Tag: M33

Who would predict the price of oil?

The price of crude oil has fallen around 40 per cent since a recent peak in June this year. This has a profound effect on economies and markets around the world as the cost of manufacturing and transporting goods falls along with oil producers’ income and the currencies of oil-rich countries.
The theory goes that consumer spending will rise because people have more disposable income; that inflation will fall as the price of goods eases; and that companies with high energy bills will become more profitable. If lower prices hold, the effect might become political and environmental as the balance of world power shifts from oil exporters to oil importers, and the impetus to develop cheaper clean energy wanes. Oil seeps so deep into the global economy you might think that to be a successful investor you need to have an accurate view on its price and its impact on asset prices. But you would be wrong.

No-one with an opinion about oil knows whether their view is right or wrong, and only the changing price will confirm which they are. Market prices are a fair reflection of the balance of opinion because they are created by many buyers and sellers agreeing on individual transactions. As an investor you can take a view of whether that balance – that price – is right but, like all other people with an opinion, you have no way of knowing whether you are right or wrong until the price moves.

Knowing this, it seems irrational to take a view (or a risk) on something so random as the direction of the oil price. In fact, why would one take a view on anything related to the changing price of oil; the US economy, for example; or the price of Shell; or Deutsche Post; or anything else?
The rational approach is to let capital markets run their course and to have a sufficiently diversified portfolio that allows you to relax in the knowledge that, over time, you will benefit from the wealth-generating power of your investments as a whole; without risking your wealth on a prediction that might go one way or the other.

Pensions Institute: ‘Almost all’ active managers fail to beat the market

Pensions Institute: ‘Almost all’ active managers fail to beat the market

This article confirms something that those of us involved in looking after client money have known for quite a while, namely that most active fund managers, despite charging extra for the pleasure, are incapable of beating the markets. This underpins our evidence based investment philosophy. To cut a long story short, the evidence from years of academic research, in many cases by Nobel Laureates, firmly suggests that the factor which has the greatest eventual impact on the returns (strictly variability and therefore expected returns, to those of you who are investment boffins) of a portfolio is the high level asset allocation, i.e. the split between equities and bonds. Strategies such as market timing (when should I buy or sell or should I hang on a little longer for the turn?) and stock selection (should I buy Tescos or M&S?) have been shown to have very little impact. Since these are the main methods supposedly used by active fund managers to add value, it comes as no real surprise that most of them fail. I say ‘supposedly’ because many simply track the markets and charge extra for doing so!

So, if you are looking for a portfolio that collects as much as possible of the market rate of return, according to the level or risk that you wish to take, start with the high level split. Then choose low cost funds and perhaps tilt towards sectors that have demonstrated an ability to provide extra returns given a certain amount of extra risk. Above all, avoid succumbing to the perfidious temptations of the financial porn which is regularly pushed out by the active fund management industry. They are thinking about themselves, not you.