FTSE recovery or a sucker's rally?

FTSE recovery or a sucker's rally?

The Daily Telegraph asks some of the City's leading experts if the FTSE bounce signals a market turn.

By Jonathan Sibun
Last Updated: 12:38PM GMT 16 Mar 2009

The FTSE-100 rose an impressive 6.3pc last week and market participants are openly questioning whether markets have reached their lows for the first time since the financial crisis began.

After weeks of gloom the scale of the surge – with the FTSE up 223 points at 3753.7, the biggest full-week rise this year – took many by surprise.

The Daily Telegraph talks to some of the City's leading experts to ask whether it is time to turn back to equities.

Anthony Bolton

Fidelity International

All of the things I look for to be in place for a market bottom were in place last week, so I think there is a reasonable chance that we have reached a bottom. A new bull market could have started.

There are three things I have looked for.

The first is the pattern of bull and bear markets. In the US, the S&P index is down 57pc from peak to trough. That is the deepest bear market but one since the early 1900s. The exception was in the 1930s but that came after huge overvaluations in the 1920s.

The second is sentiment. You would have to go back to the 1970s to see when sentiment was last this bad.

And the third is that some valuations are now compelling. There are a lot of stocks out there that are undervalued.

I don't tend to focus on the economic outlook. If you focus solely on the economy you won't see it [the bottom]. You won't see a flashing green light. By the time you see the economic indicators the equity markets will already have moved.

Edward Bonham Carter

Jupiter Asset Management

If you are asking whether this is a reasonable time to be increasing equity exposure on a three-to-five year view then the answer is yes.

However, while investors are starting to be paid to take equity risk that doesn't mean we've reached the bottom. The lesson in history is that very few people can call the bottom.

This year is likely to remain schizophrenic. You will have periods of people thinking they can see the bottom and the effects of the actions taken by governments and then periods where people believe that the economy will remain in difficulty for some time.

It is possible we could fall through the 3,000 mark but a lot of people are trying to predict the unpredictable. In bear markets, rallies are the order of the day.

Between 1966 and 1982 markets traded in a broadly sideways pattern in a range of 300 to 400 points. It is highly possible we could see that again.

Paul Kavanagh

Killick & Co

The market was due a rally. I wouldn't call it a sucker's rally but neither would I call it the bottom. I can see us getting above 4,000 but I still believe there is a long way to go before we've bottomed out. We're looking at another year of working through this.

There is sentiment around job losses which has yet to feed through. Unemployment is a lagging indicator but it will hurt sentiment if 100,000 jobs are cut a month to Christmas. Consumer spending has yet to drop off a cliff but if unemployment reaches three million there will be an impact.

Tim Steer

New Star Asset Management

We may be reaching the bottom. One justification for saying that would be that much of the refinancing that companies are going to have to do is priced into the market. The market discounts what is going to happen and it is very easy to see which companies are in need of financing and which are not.

We have already seen some companies do well from that. In a few cases companies' share prices are going up in anticipation of a rights issue. The view is that while earnings will be diluted, there will be less of a debt problem.

Garry White

Questor Editor

A market bottoms when we reach what is known as the "point of maximum pessimism". This means that investors have lost so much money they completely throw in the towel - and shares correct to an undervalued level. I don't believe we are at this level yet.

The FTSE 100 is now trading on a price-earnings multiple approaching 16 – with many more earnings downgrades likely to follow the reporting season. Some analysts believe earnings at non-financial companies may slump 24pc in 2009, this means the "real" prospective multiple of the index is much, much higher. This rally has all the marks of a bear market rally and investors should beware.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5252775/FTSEs-11-week-high-sparks-hope-that-bull-market-may-be-arriving.html

Related Articles
FTSE 100 enjoys biggest monthly gain in six years
FTSE 100 heads for biggest monthly gain in 17 years
FTSE's 11-week high sparks hope that bull market may be arriving
FTSE 100 closes the week up 6pc
Global markets search for a cure

FTSE's 11-week high sparks hope that bull market may be arriving

FTSE's 11-week high sparks hope that bull market may be arriving

Hopes that the bear market in equities is over were buoyed as shares rose and more analysts speculated we could be in the early stages of a bull market.

By Edmund Conway
Last Updated: 9:27PM BST 30 Apr 2009

The benchmark FTSE 100 index rose by 1.3pc, capping its biggest monthly increase since 2003. The market's buoyancy comes with many experts claiming that the worst of the financial crisis and market slides are now over. The FTSE dropped by more than 31pc in 2008, but has now risen back to an 11-week high of 4,243.71, despite the spread of swine flu and warnings from the International Monetary Fund that the crisis is not even half-way over.

Analysts hailed the fact that the index increased by 8.1pc this month, with a strong performance from the banking sector yesterday.

Disappointing news is just being ignored, good news is being jumped on as an excuse to get involved," said David Morrison, market strategist at GFT Global Market.

Meanwhile, Anthony Bolton, the renowned fund manager and president of investments at Fidelity International, said a bull market may have begun in March.

"All the things are in place for the bear market to have ended," he said. "When there's a strong consensus, a very negative one, and cash positions are very high, as they are at the moment, I'd like to bet against that."

A report by Barclays Wealth said the likelihood is that the world economy has avoided depression and would escape with a milder recession. Aaron Girwitz, head of global investment strategy, said: "We suggest beginning to add more risk to portfolios, and look to Asia to lead the economic revival. Credit markets will outperform as risk appetite increases.

"But we remain somewhat cautious. Market volatility will ease back only gradually. We are not urging investors to increase equity allocations to levels above their strategic norms".

However, others have warned that with many banks still needing extra capital, the crisis and the associated bear market may have longer to run.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5252775/FTSEs-11-week-high-sparks-hope-that-bull-market-may-be-arriving.html

Related Articles
UK consumer confidence rises for third month in April
Markets infected by confidence pandemic
FTSE 100 enjoys biggest monthly gain in six years
FTSE 100 heads for biggest monthly gain in 17 years
Global markets slide on banking fears
FTSE recovery or a sucker's rally?

Markets infected by confidence pandemic

Markets infected by confidence pandemic

Imagine if swine flu had broken out on March 9. A health emergency would probably have thrown stock markets - then touching 10-year lows - into an absolute rout. But less than two months later, investors don't seem to care.

By Edward Hadas, breakingviews.com
Last Updated: 4:14PM BST 30 Apr 2009

The Dow Jones Stoxx 600 European index hit a 2009 high on Thursday. That followed Wednesday's rise in the yield on 10-year US Treasury bonds above 3pc. Investors won't cough up for risk-free assets, but will take commodities and emerging markets exposure in big doses. It's a kind of flight from safety.

Clouds become mere appendages to big silver linings. Investors overlooked worse-than-expected US GDP figures, focusing instead on the need to rebuild inventories. They rejoiced in a slowdown in the contraction of eurozone bank lending, without recoiling at the contraction itself. Even the likely bankruptcy of Chrysler has found a positive spin: uncertainty is lifted.


As for unequivocally bad news - a huge increase in eurozone unemployment, confirmation that UK house prices are still falling - it is simply ignored.

Investors seem to be on a mood-enhancing drug. And in a sense they are.

Governments and central banks have been issuing vast quantities of a stimulant that gets investors and markets high - cheap money. Some of the liquidity created by near-zero official interest rates, effectively unlimited financing for banks and gargantuan fiscal deficits is almost certainly leaking into financial markets.

Investors, like policymakers, are betting that the optimism will prove self-fulfilling. Confidence makes consumers and companies more likely to spend and invest. Also, the liquidity should ease the financial squeeze, increasing the supply of credit for trade and inventories.

The cure is working so well that it's tempting to believe the monetary floodgates should remain open forever. But there's a reason why these policies are exceptional. They are likely to have adverse side effects - too high inflation if money stays too cheap for too long, or another squeeze if interest and tax rates rise too quickly.

The money drug is still in trials. What's more, it may do little to combat the underlying disease of globally unbalanced production and consumption. A long and painful recession would do that. And markets may yet follow the economy rather than the money.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/breakingviewscom/5251575/Markets-infected-by-confidence-pandemic.html

Swine flu: 'There are two weeks where it could go either way'

Swine flu: 'There are two weeks where it could go either way'
As the scientific community admits the world is overdue for a pandemic, will the outbreak of swine flu find Britain prepared, asks Neil Tweedie.

by Neil Tweedie
Last Updated: 1:30PM BST 28 Apr 2009

Comments 21 Comment on this article

Swine flu is a variant of the H1N1 strain which causes seasonal outbreaks among humans Photo: Getty
Buy shares in pharmaceuticals, sell airlines and travel operators – well, at least for the next one or two weeks. It will take about a fortnight for the threat presented by swine flu to become clear – the scaremongers can scare away to their hearts' content for the next few days but neither they nor anyone else knows if the outbreak in Mexico City represents the beginning of a global influenza pandemic.

"Flu is like fire," says Angela McLean, director of the Institute for Emerging Infections at Oxford University. "You have an outbreak and it spits out sparks. You then have to wait to see whether the sparks die out or start new fires."

Nearly 150 people in Mexico are thought to have died after contracting a new version of the flu virus, and yesterday two cases were confirmed in Scotland, as another 22 remained under observation in the UK. There are other confirmed cases in the United States, Canada and Spain; and suspected cases in New Zealand, Israel and Colombia. Meanwhile, the Russians banned imports of US and Latin American pork (for no good reason).

The version in question is a variant of the H1N1 strain responsible for seasonal outbreaks in humans but containing genetic ingredients from strains that normally affect birds and pigs. It is virtually certain that the new variant can be transmitted between humans – otherwise all those infected would have to have been in contact with pigs. Currently, that makes it more of a threat than the avian flu strain H5N1, which has killed scores of people in South-East Asia. Although H5N1 may one day mutate into a human-to-human strain, it has not yet done so – all those who died worked closely with birds.

Influenza is the most adaptable of viruses, constantly evolving to outwit human attempts to combat it. There were three flu pandemics in the 20th century: the "Spanish influenza" outbreak of 1918, which some scientists think may have evolved from swine flu and killed between 40 and 50 million people worldwide; the Asian influenza pandemic of 1957; and the Hong Kong outbreak of 1968. Between them, these may have been responsible for four million deaths. Received opinion has it that the world is overdue another one. So what could the Mexican outbreak mean for Britain?

The doctors, scientists and civil servants responsible for managing an outbreak have a problem: they can raise the alarm now and be accused of over-reacting if Mexican flu remains just that; or they can wait and be accused of under-reacting when the British economy, already in intensive care, goes into cardiac arrest as hundreds of thousands of workers take to their beds.

According to a Cabinet Office briefing paper, a flu pandemic could reach the UK within two to four weeks of an outbreak. Once here, the virus would spread to all major population centres within one or two weeks. Peak infection would occur seven weeks after its arrival.

The department states: "Depending upon the virulence of the influenza virus, the susceptibility of the population and the effectiveness of counter-measures, up to half the population could have developed the illness and between 50,000 and 750,000 additional deaths could have occurred by the end of the pandemic in the UK."

The latter is presumably based on the apocalyptic assumption that half the UK population of 61 million contracts flu and then suffers the 2.5 per cent mortality rate seen in 1918. This compares to mortality rates of 0.5 per cent in 1957 and 1968. Nevertheless, a flu pandemic could induce economic dislocation in the United Kingdom on a crippling scale, and the jitters have already begun.

The travel industry copped it first, with shares in airlines plunging and stocks in cruise lines sinking. Shares in British Airways, Carnival Cruise Lines, Intercontinental Hotels and Thomas Cook all headed south as the European Union commissioner for health advised against all but essential travel to affected areas of Mexico and the United States. That announcement was bound to drown out President Obama's expression yesterday of "concern rather than alarm" over the outbreak. The share movements could not be justified by available evidence, but then, when did that stop the speculators?

In an assessment of 2005, the World Bank warned that a pandemic could cause a loss of 2 per cent in global GDP over the course of a year, due to reduced productivity through absenteeism. Tourism and the restaurant and hotel sectors would be hit severely as people sought to stay away from each other, while health services would be overwhelmed by those seeking help. The Department of Health believes a flu pandemic would cost Britain up to £7 billion in lost GDP if a quarter of employees were affected, and double that if half went on sick leave at some point – a more likely figure. Hospitals and surgeries would be swamped: pneumonia cases could easily outstrip the 110,000 acute and 1,800 intensive beds available in England and Wales.

A specialist in acute medicine based in London told The Telegraph that he had made preliminary plans to quarantine himself from his wife and three children if the flu outbreak proves to be serious and he is treating patients.

Some 12,000 people die from influenza in England and Wales each year but because the overwhelming majority are elderly that fact tends to escape the general population. The outbreak of 1918 differed from the norm in that young adults and those in early middle age, the 25-40 age group, died in the greatest numbers. The theory is that their strong immune systems over-reacted to the flu strain with fatal results. Post-mortem examinations uncovered severe haemorrhages in lungs unlike anything seen before. Some 230,000 people in Britain are believed to have succumbed to the flu pandemic, a painful toll given the three quarters of a million claimed by the First World War.

"Even in an outbreak involving low mortality, there could be real problems in maintaining services," says Prof McLean. "Schools could close for extended periods, for example. Then there is the "milk in Tesco" question. The just-in-time ordering system of supermarkets may have made us more vulnerable to stoppages through illness. I heard one figure suggesting there are eight hours worth of milk in London at any one time."

The good news is that Britain is one of the best-prepared nations with regard to stocks of the anti-influenza drugs Tamiflu and Relenza, which would supply some protection against a new strain. And, of course, the Mexican outbreak could go the way of Sars and bird flu, viral outbreaks which claimed lives at an alarming rate initially but then failed to spread.

When swine flu broke out at a US army base in 1976, predictions of a cataclysm accompanied it. F David Mathews, the US health secretary, warned: "The indication is that we will see a return of the 1918 flu virus – that is the most virulent form of the flu. The predictions are that this virus will kill one million Americans in 1976.''

Thankfully, he was wrong. Only one person died and the outbreak spontaneously ceased.

"There is a difference between being able to transfer between one human being and another, and being able to do it efficiently," cautions Professor McLean. "This strain may not be very infectious. What matters is how much virus these people are shedding and for how long – for how long are they coughing and sneezing."

"We can't know for weeks what proportion of people catch it and what proportion die from it. This might turn out to be nothing – outside Mexico."

Even if the Mexican strain spreads to the UK, people are fitter and better fed than they were in 1918. And antibiotics mean the secondary infections that often kill flu sufferers can be seen off. Still, Prof McLean believes caution is the best policy.

"You could say that it is better to over-react and then retreat. Eating humble pie at a later date is preferable to reacting too slowly and too late because outbreaks are easier to control early on."

Even in 1918, when transport was slower and scarcer, Spanish flu managed to spread around the world, reaching – and devastating – the remotest Inuit villages in five months. The jumbo jet and the era of mass travel has made influenza's task much easier.

"If this is a pandemic, we should begin to see these newly seeded epidemics growing in different countries in one or two weeks," says Prof McLean.

"Are we overdue for one? I think I would agree that we are. It's been an awfully long time.

"These are the two weeks where it really could go either way. It's a question of watch this space."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5232571/There-are-two-weeks-where-it-could-go-either-way.html



Related Articles
Swine flu: Fingers crossed for a forgettable epidemic
Swine flu: Five confirmed cases in Britain as child dies in US
Swine flu: Companies impose travel ban on staff
Swine flu: Pandemic 'would infect four in ten Britons'
Swine flu: Germany confirms first case

Swine flu: how will shares react?

Swine flu: how will shares react?
As fears grew over the economic impact of a flu pandemic, shares initially tumbled, with travel and airline companies bearing the brunt of the losses.

By Emma Simon
Last Updated: 4:13PM BST 30 Apr 2009

Fears that the swine flu outbreak could cause further stock market shocks around the globe have proved largely unfounded, although certain shares and funds have fallen in value on the back of this latest health concern.

As fears grew over the economic impact of a flu pandemic, shares initially tumbled on Monday, with travel and airline companies bearing the brunt of the losses.

But later in the week stock markets stabilised, although there was little positive news for those companies operating in the travel and tourism sectors. By Wednesday, British Airways, which was the hardest hit in a general sell-off of airline stocks in London, fell 7.7pc.

Others shares badly affected included Carnival, the Caribbean cruise operator, which saw its share price fall by almost 7pc at one point and Thomas Cook and InterContinental, both of whom saw share prices dive by more than 4pc midweek.

But while investors were nervous about the effect that swine flu could have on these travel firms, many were buying up pharmaceutical companies on the expectation that Government's would be forced to stockpile expensive viral treatments and flu vaccinations.

Two of the biggest beneficiaries were GlaxoSmithKline, which makes flu vaccine Relenz, and Roche which manufactures the drug Tamiflu – which has been proven to be an effective treatment against both avian and the new swine flu.

Market experts said that despite the economic turmoil, stock market were not overreacting to this latest scare. (Why?)

Anthony Grech, market strategist at IG Index, said: "After weathering the likes of SARS and bird flu in recent years, there seems to be an element of wait-and-see among traders."

During the Asian bird flu outbreaks in 2005 and 2006, airline, hotel groups, insurers and oil companies stocks fell heavily, while shares in drug, health care and cleaning product businesses soared.

"I think there will be a little bit of a lift for pharmaceuticals, but this may not follow through unless the situation gets out of hand," said Paul Kavanagh of stockbroker Killik & Co. "Governments will be looking at vaccines, but it's come at a bad time for the world economy and could be very expensive."

For investors that hold Isas, unit trusts and other investment funds, this latest market turbulence may be fraying already taut nerves. But financial advisers have pointed out that the volatility this week should be put into perspective.

Adrian Lowcock, the senior investment adviser at Bestinvest said: "Stock market has a nervous day on Tuesday following the spread of swine flue, but have bounced back as concerns ease. Unless this develops into something much more prevalent we don't expect to see any further impact. The volatile is insignificant when compared to recent events."

He points out that the road to recovery will be bumpy - but this latest jolt does not seem to have derailed the slight market improvements seen over the past month.

The focus on swine flu, may be focusing people's attention on pharmaceutical companies and biotech and healthcare funds. The former invest solely in companies involved in developing new drug treatments and therapies.

The latter have a broader remit, also investing in other health care related companies, such as the large pharmaceutical giants, and companies such as Smith & Nephew that manufacture medical equipment - be it surgical instruments or face masks.

Over the past 12 months, these funds have delivered reasonable returns for investors: Framlington's biotech fund is up 20pc, while Franklin Templeton's biotech fund is up 21pc.

The health care funds have produced more modest returns (Schroders Medical Discovery is up 3.5pc, while Framlington's Health care is up just 0.6pc) but given the wider market falls, anyone invested in one of these funds is no doubt delighted with positive returns.

However, Mark Dampier, of Hargreaves Lansdown says: "Up until a year ago the performance of these funds has been awful." He adds that investors should remember that these are high risk funds, where returns can be volatile. Many are largely invested in US-listed companies, so currency movements can affect returns.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/5246672/Swine-flu-how-will-shares-react.html



Related Articles
Swine flu: Will travel insurance cover you?
The fund that's up 68pc in a month
Swine flu: 'There are two weeks where it could go either way'
FTSE 100 edges higher as swine flu fears ease
GlaxoSmithKline leads pharmaceutical shares higher on swine flu outbreak
Swine flu hits British Airways and Iberia merger talks

Recognizing Value Situations - Growth at a Reasonable Price (GARP)

Recognizing Value Situations - Growth at a Reasonable Price (GARP)


GARP is the mainstream scenario of reasonable market valuation - or undervaluation - of growth potential. Solid and improving fundamentals and supporting intangibles are key. As part of the assessment the value investor must ask how realistic are the growth projections, particularly over time, and whether the company takes a balanced approach to the business and fundamentals. In short, is the business a good business, capable of sustained growth, and selling at a reasonable price? Key words not to lose sight of are good, sustained, and reasonable.


Or is the business a bet on an extreme but temporary success in short-term margins, market share, revenue, or profit? The G in GARP must be sustainable, not based on a short-term blip, fad, acquisition, or worse, a wild hope. The business model and its perception in the marketplace must be solid and on the rise.


Stocks with a PEG ratio of 2 or less with other solid fudamentals are good candidates, but "GARP" is not a matter of ratios alone.


Select companies with solid fundamentals and strong growth prospects based on various factors to analyse, but beware the growth maybe far from a sure thing.

Also read:
Recognizing Value Situations
Recognizing Value Situations - Growth at a Reasonable Price
Recognizing Value Situations - The Fire Sale
Recognizing Value Situations - The Asset Play
Recognizing Value Situations - Growth Kickers
Recognizing Value Situations - Turning the Ship Around
Recognizing Value Situations - Cyclical Plays
Recognizing Value Situations - Smoke and Mirrors

Recognizing Value Situations

Recognizing Value Situations

Value comes wrapped in many different packages. The common is the growth case through normal business results, where solid and improving business fundamentals and intangibles point to solid business growh down the road, and where the market has undervalued that growth. That's arguably the most clear-cut, least risky, and easiest-to-understand scenario.

But other situations do present themselves, and although they may take weeks of professional-level analysis to fully grasp, they can be quite interesting. And in a few cases, they may be as easily justified by your own observations, common sense, and gut feeling as by the numbers.

In general, you're encouraged to be a do-it-yourselfer. But in many of the special situations, do-it-yourself may not be practical. Some of these value drivers can be well hidden and subjective - like a company's breakup value. They often turn into value not through normal business results but by being unlocked through acquisitions and restructurings. For these situations it makes sense to rely a bit more on industry professionals and analysts, who have access to key, paid-for data and a lot of historical precident. They can also pick up the phone and call the company itself or others who may have interest in the assets.

Smart value investors know when to - and when not to- rely on the work of others.


Also read:
Recognizing Value Situations
Recognizing Value Situations - Growth at a Reasonable Price
Recognizing Value Situations - The Fire Sale
Recognizing Value Situations - The Asset Play
Recognizing Value Situations - Growth Kickers
Recognizing Value Situations - Turning the Ship Around
Recognizing Value Situations - Cyclical Plays
Recognizing Value Situations - Smoke and Mirrors

The Thought Process Is What Counts

The Thought Process Is What Counts

In value investing, it really is the thought that counts. The thought process is important. This is how you think about your investments and investment decisions. Analysis doesn't decide for you; it only serves to support the thinking behind the choices you make.

There are many analytical blocks and approaches to appraising company value and many ways to decide whether the price paid for that value is right. These are evident in the postings in this blog. However, it is repeatedly obvious that no single method works all the time, and if one did, everyone would make the same findings and buy the same companies and values would no longer be values. Every article, every book, every value investor has a unique application of the vlaue investing thought process.

The thought process is the intellectual process - the philosophy - that the value investor internalizes. The tools are there to help, and different tools will help more at different times. If you strive to understand the business value underlying the price before you buy, investing history will be on your side. As you get good at understanding value and price, your investment decisions and performance will only improve.

In the real, practical world of value investing, value comes in many forms. There is so much detail on any given company (much of which you can't know) that it often isn't realistic to become a walking encyclopedia on a company or its fundamentals. And formulas and ratios, although they work and can help, hardly can deliver absolute answers. Usually, taking a few shortcuts makes sense, reserving the deepest analysis to the most critical, difficult and largest investing decisions.

As a practical matter, the so-called Pareto principle, also called the 80-20 rule, applies to investing as it does in much of business: 80 percent of the picture comes from 20 percent of the questions you may ask or facts you may collect about a business. If you focus on most critical aspects of a given business, you'll get most of the picture, without digging up 100 percent of everything about it. If this weren't the case, you'd spend six months analyzing each investment.

You can't spend days on each company and you can't analyze all companies in the investing universe. A simplified, practical approach will help the new value investor get started, and will also help experienced value investors improve their game. You'll undoubtedly find yourself adding plays to your value investing playbook as you gain experience. And you'll also get better at finding that 20 percent that's really important.


Famed fund manager Peter Lynch, in his famous book, One Up on Wall Street, shared this wisdom: "Once you're able to tell the story of a stock to your family, your friends or the dog, and so that even a child could understand it, then you have a proper grasp of the situation."

Shopping for Value: A Practical Approach

Shopping for Value: A Practical Approach

"Value investing boils down to finding a good business, analyzing it to find the simple truths about it, and deciding whether the truths are on track and the price is right."

The thought process is what counts.

1. Recognizing value situations:

• Growth at a reasonable price (GARP)
• The fire sale
• The asset play
• Growth kickers
• Turning the ship around
• Cyclical plays

2. Making a value judgement in practice

3. It ain't over until it's over

• Keeping track
• Making the "sell decision"

8 Questions That Define Your Investing Style

8 Questions That Define Your Investing Style
By Dayana Yochim April 29, 2009 Comments (3)


We're celebrating Financial Literacy Month in numeric style. Follow our crash course on maximizing your portfolio and finances with The 10 Essential Money Lessons.

The path to financial literacy follows a logical sequence from start to success. So far in this series you've:

1. put your financial house in order,
2. set aside the cash that you need for the near term,
3. brushed up on some classic investing tomes,
4. learned some key investing metrics,
5. and kicked the tires on a couple of investment ideas.

Ready to invest? Set! And ... wait!

One more thing -- well, eight more things, actually.

Your moment of investing Zen
How well do you know yourself? Do you know your tolerance for risk and loss? Have you pinpointed your investing time horizon? To what degree are you interested in digging into stock research? In other words, what color is your investing parachute?

As Warren Buffett says, "Success in investing doesn't correlate with I.Q. ... what you need is the temperament to control the urges that get other people into trouble in investing." You've gotten this far, so it would be a shame to get sidetracked by emotional triggers that lead to bad investment decisions.

How are you wired?
Before you deploy your money in the market, take this quiz to identify your natural inclinations (both good and bad) so you can find the methods, philosophies, and strategies that best match the way your brain is wired.

1. You're at the store and on the shelf is an array of options for the product you need. Which are you most likely to toss into your shopping cart?

A. The brand you've purchased in the past, even though it lacks the bells and whistles of some of the others.
B. A pricier brand you've always wanted to try because it's on sale for 20% off today.
C. A brand-new product that promises revolutionary results.
D. A reasonably priced version that has not been FDA approved, but has gotten favorable reviews from its customers.

2. You log onto your brokerage account. Which scenario are you happiest to see?

A. The market's up a whopping 10%, but your stock gained just 1% during the run-up.
B. One of the companies you own missed hitting its earnings target and is down 30% as a result, giving you the opportunity to buy more shares at fire-sale prices.
C. Over the past six months a stock in your portfolio has traded anywhere from $10 to $80. It's at the low end of that range right now, but you think it has the potential to double or even quadruple over time.
D. One of your stocks is up 15%, but there's no obvious reason why, so you'll have to do more research to find out.

3. Which activity are you most likely to choose at the theme park?

A. A spin on the merry-go-round with your kids.
B. The newly revamped 3-D laser Zombie show.
C. The Nitro at Six Flags.
D. Forget the rides and head to the "Tastes of the World" food court.

4. How much information do you need to comfortably make buy, sell, or hold decisions?

A. You like to get regular company updates that are widely followed and analyzed by Wall Street, the media, and individual investors.
B. You prefer to check in on the business -- or its customers -- firsthand either in person or via online forums.
C. You regularly consult SEC filings, trade journals, and industry forums and do all your own analysis.
D. You're content with fairly regular coverage of the sector in which the company operates, even if news about your particular company can be spotty.

5. One of your companies is in the headlines today. Which event would not cause you to lose sleep tonight?

A. The company says it may have to temporarily suspend paying its dividend.
B. The launch of the company's next product has been delayed for at least several months.
C. The Board of Directors is making noises about ousting the CEO in order to install an industry veteran.
D. The currency of the country in which your company operates has taken a haircut.

6. If this were an "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" ad, which company would you be?

A. Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B)
B. Buffalo Wild Wings (Nasdaq: BWLD)
C. Google (Nasdaq: GOOG)
D. America Movil (NYSE: AMX)

7. The business trajectory that most excites you is ...

A. A stable, mature company with some room to grow via cost-cutting efforts, strategic acquisitions, and/or partnerships.
B. A newcomer that has not yet made a name for itself (and may not for many years) and has no heady expectations priced into the stock.
C. An innovative -- and often volatile -- company that challenges the status quo and has the potential to dominate (or create) a business niche.
D. A company that is ideally positioned to capitalize on fast-growing economies overseas.

8. What kind of volatility are you willing to endure on the road to wealth?

A. I'm not looking for massive growth -- I'm willing to settle for a couple of years of so-so returns just so I don't lose a lot of money.
B. I'm willing to endure a few white-knuckle periods until my investment hits the bull's-eye.
C. I'll hold on for dear life -- even while everyone else is bailing -- if I truly believe that the long-term payoff will be big.
D. I can stomach volatility that is beyond the company management's control (e.g. currency fluctuations, political messes) if it means being in the right place at the right time.


The Key: What's your investing temperament?

Let's see how you're wired.

Mostly As: You've worked hard for your money and even if it means passing up headier potential returns, you're most comfortable limiting your exposure to risk. Patience is your investing virtue. Like the great Warren Buffett, you have the temperament to wait for a quality company to go on sale.

Your stocks probably won't wow anyone at a cocktail party -- after all, big-name, been-around-forever companies don't typically make for riveting chitchat. But when the confetti settles, it's your time to shine. If your portfolio were a party guest, it'd be the designated driver: sober but reliable. It gets you where you need to go with no hairpin turns or squealing wheels.

Look for quality companies that have seen their share prices temporarily discounted. You'd also do well to seek steady growth with investments that literally pay investors back -- dividend stocks. (These are the investing strategies we practice in our Inside Value and Income Investor services.)

Mostly Bs: Sound business practices (e.g., strong balance sheets, good management) are as important to you as any investor. But you're willing to look for these things where few others dare to tread -- in small-cap territory.

While the rest of the world is fixating on the name-brand players, you're prowling for their smaller, nimbler, lesser-known competition. At The Motley Fool, we call such companies Hidden Gems.

Because of their size, these companies fly well under Wall Street's radar. The flip side is, of course, that they can often wildly fluctuate in a single trading day. But if "Bs" dominated your quiz results, then you have the stomach to tolerate the volatility, particularly in the pursuit of bigger returns.

You could build a market-beating portfolio solely comprised of Hidden Gems (or any other type of investment, in fact). But it's probably more reasonable to devote just a portion of your investible assets to the best-of-small breed of stocks -- anywhere from 10% to 40% of a portfolio depending on your comfort level.

Mostly Cs: Innovation gets your heart racing. When high-def, Bluetooth-enabled, surround-sound rocket boots hit stores, you'll probably be the first person on your block to own a pair.
In investment terms, you seek companies that challenge the status quo -- those that take on an established business, reinvent it, and eventually usurp the original. Even better are those that create an entirely new market for something everyone didn't even realize we couldn't live without.

At the Fool we call these companies Rule Breakers (apt, eh?). And in every way, these businesses defy the rules. Traditional valuation metrics like P/E ratios and discounted cash-flow calculations don't fly in the land of Rule Breakers. The numbers often look wacky because the Street simply doesn't have the tools to accurately assess these companies' merits, so as a shareholder you need to stay alert and be psychologically nimble enough to reevaluate your investment thesis. Flexibility is a must.

Also be aware of the rule of Daedalus: You can't keep flying higher and higher without eventually getting burned. This may be the most exciting kind of investing there is. But you must recognize the big-risk/big-reward connection. Your mistakes will cost you. But it's a lot less painful if you spread the risk around with other asset classes.

Mostly Ds: You are a worldly Fool. In the pursuit of investment opportunities, you're not afraid to tread into foreign territory -- literally. You recognize that the rate of growth of our economy versus others has changed. The U.S. will still grow, but there are countries where the growth opportunities are astronomical.

"International" is not an investing strategy per se. In our Global Gains newsletter service we seek investment opportunities overseas no matter what label they carry -- small cap, value, Rule Breaker, etc.

If you pine for foreign flavor in your portfolio get comfy with a little less clarity from the companies in this universe. Your comfort level with different accounting methods, shareholder laws, currency risks, and even "political risk" will determine how much of your portfolio to devote to international fare.

A combination of As, Bs, Cs, and Ds: No, you're not fickle. You simply seek a variety of opportunities to make your money grow. In your heart you know that investing in the stock market is the one true way to build inflation-beating wealth over the long term. But sometimes your doubts overcome your determination to stay the course. You can be gun-shy, perhaps because of a few investing missteps in the past (burned by a hot tip, perhaps?). Or maybe the stock market's recent contortions have left you questioning how much risk you really can stomach.

Your answers reveal a temperament that recognizes the true price of opportunity (taking on some amount of risk) and the real cost of waiting out the storm (missing the market's brief yet inevitable uptick). You've got a mind-set that's well-suited to allocating portions of your portfolio to the best investments from a variety of stock-picking approaches.

Establishing clear parameters -- an asset allocation model -- is the way to go. As to how much to put into which pot, the correct answer is the one that best lets you sleep at night and stick it out through thick and thin. Don't fight your natural tendencies ... instead play to your strengths and seek investments that sit well with you.

Finally, consider that the stock market's recent gyrations may be influencing your answers. That's understandable; even the best investors have been rattled, and may even be questioning their own core strategies. However, in volatility, there is opportunity. Not just in finding bargain stocks, but in taking the pulse of your own investing temperament in a real-world/real-money scenario.

Now that you've gotten a handle on your finances and have tuned into your inner investor, you're ready for our bonus tip. Tomorrow, we're going to give you the rundown about Foolishly investing in the stock market. Check back then!


In the mood for more financial know-how? Check out the rest of our 10 Essential Money Lessons.

Before joining The Motley Fool, Dayana Yochim's investing temperament could be confused for that of an 87-year-old widow. Today she is a mix of As, Bs, Cs, and Ds -- a true investing moderate. The Fool's disclosure policy is steady as she goes. Berkshire Hathaway is a Stock Advisor and Inside Value recommendation. Google is a Rule Breakers selection and America Movil is a Global Gains pick. Buffalo Wild Wings is a Motley Fool Hidden Gems recommendation. The Fool owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and Buffalo Wild Wings.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2009/04/29/8-questions-that-define-your-investing-style.aspx

Markets face 20pc fall if swine flu spreads

Markets face 20pc fall if swine flu spreads

World stock markets could fall by 15pc-20pc if the World Health Organisation (WHO) upgrades the swine flu outbreak to a "phase 5" crisis, a leading fund manager has warned.

By Alistair Osborne
Last Updated: 9:14PM BST 29 Apr 2009

Mark Bon, at Canada Life, based his calculation on the market reaction in Asia to 2003's SARS outbreak, which killed 813 people.

The WHO yesterday said it was "moving closer" to raising its six-level pandemic alert to "phase 5", which is characterised by human-to-human spread of the virus into at least two countries in one WHO region.

Mr Bon said that, as the crisis moves closer to a pandemic, "it alters the economic environment and people behave differently. They stop shopping in crowded areas and they travel less."

So far the markets have shrugged off the swine flu threat, with the FTSE-100 last night closing up 93.19, or 2.27pc, at 4189.59. However, Mr Bon said: "If the market is wrong-footed, the reaction could be quite severe."

Narim Behravesh, chief economist at IHS Global Insight, warned that a pandemic could cut GDP in developed economies by 2pc-3pc, exacerbating the world downturn. "For poorer countries, the impact would be devastating," he said.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/5246131/Markets-face-20pc-fall-if-swine-flu-spreads.html

Related Articles
Swine flu: WHO raises pandemic alert level
Swine flu: 'inevitable flu pandemic' would be fourth in a century
Swine flu: What do the World Health Organisation's pandemic alert levels mean?
Swine flu: British tourists repatriated from Mexico as virus spreads
Swine flu: Border controls 'don't work' warns WHO

Europe's age crisis begins to bite

Europe's age crisis begins to bite

The EU's working age population will peak next year before tipping into decline for half a century

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 9:25PM BST 29 Apr 2009

This will cause a relentless rise in pension and health costs that risk asphyxiating the region's economy.

A new report by the European Commission said this financial crisis could turn into a "permanent shock to growth" from which Europe never fully recovers unless it moves fast to bring its public debts under control.

The main danger is a "Lost Decade" akin to Japan's deflation slump, with economies contracting by 0.9pc into the middle of the next decade, but there is also a risk of a deeper downward spiral.

Every country in the EU has a fertility rate below 2.1 births per woman, the minimum to keep the population stable. The average is 1.51, chiefly caused by women waiting late into their 20s or 30s before having children. This stretches out the generations.

While the fertility rate is expected to rise over time, demographic shifts tend to be glacial. An ageing crunch is already baked into the pie, hitting hardest from 2015 to 2035.

Britain fares relatively well, helped by immigrants and – some say – by its unwed teenage mothers, who lift the fertility rate at 1.8. The British working age cohort will be the biggest of any EU country by mid-century at 45m, followed closely by France.

If demographics is destiny, Britain and France may reclaim their mid-19th century status as the two dominant powers of Europe, but by then the Old World will be a much reduced force.

Germany's working population will shrink by 29pc to just 39m. Poland, Bulgaria, Romania and the Baltic states will all see drops of over 40pc.

No country will be spared the vaulting costs of ageing, an extra tax of 5pc on GDP, leaving aside the less visible tax on cultural dynamism that comes with lost youth.

The EU "dependency ratio" will soar: there will be two workers to support each person over 65, compared to four today. It will be worse if Europe fails to attract enough immigrants, all too likely given the catch-up under way in the developing world.

Faced with this future, Britain and Europe need to slash debt and salt away investment wealth in the rising East. Instead, public debt is exploding. Brussels has laid it bare: we will need hair-shirt discipline once we emerge from this recession. It may be our last chance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/5245757/Europes-age-crisis-begins-to-bite.html

Related Articles
Japan leads world in demographic decline
World population 'should begin falling in 2070'
Britain will be Europe's biggest country by 2060 with 77m people
Fall in EU population forecast by 2050
Folkestone: wave of optimism at the seaside

Swine flu deflation

Swine flu deflation
Posted By: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard at Apr 28, 2009 at 19:20:44 [General]

The markets have been remarkably relaxed about the rise in the World health Organization pandemic alert Phase 4 (sustained human to human transmission) - and tonight perhaps to Phase 5.

They seem not to care that confirmed cases of H1N1 avian-swine flu have spread to Israel, Spain, France, New Zealand, and Korea.

This surprises me. The WHO alert is the best objective indicator we have of rising risk, and the potential implications of Phase 4 or Phase 5 are .. well .. awful.

We can all argue about the likely damage from a "severe pandemic" along the lines of 1918 'Spanish Flu' or the Neapolitan pandemic of 1775.

The World Bank has floated a figure of $3 trillion, or 4.8pc of global GDP. The US Congressional Budget Office has come up with something similar. These are arbitrary telephone book numbers.

But even if losses are less, we are still talking about a further deflationary shock to a world economy already tipping into debt deflation (though it might not be a uniform deflation, if shortages push up local food and fuel prices). It would certainly finish off half the global banking system.

It is too frightful to think about. That perhaps is why investors are doing exactly that: refusing to think about.

Over the last couple of days I have been deluged by notes from City analysts and economists suggesting that H1N1 avian-swine flu poses no great threat to the global economy because the authorities showed during the 2003 SARS epidemic in Asia that outbreaks can be contained.

This is a misreading of the threat we face.

SARS is a coronavirus. It is extremely hard to catch. Just 8,000 people were infected worldwide during the entire epidemic (10pc died).

Today's H1N1 outbreak is an influenza virus, which is far more contagious.

Dr. Keiji Fukuda, the WHO's assistant director-general, said it is already too late to stop the spread of the disease. “At this time, containment is not a feasible option.

It is entirely possible that we may see a very mild pandemic. I think we have to be mindful and respectful of the fact that influenza moves in ways we cannot predict.

The worst pandemic of the 20th century occurred in 1918, and it also started out as a relatively mild pandemic that wasn’t very much noticed in most places. Then in time it became a very severe pandemic, one of the most severe infectious disease episodes ever recorded.

Perhaps because so few market players studied science, or have a current link to science, they seem not to realize that the world’s virologists and flu experts are in a state of nail-biting, ashen-faced, fear.

Rob Carnell, chief economist at ING, is one of the exceptions. “We believe fear of infection will lead to drastically altered behaviour. It may be that swine flu does not tip the human fear scale sufficiently, but if it did, with the economy already in tatters, the results could be catastrophic,” he said in a note today.

We may be lucky. The virus may indeed prove mild - like the Hong Kong flu in 1968 - or burn out altogether as it mutates.

The early cases in the US and Canada give hope. So does the apparent fall-off in the fatality rates in Mexico.

But as Dr Fukuda said, nobody can pre-judge the virulence of this pandemic. Least of all the markets.

Full coverage of the swine flu virus.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ambrose_evans-pritchard/blog/2009/04/28/swine_flu_deflation

Investors can learn a psychological lesson or two from swine flu

Investors can learn a psychological lesson or two from swine flu

We're all experts in epidemiology now and it is, therefore, with some trepidation that I add to the canon of knowledge on this subject.

By Tom Stevenson
Last Updated: 9:02PM BST 29 Apr 2009

Comments 0 Comment on this article

Like most people, I know nothing worth listening to about viruses or pandemics but the medicine is only half the story. Just as interesting, especially to investors, are the lessons swine flu can offer about human behaviour and psychology. Here are six:

1. What's in a name? A rose may smell as sweet by any other name but the tag we hang on an illness can have real economic significance. The World Health Organisation plumped for swine flu because the virus involved is more porcine than avian or human. Sorry pigs. And sorry the pig-breeding and rearing industry. A number of countries have already slapped a ban on Mexican pork exports, despite the fact that the flu cannot be passed on through meat. Previous flu pandemics have adopted the name of their country of origin but here too mistakes are made – the Spanish flu of 1918-1919 apparently started in Scotland. Fortunately memories are short and, even if this outbreak comes to be known as Mexican flu, the tourists will be back soon enough.


2. Heads you win, tails I lose. Which is worse, do you think, a high mortality rate or a high infection rate? As an individual, I'd prefer it if there were a good chance I caught the flu but a slim chance it would kill me. My employer might be less relaxed about high numbers of its staff staying in bed for a week. More broadly, business would suffer if a highly infectious strain kept people at home (and out of the shops) for fear of getting sick. But fear could be an even greater factor if, as in Hong Kong six years ago, it was relatively hard to get infected but relatively easy to die if you did.

3. History is bunk. Having already mentioned Spanish flu and SARS, I am hardly one to say that historical comparisons are of limited use. We can't resist them, though. Smack bang in the worst economic slump since the Great Depression, we're now facing the worst pandemic since the Great War. But the world was rather different in 1918 as millions of troops criss-crossed the globe on their way home from the front line. The Spanish flu may have killed more people than the First World War but that doesn't necessarily tell us much about today's circumstances. SARS, too, was apparently a completely different type of virus and it was restricted to Hong Kong, quite different from the rapid spread of today's outbreak.

4. The appliance of science. Investment banks have always picked up their fair share of physics PhD graduates – who do you think dreamt up all those complex derivatives? – but otherwise the City and science tend to keep their distance. Because investors do not understand science well, they either over-react to it or are complacent about it. If investors and regulators had had a better understanding of the way in which complex systems work in the real world (hurricanes, pandemics) they might have been less relaxed about the impact that a modest shock such as a decline in US house prices could have on the global economy.

5. Black swans and sick pigs. While we were all watching the oil price or the cost of chartering a freight ship, the end to the seven-week share price rally flew in unnoticed from a country few were keeping an eye on. Like the Australian black swan that ended the idea that all swans are white, the poorly Mexican porker was the "unknown unknown" that, perhaps temporarily, slammed the brakes on the nascent equity bull market. And, who knows, there may be worse to come. When HSBC announced in 2007 that it had problems at its Household subsidiary in the US, few imagined what it would lead to.

6. The final lesson from the last week is that markets react to unfolding events both very quickly and far too slowly. The usual suspects took an immediate pounding when the news broke – airlines, travel companies, hotels, retailers – so it is tempting to think that, having missed the first knee-jerk response, it is too late to react to a market-moving story. But selling banks was the right thing to do for months after it was apparent that they were in trouble. The reason markets sometimes move slowly is that they don't benefit from hindsight. If a pandemic occurs, with a further reduction in GDP hitting severely weakened economies, the market's apparent complacency today will seem odd. If the outbreak peters out, it will look like investors were right to ignore the media storm. Sadly, we won't know until it's too late.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/tom-stevenson/5246246/Investors-can-learn-a-psychological-lesson-or-two-from-swine-flu.html

US in worst recession for 50 years

US in worst recession for 50 years

The US economy slowed by an annualised rate of 6.1pc in the first quarter, confirming the current downturn is the worst American recession in 50 years.

By James Quinn Wall Street Correspondent
Last Updated: 10:12PM BST 29 Apr 2009

Poor, tired, huddled masses: not since the presidency of Dwight D Eisenhower 50 years ago has America experienced such an economic downturn However, the GDP figures from the US Commerce Department gave hope that America is seeing "green shoots" emerge, thanks to a return in consumer spending in some parts of the economy.

The data came ahead of yesterday's meeting of the Federal Reserve's Open Markets Committee (FOMC) which was expected to maintain its base interest rate at a range of 0pc-0.25pc.

The world's largest economy has now shrunk by 3.3pc since its peak last year, making this the worst recession since the 1957-58 slump, when GDP fell by 3.8pc. In addition, it is the first time since the 1974-75 downturn that America has recorded third consecutive quarters of negative growth.

The headline figure of a 6.1pc slump, on top of a 6.3pc contraction in the fourth quarter of 2008, was worse than the 4.6pc slide for the three months to March economists had expected.

But, in spite of better-than-expected consumer spending, businesses drastically cut spending and inventories, and the government sector, which has been propping up the US economy in recent months, also spent less than forecast.

The GDP figures are seen as possibly the most important read on the state of any country's economy, and are an indicator to production across the economy.

Consumer spending makes up approximately 70pc of US GDP, and the fact that it rose by 2.2pc in the first quarter – after dropping 4.3pc in the fourth quarter – is a positive sign amongst the gloom.

But increased consumption could not mask falls in other parts of the economy, such as a 34pc annualised slide in equipment and software, or a 38pc slide in residential investment.

Exports collapsed by 30pc, the biggest fall since 1969, while investment by business fell a record 37.9pc.

Related Articles
Markets jump as US recession shows signs of easing
US economy contracts 6.1pc in first quarter
US Federal Reserve plans $1.15 trillion injection
US jobless rate jumps to 25-year high
Do the 'green shoots' in Britain's economy amount to much?
Australians rip up optimistic forecast and predict recession

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5245603/US-in-worst-recession-for-50-years.html

The bear case for gold

A Goldilocks economy, like Goldilocks' porridge, is neither too hot nor too cold

Goldilocks and the bear case for gold

The primary risk to the gold price is a return of the "Goldilocks" economy, according to analysts at a firm of asset managers.

By Richard Evans

Last Updated: 5:02PM BST 28 Apr 2009

A Goldilocks economy – one that is neither too hot nor too cold, sustaining moderate economic growth, low inflation and low interest rates – would "completely remove the safe-haven investment case for gold as a form of insurance against inflation or as an alternative currency", said the commodities and resources team at Investec Asset Management.

Real yields could once again be obtained in cash and bonds, and equities could begin discounting economic growth, the analysts added.

Related Articles
The fund that's up 68pc in a month
Gold remains subdued as its appeal as a safe-haven eases
Opportunities still abound in tougher financial times
Gold: 'Inflation will beat deflation and gold will hit $3,000'
Lending revival plan spooks gold price
A gold bubble may well be coming our way

"Under the Goldilocks scenario the US Federal Reserve's balance sheet will quickly adapt once economic activity begins to improve as the Fed reduces the money supply dramatically and curbs any major inflationary cycle," Investec said.

"Furthermore, under this scenario all other central banks will do the same. Inflation would be averted, and economic growth could continue."

The bank said the current high price of gold was driven by demand from investors putting their money into the classic safe-haven asset. But it added: "Should investment flows into gold cease or turn negative, we believe that this drying up of investor demand will have repercussions for the gold price.

"A return of risk appetite or improvements in other asset classes could result in an unwinding of investment buying and put considerable downward pressure on the gold price, particularly if global economic and financial conditions begin to show meaningful signs of improvement."

Although Investec has identified factors that could push the gold price down, the bank's overall stance on the precious metal remains bullish. It said: "We continue to believe that gold can perform well in either an inflationary or deflationary environment.

"This supports our positive outlook for the commodity and for gold equities. Quantitative easing programmes are also supportive for gold."

The London afternoon gold fix was $891.00 an ounce.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/5237330/Goldilocks-and-the-bear-case-for-gold.html

Behaviour and projections

Behaviour and projections
Published: 2009/04/29


This article intends to explore the behavioural side of those who make stock market projections

THE economic tsunami that has hit the world since late-2007 has left many wondering where it is heading, what to expect, etc. Experts as well as laymen make projections, mostly trying to predict when the stock market will hit bottom. Unfortunately, no one can really provide a definite answer. Setting aside the technical details of the various projections that have been and are being made as we speak, this piece intends to explore the behavioural side of those who make these projections.

Gambler Fallacy

According to Hersh Shefrin, in his book titled "Beyond Greed and Fear", research has shown that strategists and analysts are often caught in a behavioural phenomenon called "gambler fallacy"- the misconception that the law of averages can be applied to even a small sample size.

This is illustrated by a simple coin-tossing game. If five consecutive tosses of a coin come up heads, most people tend to think that the sixth toss should be tails, even though the probability of getting either heads or tails is 50/50. Going by this, some predictions tend to project inappropriate trend reversal as evident by a study done by De Bondt in 1991. Based on published predictions by Wall Street analysts, the study shows that the analysts are overly pessimistic after three-year bull markets and overly optimistic after three-year bear markets.

What does this behaviour mean to you?

It is especially important if you use the projections to make investment decisions. When dealing with a bear market that has yet to touch the bottom, using an overly optimistic projection would lead to the wrong decision. You stand to lose by buying certain stocks believing that their prices are low enough and the downtrend is going to reverse anytime soon, only to find that the prices continue to drop. By the time the market actually hits bottom, you may have already used up your resources.

Naive Extrapolation

Studies have shown that individual investors have the behaviour that is quite the opposite of what has been described above. The retailers in the market, for instance, have the tendency of doing simple extrapolation - projecting the future based on the recent past. As a result, they are overly optimistic during bull markets and overly pessimistic during bear markets.

Seasoned investors would always tell you to prepare to leave the market when you hear that people around you (especially those who've hardly ever talked about investing) start to be active in the stock market. This may indicate that the bull run is about to end. Unfortunately, new and inexperienced investors would naively think that the bull run would continue.

The time to look around hard is when no one is talking about buying stocks. Your golden opportunity in getting good stocks at a bargain surfaces when others steer clear of buying them. As Warren Buffett said, "Most people get interested in stocks when everyone else is. The time to get interested is when no one else is. You can't buy what is popular and do well".

Overconfidence

Both the analysts and individual investors have something in common. They are overconfident when it comes to predicting the future. So, they often end up getting surprises. Interestingly, it has also been found that experience plays an important part here. Those who are inexperienced turn out to be the ones that have greater confidence in their predictions and therefore higher expectations in stock market returns. Seasoned investors and analysts, on the other hand, tread with more caution and are more conservative in their investment approach.

Less Predicting, More Reading!

The combined effect of the behavioural phenomena from the investors drives market sentiment. As an intelligent investor, learn to separate yourself from the herd effect and try not to fall into the biased behaviour described above. You need to be aware of the market direction, but don't waste too much time predicting when the market will bottom out. Instead, spend your valuable time reading more and doing your research on the companies of your interest. Understand the fundamentals well and learn from errors that others have made in the market.

Securities Industry Development Corporation, the leading capital markets education, training and information resource provider in Asean, is the training and development arm of the Securities Commission Malaysia. It was es tablished in 1994 and incorporated in 2007.

Ten Habits of Highly Successful Value Investors

Ten Habits of Highly Successful Value Investors


Warren Buffett once said, "All there is to investing is picking good stocks at good times and staying with them as long as they remain good companies."


Keeping this in mind, here are ten things to remember as you evolve your value investing style.

1. Do the due diligence
2. Think independently and trust yourself
3. Ignore the market
4. Always think long term
5. Remember that your're buying a business
6. Always buy "on sale"
7. Keep emotion out of it
8. Invest to meet goals, not to earn bragging rights
9. Swing only at good pitches
10. Keep your antennae up

Ten Signs of Value

Ten Signs of Value

Looking at five tangible signs of value

Steady or increasing return on equity (ROE)
Strong and growing profitability
Improving productivity
Producer, not consumer, of capital
The right valuation ratios

Understanding five intangible signs of value

A franchise
Price control
Market leadership
Candid management
Customer care

Ten Signs of Unvalue

Ten Signs of Unvalue

Looking at five tangible signs of unvalue

Deteriorating margins
Receivables or inventory growth outpacing sales
Poor earnings quality
Inconsistent results
Good business, but stocks is too expensive

Considering five intangible signs of unvalue

Acquisition addiction
On the discount rack
Losing market share
Can't control cost structure
Management in hiding

Take charge and evolve your own investing style

Like most investors, Buffett evolved his investing style, trying different things along the way.

1. Often, Buffett would simply buy shares, hold them, and wait for growth prospects to materialize.

2. Sometimes, his objective was a little more short term in nature, buying to capture arbitrage - small differences between price and value that often emerge in merger, acquisition and liquidation situations. (Capturing arbitrage is value investing, too; it's very shrot term in nature and one had better be good. One is going against other professionals who have access to a lot of information and are betting for something different to happen.)

3. Sometimes Buffett would buy a large stake in an undervalued company, large enough to be noticed and reported to the SEC, usually 5 percent or more. He then would get himself installed on the company's board of direcctors. Many of these companies were having financial problems or problems translating company value into shareholder value. Many welcomed his presence. Buffett would help right these problems and, if necessary, assist in selling or finding a merger partner for the company.

Of course, most ordinary investors can't do this, but the thought process is important.

How I Lost $100,000 (Without Even Trying!)

How I Lost $100,000 (Without Even Trying!)
By Rich Smith April 25, 2009 Comments (4)

Once upon a time, I bought a house.

At the time, I thought I had overpaid ... but "the time" was 2001 -- much nearer the start of the housing boom (that's recently turned bust) than its end. Fast forward a few years, and I sat down to my trusty computer, pulled up Zillow.com for a "Zestimate," and was informed that my little brick box was worth more than $500,000. Amazing news? Sure. Gratifying? You bet. Zillow was telling me that my house had more than doubled in value in just five short years.
Sadly, Zillow was on crack.

Welcome to the other side of the looking glass

About a year after receiving the good news from Zillow, I sold the house for far less than the site had told me it was worth. A 25% drop -- $100,000 -- from the top, in fact. Or, if you're a glass-half-full kind of a Fool, a 60% profit beyond what I paid for it.

The real truth, though, is that the house was worth neither what I paid for it, nor what I could have sold it for in 2006 -- nor even what I ultimately pocketed from the whole transaction. The real worth of the house was something unknowable, something that could only be guessed at: its intrinsic value.

"Price is what you pay. Value is what you get."

Leave it to Warren Buffett to sum up the dilemma in a single pithy dichotomy. The world's greatest investor reminds us that the value of an asset -- whether a car, a house, or a stock -- does not necessarily have any relation to the price we pay to own it. Far be it from me to criticize the Oracle's wisdom, but Buffett's observation still leaves us with one crucial question: How exactly do we know the value of the asset?

Benjamin Graham's classic non-answer stated that an asset is worth at least its book value, so you're safe if you pay less than that. There's also a logically impeccable but not very helpful adage that "an asset is worth whatever someone will pay for it." And Professor Aswath Damodaran offers this math-intensive solution: "The value of equity is obtained by discounting expected [residual] cash flows."

A more honest answer, though, is that we simply never know how much anything is worth. Not exactly, at least.

Hunting stocks with an axe

Yet in real life, we don't allow the lack of an exact answer to stop us from buying. Humans need shelter, so we buy a house when the price seems fair. We need cars, so we work from sticker prices and the Kelly Blue Book to pick an acceptable price for those, too.

The same goes for stocks. We shouldn't "measure with a micrometer, mark it off with chalk, then cut it with an axe." We make our best guess at a fair price. We try to buy for significantly less than our estimation. If we guess right more often than wrong, we make money. But where do we start?

Start with common sense

Look in places where you're more likely than not to find bargains:

Low prices: Stocks hitting the new 52-week-lows list may be "down for a reason." Still, a stock selling cheaper today than it's sold any time for the past year is more likely a good bargain than a stock selling for more than it's ever fetched before. Last month, I noted five stocks that had fallen to their 52-week lows. While the S&P trades 12% higher today, all five of those stocks have risen anywhere from 22% (Marvel Entertainment (NYSE: MVL)) to 184% (Republic Airways).

Read the paper: Newspaper headlines offer another superb place to seek bargains. Remember how oil was selling for $150 a barrel last July? Remember how a few months later, it sold for less than $40? How much do you want to bet that the intrinsic values of oil majors such as ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) or Chevron (NYSE: CVX) tracked those movements exactly? (Hint: They didn't.) Somewhere between $40 and $150, there was value to be had in the oil majors.

Cheap valuations: Another great way to scan for bargains is to run a stock screener every once in a while. I like to look for stocks that trade for low price-to-free cash flow multiples, exhibit strong growth, and have low debt. In recent weeks, this method has yielded me such unexpected bargains as NetEase.com (Nasdaq: NTES), priceline.com (Nasdaq: PCLN), and eBay (Nasdaq: EBAY).

Foolish takeaway

The key point I want you to take away from all this is simple: Trust your instincts.

When Zillow tells you your house has doubled in value, treat that "Zestimate" with some skepticism. When Suntech Power (NYSE: STP) doubles in price on announcements of industry subsidies from China, be wary. On the other hand, when stocks that have little to do with the financial crisis drop 50% in the space of a year, when stock prices don't match the news they're supposed to reflect, or when you stumble across a stock with a price that looks cheap, you might just have found a bargain.


Fool contributor Rich Smith owns shares of Marvel Entertainment and priceline.com. eBay, Marvel, and priceline.com are Stock Advisor recommendations. eBay is also an Inside Value pick. Netease.com and Suntech Power are Rule Breakers selections. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

http://www.fool.com/investing/value/2009/04/25/how-i-lost-100000-without-even-trying.aspx