Investing Contest Article

Have a question about your personal investments? No matter how simple or complex, you can ask it here.

Investing Contest Article

Postby livesoft » Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:30 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/busin ... e-low.html

James Stewart writes in the NYTimes about an investing contest for when interest rates are low. Readers of this forum will enjoy the results.

I will be able to tell who didn't read the article by their comments in this thread. :twisted:
It's all about short-term opportunistic rebalancing due to a short-term change in one's asset allocation, uh, I mean opportunistic rebalancing, uh I mean rebalancing, uh I mean market timing.
livesoft
 
Posts: 34293
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby Rick Ferri » Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:52 pm

I had to chuckle a few times.

The asset management firm BlackRock was a co-sponsor of the contest. The article quotes Michael Fredericks, lead portfolio manager for the BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund. “The traditional 60/40 approach to building a portfolio is on the way out, it is being replaced, he said, by tactical asset allocation, a strategy in which investors change their allocation based on the current pricing of asset classes." The BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund "A" shares have a 5.25% front-end commission and 1.30% annual fee (0.98% after waiver), "C" shares have a 2.03% fee (1.73% after waiver), and Institutional shares have a 1.03% fee (0.73 after waiver).

It seems the only thing tactical going on here is that BlackRock is using Duke as a marketing ploy to tactically separate investors from their money!

Rick Ferri
Mutual fund investing is simple. There is risk, there is return, and there are costs. All else is marketing.
User avatar
Rick Ferri
 
Posts: 7819
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:40 pm
Location: Home on the range in Medina, Texas

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby NYBoglehead » Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:56 pm

^But Rick, think of all the "risk management" you get for those fees!!
NYBoglehead
 
Posts: 1588
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 10:38 am

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby retiredjg » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:01 pm

I have a secret wish that everyone would start out at 60/40 and not be allowed to move until 2 years after their first real crash.... :P
retiredjg
 
Posts: 18193
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:56 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby FinancialDave » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:05 pm

There was one true aspect of the report -- THE JURY IS OUT ON THE RESULTS.

The one thing that I did not hear was anything that could beat the 100% stock portfolio long term.

fd
I love simulated data. It turns the impossible into the possible!
FinancialDave
 
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 10:36 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby Fallible » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:08 pm

Rick Ferri wrote:I had to chuckle a few times.

The asset management firm BlackRock was a co-sponsor of the contest. The article quotes Michael Fredericks, lead portfolio manager for the BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund. “The traditional 60/40 approach to building a portfolio is on the way out, it is being replaced, he said, by tactical asset allocation, a strategy in which investors change their allocation based on the current pricing of asset classes." The BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund "A" shares have a 5.25% front-end commission and 1.30% annual fee (0.98% after waiver), "C" shares have a 2.03% fee (1.73% after waiver), and Institutional shares have a 1.03% fee (0.73 after waiver)....

Last paragraph of the article: "After all the models and projections, they’ve ended up pretty close to the old 60/40 approach."
"Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing." -William James
Fallible
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby market timer » Sat Feb 02, 2013 3:23 pm

From the article: Mr. Kim conceded that his team’s projected return for TIPS (5.66 percent) and bonds (5.91 percent) “may be optimistic, given current market conditions.”

So, basically, they assumed away the problem of low yield. I wonder where their model assumes yields will be in 7 years.
"I fancy that over-confidence seldom does any great harm except when, as, and if, it beguiles its victims into debt." -Irving Fisher
User avatar
market timer
 
Posts: 5169
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:42 am

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby letsgobobby » Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:18 pm

market timer wrote:From the article: Mr. Kim conceded that his team’s projected return for TIPS (5.66 percent) and bonds (5.91 percent) “may be optimistic, given current market conditions.”

So, basically, they assumed away the problem of low yield. I wonder where their model assumes yields will be in 7 years.

I agree; since that was the premise of the entire contest, the whole exercise seems absurd.
letsgobobby
 
Posts: 7161
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:10 am

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby baw703916 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:41 pm

market timer wrote:So, basically, they assumed away the problem of low yield.


They have a bright future in the financial industry! :D
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
baw703916
 
Posts: 5706
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:10 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby damjam » Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:43 pm

The team’s contest entry called for allocating 43 percent to United States stocks — 30.3 percent to a Russell 2000 index fund and 12.7 percent to a Russell 2000 fund that invests in midsize companies. They made no allocation to international stocks. Like more traditional models, they maintained a large allocation to fixed income, but weighted it heavily toward Treasury inflation-protected securities, or TIPS, whose yields rise with inflation. They allocated 32.1 percent to TIPS and 24.9 percent to an aggregate bond fund.


I think 43/57 is not pretty much the same as 60/40. Unless 17% variance on either asset class is pretty much the same.
User avatar
damjam
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 8:46 am

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby baw703916 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:49 pm

But they were pessimistic about Europe and emerging markets, given the euro zone crisis and what they saw as slowing growth in countries like China and Brazil.

The team’s contest entry called for allocating 43 percent to United States stocks — 30.3 percent to a Russell 2000 index fund and 12.7 percent to a Russell 2000 fund that invests in midsize companies. They made no allocation to international stocks.


Um, are they aware that Europe and EM both outperformed the U.S. last year?

Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
baw703916
 
Posts: 5706
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:10 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby ladders11 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 6:43 pm

I read this article and I'm not sure that I understand the contest. They didn't use any actual market results. Why did the winners win?

"The result was a 9.7 percent projected annual return, with less volatility than the model funds they examined."


How did they project a 9.7 percent annual return from a portfolio comprised of 32.1% TIPS, 24.9% AGG, 30.3% Russell 2000 and 12.7% Russell midcaps? Who thinks this is likely?

Oh, and the prize is "an interview and a shot at an internship". What gives, BlackRock? Can't commit? I love a contest that awards the winner "a shot" at a prize, which is in fact free or underpaid labor in an office. Grrrrrrrreat. America 2013.
User avatar
ladders11
 
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:20 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby paper200 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 7:17 pm

More than the student or Blackrock - what was the Class Professor thinking? Backing testing can predict future volatility and short term returns. The prof should re-educate himself in this website.
paper200
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:40 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby mm9811 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 7:37 pm

Rick Ferri wrote:I had to chuckle a few times.

The asset management firm BlackRock was a co-sponsor of the contest. The article quotes Michael Fredericks, lead portfolio manager for the BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund. “The traditional 60/40 approach to building a portfolio is on the way out, it is being replaced, he said, by tactical asset allocation, a strategy in which investors change their allocation based on the current pricing of asset classes." The BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund "A" shares have a 5.25% front-end commission and 1.30% annual fee (0.98% after waiver), "C" shares have a 2.03% fee (1.73% after waiver), and Institutional shares have a 1.03% fee (0.73 after waiver).

It seems the only thing tactical going on here is that BlackRock is using Duke as a marketing ploy to tactically separate investors from their money!

Rick Ferri


+1

I love that phrase "tactical asset allocation" and "The traditional 60/40 approach to building a portfolio is on the way out"....along with "the new normal" and "this time things are different"
:D :D
mm9811
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:29 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby jdilla1107 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 10:12 pm

"43% to US stocks"

A number that precise sure sounds like overfitting to past results.
jdilla1107
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:31 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby baw703916 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 10:24 pm

Since Boglehead Ed Tower is an econ professor at Duke, I wonder if he has any information on the backstory behind this contest?
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
baw703916
 
Posts: 5706
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:10 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby SSSS » Sat Feb 02, 2013 10:34 pm

Rick Ferri wrote:The BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Fund "A" shares have a 5.25% front-end commission and 1.30% annual fee (0.98% after waiver), "C" shares have a 2.03% fee (1.73% after waiver), and Institutional shares have a 1.03% fee (0.73 after waiver).


BlackRock must have bipolar disorder or something. In my 401k I've got a BlackRock total stock index collective trust at 0.08%, a total bond market at 0.07%, and index-based target retirement funds at 0.11%. Seems like they have a weirdly versatile product lineup.
User avatar
SSSS
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:50 pm

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby roymeo » Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:47 pm

Wait, I'm supposed to have 60/40, but then I'm supposed to have my age in bonds?

Everything is THE rule of thumb.
The sewer system is a form of welfare state. | -- "Libra", Don DeLillo
User avatar
roymeo
 
Posts: 1023
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: SF, CA

Re: Investing Contest Article

Postby umfundi » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:18 am

This is a beauty pageant and infomercial, not a contest.

Nothing was measured, the "winners" were chosen by Blackrock.

Companies do this all the time, sponsor bogus (and sometimes real) contests to help them find future employees. I was just surprised there was not a redemption section for essays on save the children or world hunger.

( :oops: That was Miss America.)

Keith
Déjà Vu is not a prediction
umfundi
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:26 pm


Return to Investing - Help with Personal Investments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AKBTX14, AZMax, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], feh, g$$, goingup, gw, jbrinker, jfn111, John Z, Kaufmanrider, Mel Lindauer, Mrxyz, P_Nut, qzk795, retiredjg, rixer, ronbeck, Shredder, SkierMom, synpacket, Tanelorn, tecmage, TheRightKost87, thomasbayarea, tyrion, Yahoo [Bot] and 81 guests