
Those who have heard me speak about the media’s influence on investor’s decision-making know that I believe in a phenomenon I call “The Creation of Crisis”—whereby 24-hour news outlets fill airtime by making “vital” news stories out of non-stories. These crises can have impact on investor behavior, which in turn has potential impact on investor’ process. This can also work the other way, and is why I believe many investors have felt frustration with portfolio performance throughout 2014.
In this month’s 8 Wealth Issues blog entry, I thought it would be a good idea to look at why continuing to emphasize the institutional process of investing is still a better idea than benchmarking against the S&P 500.
Diversification is essential, yet it comes with trade-offs. Investors are repeatedly urged to allocate portfolio assets across a variety of investment classes. This is fundamental; market shocks and month-to-month volatility may bring big losses to portfolios weighted too heavily in one or two classes.
Just as there is a potential upside to diversification, there is also a potential downside. It can expose a percentage of the portfolio to underperforming sectors of the market. Last year, that kind of exposure affected the returns of some prudent investors.
The media insists on reporting on about 1.5 asset classes: The Dow Jones Industrial Average & S&P 500 are both Large Cap US-based indices, and NASDAQ is a US technology-based index which has many Large Cap companies in it. It is a POOR comparison to any risk-based managed investment strategy.
Sometimes diversification hinders overall performance. The stock market has performed well of late, but very few portfolios have 100% allocation to stocks for sensible reasons. At times investors take a quick glance at stock index performance and forget that their return reflects the performance of multiple market segments. While the S&P 500 rose +11.39% in 2014, other asset classes saw minor returns or losses last year.1
As an example, Morningstar assessed fixed-income managers for 2014 and found a median return of just +2.35% for domestic high yield strategies. The Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index advanced +5.97% in 2014 (that encompasses coupon payments and capital appreciation), while the Citigroup Non-U.S. World Government Bond index lost -2.68%.1,2
Turning to some very conservative options, the 10-year Treasury had a +2.17% yield on December 31, 2014; & Bankrate found the annual percentage yield for a 1-year CD averaged +0.27% nationally, with the yields on 5-year CDs averaging +0.87%; last year’s average yields were similar.3,4
Oil’s poor 2014 affected numerous portfolios. Light sweet crude ended 2014 at just $53.27 on the NYMEX, going -45.42% on the year. (In 2008, prices peaked at $147 a barrel). Correspondingly, the Thomson Reuters/CRB Commodities Index, which tracks the 19 most watched commodity futures, dropped 17.9% in 2014 after slips of 5.0% in 2013, 3.4% in 2012 and 8.3% in 2011. At the end of last year, it was at the same level it had been at the end of 2008.5,6
The longstanding MSCI EAFE Index (an International index tracking Europe and the Asia Pacific region) lost -7.35% for 2014. At the end of last year, it had returned an average of +2.34% across 2010-2014. So on the whole, equity indices in the emerging markets and the eurozone have not performed exceptionally well last year or over the past few years.7
Why favor an Institutional Process? I sometimes get the question “Why wasn’t I allocated more” to the best performing asset class? Active investment management with an institutional risk-managed process is about both tilting portfolios TOWARD perceived opportunities and AWAY from too much risk—given the client’s comfort with a particular level of risk. For most people an over-allocation to the Large Cap Domestic asset class may have shown to be an unnecessary amount of risk. History tells us that a patient, well considered investment process tied to goals based in a financial plan gives us the best probability of long-term financial success. It also gives the investor a better, more consistent experience. The downside to employing this process is the myopic view: In a year like 2014 when the S&P 500 does well and everything else doesn’t, your diversified portfolio also doesn’t.
In most year’s I do not hear complaints about why managed portfolio’s didn’t beat the best performing asset class. But when the best performing asset class is the only index the media tracks, I understand why it could become a question.