Tag: Financial Advice

You Would Probably Make a Terrible Stock Picker

Mærsk_Mc-Kinney_MøllerYou would probably make a terrible stock picker. You really would. Why you ask? Because the world is big and complicated and its hard to hold on to more than a small piece of it at any one time.

Picking stocks isn’t exactly all the rage, but with the sheer volume of discount brokerages and online trading platforms there’s clearly enough interest in the DIY method of investing that it’s easy for people to either manage an entire stock portfolio or dabble in the occasional stock tip. Is this a good idea? Cost wise it’s hardly prohibitive, but from the standpoint of whether this makes for smart investing I have my doubts.

Why? Well, for one thing even the professionals get things wrong sometimes. But the investment industry is staffed with analysts that specialize in entire industries, looking to understand companies from different points of view that reveal opportunities for growth, value or misplaced market opportunities. These people spend their careers trying to understand companies and the industries they are part of.

By comparison the DIY investor tends to act on the things they think they know, and perhaps even the unknown knowns. All of this can lead to serious errors in judgement and costly mistakes in their investments. Are you right to think that Apple is on the decline because it isn’t innovative enough? Or that Microsoft has already lost because of declining computer sales. Is Tesla really worth as much as 50% of GM? Is that hot mining stock you heard about really as good a bet as you think?

In my time working at a mutual fund company I was most impressed when I spoke to portfolio managers who  talked about why they looked at companies and industries that no one else did. How much time did you think about mattress companies? How often were you reviewing currency trends between Mexico and India (yes that’s a thing)? How much do you really know about a company?

For example, have you ever heard of A.P. Moller-Maersk? It’s okay if you haven’t, but you might be surprised to learn just how big a company it is. Maersk is a Danish corporation that’s core business is global shipping. It’s so large a firm that it accounts for 20% of Denmark’s GDP. It owns and operates countless subsidiaries, including banks, energy companies and supermarkets. It’s full list of associated companies is 12 pages long (Company Overview), showing firms from Angola to Canada, the United States to  Japan, on the Middle East and through every Emerging and Developed market you can think of. Maersk commands a shipping fleet of six hundred vessels, making it the world’s largest. It’s revenues in 2011 were $60.2 billion, just shy of Microsoft’s. In 2005 it launched one of its biggest ships, called an E-class, that could carry 15,000 containers. In 2013 Maersk started using its Triple-E Class ship, so large it carries 18,000 containers.*

image.axd

I fully admit to knowing very little about such a large company, and it surprises me that a firm with such reach seems to fly just below the radar. But my job is to help people save for retirement and work with their individual financial situations. That’s why I trust professional analysts and portfolio managers to understand the nuances of the companies that make up the investing world. For the DIY investor all too often rumour and news reports substitute for real knowledge. The good fortune of a stock going up instills courage in stock picking prowess, while a declining market either confuses or robs an investor of their confidence and possibly their savings. Investing is a tricky business, and one where we should seek help when its offered.

*All the information regarding Maersk’s business comes either from their website or the excellent book Ninety Percent of Everything by Rose George, which I highly recommend. 

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Why Buy an ETF?

Exchange Traded FundIt’s become an excepted fact amongst business reporters that the best investments to buy are ETFs, otherwise known as Exchange Traded Funds. What is an ETF and why are so many journalists convinced that you should buy them? Well an ETF is a fancy way to describe an investment that looks very similar too, (but isn’t quite) a stock market index. Unlike mutual funds, the ETF is bought and sold like a stock, but mirrors the performance of an index of your choosing, and by extension all the companies that make up that index. In that respect it shares the (supposedly) best aspects of both stocks and mutual funds. It is traded quickly and is quite inexpensive compared to a traditional fund, but unlike a stock is widely diversified and so should have reduced risk compared to a single company.

In the aftermath of 2008, many journalists that cover the investment portion of the news have touted ETFs as a better investment than traditional mutual funds, citing underperformance against respective benchmarks and the significant discount on trading costs for holding ETFs. ETFs represent a “passive investment”, meaning they don’t try to out perform their mirrored indexes, instead you get all of the ups, and all of the downs of the market. This message of lower fees and comparable performance has had some resonance on investors, and questions about ETFs are some of the most frequent I receive, however while I am not opposed to ETFs I am very hesitant about giving them a blanket endorsement.

That’s because I don’t know anybody who is happy with 100% risk. In the great wisdom of investing the investor should stay focused on “long term” returns and ignore short term fluctuations in the market. But investors are people, and people (this may shock you) are not cold calculating machines. They live each day as it comes and fret over negative news, get too excited about positive news and are generally greedy when they shouldn’t be. In short, people aren’t naturally good investors and being encouraged to buy an investment like an ETF exclusively on cost alone opens up all kinds of other problems for people who find that the market makes them nervous, or may be closing in on retirement. The passive nature of an ETF may be right for some people, but that decision will rarely depend solely on the cost of the product.

The hype for ETFs is therefore more comparable to buying a car exclusively on price based on the argument that all cars function the same way. But depending on your needs there may be multiple aspects you want to consider: size, safety, speed, etc. Investments are similar, with different products offering different benefits its important not to let greed set all of your investment designs. Investing is typically about retirement, not about maximizing every last dollar the market can offer. Reaching retirement is about balancing those investor needs with their wants, and frequently providing less downside at the expense of some of the performance is preferable to the full volatility of the financial markets.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Apple May Have Just Won the Tablet Wars

Global Tablet Sales
In 2013 global sales of tablets reached just over 195 million. Of that Apple sold over 70 million tablets, growing their year over year sales.

As of today you can download and use Microsoft Office on your iPad. This news has hit my family with a yawn, but to me this is an excellent signal for the long term financial health of both Apple and Microsoft. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that Apple may have just won the tablet wars for the foreseeable future.

In case you don’t know Microsoft has been hurting. Not financially. It’s doing great financially, but as a company where being “with it” seems important, Microsoft is decidedly not. Steve Baumer, the recently retired (and Bill Gates hand picked) CEO made several attempts to broaden and improve Microsoft’s product offerings, but many of them fell flat. The most notable has been Windows 8 and the Surface tablet, the new operating system that was meant to take Windows into the mobile era. The reception to both the Surface and Windows 8 has been so negative that the cost has been extraordinary. Microsoft has already announced Windows 9 and it is expected that it will be a return to the things that people love most about Windows.

Part of the strategy for moving into mobile computing had been to withhold Microsoft Office from the iPad. Office is still the bread and butter of the business world and it drives much of the revenue for Microsoft. The thought had been that limiting Office to a Microsoft platform would make their tablets more desirable and would steer the mobile business world towards Microsoft products. How wrong they were. Apple accounts for 73% of mobile enterprise solutions (sorry Blackberry). Even without the Microsoft Office platform people and businesses preferred to use the iPad, using different apps and numerous work arounds to integrate the Apple product into their business life.

Some will assume that the availability of Office for the iPad signals some kind of death knell for Microsoft’s future in the mobile world. I doubt that. If anything it will make them stronger. It will help solidify Microsoft Office as both the preferred software for businesses, renew interest in its personal use, and ease the pressure to choose the “right” tablet knowing that software can be shared across multiple platforms. The bigger story here is for Apple. Apple’s mobile operating system (iOS) may lag behind the sheer volume of users of Google’s Android operating system, but Apple easily sells the most tablets of any one company. In fact in 2013 Apple sold nearly double the number of iPad’s compared to its nearest competitor, Samsung.

But with the arrival of Microsoft Office it seems clear that Apple is likely to retain the profitable sector of personal and business tablets. Whether this ends up being reflected in the stock price of Apple is yet to be seen.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Las Vegas and the Shrinking Invisible Economy

dsc1511lJust over a year ago I postulated that environmental investing may not be dead. The issue that keeps arising is the invisible economy. Traditionally in economics things that are provided “free” by the natural world don’t get counted in “The Economy”, while things that people do want from the natural world do get counted. For instance, everyone agrees that there is a market for commodities like gold, oil and lumber. Extracting any of those commodities is considered part of the economic growth of the country, from the people who build the roads and equipment for accessibility to the physical harvesting of the raw materials, back to its refinement all the way down to the finished product. All of that is part of the economic system. But by-products from all this economic activity that pollute water ways, or urban expansion that paves over marsh grounds, or excessive water waste that diminishes aquifers isn’t considered an economic activity, it’s called an externality.

In other words there are a number of benefits that are provided to us through natural processes that we get “for free” and rarely get assigned a price tag for their contribution. This has been allowed to happen since much of the ecosystems have been able to absorb considerable abuse without stopping the benefits that we have been provided. Except in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas already doesn’t make sense. It’s a desert oasis without an oasis. A bustling city that’s situated in the middle of nowhere, with few natural resources to support it. In fact Las Vegas is so heavily dependent on water that it is literally drying up the desert that will likely lead to the ending of the Hoover Dam as a source of power. Lake Mead, the lake created by the dam is the primary source of water for the city, and the city’s needs have become so great, and the water level so low that there are now two emergency tunnelling construction projects underway to ensure that there is still water for Sin City.

How low is the water? Currently the elevation of the lake shows 1104 ft. The lake is expected to be down to 1080ft by April of 2015. Five more feet and officially there is a level 1 emergency shortage declared. If the lake drops further, to 1050 ft. the Hoover dam stops producing electricity. Under current estimates (assuming that the desert doesn’t get torrential rains for the next few years) this isn’t a question about if, but about when.

Screen shot 2010-10-21 at 11.02.31 AM-2

Las Vegas is unique for other reasons, it wastes an unbelievable amount of water, and its growth rate has been much higher than its gains in conservation. But its situation isn’t unique. It’s happening all over the world, and the result is both rising prices for water and growing infrastructure investments. These will be good opportunities for investors, but bad for local economies as disposable income will be shifted to covering increasing water costs. Las Vegas is useful because the scope of these problems is obvious. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent to extend the usefulness of Lake Mead to Vegas. Water rights are being purchased by the city as fast as possible, and if the Hoover Dam stops producing electricity there will be not simply lost revenue from the dam, but increasing electricity and infrastructure costs. The invisible economy of the environment may soon not be so invisible.

Lake Mead

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Crimean Crisis Reminds Everybody Why Investing is a Long Game

kiev-split_2829872b
Kiev Square, before and during the protests.

You might have been forgiven if you hadn’t been paying close attention to the Ukrainian Revolution two months ago when it was a long and violent standoff between the Ukrainian government and its people. Kiev square looked like a war zone and reports, while increasingly dire, were not necessarily front page news. But since the toppling of the pro-Russian Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych it has been impossible to not pay attention to the exploding diplomatic mess of the Crimea.

As of this morning it appears that Vladimir Putin is going to annex the Crimea, much to Ukraine’s dismay, Europe’s frustrations and America’s exhaustion. The crisis is also far from over. The Ukrainian government (now mostly pro-western Europe) is saying that that will not allow such a loss of territory, EU and US sanctions are targeting Russian oligarchs. France is promising to cancel an order of military ships to Russia if Britain punishes Russian billionaire’s living in London. Russia seems relatively unfazed by any of this and seems to know that regardless of what legal reasons may exist that could start a war, few seem interested in shedding blood for the Ukraine.

All of this is obviously upsetting markets. Over the last month the global markets, and especially European markets have taken significant hits over concerns that some kind of conflict is about to breakout.

Bloomberg's Global Index looks at European, Middle Eastern and African Markets
Bloomberg’s Global Index looks at European, Middle Eastern and African Markets
This is the UK stock market (FTSE) over the last month. Performance has clearly suffered as the Crimean situation has worsened.
This is the UK stock market (FTSE) over the last month. Performance has clearly suffered as the Crimean situation has worsened.

This creates the kind of immediate volatility that is both temporary and is difficult to counter. It’s a reminder that investing is different from day trading. There are people who are willing to try and make profits from the day to day fluctuations of this (most recent) crisis. They will be jumping in and out of the markets, trying to grab the slight differences over each day and profiting from nervous investors. But being an investor means riding out this volatility with the knowledge that while it is uncomfortable, it is ultimately temporary and that real growth comes from long term success, not day to day jitters.

That being said, it would be nice if we didn’t accidentally end the world!

the-worlds-end-poster-header

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Looking for Dark Clouds Amidst Silver Linings

628x471This year got off to a rocky start. As of writing this post, the S&P 500 is down over -2% year-to-date (YTD), while other global markets have been similarly affected. The MSCI Global Index is down nearly -1%, the MSCI Emerging Markets index is also down -4.5%, as is the FTSE 100 (UK, -1.3%) and last year’s super-performer, Japan (-12.1%). This sudden “frothiness” has brought out the fear mongers and market doom-sayers. So regularly has the drum been beaten that 2014 should see a significant slide in market value that it has become a regular question in every meeting. (note: I did not update these numbers for the current week, however many of these returns have improved. In some cases quite dramatically)

The only problem is that any internet search will easily reveal market calls for a correction EACH and EVERY YEAR! This doesn’t mean that a correction won’t happen, in fact if there is one thing that we know about the markets its that corrections do, and must happen. We also know that the longer you go without a correction the closer you must be to having one. The problem is that we place value on people who claim to be able to predict a market downturn, even when we can’t actually predict when a downturn will actually occur. So the media keeps trotting out people willing to make outlandish market predictions knowing that it will grab headlines and eventually be right.

Except….

Except that there are lots of reasons to be cautious in the current market conditions. Not that we can predict when we might actually see a downturn, but there a lot of reasons why it makes sense to have defensive positions in your portfolio. For instance, we are currently at an all time high for IPOs, the most since 1997. There is some evidence that as IPOs peak its not uncommon to see a market correction, as less valuable companies try to cash in on market exuberance and professional investors try and sell their positions in less viable companies to bullish markets.

Other market metrics also seem to favour being on the defensive. Currently there are 84 companies on the S&P 500 with shares that are valued above 10x earnings. This means that investors are incredibly bullish about the future prospects when it comes to income growth. Many of these companies are in hi-tech sectors, like social media firms such as Twitter. For the record that is the most number of companies above this valuation since prior to the tech bubble in 1999.

Share buy backs also play a role here. If you aren’t familiar, with borrowing rates still very low many companies have taken the opportunity to borrow large sums of money and buy their outstanding shares back. Why? As the number of outstanding shares in the market declines the Earnings Per-Share goes up. This means that even if a company isn’t seeing actual growth in sales, it does mean that the the remaining shares receive a greater portion on the earnings, artificially increasing their value. In of itself this isn’t a problem, but it serves to increase the stock market while not seeing much in the way of actual economic growth.

Lastly we have also seen that the flow of money into ETF funds (passive investments that mimic indices) is also adding volatility to the markets. As investors remain concerned over negative surprises in the news, the high liquidity of ETFs causes even greater short term fluctuations in the markets as investors pull back. This is especially true in the Emerging Markets, and has had the unusual side effect of showing that actively managed funds have outperformed comparable ETFs.

In summary then there are four good reasons to believe that the markets may get more turbulent going forward. The lesson however is not to commit to a wholly negative or positive view of the markets, but rather continue to hold a diversified group of assets to deal with all market surprises, both good and bad!

 

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Canadians Losing the Battle to Save For Retirement

Money WorriesPeople sometimes ask why I seem to be so focused on housing and its costs as a financial advisor, and I think the answer is best summed up declining rates of RRSP contributions. Currently many Canadians seem to be opting out of making a RRSP contribution this year, with both Scotiabank and BMO conducting separate and disheartening surveys about likely RRSP contribution rates. Unsurprisingly the answer most Canadians gave to why they would not be contributing this year was because they “did not have enough money.” These surveys also found that 53% of Canadians did not yet have a TFSA either for similar reasons. The expectation is that by 2018 Canadians will have over a trillion dollars of unused contribution room.

These kinds of surveys invariably lead to a kind of financial “tut-tutting” by investment gurus.

As one member of BMO’s executes put it, an “annual contribution of $2,000 to an RRSP… costs less than $6 per day.” which is true but does not really spell out a viable path to a retirement, merely the ability to make a contribution to a RRSP. While there is nothing wrong with the Gail Vaz-Oxlade’s of the world handing out financial advice and directing people to live debt free, Canadians simply do not live in some kind of financial vacuum where all choices boil down to the simple mantra of “can I afford this?” Frequently debts are incurred either because they must be (educational reasons, car troubles, etc.) or because it is not feasible to partake in an economic activity without taking on debt (like buying a house). Similarly it is not practical to assume that every decision be governed exclusively by a simple weighing of financial realities. It’s true it would cost less to live in Guelph, but many people do not wish to live in Guelph and would rather live in Toronto (Nothing personal Guelph!)

What we do have though is a precarious situation where the economy is weak (but maybe improving), which sets government policy through low interest rates. Low interest rates means borrowing for big ticket items like homes in places where supply is limited, like the GTA, or Vancouver or Calgary. This in turn keeps both house prices and debt levels high. It’s telling as well that a growing number of Canadians are beginning to look at their homes as a source of potential income in retirement. All of this seems to be happening while different financial “experts” argue whether the Canadian housing market is actually over valued, or not

This is where I get a chance to make a personal plug for the benefits of my role. While I don’t have much say in government policy, or even directing housing development in big cities, it is rewarding to know that financial advisors like me have a significant impact on the savings rates of those Canadians that work with us. A study called Value of Advice Report 2012 reported that Canadians that had a personal wealth advisor (that’s me) were twice as likely to save for retirement, and that the average net worth of households was significantly higher when they had regular financial advice from an advisor (again, me). The RRSP deadline this year is March 3, so please give me a call if you haven’t yet made your RRSP contribution. 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

Jack Sparrow and the Pirate Stock Exchange

In case you missed it 2013 seemed to mark the end of Somali piracy. If you can cast your mind back to 2011, piracy off the coast of Africa seemed to be the next big problem. In fact 2011 marked the peak of Somali piracy with 237 separate attacks. In contrast 2013 saw only 15 Somali pirate attacks, an incredible reduction. Piracy is still out there, around countries like Indonesia and off the coast of some West African nations, but the threat of Somali piracy has largely disappeared.

That’s good for those on the high seas, but it means that we miss an opportunity to see how natural and beneficial capital markets are in distributing wealth and helping economies. And yes you read that sentence right.

In this photo taken Sunday, Sept. 23, 2012, masked Somali pirate Hassan stands near a Taiwanese fishing vessel that washed up on shore after the pirates were paid a ransom and released the crew, in the once-bustling pirate den of Hobyo, Somalia. The empty whisky bottles and overturned, sand-filled skiffs that litter this shoreline are signs that the heyday of Somali piracy may be over - most of the prostitutes are gone, the luxury cars repossessed, and pirates talk more about catching lobsters than seizing cargo ships. (AP Photo/Farah Abdi Warsameh)
In this photo taken Sunday, Sept. 23, 2012, masked Somali pirate Hassan stands near a Taiwanese fishing vessel that washed up on shore after the pirates were paid a ransom and released the crew, in the once-bustling pirate den of Hobyo, Somalia. The empty whisky bottles and overturned, sand-filled skiffs that litter this shoreline are signs that the heyday of Somali piracy may be over – most of the prostitutes are gone, the luxury cars repossessed, and pirates talk more about catching lobsters than seizing cargo ships. (AP Photo/Farah Abdi Warsameh)

The core problem for Somalians is that amongst their many, many problems, there is not enough money in the country. This makes sense for a number of reasons. It is a dangerous place, and people who do have money and live there are unlikely to put money into local businesses or trust a bank. Corruption is rampant and the best way to describe Somalia currently is as a failed state. All this makes it very difficult for the citizens of Somalia to attract foreign investors. As an alternative to traditional business practices, many Somalians took up the cause of high seas piracy and ransomed boats and ships back to their host countries in exchange for money. Whether you realize it or not, in this way Somalia was actually improving their economy (albeit illegally) by providing fresh inflows of foreign capital. But how did the money find its way into the local economy? Through the pirate stock market of course!

That’s right, in 2009 a stock market was set up in the small fishing community of Harardheere with about 70 different…pirate entities(?) that locals could invest in. Giving money to one of these entities helped fund piracy on the high seas and successful raids would be paid out to the investors. There is more information about it in this 2011 article in the Wall Street Journal and I encourage you to have a read of this fascinating account of a naturally occurring stock market, but I think this quote from the article sums up the rather banal and natural benefits that markets provide to economies:

As local security officer Mohamed Adam put it to Reuters, “Piracy-related business has become the main profitable economic activity in our area and as locals we depend on their output.” Mr. Adam claims that the district government gets a cut of every dollar collected by pirates and uses it—naturally—for schools, hospitals and other public infrastructure.

jack-sparrow-running

Since then however the international response to Somalian piracy has been swift and decisive. And while the horn of Africa might be safer for international shipping the reasons behind Somalian piracy remain unresolved. But it is insightful to see that this brief chapter of piracy (outside of the Johnny Depp variety) was actually more nuanced and lends an odd credibility to the needs and benefits of markets for investors and companies, regardless of who they are or what business they are in.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc

More Proof that “The Facebook” is Probably Terrible for Investors

social-media-logosI have been previously quite critical of the excitement around IPOs and Social Media. My major complaint is that most social media doesn’t make any money, but receive incredible valuations under the assumption that they might make money someday.

The reason for this is that two companies have made money this way, notably Facebook and Google. Both started out as free services with no revenue and have ballooned into mega-businesses busy shoving marketing at you everywhere you turn. This has, in turn, created a market of investors willing to buy into companies that seem to be doing big business for free on the hope that they can eventually turn a profit.

I’m critical here for a couple of reasons. First, there is little guarantee that any of these businesses can actually ever turn a profit. Social media has often been fickle, Myspace was going to be the next big thing until it was ultimately eclipsed by Facebook. And for every “Facebook” there are literally hundreds of other challengers vying for that attention. But how many Facebooks do we need? According to Pew research, not many.

Use of Social Media Sites
Use of Social Media Sites

Second, how success is judged should be given more scrutiny. Twitter, Facebook and other similar sites get paid by content creators to promote their material. This form of direct marketing (promoting to presumably interested parties) has really to do more with engagement than merely being seen. It’s the idea of engagement that makes these businesses viable platforms. But companies and their marketers have found making something go “viral” notoriously difficult. For every great viral video that turns out to be an ad, almost all the others fail. Estimates range from a 15% success rate, to even less.

Into this fray comes Veritasium, an entertaining science based web series that had an actual look at how Facebook might not be that useful a company to do business with. I’ll let you watch the video without spoiling his point, but I think that if you were looking for a place to spend money and understood how Facebook actually utilized your advertising dollars, you’d think twice.

by The Walker Report of Walker Wealth Management and Aligned Capital Partners Inc