January 2012

A Cork on the Sea

In our industry, there are a few writers that have emerged as authors by summarizing articles published in the most highly respected trade journals for wealth managers and financial planners.  Everybody wins; the authors make a good living, and, we get to read more than we might otherwise have been able to.

In that spirit, what follows is my own summary of a recent article in Money Magazine by Pat Regnier.  We received this magazine by accident - perhaps because we got on a mailing list of prospective subscribers.  We don't subscribe to Money Magazine because it is normally replete with articles prognosticating about the future, the "Best Stocks for 2012", "Secrets of Picking Stocks", etc.  Of course, you know by now that we are not market-timers and don't pretend to be able to predict the future.  However, since it happened to be at arms-length during breakfast, I flipped through it and was pleasantly surprised to read "My Brilliant Trade".

Regnier describes a scenario in which he "brilliantly" dumped his entire equity position on July 26th, 2011.  And then, go figure - his disaster bet paid off.  The very next week, the stock market had the biggest one-day loss since the 2008 financial crisis.  He "felt like a genius".  Acting on a forecast and seeing it proved true is exhilarating - possibly even addicting.  Much like golf, a few good holes can keep one coming back for more.  Or, one big fish can keep you in the boat for months without so much as even a decent nibble.

However, Regnier then honestly proceeds to tell us, in a slightly self-deprecating manner, that even he realizes he would be ignoring an awful lot of evidence suggesting the world really isn't predictable.  On top of that, he now has himself squarely in a pickle: when to get back in.  He quotes a study by Philip Tetlock, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, who evaluated the responses of experts to make predictions of world events - particularly, the global economy.  The experts barely beat a simple formula that assigned equal probabilities to each possible outcome.  There is a well known bias regarding feeling worse about bad things happening because of something we actively do, versus when bad things happen to us.

"The mistake I made was selling without defining the conditions in which I would get back in."  He still is not back "in" and is now wrestling with a decision that seems to have existential stakes with the equity markets now at six-month highs - higher than when he got out!  If he gets back in and the market goes down, he'll have erased his genius moment.  He is now reminiscing about how nice it would be to return to being a "cork on the sea...bobbing up and down with the tide", i.e. staying fully invested in an appropriate asset allocation for your goals and risk tolerance.  As you know, this is the approach we take with your long-term portfolio after protecting your short- and medium-term portfolios from these ups and downs of the markets.

Regnier notes that for most people, active trading turns out to be just a reliable way to erode returns over time.  To back this up, he quotes a Morningstar statistic: "From 2000 to 2010, equity funds earned an annualized 1.6%, but, the researchers found that the typical investor captured only a 0.2% return".  Why?  Because they didn't stay fully invested for the full time.  He then proceeds to make another point with which we concur.  Your human capital, or earning potential, is the greatest contributor to your wealth.

So, shutting off CNN and getting back to work might just be the ticket.  In the mean time, Reigner is sweating his next decision because he didn't define the "trigger" for getting back in when he got out.  Stay tuned...

 

Tightwads and Spendthrifts!

Happy New Year!  We hope the year is off to a great start for you and yours.

At Pauley Financial, we have kicked off the new year with a valuable addition to our team. We are honored to welcome Brian Cox to our firm as we continue to challenge ourselves to provide better service to our readers and clients. Doug first met Brian over 10 years ago. A brief bio of Brian follows:

Brian received his Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree from the United States Military Academy (USMA) at West Point in 1995. Following graduation, he completed Airborne, Air Assault, and Ranger training, and served as an artillery officer. At the completion of his active service, Brian volunteered for Reserve Officer duties, and was later called back to serve in Baghdad as a member of the Special Staff for the Commanding General of the Multi-National Forces - Iraq.

After earning his MBA from the University of Michigan in 2003, Brian followed his lifelong passion for investing by joining the JPMorgan Private Bank as an Investment Associate in New York. He has taken on positions of increasing responsibility in the asset management industry, most recently as a Principal of WestSpring Advisors, LP. He has managed institutional and high net worth client relationships globally, and his background and experience in both traditional and alternative asset classes appropriately complement Pauley Financial. He has served as a panelist and industry awards judge for various institutional industry groups and publications.

Brian is married with three sons. He enjoys triathlons and volunteering - as a youth coach, as a Service Director for the Wounded Warrior Mentorship programs, and as an active member of his church. Brian and his family now reside in New Braunfels, Texas.

Moving onto our topic - "Tightwads and Spendthrifts - Unite"! I'm sure none of you reading this article could relate, however, in the event that you may know someone that shares these characteristics, perhaps they might find this article of interest. We have adapted this newsletter from a Kiplinger article published in February 2012 authored by Bob Frick.

Consider the results of brain scans performed on people while they made buying decisions… Researchers found that when subjects were shown products and then prices, about 30% of them experienced a fired-up insula. The insula is the part of the brain that's active "when we're getting socially excluded or somebody's unfair to us or we have to smell something gross," says Scott Rick, a professor of marketing at the University of Michigan and one of the researchers. The study also found that about half of subjects had a more measured response when contemplating a purchase, and 20% seemed to feel pleasure and little pain.

That study was the genesis of a scale that measures how likely you are to be a tightwad or a spendthrift. Spendthrifts don't feel enough pain for their own good, so they overspend, carry more debt and feel guilty later. Tightwads, however, experience too much pain, which leads to feelings of regret for not having spent enough. Rick says it's worse to be a spendthrift because of the financial costs, but neither extreme is as good as the middle group, labeled unconflicted. "Spendthrifts are bad off financially and psychologically," he says. "Tightwads have big bank accounts, but we find that they're less happy than the unconflicted group."

Where Do You Stand?

You don't need a brain scan to figure out where you land on the scale; a simple survey will do. In a 2008 paper, "Tightwads and Spendthrifts," Rick, George Loewenstein, of Carnegie Mellon University, and Cynthia Cryder, now with Washington University, surveyed more than 13,000 adults. They found that spendthrifts were three times as likely as tightwads to be in debt, regardless of income. (Take the survey yourself: Are You a Tightwad or a Spendthrift?)

Fatal Fiscal Attraction

Rick and two colleagues, Deborah Small, of the University of Pennsylvania, and Eli Finkel, of Northwestern University, applied their scale to a study of married couples, "Fatal (Fiscal) Attraction: Spendthrifts and Tightwads in Marriage." Researchers found that tightwads and spendthrifts regret their spending habits and often marry spending opposites to compensate. Such a marriage starts out well, says Rick. The spouses "help each other meet in the middle." When dining out, for example, "they don't spend a million dollars on a great meal, but they don't go Dumpster-diving either."

Tensions rise with purchases that really matter, such as cars and houses, says Rick, a self-described spendthrift. Such marriages "might be refreshing at first, but my own guess is that they then become maddening" as couples begin to bicker over spending issues. The study suggests that spendthrifts who marry tightwads, as you might expect, tend to be better off financially than spendthrifts who marry spendthrifts. But spendthrifts who marry spendthrifts tend to have a happier relationship, even though their financial situation is often worse. When two tightwads marry, they enjoy both better finances and a more satisfying relationship.

Balance Your Spending

To help rein in spendthrift tendencies, you can focus on the opportunity costs of buying more than you need. For example, when buying a car, instead of spending $3,000 on the luxury-options package, think how that money could be put to better use.

Tightwads can frame some outlays as investments -- think of a vacation as an investment in productivity, Rick suggests. They can also buy with plastic because it's less painful than paying with cash.

As we said tongue-in-cheek as we introduced this topic, we are certain that you and yours fall nicely into the 'unconflicted' category! In the event, however, that you may be able to relate to either of these personality types, or know someone that does, know that we continually work to help our clients find the right balance of living for today and saving for tomorrow. The trick is finding and tweaking the balance that works for you.