Larry Swedroe

Wise Investing
Click Here

Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

By Larry Swedroe | Aug 14, 2009 |

My friend Bill Bernstein is one of the best personal finance writers around. If he has written it, it’s a must read, and his latest book The Investor’s Manifesto is no exception. There are very few times over the years that I’ve disagreed with Bill (which is good, since he’s rarely wrong). Thus, I was pleased to see that he no longer believes average investors can do it themselves.

Bill used to think most people could handle their investments with little or no assistance, since ”After all, the flesh was willing, the vehicles were available, and the math wasn’t that hard.” But there’s simply more to investing than that. I agreed with his post on his Web site Efficient Frontier that there are four requirements to be a successful investor:

  • “An interest in investing. It’s no different from cooking, gardening, or parenting. If you don’t enjoy it, you’ll do a lousy job. Most people enjoy finance about as much as Carmela Soprano enjoys her husband’s concept of marital fidelity.”
  • “The horsepower to do the math … The Discounted Dividend Model, or at least the Gordon Equation? Geometric versus arithmetic return? Standard deviation? Correlation,for God’s sake? Fuggedaboudit!”
  • “The knowledge base — Fama, French, Malkiel, Thaler, Bogle, Shiller — seven decades of evidence-based finance back to Cowles. Plus, the ‘database’ itself — a working knowledge of financial history, from the South Sea Bubble to Yahoo!.”
  • “The emotional discipline to execute faithfully, come hell, high water, or Bob Prechter. Mr. Bogle makes it sound almost easy: ‘Stay the course.’ Alas, it is not.”

Bill noted: “Even if you optimistically believe that there is a 30 percent success rate on each count, if each is independent only 1 percent of the population can make all four. However, that may be too pessimistic since these four abilities are not entirely independent — if you’re smart enough, it’s more likely you’ll be interested in finance and be driven to delve into the appropriate finance literature. But even if true, more than a little luck is involved. Head down to the personal-finance section of your local Barnes and Noble, and you’re more likely to run into Suze Orman than Jack Bogle. You’ll need a telescope to find the really important stuff.” Bill concluded the article: “I wish I had a nickel for every smart, savvy and motivated financial type I’ve met who simply could not execute.”

While there are individuals who can do it themselves, they’re few and far between. Unfortunately, as the academic research demonstrates, far too many are overconfident of their abilities. A good financial advisor adds value by:

  • Developing an investment plan that provides the greatest chance of achieving your financial goals without exceeding your ability, willingness or need to take risk.
  • Integrating your investment plan into an overall estate, tax and risk management plan.
  • Helping you act like a postage stamp — sticking to your plan until you reach your financial goal.
 
Reply to Story

MoneyWatch TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    mzhuang

    08/15/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    Well said, if we can help them from instinctively hurting themselves like I described in this article, we've done our job.

    http://investmentscientist.com/2009/07/30/how-investors-lost-money-evidence-from-mutual-fund-flows/

    Michael

  •  
    2

    larry swedroe

    08/15/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Yes Michael, there are many studies showing that the investor's worst enemy is staring them in the mirror. Investors destroy returns by action when inaction is far more likely to be the right strategy.

    For example, one study by Brad Barber and Terrance Odean found that on average the stocks investors sold go on to outperform the ones they buy. Another they did study showed the investors that traded the most underperformed the market by 10% year--OUCH.

    And another study found that despite the fact that the stocks they bought did no better than the stocks men bought, women outperformed men simply because they traded less, leaving less for the croupier.

    And just to show that intelligence is not necessarily correlated with investment skills, the Mensa investment club underperformed the market by 13.5% a year for 15 years. One member when asked to explain their strategy said it was to buy low and sell lower (:-))

  •  
    3

    mzhuang

    08/16/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    You are very well read. Terry Odean's research papers are my must read as well.

    I am curious to know how do you incorporate these insights into your practice? How do you deal with clients and prospects who don't share our belief? If a client's habitual practice is B and your best plan for him is A. How do you move him to A? How do you strike a balance between his financial need and his mental need?

  •  
    4

    larry swedroe

    08/16/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Michael

    First, we explain to prospects that our advice is based on the science of investing, or evidence-based investing, not our opinions. Just as you would want your doctor to give advice based on the science of medicine (not folklore) investors should want their advisor to base their advice on the science, not opinions. And that science definitely includes the field of behavioral finance.

    Second, my third book, Rational Investing in Irrational Times in fact covered the field of behavioral finance and 52 mistakes even smart people make.

    Third, our job is to continually educate clients on the science, including behavioral errors, so that they will be informed and have the best chance of avoiding mistakes like overconfidence, lose aversion, confusing familiarity with safety, recency and herding. We do this through regular newsletters, client communications and papers posted on our website. And now even through this blog.

    Fourth, we will not accept clients who do not believe in our approach because we know that when risks show up they will make the mistake I call confusing strategy with outcome. Smart people know that because we live in a world without clear crystal balls a strategy must be right or wrong before you know the outcome. That causes them to abandon well thought out plans and then they go on to repeat the errors with the next advisor or strategy they engage in on their own.

    The recent bear market provides a great example. I was speaking with someone who said that they had fired their advisor because during the last bear market they "knew" things were going bad and their advisor kept advising them to stay the course. They saw how "obvious" it was that we were going to have a bear market. So they eventually, in March, fired that advisor. Then they hired an advisor who had managed to loss less during the bear market. I asked them if they had any reason to believe that the new advisor would outperform in the future? Was there any evidence to support that view? I then discussed all the studies showing that past performance was a terrible predictor and that pension plans that engaged in that behavior (hiring prior winners) failed to outperform in the long term because there is no persistence of performance. But even that did not change their minds. Some people you cannot protect from themselves and you have to simply accept that. The odds are great that within a short time they will go on to fire that manager and repeat the same behavior (as this was not the first time they had done so). I noted that and asked if they knew Einstein's definition of insanity? Repeating the same behavior and expecting a different result (the behavior of the pension plans is insane by that definition).

    Bottom line is that the job of a good advisor is to provide the education necessary so that the investor can make an informed decision that is in their best interest. But ultimately the investor has to live with the consequences of the decisions. And therefore the investor needs to take ownership. In order to do that and to stay disciplined the investor must understand the strategy and why it is the one that provides the best hope of reaching financial goals. The reason is that it is easy to stay the course when things are going well, but very difficult when risks show up.

    I will close with this insight provided by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. It is one of my favorites.

    Lucky fools do not bear the slightest suspicion that they may be lucky fools?by definition, they do not know that they belong to such a category. They will act as if they deserve the money. The lucky fool [is] defined as a person who benefited from a disproportionate share of luck but attributes his success to some other, generally very precise, reason.


    I hope that is helpful

  •  
    5

    Wealth Builder

    08/16/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Mr. Swedore,

    Your explanation above is well thought out and even humorous at times. Thank you for sharing.

    I happened to meet a couple who fired their RIA in 2007 because the advisor was not making enough money for them. So they took over and invested on their own by putting most of their lifetime savings in hot stocks, sectors, funds, etc. Then the big crash came in 2008 and they lost their butt. They attempted to rehire the advisor, but the advisor refused to take them back.

    Live and learn.

  •  
    6

    larry swedroe

    08/17/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Wealth Builder

    Thanks for sharing that story, which, unfortunately, is an all-too-common one.

    I would add this: Even smart people make mistakes. I should know, having made many in my life. But the difference between smart people and fools is that smart people learn from their mistakes and don't repeat them (remember Einstein's definition of insanity). If that client situation had occurred my recommendation would have been to have a discussion with the client to see what, if anything, they had learned. If they were still "chasing returns" then I would not take them back. But if they had learned from the mistake and were now truly committed to be a disciplined buy-hold-and rebalance investor I would take them on.

    But I would want to be as sure as possible that they truly had learned from their mistake.

  •  
    7

    mzhuang

    08/17/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    Thank you very much for answering my question. You put a lot of thought into it and your answer is even longer than your original essay.

    I totally agree with you on education. That is precisely what I am trying to do with my blog - http://investment-fiduciary.com. My blog focuses on investor behaviors, conflict of interest and market characteristics, since these are the areas investors get hurt the most. I also try to make my post short and accessible. After all, we live in an area of 140 characters or less.

    On your forth point about not accepting clients who don't believe in our approach. I would say that would instantly eliminate 90% of the market. Also, investors who have a tendency to hurt themselves are precisely those who need the most help from us. Do you see the paradox here?

    In dealing with clients like that, I generally adopt a flexible disciplined approach. I help them develop a plan with just enough flexibility to sooth their mind. I try to undergird their decisions (which are often time driven by instinct and habit) with a process. I found helping clients like that both challenging and rewarding.

    Michael Zhuang
    http://www.MzCap.com

  •  
    8

    larry swedroe

    08/17/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Michael
    I think your point about 140 character world is very telling. I have found that despite its importance, very few people will take the time to educate themselves on financial economics. They would rather watch some reality TV show or interact on some social networking site. Hence they make all kinds of expensive mistakes. Sad but true.

    Also I would add this: The more rope (flexibility) you give an investor, the more likely it is they will "hang themselves" with that flexibility.

    One of my favorite expressions is that while asset allocation is the most important determinant of INVESTMENT returns, the ability to adhere to a well-thought-out plan is the most important determinant of INVESTOR returns. Therefore, the most important role of an advisor is to keep a client disciplined to whatever plan and strategy they have decided on. And that takes continual education because the markets continually throw challenges at investors in the form of crises.

    Best wishes
    Larry

  •  
    9

    MarkWolfinger

    08/17/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    It may be true that individuals should not have any expectation of beating the market, but there is more to investing than searching for stocks with upside potential.

    There's even more than accepting passive investment as ideal.

    Risk management is the key to success. Investors who minimize losses will outperform over time.

    I believe millions of investors can improve their results, if they would learn to use conservative option strategies, specifically the collar.

    Have you ever considering reducing investment risk with collars?

    Mark Wolfinger
    http://blog.mdwoptions.com

    http://tinyurl.com/lwxo4x



  •  
    10

    larry swedroe

    08/17/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Mark

    IMO options strategies don't really make much sense except to protect investments that you must hold for some reason, like stock in the company you work for. So you write a collar.

    I covered the issue of covered calls in my book, The Only Guide to Alternative Investments You'll Ever Need, putting them in the flawed category. The book goes into detail in why I don't recommend them.

    The best way to manage risk is through the asset allocation process and using insurance (like payout annuities to deal with longevity risk, and life insurance for the other side of that risk). TIPS also act as insurance against unexpected inflation and commodities in the form of collateralized commodity futures can act as portfolio insurance against some event risks and unexpected inflation.

  •  
    11

    mzhuang

    08/18/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    I have a question I'd like to ask in private, do you mind sharing your email with me? Mine is mzhuang[at]mzcap.com

    Michael

  •  
    12

    financial advisor

    08/18/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Unfortunately, individual investors have a hard time finding financial advice.

    I agree, if you have a simple allocation to decide, have no dependents, have your emergency stash and can come up with a decent investment allocation, then yes, you may be able to "do it yourself".

    However, many investor's financial situations are more complicated than this. Can you do a Monte Carlo simulation on your retirement plan or come up with your estate planning documents on your own? Most likely no. Most people need help with the basics also. Firms like http://www.claroconnect.com can help the average person find a financial advisor who is best for their situation.

    Most people don't realize that there are financial advisors who specialize in business owners, teachers, socially responsible investing and many other niches. My best advice to individuals is to find an advisor who has experience working with others in their same financial situation. They should also realize that the goal isn't to "beat the market", but to come up with a plan that actually reaches their goals.

  •  
    13

    MarkWolfinger

    08/19/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Larry,

    I find the reply to 'financial advisor' to be disappointing.

    You are telling people to accept the fact that financial advisors are doing the best they can, and under those conditions, all investors can do is go along and accept the performance of those advisors. Yes, do due dilligence. Yes, only take an advisor who comes recommended. But I do not believe that's good enough.

    So what if an advisor specializes in planning for (fill in the blank)? If that guy/gal doesn't really understand the modern world, if that advisor sticks to the old rules and believes that smiply allocating assets and diversification will take all risk out of the portfolio (and that idea is absolutely outdated, IMHO), then the customer is stuck with insufficient advice - and on top of that - has to a pay a fee for advice. Why would anyone use an advisor who does not understand how to really protect investments?

    My answer is that too many responsible, intelligent people - like yourself - continue to recommend advisors when those advisors are clueless. How can an investor understand that he/she must do much more to protect his/her assets than hire an advisor or planner? Someone must tell them. I'm trying to do just that.

    Advisor/planner ideas worked during bull markets, but so what? Almost anything works then. What investors need is to learn to protect themselves in bear markets - and 99% of advisors don't know how do to that.

    Best regards,
    Mark

  •  
    14

    larry swedroe

    08/19/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Mark the problem with your statement is that the premise is false.

    Here is an example:
    "If that advisor sticks to the old rules and believes that smiply allocating assets and diversification will take all risk out of the portfolio (and that idea is absolutely outdated, IMHO),"

    That statement is wrong because it was NEVER true and any advisor who stated that is by definition not a good advisor. Anyone making such a statement simply did not know what they were talking about.

    Having said that, nothing that happened last year should either have surprised anyone (in terms of the size of the loss that was incurred by various asset classes) except for the timing of the event. And there is no evidence that anyone can foresee the future of markets; that is the realm of charlatans.
    What happened was that risks showed up, risks that should have been anticipated upfront and built into the plan (the possibility of them occurring, if not the certainty--this was the third loss of about 50% in just the last 36 years so why was it a surprise? If it was the advisor simply did not know their history.


    No rules changed. There is nothing new, only the investment history people don't know.

    The bottom line is this, IMO, while good advice doesn't have to be expensive, bad advice will cost you dearly no matter how little you pay for it. The hard part may be in doing sufficient due diligence to identify the advisors who can really add value.

    I hope that is helpful

    Best wishes
    Larry

  •  
    15

    MarkWolfinger

    08/20/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    I agree that due diligence is very difficult. I cannot imagine a planner being willing (or even ethically allowed) to show you the result of every plan he/she manages.

    And even if he/she could, I would still not know the circumstances/needs of each client.

    I appreciate the discussion. Thanks.

    I know I feel comfortable knowing my stock market investments can be guaranteed not to lose more than the equivalent of the deductible on an insurance policy.

  •  
    16

    Wealth Builder

    08/20/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    [Quote from MarkWolfinger]I know I feel comfortable knowing my stock market investments can be guaranteed not to lose more than the equivalent of the deductible on an insurance policy.[End Quote]

    Guaranteed? How big is the deductible? I found your assertion a bit hard to believe.

  •  
    17

    MarkWolfinger

    08/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Option collars provide such a guarantee - with a cost.

    If I own IWM (the ETF that mimics the performance of the Russell 2000 index), I can buy a put option that is guaranteed to limit losses - at the cost of limiting gains.

    An example at today's prices: IWM is roughly 58.12 as I write this.

    if I buy an IWM Nov 54 put and sell an IWM Nov 61 call [obviously can choose any put and call that suits the investor], my cost is $0.18, or $18 plus commissions.

    For that small amount of cash, I get protection for 8 weeks, with a guarantee that I can sell my shares at $54, no matter how low the market declines. That's a deductible of $430, or 7%. [lose 4.12 on IWM shares plus 0.18 for collar].

    In return, I limited my profit and my maximum selling price is $61, or the strike price of the call. Deducting the collar cost, my effective maximum gain over this time period is $60.82 (effective selling price) minus 58.12, the current price, or 2.70 points.

    That's a good trade-off for me, but it's not for everyone. Investors can use different strike prices to get better protection. Not everyone is willing to sacrifice the potential upside, but in my opinion, conservative traders who need/want portfolio insurance are well-served by using collars.

    The Rookie's Guide to Options

  •  
    18

    larry swedroe

    08/21/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Mark
    IMO options are not a good strategy, except as protection for those that need to hold a stock. For example, in contemplation of death don't want to sell so heirs can get step up in basis.

    There are better ways to manage risk. For example, you can lower your exposure to equities while tilting more to small and value stocks.
    That would maintain expected return while reducing potential dispersion of returns and do it in more tax efficient manner and with less trading costs

  •  
    19

    Allan Roth

    09/14/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Mark,

    I've got to say that I'm 100% behind Larry on this one. Options are mathematically a zero sum game and be used only in very rare circumstances such as Larry described.

  •  
    20

    MarkWolfinger

    09/15/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    They are not a zero sum game when you are NOT buying options as a speculation.

    Also Larry's perspective is off on one important point: It's not only for people who 'need' to hold a stock. It's also for anyone who invests in index funds, or their ETF equivalents.

    That's the key. Collars are very effective for passive investors. That's the point few recognize.

    When a collar strategy is used, assets are PROTECTED. GUARANTEED. Much more effective than any asset allocation. In exchange, profits are limited.

    And, as Larry says, you can invest less and less of in cash any time you want to do so - but options can (and should be) used to reduce risk. Too many people have a misunderstanding of how options work and believe they are only used to place bets on market direction. That's gambling, in my opinion, and I NEVER suggest anyone use options to do anything except reduce risk.

    http://blog.mdwoptions.com

  •  
    21

    Allan Roth

    09/29/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    MarkWolfinger,

    For every dollar made in options, their is a dollar lost. In aggregate, they are a zero sum game.

    It doesn't matter whether we are talking collars, covered calls, or any options strategy.

    Before costs, options are a zero sum game. After costs, they must be negative. All that is needed to prove this is simple arithmetic.

  •  
    22

    MarkWolfinger

    10/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Allan,

    I don't agree with your simple arithmetic. Because it is blind to reality. Example:

    The stock is 49.

    a) You buy an Oct 50 call from me, paying $2. You make $1,000 when the stock finishes at $62.

    b) I own 100 shares and decide to write the Oct 50 call, collecting $2. When expiration arrives, I sell my stock at 50 and earn $300.

    I benefited by selling the call. I achieved my maximum possible result. What happened was that you paid me $200 for the potential upside over $50. I happily accepted $200 for those rights.

    You made $1,000. I made $300. No one lost anything in this example.

    If you tell me I lost the upside, you are incorrect. I sold that upside for a guaranteed $200. A fair deal. The fact that it was a more profitable trade for you than for me does not mean that I lost anything. I sold the upside; you bought the upside.

    I lost NOTHING.

  •  
    23

    Allan Roth

    10/19/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    I made $1000 and you lost $1000 - all before commissions.

    By selling a covered call, you convinced yourself you made money but you'd have had an extra grand had you not sold that option.

  •  
    24

    MarkWolfinger

    10/20/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    Had I not sold the option, I would never have bought the stock in the first place.

    Thus, because I sold the call, I earned the maximum possible profit available to me. I lost nothing.

    I never own stocks that are unhedged. That is a reasonable strategy for a conservative investor.



  •  
    25

    investingRookie

    10/22/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Should Average Investors Do It Themselves?

    As Jim Kawasaki says, financial advisors will only tell as much as you want. You have to educate yourself in the field.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement

Larry Swedroe

Larry Swedroe is principal and director of research for The Buckingham Family of Financial Services. He has authored or co-authored seven books, including The Only Guide to a Winning Investment Strategy You'll Ever Need.

Larry Swedroe

Larry Swedroe is a principal and the director of research for Buckingham Asset Management and BAM Advisor Services. He has also worked with Prudential Home Mortgage and Citicorp, totaling nearly 40 years of managing financial risks for major corporations and advising individuals on ways to do the same.

His opinions and comments expressed on this site are his own and may not accurately reflect those of the firm.

Click Here
track your portfolio