. Flow estimates are derived from data collected covering more than 95 percent of industry assets and are adjusted to represent industry totals.

Municipal Bond Funds were the only category that saw net inflows in the week ending 5/12/10. Domestic equities were particularly hard hit with redemptions.

Posted by:


Net Worth is a Worthwhile Obsession

May 19, 2010

Ron Lieber wrote an interesting article in the New York Times about a number of websites that allow you to anonymously track and post your net worth and compare it with others in similar circumstances. Mr. Lieber didn’t say explicitly what he thought about this new trend in social networking, but the title to the article, “Net Worth Obsession,” gives a clue. A number of pundits were quoted decrying the trend:

But does our almost irresistible urge to rank ourselves against others based on any available data serve as a source of inspiration? Or does it lead to endless striving in search of some ever-elusive achievement? “I think this is a profound problem, this aspect of humans in the West,” said Andrew Oswald, a professor of behavioral science at the Warwick Business School in England. “We’re now extraordinarily rich by almost any standard of human history. But because we are creatures of comparison, it’s harder to get happier and happier.”

It’s certainly possible to pay too much attention to your net worth and ignore your happiness, but most of the actual site participants had very positive things to say. Perhaps there is something redeeming in tracking assets minus debts! One user says:

Initially, the idea of laying herself bare on a blog and on NetworthIQ caused a lot of anxiety. “You’re saying I have a secret and here it is for everyone to see,” she says. “But once it’s out there, and especially now that it’s not just a flat line saying ‘negative $23,000,’ and it is moving up a little bit, there’s a sense of pride and accomplishment that goes along with that. I know people are visiting, and it makes me want to pay something else off so I can post another entry that’s something good.” She’s currently putting a third of her monthly take-home pay from her job as a benefits analyst toward debt payments.

All of this has led to some odd reversals in her life. She looks forward to getting her bills in the mail, for instance, because it means it’s time to update her total debt. “Which might be a little bit sick,” she said. “But I know it’s lower than the last month. I know it for a fact.”

Grant often wonders about the people who are far ahead of her in the NetworthIQ standings. Did they get lucky? Are they lottery winners? Or did they get smart about money before she did? She tries not to beat herself up over it. “For people with the same income as me but higher net worth, it tells me that I can get there, too. It just takes discipline,” she says. “I know it has only been a couple of months now, but I kind of feel like I’ve made a life change.”

In other words, most of the participants found tracking their net worth to be motivational. This is something that I have noticed repeatedly with real clients over the past 25 years. The clients who track their net worth always do way, way better than clients who have only a vague idea of their finances. The difference is so dramatic that I routinely suggest the practice to clients. Before there were social networking websites for net worth, there were spreadsheets. As far as I know, none of my clients have ever shared their information with anyone but their financial advisor, but like most things, just the fact that it is being tracked makes them pay attention to it. Most clients do not see updating their spreadsheet each month or each quarter as a joyless activity-they are instead motivated to keep that number moving north.

If competing with your net worth on a social networking website helps push you to save and invest, well, more power to you. One person interviewed in the New York Times article makes this same point:

She admits that some of her pleasure is fueled as much by competition as self-satisfaction. “I’m not that far off from the person right above me” on the NetworthIQ list, she says. “I can probably catch them this month. And maybe next month I can get to the next one.”

It’s not as if people don’t notice their socioeconomic status anyway. Even Mr. Osvald, who was quoted earlier in the article lamenting the “profound problem” with humans admits that comparison is actually just human nature:

Oswald, the professor of behavioral science, says the craving for comparison may be rooted in our biology. “It’s easier said than done to break through two million years of evolution,” he says. “A million years ago, you could watch what others were doing and mimic that to get food and resources. Or if you were high up the monkey pack, you could get the best mates.”

Let’s face it: everyone wants to be high up in the monkey pack. Perhaps we’re not all members of the same monkey pack, but humans always and everywhere are in competition for resources. Consequently, social and economic signifiers are embedded in everything from the car you drive, the sneakers you wear, the sports you enjoy (polo anyone?), the bling and tats you do (or do not) have. We have elaborate social ways of interpreting these signifiers: the same Bentley might be seen as appropriate if the owner comes from ”old money,” but tacky if the owner is “nouveaux riche.” Most product marketing is based more on the branding-the social signifier-than on the actual product features.

“Keeping up with the Joneses” will always be with us. Ultimately, I think tracking net worth is a much healthier way of keeping up with the Joneses than accumulating possessions and racking up consumer debt. After all, most of our personal and national fiscal problems are caused from too much spending and not enough savings and investment. Tracking your net worth, I suspect, is actually aspirational and motivational rather than pathological. Instead of sucking the fun out of life, clients end up bonding with their grandkids for the summer at the beach condo they wouldn’t otherwise have had. Pundits may worry about it, but the public seems to find it practical and valuable.

Posted by:


How To Get Back on the Bike

May 19, 2010

Most of us learn to ride a bicycle when we are young. The process, despite the well-meaning frantic coaching of our parents running alongside us, is basically trial and error-including lots of crashes. As children, we have a “beginner’s mind.” We are willing to listen to anyone who has a plausible theory about riding a bike because, after all, we know nothing about it. When we fall down, we are told to immediately get back up and to get back on the bike. And we do, since most all of us can ride a bike. But what happens when an experienced rider-who expects to be successful-has a crash?

Today I read an article in the New York Times about horrific cycling crashes, and how professional cyclists get over their fear and get back on the road. I noticed a number of parallels between the article and how the capital markets operate.

Click here to read the NYT article, Crashes Can Make Even the Best Cyclists Uneasy.”

The article focuses mostly on Jens Voigt, who is one of the older and more experienced riders on the professional circuit. In the Tour de France of 2009, Voigt crashed so badly that he couldn’t finish the race. Plenty of people worried he would never race again.

He had a concussion, a litany of bruises and several broken bones in his face. His orbital bone was broken in two places, his jaw in one. The wall of one of his sinuses had been punctured and was filling with blood, causing equilibrium problems, Voigt said. That injury later required the insertion of a titanium plate to hasten healing.

Sound familiar? If you were invested in the stock market during 2008, the description of Voigt’s wounds should ring a bell…that’s probably how you felt by the end of the year. Broken down, beaten up, your face literally smashed in.

A lot of people quit the market after the 2008 meltdown (see this post about money on the sidelines), just like some cyclists never recover from these types of epic crashes. It’s just human nature – some people just can’t get over that fear of defeat, especially after tasting asphalt.

gal voigt crash How To Get Back on the Bike

Jens Voigt on the ground after his crash. Source: NYDailyNews

What separates those who can get back on the bike, and those who just walk away? The answer is probably different for every person, but I’m going to tie it directly to one of the skills required for success in the capital markets- DISCIPLINE. The type of person who can get up after a bicycle crash is the same type of person who can recover from a setback in the market. The determination and willpower necessary to recover and excel professionally after this type of crash is not superhuman-we all do it when we are first learning to ride a bike. This type of behavior is not to be confused with blind faith or sheer stupidity. Each time you get back on the bike you try to do things a little better than last time, but you have a strong underlying belief that you can learn to ride successfully because you see others who have learned how to ride.

Now consider a time-tested investment strategy like relative strength that has outperformed for decades – do you just walk away from your strategy after hitting the pavement? Or do you shake yourself off, collect your senses, and get back on the road? The drive to succeed is a matter of temperament and must come from within. A systematic process can only do so much to help you with this decision…anyone can just quit and go home.

If we’re working on being smart while operating within the capital markets, discipline alone will not carry you to finish line. It’s the whole package – knowledge, discipline, and patience – that are going to guide you successfully. Crashes are always just around the corner. Crashes happen. It’s your job as an advisor to be ready to deal with them.

Final Thought: One of the more interesting bits in the article highlights how Voigt went back over the tapes again and again to try to figure out “what he did wrong.” In the end, his tire slipped on road paint and he was face-first on the ground within half a second. There was literally nothing he could have done to prevent the crash. That’s often the case in markets as well. You can’t always prevent it, so you’ve got to be prepared to deal with it and get back on the bike.

Posted by:


High RS Diffusion Index

May 19, 2010

The chart below measures the percentage of high relative strength stocks that are trading above their 50-day moving average (universe of mid and large cap stocks.) As of 5/18/10.

(Click to Enlarge)

The 10-day moving average of this indicator is 49% and the one-day reading is 33%. Dips in this oscillator have often provided good opportunities to add to relative strength strategies.

Posted by:


What a Difference a Dollar Makes

May 18, 2010

Six or eight months ago, the head of China’s central bank was giving angry press conferences talking about curtailing purchases of U.S. Treasury securities. Today a Chinese news site, Xinhuanet.com, reports that China’s buying of U.S. Treasuries is rising. In fact, the Chinese now love our bonds:

The March increase was the largest one-month gain on record. It surpassed the old record of a net increase of 135.8 billion dollars in May 2007.

They are probably impressed with the administration’s newfound fiscal discipline and the stern budget cuts being proposed by Congressional leaders. icon smile What a Difference a Dollar Makes Oops. None of that has happened, or is likely to. So what’s up?

What’s up is the U.S. dollar! Suddenly fiscal discipline is immaterial. As the dollar goes higher against other currencies, the Chinese are making money on their investment.

Courtesy: Yahoo! Finance

Currency markets run on pure relative strength. A currency is only as good as the economy backing it-and even though those of us in the United States can see problems with our economy, from the outside it is clearly in better shape than most of our competitors. This is one reason why it may be a big mistake to be too parochial about your investment universe. The market is global even if your portfolio isn’t. It makes sense to widen your investment horizons, to look for returns wherever they are.

Posted by:


The Wellspring of Relative Strength

May 18, 2010

Relative strength investors had an excellent Q1 this year. In order to continue to generate returns from relative strength, discipline and patience are required. But news items and temporary issues can cause investors to take their eyes off the ball. As Zacks Investment Research put it:

Even though the market no longer seems to care about mundane things like earnings and revenues when there are such exciting things like a debt crisis in the cradle of democracy, this has been a very good earnings season.

In their recap of the current quarter’s earnings, Zacks goes into mind-numbing detail, sector by sector, for a large number of factors. Obviously they believe the market has been good because earnings have been good. When you examine the sector data, you will notice that quite a number of the strongest sectors in terms of relative strength are also sectors with really good earnings and positive estimate revisions.

Wow. What a shock! Sometimes when I read articles about relative strength or momentum, the writer makes it sound like a mindless exercise in buying whatever is going up, as if the stock or asset had no reason to appreciate other than group mania. But things typically don’t go up for no reason-keep in mind there’s always an informed investor on the other side of the trade too. If the fundamentals are strong, there’s often strong demand for the asset-and that’s usually where the relative strength comes from.

Posted by: