Evaluating Stocks, Part 1

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit enslaves us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

I’m back after a fun filled fabulous family vacation. (That’s for all of you who enjoy alliteration!) Let’s just jump into it.

Let’s assume you want to get into individual stock buying yourself either without a financial advisor or on the side of your financial advisor. Also (and always a good idea), you could just want to check the stocks your advisor has selected for your portfolio.

Let’s start with the basics.

My bias: When I look at a stock that I am mulling over, I start with Yahoo Finance. It’s concise, easy to read, readily accessible, and has the basic statistics needed for at a minimum first blush impression of the equity.

Most importantly, you can’t beat the price point.

It’s absolutely free for life!

There are many many other stock research sites you can use and some will convince they are the best and even try to seduce with a freemium model where if you just only spend a few measly dollars a month, even more information like “quantum data” or some such thing will be unleashed for just smart people like you.

Here is how Yahoo Finance is set up for individual stocks.(I’ll use Microsoft [MSFT] as an example though this could be any stock.)

 

 

Sarcastic Reader: That’s as we say in the biz…a shit ton of numbers…

Dr. Scared: This is it! This is how they screw you!!

Dr. Unwise: Exactly what business are you in that a “shit ton” is actually a unit of measure?

PWT: Uh…guys…FOCUS!

One by one, let’s discuss the above statistics.

The company name along with its stock symbol is listed. The stock exchange where this stock is traded is also listed as you can see in this case is our old friend, the NASDAQ,

It also is noted that the prices you see is in US currency.

The current price is pretty obvious (I hope) with how much it went up (YAY!) or how much it went down (Boo!) as well as the percent increase (or decrease) corresponding to the number of dollars and cents the stock moved.

Believe it or not, there is after hours trading (but not for mere mortals like you and me) that causes (generally speaking) small fluctuations and a difference between what the stock in question closed at and what price it will open at the following morning. Along with this again is both the percent increase (or decrease) corresponding to the number of dollars and cents the stock moved.

Previous Close: This is what price the stock closed at just before trading started today (ie, the day you are looking at the stock’s info)

Open: This is what the stock price is at the open of the trading day which can be quite different than what the closing price was depending on what happened between those points in time Remember that any event in the world at any time may affect a company’s stock—a scarcity of a needed mineral, a civil war, a strike starting at midnight after failed last minute negotiations, etc, etc.

Bid: The highest price that buyers of the stock are willing to pay for the stock

Ask: The price at which sellers of the stock are willing to sell it at

Day’s Range: Easy peasy lemon squeezy. This is the top price of the day along with the lowest stock price of the day which just means the range of prices that you could possibly have purchased or sold at. Realize that the closing price or opening price does not have to be either the top or bottom price of this range, just somewhere within this range.

52 week Range: Just as easy as the above. This is the lowest stock price and the highest stock price over the past year (ie, 52 weeks) to give you an idea of where the current stock price is relative to its (fairly recent) highs and lows

Volume: the number of shares traded during a given period of time (usually in a day if not stated differently otherwise) Volume typically does not affect stock price directly. However, a  very lightly traded stock (not likely any companies you have heard of and not any you would invest in until you have a critical mass of core holdings already and become a more savvy [and bolder] investor) may fluctuate significantly with an unusually high volume of trading. Also, if you see volume change significantly (higher or lower) for any stock, it may be indicating something about the company that should you pay attention. Stop looking at the key statistics of the stock and just put the company’s name into a search engine and see what news is out there about the company. ALWAYS REMEMBER: YOU’RE INVESTING IN COMPANIES, NOT JUST STOCKS.  

Average Volume: the number of shares traded in any given time period divided by that unit of time which can be recorded as daily, weekly, etc though it is often daily and in some stock sites it is then denoted as “Average Daily Trading Volume (ADTV)”

Market Capitalization: the stock price times the number of shares available for sale (ie, the number of outstanding shares) This can be misleading in terms of saying this is how much a company is worth given the fact that it doesn’t account how much debt the company may be carrying and the fact that it also doesn’t account for all the shares the company doesn’t put out for public sale among many other factors not to be discussed here

Beta: a stock’s sensitivity to the overall market

A beta of 1.0 means the stock moves (up or down) in perfect alignment with the overall market whereas a higher one means it moves higher or lower than the market’s same direction. For example, a beta of 1.10 means that this particular stock will move (up or down) 10% greater than the overall market does. A lower beta means that the stock in question will not move (up or down) as readily as the overall market does. Ideally, your stock has a beta of 1.0 since it is predictable relative to the market. If you have a high beta stock and the market has a downturn (and it will happen as sure night follows day), then your stock will likely get crushed.

(For you sadists who need to know how beta is calculated [no one is talking to you Dr. Scared or Sarcastic Reader], this is how it works in a thumbnail sketch. Believe it or not, the company’s monthly earnings over the past five months versus the returns from a major index {usually the S&P 500 which is serving as the surrogate of the overall market} who then undergo a statistical regression analyses [don’t ask me details people, I’m no mathmagician] and, voila, your greatly desired beta pops out.

Now imagine doing that for every publicly traded company every month.   

PE Ratio (TTM): the current share price divided by the EPS (earnings per share) This is a way to figure out the pricing of a stock relative to the overall market  and also other companies’ stocks especially if in the same sector (eg, comparing two tech companies or even more relevant [since tech companies are widely diverse—Google vs Netflix anyone?] two car companies). TTM=twelve trailing months—all numbers are based on what the company has done over the 12 months prior to the time you’re viewing these statistics.

EPS (TTM): Earnings per share The company’s earnings over the past 12 months divided by the number of shares of the company’s stock available for trading (AKA outstanding shares)

TTM=twelve trailing months—all numbers are based on what the company has done over the 12 months prior to the time you’re viewing these statistics

Earnings Date: The date at which the earnings of the company in question are publicly revealed This is done quarterly at least and can significantly change a stock’s price. People have bribed their way into getting that data early and invest accordingly—and then go to jail for insider trading

Forward Dividend & Yield: Forward dividends are exactly what they sound like—payments that are expected to be paid out in the future Trailing dividends are the ones that have already been paid and can be cataloged given that they have already been paid and are well known. There’s no speculation in trailing dividends, just forward ones. Estimating forward dividends is an art, not a science. If you have a company with stable dividend payments without any fluctuation for years or even decades, then the forward dividend estimation is easy. However, that’s rarely the case and then you need to look at the forward dividends with a skeptical eye. In either case, all dividend calculations are based off a time period of 12 months.

Dividend rate is the total amount of dividend payments paid over 12 months (forward or trailing). Dividing this dividend rate by the price of the stock and then multiplying that by 100 is the dividend yield. Think of the dividend yield this way: For every $100 invested in the stock in question, the dividend yield will tell you how much money will get paid out to you each year. (For example, a dividend yield of 3.35% will mean you as an investor will get $3.35 for every 100 dollars invested in that stock for that year.)

Ex Dividend Date: The date by which an investor will not get the next dividend Buy before this date and you will own the stock as short as possible to still get the dividend. If you’re going to buy a dividend paying stock anyway, the least you can do is buy it so you get your first dividend ASAP which makes a giant difference over the next 20-25 years.

1 Y Target Est.:To quote Yahoo Finance itself, “The 1-year target price estimate represents the median target price as forecast by analysts covering the stock. Data is provided by Thomson Reuters. More detailed target estimate data can be found by clicking a company’s “research” link.” In a practical sense, this is largely worthless given the fact it is updated only every 6 months or so.

Here are a few more statistics that Yahoo Finance doesn’t have featured prominently, but that other stock websites do.

Sales short:the total number of shares that are being sold short (ie, shares that are borrowed with the hopes that the company’s stock will go down in price) This gives you an idea of how some large experienced or even institutional investors view the stock if there is a high number of “shorts” betting against the stock. They may be wrong, but it should be heeded when many people are betting against the stock. What do they know that you don’t? It should give you pause as to why so many people are betting against it and why.

Short Interest: percent of outstanding shares that are being sold short In other words, of all the shares that are available for public sale, how many are betting that the stock will be going up versus how many are betting that the stock will be going down. It’s a general (though only one) indicator of investor sentiment which alone can drag down or elevate stock prices.

Ok….tons of info thrown out at you in one not-so-little blog post. Now that we’ve learned how to read through key statistics of a company’s stock, we can build on that next time.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues. Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

 

Portfolio Building Part VB: Examples of What We’re Talking About

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

Portfolio Building, Part VB

In the last post, we discussed a reasonable (perhaps even great) investing strategy with little (no?)  day-to-day effort on your part.

As a reminder, here is what was proposed:

25% S&P 500 Index Fund

25% Mid cap Fund

25% Small Cap Fund

25% Stocks

Let’s leave the stock behind for now and talk specifics on the funds.

As I’ve said many other times in other places, low fees is the key to outsized gains long term for index funds since they are more passive investing where they are matching (or, at least, attempting to match) the index they are designed to match.

Realize that there are several indexes that funds can follow at each level of market capitalization.

The S&P 500 and NASDAQ Composite Index are the two best known large cap indexes that are tracked. Another large cap index is the Russell 1000 (which is the compilation of the 1,000 largest publicly traded companies in the US).

The mid cap indexes are the  S&P Mid-Cap 400, the Russell Midcap Index, and the Wilshire US Mid-Cap Index.

The best known small cap indexes are the Russell 2000 Index and the S&P 600.

Cheapest Index Funds

S&P 500 Index Funds:

Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares

Symbol:  VFINX

Net Expense Ratio:  0.14%

Minimum Initial Investment:  $3,000

But if you can reach the initial investment requirement of $10,000 for their “Admiral” share class (symbol: VFIAX), you can get the cheapest available S&P 500 index fund with an expense ratio of 0.05% which translates into a $5 fee for every $10,000 invested.

Schwab S&P 500 Index (SWPPX): The expense ratio is 0.09%, or $9 for every $10,000 invested. The minimum initial investment is $100.

There are many, many large cap index funds that do not track the S&P 500 index, but rather other large cap indexes such as the Russell 1000, so feel free to look for them if you would prefer those rather than the ones that track the S&P 500.

Mid cap Index Funds:

Northern Mid Cap Index (NOMIX):

The expense ratio is 0.15%, or $15 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $2,500.

Vanguard Mid Cap Index (VIMSX):

The expense ratio is 0.20%, or $20 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $3,000.

Small Cap Index Funds:

SPDR S&P 600 Small Cap ETF (SLY):

The expense ratio is 0.15%, or $15 for every $10,000 invested.

Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO):

The expense ratio is 0.15%, or $15 for every $10,000 invested.

Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund Investor Shares (NAESX):

The expense ratio is 0.17%, or $17 for every $10,000 invested with a minimum initial investment of $3,000.

However you can pony up the minimum initial investment of $10,000, you too can be invested in the Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund Admiral Shares (VSMAX) which charges a microscopic expense ratio of 0.05% or only a $5 fee for $10,000 invested.

How do they do it? Vanguard does it again!!

iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM):

The expense ratio is 0.20%, or $20 for every $10,000 invested.

Northern Small Cap Index (NSIDX):

The expense ratio is 0.15%, or $15 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $2,500.

Schwab Small Cap Index (SWSSX):

The expense ratio is 0.17%, or $17 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $100.

And for those of you who want to look beyond the US borders…

International Stock Index Funds:

Vanguard Total International Stock Index (VGTSX):

The expense ratio is 0.19%, or $19 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $3,000.

Schwab International Index Fund (SWISX):

The expense ratio is 0.19%, or $19 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $100.

Let’s discuss two other types of funds that are less commonly invested in, but may be of interest to some, especially if you’re not going to invest in individual stocks and have a 25% void to fill (rather than making your S&P 500 fund, mid cap fund, and small cap fund 33% each which is a completely reasonable option).

You have never heard of micro cap companies/funds (if you don’t read all my posts—shame on you, reader—or have a faulty memory), but as hinted at they are smaller than small cap companies/funds.

A Quick review:

Mega caps>$200-$300 billion in market capitalization (remember that?) (it’s arguable on the cutoff especially since it’s a newer term that holds no real value in terms of funds, etc being set up to follow just these companies since there is no significant growth in these companies given how big they already are)

Large caps>$10 billion

Mid caps=$2 billion-$10 billion

Small caps=$300 ($500) million-$2 billion

Micro caps=$50 million-$300 million (or $500 million depending on who you ask/use as a resource)

Nano caps<$50 million

There are no true micro cap indexes as the two best known (the Russell Micro Cap Index and the Dow Jones Wilshire US Micro Cap Index) also include small cap companies in them thus skewing what the performance of the micro cap market actually is which makes it difficult or even impossible to see how your micro cap fund is doing versus all micro cap companies en toto.

And just forget the tracking of nano caps.

Micro Cap Index Funds:

For a relative unknown group of companies, there are dozens upon dozens of choices in the micro cap index fund world. So, good luck in your search at this market capitalization level of funds since it’s likely you may not know any of the component companies in these funds.

Bond Index Funds*:

Vanguard Total Bond Index (VBMFX):

The expense ratio is 0.16%, or $16 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $3,000.

Northern Bond Index (NOBOX):

The expense ratio is 0.16%, or $16 for every $10,000 invested, and the minimum initial investment is $2,500.

*I loathe bond index funds as mentioned earlier as they combine the downside of low returns of bonds with the relative higher risk of mutual funds. But for the sake of completeness, the above are some inexpensive bond funds.

Blech!

As you can see, there are quite a few Vanguard funds here which is not surprising as they made their name and fortune on low cost index funds as others ridiculed them for it. Vanguard got the last laugh as it is now the largest fund family in the world with over a TRILLION dollars invested with them (AKA assets under management AKA AUM).

Certainly, there is no reason to invest in only the Vanguard funds alone as they are not always the cheapest as you can see from the above listings, but for the sake of convenience, Vanguard is as close as you can get to a one stop shop for all you low cost index fund shopping needs. Is that slightly increased cost on 1-2 funds worth less hassle than a few funds under Vanguard and then one under another fund family and yet one more under a third fund family? Only you can answer that question for yourself.

Well, that should about do it for this post.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues. Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

Brick Upon Brick Redux

Never forget these two axioms:

 

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

 

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

 

Portfolio Building, Part V: Brick Upon Brick

After significant deliberation, I decided to re-post this from weeks ago with some key additions to the post to better explain the caveats and even pitfalls with certain aspects of portfolio building.

 My apologies for not thinking this through fully to have it in the first time, but I hope the additions are worth your time the second time around or for new guests, consider this the Greatest Post in Investing Blog History.

So here we go (again)… 

We talked about various fund only portfolios, but not one with stocks mixed in which is a good way to help increase your returns above what the S&P 500 as long as you understand there is at least a commensurate (nice SAT word, nerd!) increase in risk if not more.

An easy way to set up a retirement portfolio is to do the following:

25% S&P 500 Index Fund

25% Mid cap Fund

25% Small Cap Fund

25% Stocks

There it is.

That’s it.

That’s all there it is to do to retire on Easy Street.

That simple.

Well, I guess I should close down the blog now.

 

What?

Wait, you want to know more?

OK then.

Let’s get started.

Let me introduce you to the brilliant David Fish  (RIP to the recently departed King of Dividend Investing) who spent the past decade plus compiling publicly traded companies who kept increasing the dividend yearly for a string of consecutive years while you were learning about the difference between Golgi apparati and mitochondria and the finer points of the brachial plexus. Fish has categorized these companies that have increased their dividends to their shareholders year after year by the number of years that the dividend increases have taken place.

Dividend Challengers: the last consecutive 5-9 years

Dividend Contenders: the last consecutive 10-24 years

Dividend Champions: the last consecutive 25+ years

Then, to add to the confusion, there’s another overlapping category:

Dividend Aristocrats: the last consecutive 25+ years

SR: Umm…that’s the same thing there, Captain.

To explain, the Standard and Poor’s (remember them?) put together the Dividend Aristocrat Index with the principal difference between the David Fish’s Dividend Champions and the S&P’s DIvidend Aristocrats is the latter, not surprisingly, only contains companies in the S&P 500..

SR: The fix is in…

Dr. Scared: This is it!! This is how they screw you!!

PWT: Uuh..yeah..so anyway…

…whereas the Dividend Champions are any publicly traded companies on any index that fulfill the criteria as stated above (ie, increasing their dividend each consecutive for 25 years or greater). Therefore with this difference, there is a sizable difference between the Champions (115) and Aristocrats (53).

This “CCC” list is updated at the end of each month  by David Fish to ensure if a company has not increased their dividend in consecutive years or, even better, if a company has increased its dividend in enough consecutive years to be listed in any of the above categories.

To be able to not just maintain the same dividend, but actually increase it year after year, especially after a quarter of a century or even longer is beyond remarkable, In fact, it’s stunning when you think about it. These companies would have not just survived, but actually thrived, in all sorts of conditions including recessions, wars, new competitors, changing technology, etc.

Let’s take a look at the dividend aristocrats in particular.

These 53 are large companies (multi-billion dollars in market capitalization) that have survived and even thrived through all the gyrations of the market and nation since their respective inceptions. These companies have few opportunities for significant growth because of how massive they are already, but make you lots of money in the long term even if their share price barely budge over the years. (One way to think of it is like this: ideally, the company whose stock you own keeps jacking up their dividend year after year with the stock price barely moving     allowing you to buy more and more stock, and then three months before you retire it triples in value. This would be epically awesome AKA The Unattainable Dream.)

As noted before, the beauty of dividend investing is getting paid to buy a company’s stock and then be patient to continue to get paid during which time the more stock you buy, the more dividend it generates thus leading to more cash to buy even more stock leading to an upward spiral of stock/dividend/cash which is a beautiful thing to behold.

Here is an example of ten Dividend Champions along with the number of consecutive years that dividends were raised (and placed in descending order of those number of years) :

3M–59

Coca-Cola–55

Johnson & Johnson–55

Colgate Palmolive–54

*Altria (Tobacco company; formerly Phillip Morris)–48

McDonald’s–42

RLI (Insurance Company)–42

Clorox–40

ExxonMobil–35

AT&T–34

*Altria is the one company above that is not in the S&P 500 thus making this a list of DIvidend Champions, not Aristocrats, to be technically correct.

It’s a pretty well diversified group that virtually every American purchases from at one point or another throughout any given year. If most or all of these companies go down, then you don’t have a portfolio problem, you have a national/global economic crisis (see 2008-2009).

So, in a portfolio sense, it would break down as the following:

25% S&P 500 Index Fund

25% Mid cap Fund

25% Small Cap Fund

25% Stocks with each of the ten above stocks receiving 2.5% each (also make sure all dividends in these stocks and even the funds above are set up to automatically be reinvested back into whatever stock or fund they came from)

Just make sure you regularly invest into the above four categories or thirteen discrete securities consistently (ie, monthly or even more frequently, not any less frequently than monthly however—more on the mechanics and logistics of stock/fund purchasing in a later post).

Then just sit back and watch the returns roll in.

Several caveats:

1,) Realize that the above percentages (25% for each category with 2.5% of each stock) is how it will start, but not likely how it will be in 2, 5, 10, or a greater number of years. Stocks and funds will fluctuate and will also generate dividends in varying amounts at varying times which should then be purchasing those same stocks and funds at varying prices.WIth differences like that, it’s inevitable that some equities will race ahead of others over years to decades.

2.) This inequity in your equities (HA! I’m here all week folks!) may be perfectly fine and isn’t dangerous or problematic in of its own though some people rebalance their investments by shifting how much they pay into each equity to keep them the same as much  as possible (OCD much?). Rebalancing these equities will take constant monitoring and not an insignificant amount of calculating/effort to do so which is totally contrary to what any of us would like and certainly not the whole point of the “build it and feed it and otherwise leave it alone” system of retirement investing.

The one thing to note as equities separate out from one another is to realize that the inequity is blunted by the fact that the most expensive ones will wind up gaining fewer and fewer shares with each purchase due to their share prices relative to the other cheaper ones.

3.) Do NOT fall into the trap of changing your equal contribution towards the best performing equities and away from others. The point of having equal contributions is to have your savings spread out throughout the US or even global economy in case of fluctuations and especially in case of downturns. What is well performing one quarter or year or even decade may stall or even recede suddenly at the exact time where you keep putting in more and more money into that very equity. Don’t let market fluctuations in the short term distract you from a solid-great plan that will thrive over 25-35 years, not 25-35  days or even 25-35 months.

4.) A good argument against the above portfolio is that owning shares of mega cap companies in addition to a S&P 500 fund is that they are both representative of large cap companies which is now 50% of the portfolio with mid caps and small caps at 25% each. In addition, some people are just not comfortable with owning stocks of individual companies which I think is personally fine. Do what you’re comfortable with and not what you think you should be doing. None of this is worth having reflux or insomnia over. That is an absolute certitude.     

Before we finish, it’s time for a little shouting however.

THE DIVIDEND CHAMPIONS I CHOSE ARE PURELY ARBITRARY OTHER THAN BEING WELL KNOWN COMPANIES AND DO NOT AT ALL REFLECT MY CHOICES OF WHAT A GOOD INVESTMENT CONSTITUTE. DO NOT THINK IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM THAT I AM PROMOTING ANY ONE OF THESE COMPANIES FOR ANY PERSON TO BUY.

END OF YELLING DISCLAIMER…

Thanks for tolerating my CYA tirade!

We will discuss evaluating individual stocks in a future post however.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues. Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

Beyond The Foundation, Beyond The Nation

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

Portfolio Building, Part IV B

I said posting would be sparse, but the last few weeks was the reductio ad absurdum of that notion and for that I  am profoundly sorry.

Lot of things happened—some good, some bad—in the interval.

In short, life happened.

Once again, I’m truly sorry.

Anyway…

Let’s pick up where we left off.

You’ve decided you’ve wanted to have a small portion of your retirement portfolio invested in international funds.

One point before we move on:

Given how well diversified and well covered the US would be by a trio of S&P 500 fund, mid cap fund, and small cap fund, your international investing should be comprised only of countries that are based out of the US as to not overlap investments of the US based trio with your “international” fund (which if you’re not careful could be a “global fund” where 50% of the fund is actually invested in US companies all over again).

So now what?

Here are a few options for international investing:

1.) Pick what is known as “ex US” fund (which means any country “ex”cept the US) all for one simple fee (the lower, the better as always). This leaves tens of thousands of companies over dozens of countries, so someone or many people will need to do the research on where to put the money and to continue to follow if that remains a good investment. Therefore, these funds usually (but not always) will necessarily be actively managed, so mind those fees and make sure that the returns of the fund are rock solid in terms of how good they are and how consistent they are even after the fees are subtracted out.

Examples (but not suggestions): Vanguard FTSE All World ex US Index Fund, iShares MSCI ACWI ex US ETF (Yeah, even the names of these funds are intimidating.)

2.) Pick a regional fund which focuses on one geographic area such as Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Latin America, or even sole countries such as Japan or Turkey. It’s completely fine to do this, but there are several caveats to be noted here.

A,) You MUST have some general knowledge of the region or country. Vacations or a semester abroad fifteen years ago which was composed of mostly boozing is not field research and does not constitute deep understanding of international geopolitics. If you don’t understand the area/country, don’t invest in it solely. What makes it attractive now may be annihilated by  civil war, political strife, a trade war, sanctions, or just plain mismanagement among many other variables.

B.) You MUST know who the managers of these funds are that you are so enchanted with. You must know who they are, what their expertise in this region/country is, how long they have been managing the fund, how long they have been managing other funds or in the mutual fund business altogether, and, likely, most importantly, the fund managers’ performance (minus fees as always) at the fund you plan to invest in for the time he/she was the manager. If their performance is great/stellar and everything else checks out, then go ahead…but one last caveat—you need to ensure that you keep track of the fund manager himself/herself. If the manager retires/dies/move on, then you might have to do the same.

Examples (but not suggestions): VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF, iShares MSCI Chile Index Fund, WisdomTree India Earnings, Fidelity Nordic Fund

3.) A hybrid fund worth mentioning is the regional funds that mix and match geographic regions such as Middle East/Africa, Africa/Asia, or Europe/Middle East. All of the above caveats for regional/country funds still hold true even though (in theory only) the risk should be less with a wider geographic distribution to draw from.

Examples (but not suggestions): T. Rowe Price Africa & Middle East Fund, Commonwealth Australia/New Zealand Fund

4.) There are funds that group together disparate countries that may or may not have anything in common like the oft-mentioned BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) nations which were rapidly developing with huge growth rates in their economies (not so much as it turns out especially since these countries have absolutely nothing to do with one another) or the lesser known CIVETS (Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey, South Africa) which were touted to be emerging or frontier markets (which also didn’t quite work out…at least so far).

Examples (but not suggestions): The less said here, the better…

If this isn’t already confusing or daunting enough, then consider this: Not only are there country or region funds like the ones above, but then each country or region could also have large cap, mid cap, or small cap funds and then each of those could be value or growth or a blend between the two in investing style terms therefore each country/region could have at least nine types of funds to compare and contrast with one another.

5.) The potentially riskiest of all international investing for the average retail investor is the stocks of non-US based companies. If you aren’t already experienced in individual stock investing in the US or even the largest non-US based companies, then you shouldn’t think of putting your hard earned money into individual stock of lesser known companies that aren’t based in the US.

Examples (but not suggestions): Shell, BP. LVMH, Nestle; the lesser known companies are ones like WalMart of Mexico, Arcos Dorados (you already know what this is if you know Spanish), and Infosys which are all multi-billion dollar companies even though you may have never heard of them  

6.) International bonds, commodities, or even real estate are potential investments, but are the riskiest of the listed securities. These are neither for the faint of heart nor for the novice investor. If you haven’t been heavily invested and experienced with the above securities domestically first, then you shouldn’t even consider an international version.

Examples (but not suggestions): If you don’t already know, you don’t need to know.

Enough for one post…

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues. Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

Brick Upon Brick: How to Consider Starting a Portfolio with Stocks in It

 

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

The blessing (for me) and curse (for all of you) is that when I run into  insurmountable obstacles like endless revisions on the alternative funds only portfolios I can just move forward in time to a future post and then jump back in time  (like this guy) once I smooth out issues with what was supposed to be the prior post (Sorry if this makes no sense).

ANYWAY…here’s a discussion on portfolios with stocks…

Portfolio Building, Part V

We talked about various fund only portfolios, but not one with stocks mixed in which is a good way to help increase your returns above what the S&P 500 as long as you understand there is at least a commensurate (nice SAT word, nerd!) increase in risk if not more.

An easy way to set up a retirement portfolio is to do the following:

25% S&P 500 Index Fund

25% Mid cap Fund

25% Small Cap Fund

25% Stocks

There it is.

That’s it.

That’s all there it is to do to retire on Easy Street.

That simple.

Well, I guess I should close down the blog now.

 

What?

Wait, you want to know more?

OK then.

Let’s get started.

Let me introduce you to the brilliant David Fish who spent the past decade plus compiling publicly traded companies who kept increasing the dividend yearly for a string of consecutive years while you were learning about the difference between Golgi apparati and mitochondria and the finer points of the brachial plexus. Fish has categorized these companies that have increased their dividends to their shareholders year after year by the number of years that the dividend increases have taken place.

Dividend Challengers: the last consecutive 5-9 years

Dividend Contenders: the last consecutive 10-24 years

Dividend Champions: the last consecutive 25+ years

Then, to add to the confusion, there’s another overlapping category:

Dividend Aristocrats: the last consecutive 25+ years

SR: Umm…that’s the same thing there, Captain.

To explain, the Standard and Poor’s (remember them?) put together the Dividend Aristocrat Index with the principal difference between the David Fish’s Dividend Champions and the S&P’s DIvidend Aristocrats is the latter, not surprisingly, only contains companies in the S&P 500..

SR: The fix is in…

Dr. Scared: This is it!! This is how they screw you!!

PWT: Uuh..yeah..so anyway…

…whereas the Dividend Champions are any publicly traded companies on any index that fulfill the criteria as stated above (ie, increasing their dividend each consecutive for 25 years or greater). Therefore with this difference, there is a sizable difference between the Champions (115) and Aristocrats (53).

This “CCC” list is updated at the end of each month  by David Fish to ensure if a company has not increased their dividend in consecutive years or, even better, if a company has increased its dividend in enough consecutive years to be listed in any of the above categories.

To be able to not just maintain the same dividend, but actually increase it year after year, especially after a quarter of a century or even longer is beyond remarkable, In fact, it’s stunning when you think about it. These companies would have not just survived, but actually thrived, in all sorts of conditions including recessions, wars, new competitors, changing technology, etc.

Let’s take a look at the dividend aristocrats in particular.

These 53 are large companies (multi-billion dollars in market capitalization) that have survived and even thrived through all the gyrations of the market and nation since their respective inceptions. These companies have few opportunities for significant growth because of how massive they are already, but make you lots of money in the long term even if their share price barely budge over the years. (One way to think of it is like this: ideally, the company whose stock you own keeps jacking up their dividend year after year with the stock price barely moving  allowing you to buy more and more stock, and then three months before you retire it triples in value. This would be epic and awesome AKA The Unattainable Dream.)

As noted before, the beauty of dividend investing is getting paid to buy a company’s stock and then be patient to continue to get paid during which time the more stock you buy, the more dividend it generates thus leading to more cash to buy even more stock leading to an upward spiral of stock/dividend/cash which is a beautiful thing to behold.

Here is an example of ten Dividend Champions along with the number of consecutive years that dividends were raised (and placed in descending order of those number of years) :

3M–59

Coca-Cola–55

Johnson & Johnson–55

Colgate Palmolive–54

*Altria (Tobacco company; formerly Phillip Morris)–48

McDonald’s–42

RLI (Insurance Company)–42

Clorox–40

ExxonMobil–35

AT&T–34

*Altria is the one company above that is not in the S&P 500 thus making this a list of DIvidend Champions, not Aristocrats, to be technically correct.

It’s a pretty well diversified group that virtually every American purchases from at one point or another throughout any given year. If most or all of these companies go down, then you don’t have a portfolio problem, you have a national/global economic crisis (see 2008-2009).

So, in a portfolio sense, it would break down as the following:

25% S&P 500 Index Fund

25% Mid cap Fund

25% Small Cap Fund

25% Stocks with each of the ten above stocks receiving 2.5% each (also make sure all dividends in these stocks and even the funds above are set up to automatically be reinvested back into whatever stock or fund they came from)

Just make sure you regularly invest into the above four categories or thirteen discrete securities consistently (ie, monthly or even more frequently, not any less frequently than monthly however—more on the mechanics and logistics of stock/fund purchasing in a later post).

Then just sit back and watch the returns roll in.

Before we finish, it’s time for a little shouting however.

THE DIVIDEND CHAMPIONS I CHOSE ARE PURELY ARBITRARY OTHER THAN BEING WELL KNOWN COMPANIES AND DO NOT AT ALL REFLECT MY CHOICES OF WHAT A GOOD INVESTMENT CONSTITUTE. DO NOT THINK IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM THAT I AM PROMOTING ANY ONE OF THESE COMPANIES FOR ANY PERSON TO BUY.

END OF YELLING DISCLAIMER…

Thanks for tolerating my CYA tirade!

We will discuss evaluating individual stocks in a future post however.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues. Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

 

Judging Performance

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit enslaves us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

 

JUDGING PERFORMANCE

 

Unfortunately (at least for some), there is a lot of math and statistics entailed in investing. Lots of metrics, numbers, stats, and the like are thrown around on the news, by financial advisors, in the papers and websites, etc, etc,

It’s rare that I speak in absolutes (which often drives my family and friends, but extremely rarely patients and their families), but in this one case, I will speak in definitive absolutes.

THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT NUMBER IN ALL OF INVESTING IS UNDERSTANDING HOW WELL YOUR INVESTMENT IS DOING—IE, ITS PERFORMANCE.

Nothing will impact what you do as much as this one number. It will guide you in what to do, when to do it, and whether to change course or not.

A few basic rules of the road when judging performance:

  1. Always calculate your returns net of fees (I warned you that you’d hear this phrase again) and your total amount after taxes are paid out of that amount
  2. Always use your benchmarks for comparisons rather than just looking at your percent return in a vacuum and think “Hey, I’m pretty awesome at this investing thing. Move over, Warren Buffett!” when in reality you’re worse off than the average investor. You need to know your guideposts for understanding where you stand each quarter or year especially if paying fees for what should be a higher return. (You’re paying for something, so shouldn’t you be getting what you pay for? Shouldn’t you know if you’re truly getting a higher return and not just being reassured or reassuring yourself with what you want to be true rather than what is true?)
  3. You need to look at your monthly, quarterly, or, at a minimum, annual statements. No matter how “remote control” or “passive portfolio” you’re in (or, much worse, think you’re in), you need to see what is going on there. Falling asleep at the wheel of your portfolio for a decade is just a terrible idea. You literally cannot afford to do that. Literally, And, I mean that. It’s literally not like all the people who use “literally” as a crutch word and actually mean figuratively.

{RLE #8: An extremely hard working and dedicated doctor I know only opens his statements and sees what they were in value last month and now this month with nothing else even remotely looked at. It was only after I spoke with him that he even realized that he may actually be losing money many months, but it looked like he was making money since the loss for that particular month may be less than he was contributing to his investment account. You have $100,000 in your investment account and are putting in $5,000 a month. Then, the next month, when you have $103,000, you’ve not actually gained $3,000. I don’t want alarm you. But I do have bad news for you. You’ve lost $2,0000. I couldn’t believe a guy as smart as him didn’t understand that basic truth of investing and how to even read your statements. In his entire professional career, he wouldn’t even think of being this careless or superficial in understanding a test, imaging, lab, or pathology report when it came to his patients. Yet, here he was, without even a basic grasp of his entire investment account…twenty years after he began investing for his retirement. If he was like this, how many others are there? And they don’t even know it? That is the really alarming part of this whole RLE.}

BENCHMARKS

OK, let’s get started.

First thing is to know what you should be comparing your investment to.

Stocks=S&P 500. It’s that simple…for once.

Mutual Funds and ETF’s are more complicated. They each have their own benchmark which is shown on each statement. If you search online for the performance of the fund in question, you will also see the accompanying benchmark fund to compare against. There is something known as the Lipper awards where a financial analytical company (Thomson Reuters Lipper) scours tens of thousands of funds over dozens of countries to grade each one (1 to 5 with the higher the number being better), They even award the best funds in each sector or category (eg, utilities, foreign, financials, etc.) at the end of each year based on expense and returns among other things, The Lipper grade for funds’ performance over 3, 5, and 10 years is assigned by the following metrics: Total Return, Consistent Return, Capital Preservation, Tax Efficiency (For US Funds Only), and Expense . You can use these Lipper grades to give you an idea how your fund compares to its peers.

But recall, the comparison is apples to oranges until you subtract your fees (ie, the fund’s expense ratio—remember that?) out of your fund’s performance numbers. Just simply take the percent return your fund did over the year and subtract out the expense ratio from it.

Bonds  are either the simplest investment to track for performance or the most complex.

Dr. Unwise: Huh?

Dr. Scared: This is it! This is it!! This is how they screw you!!!

PWT: No. Exactly no. It’s precisely how no one screws anyone else.

A bond has a coupon (remember?) which tells you how much you’ll get in interest payments each year until it “matures” (ie, it expires and your original value or par value is returned to). There is no true benchmark to compare against for bonds, but you can compare one bond’s performance to that of another (YTM or yield to maturity, remember?). The thing to keep in mind is that inflation (3.22% on average, right?) is eating away at your returns, especially on bond returns since they are generally speaking such low returns.

[My opinion here only: Regardless of how conservative of an investor you are, low yield (ie, low interest) bonds are not a good way to invest until you near retirement and just want to maintain what you’ve already earned. You won’t build wealth with low yield bonds and could actually lose money in a relative sense even as you gain in numerical value if your yield is less than what inflation is during the entire term of your bond. Not a great investment. Not swell. Not. At. All.]  

Let’s go through some examples.

STOCKS

You have  $10,000 of stock in Company X and check on it every so often when you hear about it on the news. It does well over the year and like a dutiful investor armed with the learned knowledge from PWT, you check on how it did versus the S&P 500.

2017 returns for Company X= 15.8% (Great job, major player!)

2017 returns for S&P 500=21.83% (Uh..oh…well, not so great job, little player…)

If you have used a financial advisor to purchase this stock for you, then that fee will need to be paid out as well. Let’s say that your financial advisor is nice and very affordable and charges you 0.5% (AKA 50 basis points in their jargon) which means that you are being charged 0.5% of the total assets with your advisor (regardless if it’s stocks, funds, or bonds).

SR: Hey, guy, I warned you about all these statistics…  

PWT: Yeah, yeah, I know.

For that $10,000 you have with your advisor, you’ll be paying your advisor $50 every year as long as you hold that money or investment with him or her. (Or, in other words, for every $10,000 you have with your advisor, you’ll pay $50 yearly. So $500 each year for $100,000. $5,000 for $1 million. And so on and so forth.) As your investment increases, so does the payout to your advisor. Therefore, your interests are aligned since the advisor makes more money as you do.

In this example then, your 2017 return for holding Company X was 15.3% (15.8-0.5), not 15,8%.

Let’s do the same example with a new twist.

$10,000 in Company X with a 4% dividend (paid out quarterly into a cash account) with a 2017 return=15.8%

2017 returns for S&P 500=21.83%

Your total investment return (pre-tax) is then at 19.8% without any advisor or 19.3% with an advisor.

However, if the dividends are automatically reinvested into Company X each quarter, then the return will be different and possibly significantly so. The total return in this case will be determined by the following:

  1. how much stock was purchased by each dividend payout (ie, what  the stock price was at the time of each purchase) which will in turn determine how much the next dividend payout will be with each dividend reinvestment leading to a higher one the next payout
  2. what the stock itself is doing in terms of its price
  3. what the dividend yield is doing (stable, up, or down) as the year progresses
  4. the taxes on your dividends
  5. the taxes on your sale of the stock if it happens (ie, capital gains taxes if you are selling higher than you bought for)

The easiest way to calculate total return in stock you held all year and didn’t sell is to just look at your 2016 year end statement and then see the value of the same stock in your 2017 year end statement, then do the easy math with a calculator. After that, you need to subtract out the taxes you owe for the dividends (whether the dividends are generating cash or being reinvested into the stock generating the dividend in the first place AKA a DRIP [Dividend Re-Investment Plan] or any other investment) no matter what. (As of 2013, the dividend tax has been 15% (or 20% for you all rich fat cats that light your fancy cigars with $100 bills and are in the top income tax bracket of 39.6%) with a 3.8% surcharge for married couples with incomes over $250,000 or single taxpayers with an income of $200,000 which was enacted in 2010 to help pay for the Affordable Care Act. [Thanks a lot, Obama!])

If you were in the top income tax bracket of 39.6% from 2010-2017, your entire dividend tax was 23.8% (20% dividend tax + 3.8% NIIT [Net Investment Income Tax AKA the Obamacare surtax among many other things].  It was fairly easy to calculate an approximate figure of your post-tax dividend gains—just divide your dividend gains by four and hold three parts for you and give one part over to the federal government or multiply the dividend gains by 0.75 if you prefer (since 23.8% is approximately 25%).

Therefore, in the above tax bracket, it will be calculated as the following.

$10,000 in Company X with a 4% dividend (paid out quarterly into a cash account) with a 2017 return=15.8%

2017 returns for S&P 500=21.83%

Pre-tax dividend gains + Company X return= 19.8% return

Post-tax dividend gains + Company X return~18.8% return (or, precisely, 18.848%).

You can see the attraction to dividend paying stocks or funds now. They can really juice the returns.

Now, the new tax reform passed in December 2017(officially titled as The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 [TCJA]) changed all of this. (One thing that didn’t change is the following: Dividends are considered “qualified” once you own the stock or fund producing the dividend for over sixty days (ninety days for preferred stock). Selling before that would make your dividends taxed as ordinary income which would mean that they are taxed far higher than what the taxes would be for qualified dividends given the income levels for the average physician.   

Dividends are now taxed at the following rates:

  1. 0% below $77,200 of taxable income for married joint filers or below $38,600 if single (or, the rarer category, married filing separately)
  2. 15% between $77,200-$479,000 for married joint filers or $425,800 if single (or, in the rarer category of being married filing separately, $38,600-$239,500)
  3. 20% if above any of the upper thresholds listed above in the 15% bracket
  4. The 3.8% NIIT is still applied to all dividends based on your modified adjusted gross income (more on taxes in a later post) of $250,000 for married joint filers or $200,000 for single (or all other) filers.

 

If you’re selling stocks and/or funds for a gain, you will be taxed at a capital gains tax rate. Short term capital gains are defined as anything held less than a year. Anything held over a year and then sold for a profit is considered a long term capital gain. Short term capital gains are taxed at whatever level your income level determines as short term capital gains are taxed as ordinary income. Long term capital gains are taxed far below what the taxes would be for short term capital gains given the income levels for the average physician.   

Long term capital gains would be taxed as the following:

  1. 0% below $77,200 of taxable income for married joint filers or below $38,600 if single (or, the rarer category, married filing separately)
  2. 15% between $77,200-$479,000 for married joint filers or $425,800 if single (or, in the rarer category of being married filing separately, $38,600-$239,500)
  3. 20% if above any of the upper thresholds listed above in the 15% bracket
  4. No NIIT!!

 

SR: Hey, wait a second…those long term capital gains tax rates…aren’t they…?

PWT: Yep. Both the qualified dividend and long term capital gains tax rates are identical.

Mutual Funds

Thankfully, mutual funds are treated exactly the same as stocks in terms of taxing the dividends and capital gains. So re-read the above (or reference the above passage) when dealing with mutual funds and their tax implications.

SR: About time something broke our way…

There is one exception however when it comes to ETFs.

SR: God Damn it! Well, that didn’t last very long…

Dr. Scared: This it! This is it!! This is how they screw you!!!

PWT: It’s actually a good thing.

The dividends of ETF’s are taxed precisely the same way as those of mutual funds. The one difference is that ETFs create less taxable events leading to what should be less taxes for you on average over an extended period of time (years, not months).

Just don’t forget to subtract out the expense ratio from your earnings from any fund, then your taxes out of that figure. It’s an extra expense (and step) you don’t have to deal with when it come to stocks.

Bonds

Bonds can be a little tricky when it come to taxes depending on the type you get.

Dr. Scared: This is it! This is it!! This is how they screw you!!!

Dr. Unwise:…so annoying….

Let’s go over the generalities first.

Only the earnings from the bonds (either the payout or the difference between the original purchase price and what you sell it for are what is taxed, not the original principal investment) are taxed. By whom for each bond is explained below.

The earnings from corporate bonds are taxed by all levels of government (federal, state, and local) as ordinary income. Keep that in mind as you calculate your earnings from a corporate bond.

The earnings from municipal bonds are free from local taxes. State issued bonds are free from state taxes. Most state bonds have their earnings taxed at the federal level as ordinary income whereas municipal bonds are usually exempt from federal taxes.

However, there is a potentially juicy bonus here. There are municipal bonds that are known as “triple tax free” where all three levels of government have decided that a certain construction project is so important that no local, state, or federal taxes will be levied against the earnings from these particular municipal bonds. Often, these “triple tax free” bonds have a lower yield rate since they already have such a great  tax advantage to them. Therefore, a little math will be needed to figure out if these bonds are the best earning for you vs other bonds that are taxed by one, two, or even all three levels of government, but have a significantly higher yield to compensate for these taxes. That’s also where you handy dandy friendly neighborhood financial advisor comes in. They do all those math, so you don’t have to. Honestly, they should. You’re paying them after all. This is exactly how they earn it.

Lastly, the earnings from federal AKA US Treasury bills/notes/bonds (remember the difference?) are not taxed at the federal level, but are at the local and state level.

I always judge performance only after all fees and taxes owed are paid out. After all, that’s what you will live off of eventually, not the debt to your mutual fund, financial advisor, or taxes still owed. I look at how much total I put into any investment and then take out all the fees and taxes owed and then see what I have left thus telling me exactly what I made each year or over the years.  Anything else is a complete overestimation of how much you have/have made which will blind you to how well you or your financial advisor is really doing and how tax efficient your investing is which would in turn help you decide if you should stay the course and keep adding to said investment or change it for better returns by making either at least this investment or even your entire portfolio more tax efficient (at a minimum) OR just changing your investments totally in a different direction/asset class,etc.

One last point before we depart…

When figuring out how well your investment has done over multiple years (say, 3, 5, 10, 15, or even 20 years), you need to understand how to calculate how well your investment did on average yearly over that time, not just as one lump sum at the end of the time period you decided to study/look at your investment.

If you put $10,000 into an investment—anything as it doesn’t matter what for the sake of this example, but to make it simple, let say it’s an index mutual fund—and five years later, it has grown to $15,000 (Hells yeah!), then you’ve had a fifty percent gain over the past five years. The temptation is to say that you have earned an average of 10%/year over the past five years to give you a total return of 50% over the past half decade. Then, you march out the (in this example) fund’s expense ratio (let’s say…hmm, I don’t know, 0.14%, for no particular reason) and you get a very healthy 9.86% per year average over the past five years.

Right?

Right??

Wrong.

Dr. Scared: Oh God, just kill me now!   

When you calculate your average growth rate over five years properly, the actual compound average growth rate (CAGR) is 8.45%/year over the past five years, not 10%/year which is just the arithmetic mean (total return/years needed to gain this return).  After your theoretical expense ratio is subtracted out, then your CAGR is actually 8.31% over the past five years, not 9.86%. If it had been 9.86%, then your $10,000 would be $16,000 five years later, not $15,000—a sizable difference when dealing with tens or especially hundreds of thousands of dollars, no?

The reason for the difference here is simply that you have to account for the yearly gains since the money is gained throughout each year and not just all at once at the end of the five years in this example.

Ten percent of $10,000 the first year would be $1,000 making $11,000. Then, 10% of $11,000 would be $1,100 making the total $12,100 thus already showing you how off the calculation is by year two alone. (Even these calculated assumptions can be quite off depending on when the gains are made [ie, how early or late in the year] versus when the interest is applied [beginning of the year, end of the year, or throughout the year evenly or irregularly throughout the year as more money is put into a stock or fund which is usually the case when investing money at regular time intervals without paying attention to the cost of the equity which is known as dollar cost averaging as sometimes you will buy at a lower price and other times at a higher price, but overall will get it at a hopefully great company at a good price on average.])

Well, I think we have done enough (and then some) for one post.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word to your family, friends, and colleagues. It would be greatly appreciated.

Until next time…

Risk: A Game of Not Global Domination, But Financial Planning

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

Risk: A Game of Not Global Domination, But Financial Planning

Before determining what you’re buying at what price in what quantity and keeping said security for whatever length of time, you need to decide for yourself (and your family if applicable) what you want as an end result of your investing and what risk you’re willing to take to hold them as an investment.

Realize that all investments contain risk.

ALL.

OF.

THEM.

By risk, we mean that you will lose money on said investment, possibly even all that hard earned money you put in originally.

We all do this every day as doctors. As we take care of patients, we weight the risks and benefits of each treatment or testing option and move forward with the most beneficial course with risks ranging from none to tolerable to even high.

That’s essentially all investing is when talking about what is known as risk tolerance.

Virtually all securities that return a greater amount of money carry a higher risk than those that return a lesser amount.

Unfortunately, risk and return are directly related.

In my mind (and perhaps mine alone), it’s like why all the best tasting stuff is bad for you and the healthiest stuff tastes…meh.

ANYWAY…

In reverse order of risk:

Bonds carry low risk.

Federal or AKA Treasury bonds (bills and notes too, but I’ll just say bonds moving forward for the sake of convenience) are considered risk free because of the almost metaphysical certitude by which they are paid. The US government would have to completely fold and not pay anything ever before bond payments stop . If you recall, you as the bondholder are the creditor that is owed money before the debtor (in this case, the US government)  goes bankrupt. Given the fact that the US government can literally print as much as money as needed for any reason under the sun (reading this again as I proofread this post…this explains a lot of what is perhaps wrong with our current polticoeconomic situation), it’s virtually impossible to have US Treasury bonds default. Thus, risk free…

Municipal (AKA US city or county) bonds are slightly higher risk than federal bonds, but lower risk than any other widely available security. CIties (or counties or states) would have to go bankrupt before bonds issued by them became worthless. It can happen (hello again, Detroit! Also, hello Stockton, California!), but it’s extremely rare, may not affect these bonds while the city or county or state government “reorganizes” its finances, and is easily avoidable in the first place by knowing which areas are fiscally distressed. The latter is easily found out by a five minute Internet search into the area that is issuing the bonds or just simply (here’s a novel idea!) reading/listening to the news and being aware of the world around you. Remember that there may be extra tax benefits to certain municipal bonds which may make the juice worth the squeeze.

Corporate bonds are still safer than either stocks or funds by quite a bit (provided that they are not the often talked about and greatly derided/feared junk bonds), but less safe than other aforementioned (What a great word! You literally cannot sound stupid saying it) types of bonds. As expected, the riskier these bonds the higher the yield, And the lower the yield, the lower your risk you have to endure to get your money.

Mutual funds and ETF’s carry a risk in between bonds (lowest) and stocks (highest risk). The collection of stocks and/or bonds will offer downside protection because even as some stocks fall, other will rise or at least stay even.

Stocks offer the highest return of the Big Three widely commercially available securities with the highest possibility of downside. Just ask anyone who suffered through the 2008-2009 Great Recession.

In 2008, the S&P 500 finished the year 37% lower than it opened.

This is what the risk averse and haters of the stock market in general or stocks specifically bring up as soon as the topic of investing comes up. Even if you had suffered through the brutality of the 2008 market (which didn’t hit its bottom until March 2009 actually), the market went on a tear that hasn’t slowed down since. In fact, it’s been on a rocket since 2017 began.

The annualized return from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2017 (thus even including the terrible months of Jan-March 2009) is 15.29%.

SR: Uh, yeah, stats guy. That’s great and all…IF YOU’RE A NERD!!! What does that mean in real dollars?

 

PWT: Sure Great question. After all, that’s why we’re all here.

 

SR: Nah. I’m mostly here to crack wise. I’m like a digital Statler…or Waldorf…or both.

 

PWT: Not one millenial here has any idea what you’re talking about right now.

 

SR: Ah, shut up, money man.

 

PWT: Anyway…

For every $100 you had in the stock market (not bonds, cash, etc.) at the start of 2008, you would have $63 at the end of that same year.

SR: Ouch

Dr. Scared: This is it!! This is how they screw you!

For every $63 (the amount left from the original $100 once reduced by the annus horribilis of 2008)  in stocks starting at the beginning of 2009, you’d have $226.80 on January 1, 2018.

So, 226% increase since 2009.

Not bad.

Even if you include 2008, the worst performing year of the last three decades in the stock market, you had a 8.49% per year annualized return in a S&P 500 only portfolio from Jan 1, 2008 to Dec. 31, 2017.

SR: Hey there, guy, I just need…

PWT: We know, We know.

For every $1 you put into the market at the start of 2008,  you would have wound up with $2.26 by the end of 2017…and that’s with surviving the worst year in recent memory.

For those who would argue that they would have retired in 2009 if the stock market hadn’t crashed, then you likely weren’t positioned for retirement in the first place. (Much more about this in a later post.)

Also, this assumes you were only in stocks, not any outperforming fund, bonds, any alternative investments, or just cash (always in style, always fits, and never gets old). Even if you had 100% of your portfolio in only stocks, and then decided to not see the 2008-2009 crash as a buying opportunity (but hopefully not as a selling point either), then you would have been forced to work until 2012 ended. (If you worked through the end of 2011, your stocks only portfolio would be 94% of its January 1, 2008 value.)

The above is predicated on two basic assumptions:

  1. ) Your stocks only portfolio is completely identical to the gyrations of the         S&P 500.
  2. ) All dividends were included and calculated in these returns.

This shouldn’t scare you off from the stock market, but rather convince you that you need to always be cognizant of your age, your net worth, your closeness to retirement, and what your Magic Number is.   

Therefore, the closer you are to your Magic Number, the more you need to be oriented towards maintaining your net worth (what is known as capital preservation) rather than growing it further.

ANYWAY…

Think of risk tolerance as an individual exercise. Don’t worry that yours may be dramatically different than your best friend’s, colleagues at work, etc.It should be different. In fact, I’d be worried if your risk tolerance is the same as everyone else you know.

Think of it like this.

How do you drive? How aggressive are you? How fast above the speed limit are you willing to push it on a highway? How willing are you to hit bumpers when you have to parallel park?

There’s plenty of online quizzes that test your risk tolerance as an investor that you can search for, but none of them are much better than thinking about what kind of driver you are.

It all boils down to the following:

Aggressive investors are willing to lose money in the short term in order to make outsized gains in the future/long term.They’re exchanging security for better returns.

Conservative investors are willing to have lower returns as long as their original investment is preserved and gradually increases in value over time. They’re exchanging returns for security. Or, as some might say, they’re exchanging returns for peace of mind.

And there are moderately aggressive investors that have a blended approach between the two which is likely where the vast majority of us are.

Just reading this probably tells you where you lie based on how you felt as you read that last passage.

It’s easy to be critical of others that aren’t like you, but being more aggressive than you’re comfortable and working on an ulcer rather than sleeping each night is nothing to brag about. But, people do it all the time. I know some that do. I’m sure you do as well.

Grousing about how well the market is doing and bitching about it all the time when you’re investing too conservatively for you and your family is nothing to celebrate and is certainly is not any way to live.

Personally, I’ve always been an aggressive investor and it has been great for me. But, realize what that means. You don’t have to be invested in companies you don’t understand like high technology (ie, AI, cloud computing, cybersecurity, etc) companies, but rather blue chip Dividend Aristocrats along with index funds which will get you great returns, but still categorize you as an aggressive investor. I always wanted to ensure my investments after any fees and taxes were subtracted out was significantly above inflation (3.3% on average, remember?). At the end of the day, though, you need to invest to your style and comfort and no one else’s.  

What is your risk tolerance?

Think about it.

If you’re married or in a seriously committed relationship, talk to your spouse or partner about it. Hopefully, if you’re not on the same page, you can find a very terrifically happy medium.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your friends (real and virtual), family, and colleagues.

Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

Preferred Stock (Or, in this case, Forgotten, not Preferred)

Never forget these two axioms:

Money frees us, but its pursuit enslaves us.

It’s not how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

Preferred Stock

OK, people.

Confession time.

I made a massive mistake and am now correcting the error of my ways. While going over the basics of stocks, I somehow ignored/forgot the ins and outs of preferred stock.

PWT: Physician, Wealth Thyself to the rescue!!!

SR: What a dork…

Preferred stock lies somewhere between common stock (I know. Common…it makes you sound like a peasant…and this whole time you thought you were a budding tycoon…Damn!) and bonds in terms of what you are owed by the company and what you owe the company or are restricted doing. As the owner of preferred stock, once the company is in bankruptcy and has to liquidate its assets, it cashes out to everyone it owes money to including bond holders and then owners of preferred stock and then finally common stock owners…if anything at all is left over…which there never is.

Generally speaking, preferred stock have dividends and those dividends are paid out as a higher priority than those of common stocks. Even when the company in question is cutting or suspending dividends for common stock, it will pay out the dividends for preferred stock. However, if the company falls into such a bad cash flow situation that all dividends are suspended, eventually even the dividends of some types of preferred stocks can and will be stopped (whereas others cannot such as cumulative preferred stock—more on this later).

Preferred stocks are actually rated by credit agencies similar to bonds, but they are almost always rated lower than the best bonds because bond holders are creditors (ie, the bank for the company, remember?) and the company owes them above all others.

There are many types of preferred stocks which you can learn about on your own if you’d like, but I would not be a regular investor in them unless you have been a stock investor for years and really understand the ups and downs of stock investing OR have a financial advisor that is doing so for you. Even then, your financial advisor should be able to explain to you why they are putting your hard earned money into this preferred stock rather the common stock of the same company or any other investment. If this isn’t the case, you should either ask or not be invested in the preferred stock in the first place.

As a preferred stock holder, you have no voting rights in the operations of the company which is OK for virtually all retail investors (regular Joe and Jill investors like you and me), but it does need to be noted.

There are multiple reasons a company may issue preferred stock, but on the retail investor side, it’s essentially one line of thinking that leads you to buy preferred stock. You want a large, well established company that issues preferred stock with a high dividend which is well protected. Think of something on the order of a bond, but that pays a higher dividend that a bond does in its yield (generally speaking) and doesn’t lock you in for multiple years necessarily.

Here is a quick rundown of the pros and cons of owning a preferred stock.

Pros of Preferred Stock:

  1. Higher fixed-income payments than bonds (usually) or common stock
  2. Lower investment per share compared to bonds
  3. Priority over common stocks for dividend payments and liquidation proceeds
  4. Greater price stability than common stocks typically
  5. Greater liquidity than corporate bonds of similar quality

Cons of Preferred Stock:

  1. Callability (Depending on the kind of preferred stock and/or the terms attached to it, the issuing corporation can expire the preferred stock like a bond (remember?) depending on the needs of the corporation at any given time.
  2. Lack of specific maturity date makes recovery of invested principal uncertain
  3. Limited appreciation potential (You’re making money on the dividends typically and not the share price of the preferred stock itself.)
  4. Interest rate sensitivity (Yes, interest rates will fluctuate and they can in turn affect the dividend rates on your preferred stock. As it becomes more expensive for the corporation to borrow money, then it will pinch down on money it has already borrowed from others (ie, you) when and where it can (such as it can with preferred stock and some types of bonds).
  5. Lack of voting rights (if this matters to you)

Due to its fixed higher dividend rate(s), preferred stock has become more popular over the years and especially so over the past decade. Ten years ago, in the first quarter of 2008, the entire preferred stock market was valued at approximately $100 billion which seems staggering except when compared to other securities. At that time, the common stock and funds total market value was $9.5 trillion (9500% more than that of preferred stock) and the total value of the bond market then was over $4 trillion (4000% more than that of preferred stock). The increase in the preferred stock market has been steady as it was $241 billion by mid 2015 and $34.1 billion of new preferred stock was issued in 2016 alone. However, again, it was dwarfed by the $22.71 trillion total value of all available stocks/funds/bonds at that time. In fact, just three years ago, the total preferred stock market was only 3% of the total value of just the CORPORATE bond market alone (exclusive of the municipal and federal bond markets).   

One last thing of note for preferred stocks is how they are listed. Common stocks are just listed with the name of the company and what is known as the stock symbol or ticker symbol (such as Apple with AAPL or McDonald’s with MCD).

Preferred stocks however are listed in their own language such as the following:

Ashford Hospitality Trust Inc 8.45% Cum Pfd Ser D

SR: What in the name of all that holy is that abomination of a name mean?

Ashford Hospitality Trust Inc (Incorporated) is the name of the corporation issuing the preferred stock.

The 8.45% is the dividend yield that can reliably be expected as long the preferred stock is owned.

The Cum refers to…

SR: Yeah, hold it right there, Professor, We all know what that means…

PWT: Uh, yeah. ANYWAY…

That uh…abbreviated designation refers to the fact that this preferred stock is cumulative (see the links above for the most common types of preferred stock) meaning that if for any reason that the dividend is not paid at the expected time, then it is promised to be paid later (ie, the dividends/payments will accumulate).

The “Pfd” simply refers to the fact that it is preferred stock.

The “Ser D” means Series D refers to the fact that it is the fourth time preferred stock has been issued by this company. (Since D is the fourth letter of the alphabet, it indicates that it is the fourth offering of the preferred stock issued by this particular corporation.)

Dr. Know It All: Exactly how stupid do you think we are?

SR: Wait! Don’t answer that.

The way preferred stock is listed is as variable as the numbers and types of preferred stock.

Personally, I like it that way. It’s not meant to be confusing, but certainly can be. Consider it like a check against yourself or a speed bump to slow down you deploying your hard earned capital into the scary world. If you can’t understand every single bit of the listing of the preferred stock on your own (no cheating on the Internet!), then you shouldn’t invest in it. That’s a pretty good rule of thumb I would say.

I think this is a pretty good stopping point.

My apologies to all of you for skipping over this earlier, but maybe it was a good thing since this made for a more bite sized post to digest. (Self rationalization is also a good thing.)

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Please spread the word about this blog to your family, friends, and colleagues.

Talk to you soon.

Until next time…

 

Stock Exchanges

Never forget these two axioms:

 

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not about how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

 

Stock Exchanges

 

Not to get too big of a head, but let me quote myself from an earlier post…

 

“There’s a marketplace where people go to buy stocks just like you (or people you know because I’ve actually never done this even once in my life) buy produce at a farmer’s market.  This marketplace is called an ‘exchange’.”

 

Realize that not only stocks, but bonds and other securities (i.e., any tradeable financial instrument) can be bought and sold (i.e., traded) in what are commonly called “stock exchanges” or just “exchanges”, but clearly involve far more than stocks alone.

 

There are 18 stock exchanges in the world that have a market capitalization (i.e., all the combined value of all the stocks of all the companies in said exchange) of over $ 1 trillion (US) each. They are sometimes referred to as the “$1 Trillion Club”. These 18 exchanges accounted for ~90% of global market capitalization in 2015.

The below are the top twenty exchanges in the world ranked by market capitalization.

(The below are the name of the exchange, country, city, and market capitalization in millions of US dollars as of October 2017.)

 

1.)    New York Stock Exchange    United States    New York    21,377

2.)    NASDAQ    United States    New York    9,585

3.)    Japan Exchange Group    Japan    Tokyo    5,974

4.)    Shanghai Stock Exchange    China    Shanghai    5,043

5.)    Euronext European Union         Amsterdam/Brussels/Lisbon/London/Paris 4,388

6.)  London Stock Exchange    United Kingdom London    4,297

7.)    Hong Kong Stock Exchange    Hong Kong 4,135

8.)    Shenzhen Stock Exchange    China    Shenzhen    3,688

9.)    TMX Group    Canada    Toronto    2,360

10.)    National Stock Exchange of India India    Mumbai    2,194

11.)    Deutsche Börse    Germany    Frankfurt    2,181

12.)    Bombay Stock Exchange    India Mumbai 2,175

13.)    Korea Exchange    South Korea    Seoul    1,683

14.)    SIX Swiss Exchange      Switzerland    Zurich    1,649

15.)    Nasdaq Nordic    Northern Europe, Armenia    Stockholm    1,561

16.)    Australian Securities Exchange    Australia    Sydney    1,428

17.)    JSE Limited      South Africa    Johannesburg    1,129

18.)    Taiwan Stock Exchange    Taiwan    Taipei    1,068

19.)    BM&F Bovespa  Brazil    São Paulo    935

20.)    BME Spanish Exchanges  Spain Madrid    896

 

The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)

 

New York, New YorkThe Big Daddy of Them AllMake It There and You’ll Make It Anywhere

 

The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is by far the largest of all the exchanges at over $21 trillion (roughly the value of the next four biggest exchanges in the world combined) with daily trading over $30 billion (often over $35-40 billion) and even a few days in 2017 near or above $100 billion just for that day.

There’s a reason for all this money floating around.

To be listed on the NYSE, a company must have issued at least one million shares of stock worth $100 million and must have earned more than $10 million over the last three years. The entry fee to the NYSE is up to $500,000-$75,000 with a yearly listing fee of up to $500,000 as well.

Yeah, your corner Gas-n-Sip isn’t going to cut it…unless it’s one of 400 locations.

The NYSE is open for trading Monday through Friday from 9:30 am – 4:00 pm EST, with the exception of holidays. So, putting in buy or sell orders after work means it will only be done the next trading day.

Believe it or not, the NYSE is a giant series of simultaneous auctions on all the stocks in the exchange where traders can trade stocks on behalf of investors. The traders who work for the NYSE literally huddle around the appropriate post where a specialist broker, who is employed by a NYSE member firm (ie, not an employee of the NYSE), acts as an auctioneer in an open air auction where buyers and sellers are brought together to execute transactions. If you see any movies like “Trading Places” where they show the trading floor of an exchange, it looks chaotic. And in the days of pen and paper, quite frankly, it was.

Of historical record, on September 25, 1995, NYSE member Michael Einersen, who designed and developed this system, executed 1000 shares of IBM through wireless hand-held computers (HHC) (it was his honor to do so since he designed and developed the system which allowed traders to both receive and execute trades electronically) ending a 203-year process of paper only transactions forever. Within two years, virtually all companies’ stocks could be traded electronically. Well over 90% of the trades at the NYSE are done electronically allowing for last minute, end of the day trades with nearly instantaneous execution.

Following the Black Monday market crash in 1987 (October 19, 1987, the largest one day DJIA percentage drop [22.6%, or 508 points at that time] in history occurred), the NYSE imposed brakes on trading to decrease volatility and hopefully end massive panic selling.

The NYSE has set the following three thresholds based on the average closing price of the S&P 500 (note that it’s the S&P 500 used for the benchmark and not the DJIA) for the preceding trading day.

They are the following:

Level 1: -7%

Level 2: -13%

Level 3: -20%

Therefore, if there is a level 1 or level 2 decline, there will be a 15 minute stoppage in trading (unless it occurs after 3:25 pm in which case no stoppage in trading occurs).

A Level 3 decline, on the other hand, triggers a suspension of trading being for the remainder of the day no matter when it occurs.

The NASDAQ (National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations)

The NASDAQ is the world’s second largest stock exchange as noted above (pretty impressive since it only started in 1971) and, as mentioned before, it tends to be heavy in technology companies. Microsoft, Apple, Cisco, Oracle, Dell, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Netflix (but no chill) all debuted on the NASDAQ. It is still the go to exchange for the emerging technology company to debut on.

(In contrast to the NYSE, to be listed on the NASDAQ a company must have issued at least 1.25 million shares of stock worth at least $70 million and must have earned more than $11 million over the last three years. Speaking of contrast…the entry fee to the NASDAQ is $50,000-$75,000 with a yearly listing fee of ~$27,500. It’s good business to have low entry fees for tech startups gone big who are low on cash—which is the whole reason the company is offering shares in the first place.)

Not surprisingly, the NASDAQ was the first exchange in the US to start trading online, highlighting Nasdaq-traded companies and closing each trade with the boastful claim (and not so subtle jab at the old, stodgy NYSE) that the NASDAQ was “the stock market for the next hundred years”.

As of June 2015, the NASDAQ has an average annualized growth rate of 9.24% since its opening in February 1971.

Since the end of the so called “Great Recession” in June 2009, it has increased by 18.29% on average per year.

The NASDAQ Composite Index has actually more than quadrupled since January 2009.

Again, this is not at all surprising given how many of the largest technology companies (most of which are listed on the NASDAQ) are doing in the last forty years and especially the last decade.

Just so you know, there is a third stock exchange (also in New York just so they’re not feeling left out) called the American Stock Exchange or AMEX where approximately 10% of all the securities in the US traded. So, though you may have never heard of it, this is no small, cheap, chump change operation.

Once a major competitor of the NYSE before the NASDAQ came along in 1971, the American Stock Exchange is now mostly known for trading in small cap stocks, options, and exchange traded funds. Actually, AMEX is where ETFs were first employed.

AMEX has the least strict listing requirements among the three top American exchanges, which consequently results in many small companies joining it rather than the other two.

If you haven’t heard of Peabody Energy, you probably haven’t heard of any of the other companies listed on the American Stock Exchange.

Back to the Big Two…

So both the NYSE and NASDAQ are US stock exchanges (the two largest in the world) that the vast majority of publicly traded US companies are listed on with different entry fees.

The NASDAQ is owned and run by a for profit company. The NYSE was a non-profit entity…until March 8, 2006 when the NYSE became a for profit company publicly traded…on the NYSE. (To blow your mind further, the NASDAQ trades…on…wait for it…yep, you guessed it…the NASDAQ.)

So what’s the difference between the two?

Two principal differences:

1.) The NYSE has its trading occur on an actual physical “trading floor” at 11 Wall Street NYC. The NASDAQ doesn’t have a physical location for trading, but rather is a telecommunications network upon which all their online trading occurs.

2.) As noted before, the NYSE is like the world’s largest auction house where thousands of auctions between buyers and sellers happen every trading day (i.e., an auction market—I know, I know, I used the word ‘auction’ three times in one sentence, but there is no good synonym for that word I will not mention again in this post.) In the NYSE, you’re buying essentially what someone else has just sold.

The NASDAQ, though, is what is known as a dealer’s market where both buyers and sellers conduct their desired business through a third party.

That’s really it as far as us retail investors are concerned.

One last thing…

ADRs

Dr. Unwise: Uh…what now?

Dr. Scared: This is it! This is how they screw you!! Money under the mattress is the only way to go!

PWT: Uh, yeah, anyway…

 

ADRs or American Depository Receipts is how a non-US company can be listed on a US stock exchange. Think about it for a second. How does a, say, company in the UK like BP (it is British Petroleum after all) which is already listed on the London exchange get listed in the US? Honestly, what company wouldn’t want to have access to all the money American investors, retail and institutional, (aka the US capital market) provide?

So, this is how BP pulls off the neat trick of being listed at home in London and again in New York.

Before 1927 when ADRs were first introduced, the only way an American could buy into a foreign company was to buy shares on a foreign exchange.

The problem with that is twofold:

1.) You’re at the mercy of regulations in whatever country your company of choice is from.

2.) Currency fluctuations and foreign taxes may wipe out your gains.

An ADR is a US bank issued certificate that represents a share or a number of shares (or even a fraction of a share) in a foreign company that is traded in a US exchange. (To be more precise, every ADR is issued by a US bank [known as the custodian bank] once the underlying shares of the foreign company are deposited in a bank of the same  country of the foreign company.)

They act, feel, and trade like any other shares of any other company. ADRs are bought, valued, and even pay dividends in US dollars.

Generally speaking, the ADR moves in parallel with the foreign stock in its home country (but adjusted for the ratio of ADRs to shares of the foreign company in question since they don’t have to be 1:1).

Of note, UK companies that set up ADRs generate a 1.5% “creation fee” that you get to pay for the privilege of buying the ADRs of said UK company.

Other than a few exceptions like the above, ADRs should be evaluated, treated, and traded like any other stock.

Whew!

Enough.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

 

Talk to you soon.

 

Indexes

Never forget these two axioms:

 

Money frees us, but its pursuit may enslave us.

It’s not about how much you have at the end; it’s how much you could have made.

 

We’re going to take a break from asset classes for one post to talk about what indexes actually are.

 

Indexes

 

Let’s start with the biggies.

 

There’s the S&P 500, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (usually referred to as the “Dow Jones”), and the NASDAQ.

 

You hear these terms thrown around on the news, articles, etc. all the time with everyone expecting you to know and understand what all of this means.  You may know exactly what this all means; you may only know that these words are vaguely related to investing, but you’re not sure what any of these terms actually mean.

 

What’s what what? What? Huh?

 

Market Index

 

The S&P 500, NASDAQ, Dow Jones, Russell 2000, and Wilshire 5000 are all examples of a “market index.” An index provides a summary of an overall collection of stocks by tracking some of the top stocks within that market. They provide (or try to provide) a representative picture that shows the direction (up or down) of where the overall market is going.

 

Consider them like polls for an election—just taking a representative sample to demonstrate what a larger group is or will be doing.

 

Indexes definitely don’t track every single stock. Some indexes represent small, medium, and large companies while other indexes represent only the largest companies or only small companies.

 

Some indexes tend to track companies within a certain sector, like technology, but most are broader.

 

So what are the most popular market indexes?

 

The S&P 500

 

This index tracks 500 large U.S. companies across a wide span of industries and sectors.

 

The stocks in the S&P 500 represent roughly 70 percent of all the value of all the stocks that are publicly traded (i.e., market capitalization) even though there are over 17,000 traded stocks in the US alone (which tells you how massive and valuable these 500 companies—the ones most everyone has heard of; the Apples, Googles, Facebooks, Fords, and Microsofts of the world— and how tiny and cheap the other 17,000 companies are). (By the way, “S&P” stands for “Standard and Poor’s,” the name of a stock market research firm.)

 

Companies CAN be (and often are) listed in more than one index. Some of the largest companies within the S&P 500 are also in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

 

When people talk about “the market”, as in “How did the market do today?” or “The market is on fire!“, they’re virtually always taking about/referring to the S&P 500 and its performance. The only other possibility is coming up next.

 

When trying to figure out how your stock, portfolio, or mutual fund/ETF is doing, you’ll be most often using the S&P 500 as your benchmark of comparison.

 

 

The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA)

 

Cool (my idea of cool is probably waay different than yours) fact:

 

Charles Dow, the editor of the Wall Street Journal actually, created the first index more than a century ago. (The Jones in question is Edward Jones, a statistician and fellow journalist of Dow’s.) In 1896, Dow averaged the stock prices of the top 12 publicly traded companies in the US. (All he did was add their stock prices of the top 12 publicly traded companies in the US together and divided that total by 12, the number of stocks.)

By doing this, he found that he could trace the movement of the overall market, including the average movement of stocks that weren’t included in his index. Sure, some stocks move opposite of the index, but not by much (usually) and they were the exception. (You have to be spectacularly talented (and not in a great way) to lose money when the index in question is up and you have to be spectacularly talented (in a great way!) to make money when the index in question is down.

That’s far from how it’s done now.

The “Industrial” in the Dow Jones Industrial Average is largely historical referring back to the heavy industries of the early 20th century. Many of the modern 30 component companies (It’s now 30 companies in the Dow rather than the original 12 which is why you’ll hear about the “Dow 30” occasionally) have little or nothing to do with true industry or traditional manufacturing. It is also not only the largest (however that is defined) companies in the US on it necessarily any more. For example, Google and Facebook aren’t on the DJIA…at least for now.

Also, the average is what is known as price-weighted, and to compensate for the effects of stock splits and other adjustments, it is currently done as a scaled average.

Dr. Unwise: Um, what now?

Price weighted is easy to explain.

PWT: 30 companies=100% of the DJIA, right?

Dr. Scared: Yes!

PWT: Therefore, each company~3.3% of the DJIA, right?

Dr. Scared: Yes!

PWT: Wrong. 

Dr. Scared: Oh God, kill me now!

PWT: Relax. The DJIA just takes into account the stock price of each company. Therefore, a $100 stock will have ten times the influence on the DJIA as a $10 stock and 100 times more influence than a $1 stock. 

Dr. Unwise: Makes sense. That’s great. Easy to understand too. That’s it, right?

PWT: No, sadly, like they used to tell us in med school and training, that was the easy part. 

Dr. Scared: Oh God, kill me now!

Scaled average is a statistical method to even out disparate entities that are all under one umbrella.

In other words, the value of the Dow (i.e., the number that people are saying on the news when they say “The Dow closed at…. today” or “Today, the Dow reached an all time high of ….”) is no longer the actual average of the prices of its component stocks like when it first began, but rather the sum of the component prices divided by a divisor, which changes whenever one of the component stocks has a stock split or stock dividend, so as to generate a consistent value for the index.

Whether one stock is spitting out quarterly dividends, another is splitting, and yet another is doing neither, the DJIA’s value reflects the sum of all these disparate company’s stocks. Otherwise, without the Dow divisor, dividends and, especially stock splits (remember, for example, if having 100 shares of a $100 stock for a total value of $10,000 is split 2:1, then you have 200 shares at $50 still valued at $10,000), would markedly alter the Dow’s reported number without actually changing its true value.

Currently the divisor is less than one, therefore the value of the DJIA is actually larger than the sum of the component prices.

SR: Hmm, sounds fishy. Like some real Wall street flim flam there. 

PWT: Not really. Not this time. But don’t worry. There’s plenty of flim flam going on in Wall

        Street and Washington—often one because of the other. This just isn’t it though. 

The Dow divisor has fluctuated significantly over the years. In 1928, it was 16.67. Since most big company actions (e.g., stock splits, spin offs, etc.) push the Dow divisor lower, it should be no surprise that the divisor is now microscopic compared to its 1928 value which it is.

Drum roll please…

The Dow divisor as of 12/18/17 (the day I’m writing this) is 0.14523396877348.

Unlike mathematicians, the Dow Jones clearly doesn’t believe in the rule of significant digits given it has a divisor that is currently 14 digits beyond the decimal point.

SR: Jones! Pffft…Some statistician he is!

The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA or the Dow Jones or just “the Dow”) was comprised of the 30 largest U.S. companies. (This isn’t true per se now depending on how you define company size—number of employees, sales, revenue, market capitalization, etc.)

This means the DJIA is constantly shuffling companies in and out as their values rise and fall. They drop and add new companies every so often (every 2-3 years as of late). The components of the DJIA have changed 51 times since its beginning in May 26, 1896.

Only one company on the original Dow Jones list of companies in 1896 still exists on today’s Dow Jones. Any guesses?*

Just for kicks, here are the current Dow 30 (another name used for the DJIA) companies:

3M Company

Caterpillar Inc.

Nike, Inc.

American Express Company

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Pfizer Inc.

Apple Inc. (added in March 2015 replacing AT&T which was dropped then)

The Home Depot, Inc.

The Procter & Gamble Company

The Boeing Company

Intel Corporation

The Travelers Companies, Inc.

General Electric Company

International Business Machines Corporation AKA IBM

UnitedHealth Group Incorporated

Chevron Corporation

Johnson & Johnson

United Technologies Corporation

Cisco Systems, Inc.

JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Verizon Communications Inc.

The Coca-Cola Company

McDonald’s Corporation

Visa Inc.

E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company  AKA Dupont

Merck & Co., Inc.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Exxon Mobil Corporation

Microsoft Corporation

The Walt Disney Company

 

The DJIA along with the S&P 500 are widely accepted as the leading indicators of the health of the stock market. If someone is talking about “the market”, the DJIA or S&P 500 is what they’re likely using as their measuring stick to make any remarks or generalizations about “the market.”

The Wilshire 5000

A lesser known, but still important, index represents up to 5,000 companies of all shapes and sizes, from gigantic corporations to the smallest of small companies. (In industry terminology, these are known as “large cap,” “mid-cap” and “small-cap.”)

The Wilshire 5000 is often called the “total market index.” Despite how representative this index is of the entire stock market, it oddly isn’t nearly as popular or as followed as the DJIA and S&P 500 which I’ve never quite understood. 

 

The Russell 2000

The Dow Jones focuses on large companies, but the Russell 2000 does the opposite: it follows only the tiniest companies. This index tracks 2,000 of the smallest corporations in the stock market.

If you’re either brain addled or a statistician obsessed with number needed to treat and you think that 2,000 companies is too small of a sample size, and you’re seeking for a larger, more representative snapshot of how small-cap companies are faring, you’re in luck. You can gaze upon the Russell 3000, the sister index to the Russell 2000.

The NASDAQ (the acronym for the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations)

This is one of the three big indexes, but I saved it for last as it can get a little confusing.

“NASDAQ” refers to both an index and a trading exchange.

Dr. Unwise: Uh…What now?

Dr. Scared: Oh God, kill me now!

OK, let’s back up and get a little back story here.

There’s a marketplace where people go to buy stocks just like you (or people you know because I’ve actually never done this even once in my life) buy produce at a farmer’s market.  This marketplace is called an “exchange.” The most famous one in the world that all the movies and news programs show is the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). There’s another famous one also in New York City (they’re actually only 7 minutes apart and represent over $30 trillion—that’s Trillion with a capital T or $30,000 billion or $30 million million if that is even comprehensible) called the Nasdaq Exchange.

Stocks that are traded on the Nasdaq Exchange tend to be tech companies, like Apple Amazon, Facebook, and Google, but you don’t have to be a tech company to be on it (Starbucks is traded in the Nasdaq as is Steve Madden, the shoe company, for example) nor all tech companies traded in the Nasdaq exchange. Twitter, for example, is traded on the NYSE.

SR: Ha! Twitter is a terrible example. It may not even be around by the time you post this to the World Wide Web!

Of course, companies on the Nasdaq or NYSE don’t have to be as huge as Apple, Facebook, or Google.  In fact, most of the companies listed in either exchange are much, much smaller.

You’ve likely never heard as many sell only to other businesses and not consumers like you and me.

The Nasdaq is just disproportionately heavy in tech stocks and will surge up or bounce down when something (good or bad) happens in the tech world.

The Nasdaq market index, which is known as the “Nasdaq Composite” or just the “Nasdaq”, tracks the roughly 3,000 companies that are traded on the Nasdaq Exchange by having 100 companies (mostly, but not all tech) in it to mimic what all of them are doing on any given hour of any trading day. (Very, very clever, stock people.)

This is peculiarly unique because no other exchange has its own popular index. The news doesn’t reel off closing highs or lows of the day from the “New York Stock Exchange Composite” mostly because it doesn’t exist. #fakenews

(Of note, this is a market capitalization weight based index which means that 100 companies aren’t each 1% of the index, but rather the bigger they are, the more percent of the index they are. These massive (almost always) tech companies have an outsized influence on the Nasdaq Composite. For example, if Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, and Netflix zoom up one day while most of the other 100 companies in the Nasdaq Composite edge down, then guess what? The index still moves up because the big boys have spoken. As companies decrease or increase in value, their share of the index and influence on it will fluctuate accordingly.)

The Nasdaq Composite has grown popular because it’s commonly accepted as a shortcut to understanding how the biggest tech-sector and some other innovative companies – both big and small – are performing financially. And since tech is the tail that wags the dog, everyone wants to hear what the NASDAQ is up to.

Much more on stock exchanges in a future post.

I think we’ve all had enough for one post.

Sorry for going suuuper long on this one, but there was a lot of super important stuff that was all interrelated here that I thought was best to go over all at once.

Sorry if you disagree.

Read it again or as many times as you need to or in bits and pieces. You’re all smart. You know how you best learn, so go and ahead and do it your way at your pace.

I’d love to hear from any and all of you about your thoughts, so we can all learn from one another.

Talk to you soon.

*General Electric is the only company that survived all 121 years on the DJIA list.

Well, not exactly.

GE was removed from the DJIA in September 1897 and came back in November 1907. It’s been on the DJIA since then.

And for you history buffs out there, below are the original dozen companies in the 1896 Dow Jones Industrial Average.

 

1.) American Cotton Oil Company, a predecessor company to Bestfoods which is now part of Unilever.

2.) American Sugar Company which became Domino Sugar in 1900 which is now Domino Foods, Inc.

3.) American Tobacco Company which is now broken up in a 1911 antitrust action.

4.) Chicago Gas Company which was bought by Peoples Gas Light in 1897 which has since become a subsidiary of Integrys Energy Group.

5.) Distilling & Cattle Feeding Company is now Millennium Chemicals

6.) Laclede Gas Company is still in operation as Spire Inc., but was the first company permanently removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average all the way back in 1899

7.) National Lead Company, now NL Industries, which was removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average twenty years after its inception in 1916.

8.) North American Company (boffo marketing division, guys), a holding company for electric utilities, was broken up by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 1946.

9.) Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company was bought by U.S. Steel in 1907 which was removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average in 1991—pretty great run!

10.) U.S. Leather Company was dissolved in 1952 because of jerks like you with your faux leather belts and whatnot (especially the whatnot)

11.) United States Rubber Company which changed its name to Uniroyal in 1961, then merged with B.F. Goodrich (a privately held company—i.e., a company that you can’t buy stock in) in 1986 which was then bought out by Michelin in 1990.

12.) Good ol’ GE as previously mentioned