adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Investment

Bob Pisani: Heeding the investment wisdom of Jack Bogle starts with keeping it simple

Published

 on

 

(Below is an excerpt from Bob Pisani’s new book “Shut Up & Keep Talking: Lessons on Life and Investing from the Floor of the New York Stock Exchange.”)

In 1997, just as I was becoming on-air stocks editor for CNBC, I had a telephone conversation with Jack Bogle, the founder of Vanguard.

That conversation would end up changing my life.

300x250x1

Jack was by then already an investing legend. He had founded Vanguard more than 20 years before and had created the first indexed mutual fund in 1976.

CNBC had been in the regular habit of having investing “superstars” like Bill Miller from Legg Mason, Bill Gross from Pimco or Jim Rogers on the air. It made sense: let the people who had been successful share their tips with the rest of us.

Bogle, in our brief conversation, reminded me that these superstar investors were very rare creatures, and that most people never outperformed their benchmarks. He said we were spending too much time building up these superstars and not enough time emphasizing long-term buy-and-hold, and the power of owning index funds. He reiterated that most actively managed funds charged fees that were too high and that any outperformance they might generate was usually destroyed by the high fees.

His tone was cordial, but not overly warm. Regardless: I started paying much more attention to Bogle’s investment precepts.

The birth of Vanguard

From the day it opened on May 1, 1975, Vanguard Group was modeled differently from other fund families. It was organized as a mutual company owned by the funds it managed; in other words, the company was and is owned by its customers.

One of Vanguard’s earliest products proved to be the most historic: the earliest ever index mutual fund, the First Index Investment Trust, which began operation on Aug. 31, 1976.

By then, the academic community was aware stock pickers — both those that picked individual stocks and actively managed mutual funds — underperformed the stock market. The search was on to find some cheap way to own the broad market.

A tribute to Jack Bogle, founder and retired CEO of The Vanguard Group, is displayed on the bell balcony over the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York, January 17, 2019
In 1973, Princeton professor Burton Malkiel published “A Random Walk Down Wall Street,” drawing on earlier academic research that showed that stocks tend to follow a random path, that prior price movements were not indicative of future trends and that it was not possible to outperform the market unless more risk was taken.
But selling the public on just buying an index fund that mimicked the S&P 500 was a tough sell. Wall Street was aghast: not only was there no profit in selling an index fund, but why should the public be sold on just going along with the market?  The purpose was to try to beat the market, wasn’t it?
But Vanguard, under Bogle’s leadership, kept pushing forward. In 1994, Bogle published “Bogle on Mutual Funds: New Perspectives for the Intelligent Investor,” in which he argued the case for index funds over high-fee active management and showed that those high costs had an adverse impact on long-term returns.

Bogle’s second book, “Common Sense on Mutual Funds: New Imperatives for the Intelligent Investor,” came out in 1999 and immediately became an investment classic. In it, Bogle made an extended case for low-cost investing.

Bogle’s four components to investing

Bogle’s main message was that there are four components to investing: return, risk, cost and time.

Return is how much you expect to earn.

Risk is how much you can afford to lose “without excessive damage to your pocketbook or your psyche.”

Cost is the expenses you are incurring that eat into your return, including fees, commissions and taxes.

Time is the length of your investment horizon; with a longer time horizon, you can afford to take more risk.

Stocks beat bonds over the long term

While there are some periods when bonds have done better, over the long term stocks provide superior returns, which makes sense because the risk of owning stocks is greater.

The longer the time period, the better chance stocks would outperform. For 10-year horizons, stocks beat bonds 80% of the time, for 20-year horizons, about 90% of the time and, over 30-year horizons, nearly 100% of the time.

Vanguard signage at a Morningstar Investment Conference.
M. Spencer Green | AP

Other key Bogle precepts:

Focus on the long term, because the short term is too volatile. Bogle noted that the S&P 500 had produced real (inflation-adjusted) returns of 7% annually since 1926 (when the S&P 500 was created), but two-thirds of the time the market will average returns of plus or minus 20 percentage points of that.

In other words, about two-thirds of the time the market will range between up 27% (7% plus 20) or down 13% (7% minus 20) from the prior year. The other one-third of the time, it can go outside those ranges. That is a very wide variation from year to year!

Focus on real (inflation-adjusted) returns, not nominal (non-inflation adjusted) returns. While inflation-adjusted returns for stocks (the S&P 500) have averaged about 7% annually since 1926, there were periods of high inflation that were very damaging. From 1961 to 1981, inflation hit an annual rate of 7%. Nominal (not adjusted for inflation) returns were 6.6% annually during this period, but inflation-adjusted returns were -0.4%.

The rate of return on stocks is determined by three variables: the dividend yield at the time of investment, the expected rate of growth in earnings and the change in the price-earnings ratio during the period of investment.

The first two are based on fundamentals. The third (the P/E ratio) has a “speculative” component. Bogle described that speculative component as “a barometer of investor sentiment. Investors pay more for earnings when their expectations are high, and less when they lose faith in the future.”

High costs destroy returns. Whether it is high fees, high trading costs or high sales loads, those costs eat into returns. Always choose low cost. If you need investment advice, pay close attention to the cost of that advice.

Keep costs low by owning index funds, or at least low-cost actively managed funds. Actively managed funds charge higher fees (sometimes including front-end charges) that erode outperformance, so index investors earn a higher rate of return.

As for the hopes of any consistent outperformance from active management, Bogle concluded, as Burton Malkiel had, that the skill of portfolio managers was largely a matter of luck. Bogle was never against active management, but believed it was rare to find management that outpaced the market without taking on too much risk.

Very small differences in returns make a big difference when compounded over decades. Bogle used the example of a fund that charged a 1.7% expense ratio versus a low-cost fund that charged 0.6%. Assuming an 11.1% rate of return, Bogle showed how a $10,000 investment in 25 years grew to $108,300 in the high cost fund but the low-cost fund grew to $166,200. The low-cost fund had nearly 60% more than the high-cost fund!

Bogle said this illustrated both the magic and the tyranny of compounding: “Small differences in compound interest lead to increasing, and finally staggering, differences in capital accumulation.”

Don’t try to time the markets. Investors who try to move money into and out of the stock market have to be right twice: once when they put money in, and again when they remove it.

Bogle said: “After nearly 50 years in this business, I do not know of anybody who has done it successfully and consistently. I don’t even know anybody who knows anybody who has done it successfully and consistently.”

Don’t churn your portfolio. Bogle bemoaned the fact that investors of all types traded too much, insisting that “impulse is your enemy.”

Don’t overrate past fund performance. Bogle said: “There is no way under the sun to forecast a fund’s future absolute returns based on its past records.” Funds that outperform eventually revert to the mean.

Beware of following investing stars. Bogle said: “These superstars are more like comets: they brighten the firmament for a moment in time, only to burn out and vanish into the dark universe.”

Owning fewer funds is better than owning a lot of funds. Even in 1999, Bogle bemoaned the nearly infinite variety of mutual fund investments. He made a case for owning a single balanced fund (65/35 stocks/bonds) and said it could capture 97% of total market returns.

Having too many funds (Bogle believed no more than four or five were necessary) would result in over-diversification. The total portfolio would come to resemble an index fund, but would likely incur higher costs.

Stay the course. Once you understand your risk tolerance and have selected a small number of indexed or low-cost actively managed funds, don’t do anything else.

Stay invested. Short term, the biggest risk in the market is price volatility, but long term the biggest risk is not being invested at all.

Bogle’s legacy

More than 20 years later, the basic precepts that Bogle laid down in “Common Sense on Mutual Funds” are still relevant.

Bogle never deviated from his central theme of indexing and low-cost investing, and there was no reason to do so. Time had proven him correct.

Just look at where investors are putting their money. This year, with the S&P 500 down 15%, and with bond funds down as well, more than $500 billion has flowed into exchange traded funds, the vast majority of which are low-cost index funds.

Where is that money coming from?

“Much of the outflows we have seen are coming from active [ETF] strategies,” Matthew Bartolini, head of SPDR Americas research at State Street Global Advisors, a major ETF provider, told Pension & Investments magazine recently.

Today, Vanguard has more than $8 trillion in assets under management, second only to Blackrock. While Vanguard has many actively managed funds, the majority of its assets are in low-cost index funds.

And that first Vanguard index fund? Now known as the Vanguard 500 Index Fund (VFIAX), it charges 4 basis points ($4 per $10,000 invested) to own the entire S&P 500. All major fund families have some variation of a low-cost S&P 500 index fund.

Jack Bogle would be pleased.

Bob Pisani is senior markets correspondent for CNBC. He has spent the nearly three decades reporting from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. In Shut Up and Keep Talking, Pisani shares stories about what he has learned about life and investing.

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Weaker Orders, Investment Underscore Ailing US Manufacturing – Yahoo Canada Finance

Published

 on


(Bloomberg) — US manufacturing showed more signs this week of succumbing to the Federal Reserve’s aggressive interest-rate hikes that are taking a bigger bite out of demand and risk upending the economic expansion.

Most Read from Bloomberg

The government’s first estimate of gross domestic product for the fourth quarter and a report on December factory orders for durable goods pointed to sizable downshifts in both spending on business equipment and bookings for core capital goods.

300x250x1

The durable goods report Thursday showed orders for nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft — a proxy for business investment — dropped 0.2% in December after no change a month earlier. Over the fourth quarter, bookings for these core capital goods posted the weakest annualized gain since 2020. Shipments, an input for GDP, decreased for the third time in four months.

“Taken in tandem with the output data where industrial production has declined in six of the past eight months, it is increasingly evident that the manufacturing recession is well underway,” Wells Fargo & Co. economists Tim Quinlan and Shannon Seery said in a note to clients.

Also on Thursday, the GDP report showed outlays for business equipment dropped an annualized 3.7%, the largest slide since the immediate aftermath of the pandemic. That decline was part of a broader demand slowdown, which included a smaller-than-forecast advance in personal spending.

While GDP growth beat expectations, details of the report that offer a clearer picture of domestic demand were decidedly weak. Inflation-adjusted final sales to private domestic purchasers, which strip out inventories and net exports while excluding government spending, rose at a paltry 0.2% rate — also the weakest since the second quarter of 2020.

Last month’s retreat in core capital goods orders indicates manufacturing output, which already registered sharp declines in the final two months of 2022, may struggle to gain traction this quarter.

Read more: Weak US Retail Sales, Factory Data Heighten Recession Concerns

The slump in housing is also spilling over into producers of non-durable goods. Shares of Sherwin-Williams Co. tumbled this week after the paintmaker pointed to pressures stemming from a weak residential real estate market and inflation.

“We currently see a very challenging demand environment in 2023 and visibility beyond our first half is limited,” Chief Executive Officer John Morikis said on a Jan. 26 earnings call. “The Fed has also been quite clear about its intention to slow down demand in its effort to tame inflation.”

An accumulation of inventories only adds to the headwinds. Inventory building accounted for about half of the 2.9% annualized increase in fourth-quarter GDP. For the year as a whole, inventories grew $123.3 billion, the most since 2015.

With demand moderating, there’s less incentive to ramp up orders or production as companies make greater efforts to sell from existing stock.

In addition to the aforementioned data, the latest surveys of manufacturers show sustained weakness. Measures of orders at factories in four regional Fed surveys have all indicated multiple months of contraction.

All surveys released so far for this month are consistent with an overall contraction in activity that extends back through most of the second half of 2022.

Next week, the Institute for Supply Management will issue its January manufacturing survey and economists project a third-straight month of shrinking activity.

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Canada expected to buck trend of big investment banking layoffs – Reuters

Published

 on


TORONTO, Jan 26 (Reuters) – Some of Canada’s top investment banks plan to maintain staffing levels to meet client expectations for the same level of coverage through the ups and downs of business cycles, head hunters and industry executives said.

U.S. investment banks, including Goldman Sachs (GS.N), began cutting over 3,000 employees on Jan. 11 citing a challenging macroeconomic environment, raising fears Canadian banks may follow suit. Like their global peers, many Canadian investment banks had staffed up during the pandemic only to see dealmaking slow last year.

At Royal Bank of Canada (RY.TO), the country’s biggest lender, for instance, headcount at its capital markets division jumped by 71% over the two years ending Oct. 31, 2022 to 6,887 employees.

But in the meantime Canadian dealmaking fell 39.7% last year to $89.7 billion. That is more than the 36% drop in global deal values to $3.8 trillion following a stellar 2021, according to data from Dealogic.

Yet, Canadian banks have not announced layoffs and some even say they may increase headcount, though dealmaking in the new year is down nearly 50% to $3.2 billion from a year ago, according to Dealogic.

“Right now there is a sense that there isn’t a need for cuts in the system,” Dominique Fortier, partner at recruitment firm Heidrick & Struggles’ Toronto office, told Reuters.

“When there was an upswing in 2021, it happened so quickly that there was no corresponding increase in hiring and so I don’t see that we’ll have the same decrease in terms of headcount coming.”

Toronto Dominion Bank (TD.TO), which last year agreed to buy New York-based boutique investment bank Cowen Inc (COWN.O), expects to continue to grow its global investment banking business as it work towards closing the deal, a spokesperson said.

Desjardins, another Canadian lender, will continue to invest in its growing capital markets division, a spokesperson said.

EXPENSIVE PROPOSITION

Bill Vlaad, a Toronto-based recruiter who specializes in the financial services sector, said that while there was some nervousness around the stability of investment banking teams, Canada is unlikely to see U.S.-level redundancies aside from the annual cull of poor performers called “maintenance layoffs.”

“The U.S. is very nimble. They will go in and out of hotspots very quickly. Canada doesn’t have that same luxury and has to stay relatively consistent in coverage,” said Vlaad.

“You have a consistent group of people working…and they don’t fluctuate all that much year to year, decade to decade.”

But another down year for dealmaking could see bonuses taking a hit.

RBC, which was ranked No. 2 in Canada M&A, equity capital markets and debt capital markets last year according to Dealogic, has no layoff plans for investment banking in Canada, a source with knowledge of the matter said.

Spokespeople for JP Morgan, which topped the M&A league table last year, Scotiabank (BNS.TO) and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CM.TO) declined to comment. BMO did not respond to requests for comment.

Headhunters and lawyers say it’s less expensive to lay off bankers in the United States compared to Canada.

Howard Levitt, senior partner at employment law firm Levitt Sheikh, said Canadian investment banking employees would be entitled to somewhere between four and 27 months severance with full remuneration depending on their status, re-employability, age and length of service.

Reporting by Maiya Keidan
Editing by Denny Thomas and Deepa Babington

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Weaker Orders, Investment Underscore Ailing US Manufacturing – BNN Bloomberg

Published

 on


(Bloomberg) — US manufacturing showed more signs this week of succumbing to the Federal Reserve’s aggressive interest-rate hikes that are taking a bigger bite out of demand and risk upending the economic expansion.

The government’s first estimate of gross domestic product for the fourth quarter and a report on December factory orders for durable goods pointed to sizable downshifts in both spending on business equipment and bookings for core capital goods.

The durable goods report Thursday showed orders for nondefense capital goods excluding aircraft — a proxy for business investment — dropped 0.2% in December after no change a month earlier. Over the fourth quarter, bookings for these core capital goods posted the weakest annualized gain since 2020. Shipments, an input for GDP, decreased for the third time in four months.

300x250x1

“Taken in tandem with the output data where industrial production has declined in six of the past eight months, it is increasingly evident that the manufacturing recession is well underway,” Wells Fargo & Co. economists Tim Quinlan and Shannon Seery said in a note to clients.

Also on Thursday, the GDP report showed outlays for business equipment dropped an annualized 3.7%, the largest slide since the immediate aftermath of the pandemic. That decline was part of a broader demand slowdown, which included a smaller-than-forecast advance in personal spending.

While GDP growth beat expectations, details of the report that offer a clearer picture of domestic demand were decidedly weak. Inflation-adjusted final sales to private domestic purchasers, which strip out inventories and net exports while excluding government spending, rose at a paltry 0.2% rate — also the weakest since the second quarter of 2020.

Last month’s retreat in core capital goods orders indicates manufacturing output, which already registered sharp declines in the final two months of 2022, may struggle to gain traction this quarter.

Read more: Weak US Retail Sales, Factory Data Heighten Recession Concerns

The slump in housing is also spilling over into producers of non-durable goods. Shares of Sherwin-Williams Co. tumbled this week after the paintmaker pointed to pressures stemming from a weak residential real estate market and inflation.

“We currently see a very challenging demand environment in 2023 and visibility beyond our first half is limited,” Chief Executive Officer John Morikis said on a Jan. 26 earnings call. “The Fed has also been quite clear about its intention to slow down demand in its effort to tame inflation.”

An accumulation of inventories only adds to the headwinds. Inventory building accounted for about half of the 2.9% annualized increase in fourth-quarter GDP. For the year as a whole, inventories grew $123.3 billion, the most since 2015.

With demand moderating, there’s less incentive to ramp up orders or production as companies make greater efforts to sell from existing stock.

In addition to the aforementioned data, the latest surveys of manufacturers show sustained weakness. Measures of orders at factories in four regional Fed surveys have all indicated multiple months of contraction. 

All surveys released so far for this month are consistent with an overall contraction in activity that extends back through most of the second half of 2022. 

Next week, the Institute for Supply Management will issue its January manufacturing survey and economists project a third-straight month of shrinking activity.

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending