Sep 232019
 

The lump sum or monthly dilemma 

When it comes to investment timing there are generally two recommended strategies – either invest all the cash immediately, or break up the total amount to invest in regular installments. For example, if you receive a $12,000 bonus on January 1st, should you put all $12,000 into the stock market as soon as possible, or invest $1,000 per month over the course of the entire year?

The answer, statistically speaking, is to invest the entire amount right away. This is because the stock market rises about 3/4 of the time over a typical 1 year period. So a pattern of investing as early as possible, will over time, yield lower buying prices than dollar cost averaging which spreads the capital over the course of 12 months.

However, the difference in performance isn’t very dramatic. Investment management company Charles Schwab published a study comparing these 2 strategies along with a few other ones. They gave $2,000 at the beginning of every year to 5 hypothetical investors, each with a different timing style. They are as follows.

  1. Timing the market perfectly by investing the full $2,000 at the stock market’s lowest point of the year, every year.
  2. Invests the $2,000 at the very beginning of each year.
  3. Uses dollar cost averaging, dividing the $2,000 evenly by 12 and investing once a month.
  4. Timing the market in the worst way possible, investing $2,000 at the peak of the market each year.
  5. Investing in government T-Bills and other cash equivalents that are safe instead of the stock market.

Here is how much money each investor built up after 20 years.

how investment timing works

As we can see, investing a lump sum as soon as possible yields slightly better results than splitting up the amount and investing gradually month by month. 🙂 This is true using older periods as well. The study further analyzed all 68 rolling 20-year periods dating back to 1926. In 58 of the 68 periods, the rankings were exactly the same.

In conclusion, if you plan to invest in the stock market, your best move is to invest the entire amount immediately. Don’t split up your capital to gradually invest it over time. Dollar cost averaging will probably set you back instead of help you. The earlier you take the risk with your money the more time it will have to grow. 🙂

Here are some questions to sum up today’s blog post.

  • The TSX just reached a record high last week on Sept 17. If you have money to invest now, should you wait for a small pullback before jumping in?
    Answer: The data would suggest no. Believing that lower stock prices are just around the corner is a terrible mindset to have, financially speaking. As a case study, the Dow Jones index in the U.S. reached over 120 all-time highs just in the 2010s alone so far. It’s quite common for record highs to be followed by more record highs. The last investor in Charles Schwab’s study stayed out of the market and ended up with the smallest portfolio after 20 years. Many renters in Toronto missed out on the real estate boom over the last 2 decades because they were waiting for home prices to drop since 2000. Waiting for any correction is generally not a good idea.
  • Are there times when it’s better to dollar cost average rather than invest immediately?
    Answer: Yes. If you don’t already have a large pile of money saved, then dollar cost averaging (DCA) is better than waiting until you save up enough for a larger lump sum investment. The simple lesson is the sooner your money is invested, the better. 🙂
  • Does timing the market work?
    Answer: In most cases, no. In the study above, after a 20 year period, the perfect market timer amassed only 6.5% more wealth than the investor who put money to work right away. Market timing can easily go wrong. The worst market timer in the study ended up with 12.6% less than the lump sum investor. So the risk is not the worth the potential reward to time the market.

 

 

____________________
Random Useless Fact:

The goal of golf is to play as little golf as possible.

Mar 282016
 

Is the Stock Market Overvalued?

My opinion is yes. This post will explain how I came to this conclusion. Thanks to reader Bricks for bringing up this topic.

We’ll be looking at the S&P 500 because it’s a popular index and there’s a lot of data available for it. 🙂 This index basically represents a basket of 500 large publicly traded companies in the United States. We can analyze the following 7 metrics to determine how cheap or expensive the market is. And naturally each of these ratios below can be applied to individual stocks as well. 😉

  1. Trailing P/E ratio
  2. Forward P/E ratio
  3. Forward P/S ratio
  4. Price vs Forward Earnings
  5. Shiller P/E Ratio
  6. Operating Margins
  7. EV / EBITDA ratio

Useful Ratios to Value the Stock Market

1) P/E Ratio – The price to earnings ratio, or sometimes known as the trailing P/E ratio or TTM P/E ratio, is a popular measurement to help determine the valuation of stocks. A low P/E ratio signals a cheap valuation. Historically the P/E ratio of stocks in both Canada and the U.S. hover between 10 to 20 most of the time. However, as of today the P/E ratio of the S&P 500 index is about 22, which signals it is overpriced relative to the norm. (image source)

16-03-valuation-stocks-pe-ratio

2) Forward P/E Ratio – Unlike the trailing P/E ratio, the forward P/E ratio uses projected future earnings. Of course nobody knows how much money companies will make in the future, but this metric provides a sentiment of how profitable the market feels about the next few earnings seasons. According to a FactSet report, the forward P/E ratio of the stock market is 16.5, which is above the long-term average of 14.2. So based on this data stocks are currently about 16% more expensive than what they should be.

16-03-valuation-stocks-forward-ps-ratio

3) Forward P/S Ratio – The price to sales ratio compares the total market value to revenue. It usually moves in the same direction as the P/E ratio but can provide a smoother, more accurate depiction of the market’s valuation (see yellow line in chart above.) This ratio is currently over 1.6x for the S&P 500, which suggests the market is overpriced, even compared to 2008 levels.

4) Price Change vs Forward Earnings Change– The price of the stock market is mainly determined by its future profitability. But recently the price has diverged away from future expected earnings which suggests stock prices are too high.

16-03-valuation-stocks-price-vs-earnings-eps

Notice what happened after the last time price diverged higher from the forward expected EPS in 2006 and 2007. 🙁

According to John Butters, senior earnings analyst at FactSet, for the first quarter of 2016 it appears 92 companies have issued negative EPS (earnings per share) guidance and only 26 companies have issued positive EPS guidance. This depicts a rather bearish outlook. However, stock prices have not come down nearly enough to reflect these estimates. 😕

Continue reading »

Sep 272015
 

3 Year History

Usually when investors talk about expected market returns we like to look at historical averages. Over the past 115 years stock markets in the developed world delivered an annualized return of roughly 8.5%. This means we can probably assume that a normal range would be somewhere between 6% and 11%.

I use TD as my discount brokerage at the moment. It has a useful tool to help me gauge my portfolio performance over the years. Most of my stocks are held in registered accounts such as TFSAs or RRSPs, which have preferential tax benefits. 🙂 Here is a quick overview of how my securities in those accounts have performed over the last 3 years. The green line represents my portfolio performance.

15-09-stock-performance-2012-2015

As we can see my overall stocks have achieved a 7.33% annualized rate of return since Sept 2012. This is not that surprising and falls within the 6% to 11% range of a normal market return. 🙂 Also since I can’t use margin to borrow and invest inside these registered accounts, none of my stocks in this chart uses any leverage.

The blue line represents the Canadian stock market index, which has only returned 8.65% over the last 3 years, or 2.8% annualized. This means I technically beat the market here in Canada by more than 4% a year, which is just peachy keen! 😀 But that’s probably because I hold some U.S. stocks in my RRSP and TFSA.

The purple line represents the S&P 500 index in the U.S. The graph shows it has climbed 80.22% since 2012. But keep in mind that this factors in the currency exchange. Otherwise, the return in $USD is closer to 47%, which is still pretty dope. The U.S. currency has become very strong over the past couple of years. Any Canadian who held U.S. stock would have seen double-digit returns even if the price of their stocks didn’t change domestically in U.S. dollars. 😀

Here are a few things I learned from this performance chart. I’ll be keeping these things in mind going forward.

  • It’s possible to pick and choose individual stocks without underperforming the market index, as long as you have the discipline to buy and hold most of the time.
  • Canadian stocks rely too much on commodity prices. Whenever oil and metal prices fall the market really struggles. 🙁
  • Buy some foreign currencies to hold investments that are denominated in those currencies.
  • Diversify globally. Holding a Canadian equity index fund, like the Vanguard Canada All Cap Index ETF, (symbol VCN,) would have barely even beat inflation over the past 3 years, and even the past 5 years.

Continue reading »

Apr 162015
 

Canadian Farmland Values Up Again

Okay, it’s that time of year again when the national agency, Farm Credit Canada, release its farmland value report about the previous year’s farming landscape. As it turns out in 2014 the average Canadian farmland price increased 14.3%. 😀

15-04-farmland-cat-grin-reaction

Meanwhile residential real estate prices increased only 5.2%, according to the Canadian Real Estate Association. Of course the most strategic way to invest in a portfolio of properties is to be exposed to both residential, and agricultural real estate. Farmland prices are assessed using recent comparable sales. These sales must be arm’s-length transactions. The highest price increase was an incredible 18.7% in Saskatchewan, the land of living skies. The full report is on FCC’s site.

15-04-farmland-price-2014-canada-fcc

As luck would have it I decided to buy some Sask farmland a few years ago. 😉 Back then I had blogged about why land in Saskatchewan was the bee’s knees because of how undervalued it was compared to other provinces and neighboring States.

 

The Greatest Advantage of Real Estate Over Stocks: LEVERAGE

I leveraged 8:1 to secure my position as a farm owner. This meant I borrowed $7 of the bank’s money for every $1 of my own money to invest. So an increase in Saskatchewan’s farmland value of 18.7% last year actually means a redonkulous 150% rate of return on my capital. Not too shabby. 😉

My farmland was worth about $1210/acre last year, so after this year’s adjustment it should be worth $226/acre more now. Awesome sauce! 😉 $226 doesn’t sound like a lot of money to get excited about, but since I own 310 acres it all adds up pretty quick. 🙂

15-04-farmland-satisfied-seal-reaction

Investing in farmland isn’t for everyone but hay, maybe I have it in my jeans. 😀

As much as I like to feel wealthy on paper, when one particular asset class consistently outperforms all the other ones I’m faced with an asset allocation problem. Farmland now represents about two-thirds of my financial investments (all assets except primary residence.) This means I am not very diversified anymore. 🙁 Although I realize this must be the ultimate first world problem, lol. 😛

Continue reading »