The Distorted Reality of Performance: Mutual Funds

For the vast majority of investors - mutual fund investors in particular, watching the major indices and judging your performance against them distorts the reality of not only where you should be but where you could have been. If you were to look only at the difference between the former highs the markets hit in October 2007 and those at the most recent close on last Thursday (the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA +1.36% is around 12% below its all-time high of 14,165, and the S&P 500 index SPX +1.44% is nearly 16% below its October 2007 high of 1,565.) you might be considering jumping back in.

But you would have been much better off had you done absolutely nothing. Back in those desperate times, many people did what the rest of the herd did as stocks began to tumble. You sold. But three years later, that would have proved to be the wrong thing to do. During that period, most folks fled the actively managed mutual fund, particularly the domestic issues in favor of bond funds and in far too many instances, to target date funds.

Let's consider the indices that are often compared to the riskier funds, a benchmark that has proven to be less than accurate in terms of performance. The Dow and the S&P 500 track the largest companies, a group that has struggled to assure the investor that dividends and size were enough to best the market. Turns out, that picking and choosing, as actively managed funds do, would have been the better approach.

Two things come into play. One, these funds tend to have higher fees. Less those fees, you would have still found yourself in a better position than had you simply put your money in a benchmark S&P 500 index.

And secondly, there is the liquidity issue that comes with buying mid-cap and small-cap companies. Liquidity refers to the amount of stock available in smaller companies weighed against the amount of stock held by the principals. This makes these companies more volatile and even under-purchased in indexes that track those larger markets (the Wilshire 5000 for instance may track all available stocks but the indexes crafted based on this index only own.

To complicate matters somewhat, the Wilshire 5000 actually has 5700 stocks in the index, Wilshire 4500 is the Wilshire 5000 without the S&P 500 stocks in it. A Wilshire 5000 index fund (usually called total market index) will probably own around 4000 stocks. A Wilshire 4500 index contains those same stocks less the top 500 companies.

As Mark Hulbret noted in a recent column for Marketwatch, "According to a report produced earlier this week by Lipper (a Thomson Reuters company), 45% of the domestic-equity funds for which they have data back to October 2007 were, as of the end of May, ahead of where they were on the date of the stock market’s all-time high."

So the indexes are lower than where you would have been had you stayed put - of course this is based on the assumption that many of you where using actively managed funds in your 401(k) plans, that many of those funds did not have indexes available and the post 2007 products such as target date funds or even ETFs, weren't a consideration or even an option during those days. You embraced risk and ignored fees and looking at your portfolio, that was probably seen as a good thing.

Does that mean index funds shouldn't be part of your portfolio? The simplest answer is no. Index funds still provide a low cost and low turnover environment to invest in. More importantly, the largest cap indexes add dividends to the mix. This brings these investments closer to the domestic out-performance over the last half of the year.

Diversity in this investment environment, which is still far more volatile than anyone would like it to be, with global issues remaining a major concern, means taking a little less - in terms of performance. You should be in index funds now. To do this would be considered a defensive move for those that kept the actively managed faith.

A portfolio of five, perhaps six index funds, tracking sectors from the S&P 500, a mid-cap index, a fund tracking the small-cap, an international index (which tracks the companies of what is considered the developed world), an emerging markets index (contains investments from countries like China, India, Russia, Brazil and others) along with a bond index.  This sort of diversification keeps the low cost features of index funds and avoids any crossover investment (owning the same stocks in different funds).

You can be proud of your investment accumen in getting back to those 2007 highs and perhaps beyond. But show your real prudence and protect what you have done. This economy, both domestic and globally is far from recovered and the stock market is painting a better picture than reality suggests. Being a little defensive at this juncture will keep you in the game without risking what you have gained.

Why Investors Do What They Do: The Effect of the Media Hype on Investors

Has the hype in the media over the last several months had an effect on how you invest in your retirement plan? The answer is most likely, yes. And the reason is the media presentation of investor news and nowhere is this done better than on television.

Thomas Schuster, who wrote the book "The Markets and The Media" suggests that television news has changed the way investor's react and eventually what they do. "Novices," he writes, "receive their basic training in investment issues via the media, even via such an improbable candidate as television."

Because the news is interested in only short-term events, Mr. Schuster worries that that sort of focus "provides explanations which afterwards evokes an impression of logic". There is unfortunately no way for even a savvy investor to parse that sort of information, see a developing trend that encompasses both the past and the recently reported story and make any sort of logical decision. But people do.

And the reason for this is pure coincidence. Sometimes your perception and the reality of what is happening meet and when they do, there is often a seismic shift in not only how you view your investment strategy but fundamental values as well.

There is no rational for this type of behavior short of we just do it. We treat stock information garnered from television, even stations devoted to the interactions of business and their shareholders/investors as if it were information worth having. There has been some speculation that the real traders understand this and seek to profit from this sort of non-knowledge.

It is as they say, much easier to swim with the tide. And many traders are now focused on doing just that, predicting when their colleagues, other investors all begin to believe something is worth more than they know it should be worth. The benefit these traders have is knowing that they are investing on emotion and because of their cold-hearted approach to the subject, bail long before the rest of the group realize what it is that they don't know.

So what do we do? The best thing would be to cancel cable and turn off the television. But that isn't going to happen. So the following three suggestions might help.

First: examine why you did what you did in the first place - you know, before you began to question those motives. Chances are you were probably right. If you used your retirement plan according to the time-honor, take-a-lot-of-risk-when-you-are-young method of investing, you probably should go back to that. That is, if you have changed. The most recent news has sent folks scurrying for the less risky forms of investments in their portfolio largely in part because of how the news portrayed the stock market's reaction the global financial crisis.

If you did, keep in mind that "the crisis" affected everyone, equally it seems. The second thing to remember is that you are not the only one with a damaged portfolio. If you managed to keep your job, weren't too deeply in debt and for all intents and purposes, are saving more, your approach to retirement should not have changed. Although the economy (even the global one) will not recover evenly, it will in fact recover with time. If you had spread your risk across four or five sectors (growth - large, mid-cap, small-cap, international and emerging markets) you would have covered all of your bases and be on the way to a decent recovery.

Third thing to remember is that this will take awhile. If you do not feel as though you have enough time I have bad news: investments take time and worse, take their own sweet time returning to normal. But as renowned economist and thinker John Kenneth Galbraith once suggested, the market has no memory. But you will often recall the pain of a loss much more vividly than the market does and this will keep you from making the correct investment decision when you are most emotional, which is often in the aftermath of some new piece of news.

If you have a short horizon, you need to either lengthen it or reevaluate what your plan intends to do for you if you do not allow it to recover before you start drawing down the assets.

Next up: The negative effects of optimism.