Started By
Message

re: Various Financial Questions

Posted on 1/4/13 at 4:57 pm to
Posted by tirebiter
7K R&G chile land aka SF
Member since Oct 2006
9386 posts
Posted on 1/4/13 at 4:57 pm to
quote:

Security A = Goes up 60% then down 40%
Security B = Goes up 6% then down 4%.

Security B is worth more than your initial investment while Security A is worth less. The key to growing capital over the long-term is to avoid large losses. The longer your time horizon, the higher chances the turtle will always beat the hare.

With that in mind we go to allocation drivers. Developed economies are looking at 0-2% real growth over the next 3-5 years while emerging nations are looking at 4-5% real growth. From a technical perspective, the realm of "safe" assets (treasuries, mortgages, agency debentures) is decreasing, pushing prices up and yields down. Investors are starved for yield which pushes them out the risk spectrum, in this case investment grade credit bonds would be the logical next step.

The equity market is highly volatile and if you believe that we'll only see 0-2% real growth than that is not good reason to own equities over the long term in large amounts. You should still have exposure, but "playing stocks" should be left to your personal brokerage account rather than retirement. With all this in mind this is roughly the personal allocation that I have and what I have allocated for friends and family.


There are numerous papers by competent parties which have studied equity returns over long periods of time which point to slower growing economies exhibiting stronger equity returns than faster growing economies. What you have written regarding projected/estimated future real returns would seem to make rational sense, but often it has not.

The future is unknown. I am still a fan of the Ben Graham's 25/75 guideline, it might dampen gains in some years, but does provide a cushion in avoiding large losses when market valuations are high. During a period of above average market valuations one could also choose investments in funds or ETFs which have captured significant upside and experienced lower downside risk compared to investments in market cap indexes. Some people's personalities and skill set tilt them to trading, that's not my investing method. Personally, I would not buy domestic REITs at current yields (which include ROC in most distributions) and valuations. International, maybe.

I have 20% of my portfolio in TIPS, primarily in individual bonds that were bought when real yields were much higher. Today, I couldn't advocate buying short or other duration TIPS as one is either buying negative yielding securities or accepting the volatility of long bonds for very inconsequential real yield. I bonds are a maybe, at least one is guaranteed stability of principal and maintains the option to sell with a very minimal ding to accrued interest after Yr1, through Yr5, then no penalty.
Posted by Lsut81
Member since Jun 2005
80380 posts
Posted on 1/5/13 at 7:37 am to
A few clarrification questions.... btw, thanks for all the help guys

So I looked up vanguard IRAs and I think that is whom I will be going with. Still trying to decide between rolling my 401k into a Roth or Conventional IRA

1) If I roll it into a Roth, will I automatically meet my 5k a year investment cap for the first year? Its currently $25k
2) If I roll it into a conventional, can I then open a Roth on my own and fund that with 5k out of my checking account? (Im assuming that under law you can only have one Roth?)
3) I'm I correct in thinking that with the Roth, ANY gains I earn in it will not be taxed, ever?
4) If I do roll my 401k to a roth, will I just claim another 25k in income on my 2013 tax returns?

TIA

btw, still waiting on foshizzles PM's insight
Posted by BennyAndTheInkJets
Middle of a layover
Member since Nov 2010
5624 posts
Posted on 1/7/13 at 4:57 pm to
quote:

There are numerous papers by competent parties which have studied equity returns over long periods of time which point to slower growing economies exhibiting stronger equity returns than faster growing economies. What you have written regarding projected/estimated future real returns would seem to make rational sense, but often it has not.

I understand these papers, you may have read a few that I haven't and vice versa but the common main arguement was that the 50's and 90's had the best stock market returns in a slowing growth environment. As you say the future is unknown, but all you can really do is look at the pre-existing conditions for each. In the 50's you were coming off the post-war recession and you had massive capacity to use with new labor. The 90's were a period of disinflation, falling interest rates, and broad outsourcing for cheaper expenses. Those same pre-existing conditions aren't around except for low interest rates.

The big theme I've ran into with these papers is that valuations trumps growth. If you believe stocks are still undervalued right now I completely understand your view, I just think they're slightly overvalued and slowing growth will cause people to sell if they believe equities are overvalued. Regardless, hopefully we both live to see 12/31/2017 so see which one of us is right.
quote:

During a period of above average market valuations one could also choose investments in funds or ETFs which have captured significant upside and experienced lower downside risk compared to investments in market cap indexes. Some people's personalities and skill set tilt them to trading, that's not my investing method.

I can never invest in ETFs, only trade them. The decay in ETFs is bad as it is, but those vehicles are so much more complicated than what meets the eye. I posted this in another thread but in Fall of 2011 there was a treasury ETF collateralized with 30% Italian BTPs.
quote:

Today, I couldn't advocate buying short or other duration TIPS as one is either buying negative yielding securities or accepting the volatility of long bonds for very inconsequential real yield. I bonds are a maybe, at least one is guaranteed stability of principal and maintains the option to sell with a very minimal ding to accrued interest after Yr1, through Yr5, then no penalty.

We agree on this, I wouldn't touch TIPS until past the 10-year mark.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram