Thou shalt not split 60/40

Asset allocation, risk, diversification and rebalancing. Pros/cons of hiring a financial advisor. Seeking advice on your portfolio?
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Taggart »

Thou shalt not split 60/40

I think I'll just continue with my boring, dinosaur 60/40 portfolio in the RRSP, but kind of interesting article all the same. Makes you think. Am I doing it all wrong? However, their way makes for complication and more than likely added expense, and since I'm the type who likes neither, I tend to back away from this idea. I especially liked the response from Powell Lucas below the article.
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Shakespeare »

The time when the mass media promotes short funds is the time to go long. :mrgreen:
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Taggart »

Shakespeare wrote:The time when the mass media promotes short funds is the time to go long. :mrgreen:
Agreed. :lol:
User avatar
ghariton
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 15954
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by ghariton »

Taggart wrote:kind of interesting article all the same. Makes you think.
Yes, but not in a good way.

FWIW, I bought a little bit of QID (an ETF short NASDAQ with double leverage) some years ago, watched it bounce around for a while, then asked myself why I was holding this sucker. Saw no point to it -- if I want to hedge I'll sell down some of my QQQ and invest in fixed income instead. I also looked at PHO, an infrastructure ETF. It's been doing more or less as well as VTI, sometimes a bit better, sometimes a bit worse, but not exactly what I'd call diversification. Again, I saw no point to it.

But then I suppose the sales people need hot new products into which to churn their customers' accounts -- only to churn them out again in a few years, when the next new thing is discovered.

George
The juice is worth the squeeze
User avatar
StuBee
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2944
Joined: 21 Sep 2010 11:08
Location: SW Quebec

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by StuBee »

ISTM that in a general way, we are seeing a tendency towards an acceptance of increasingly complex vehicles through financial engineering. This is all in the name of a yearning for yield. In a sense, caution is being increasingly "thrown to the wind" through an inability to accept a lower yielding environment. We all know the saying: "short-term pain for long-term gain" but no one is willing to wait anymore. How often in the past has the statement "This time it is different" actually been true?

I think we should admire (though not necessarily agree with) our financial institutions in there ability to take advantage of the diverse characteristics (weakness's?) of those on the buy side.

As for me, I will be patient... I have purposefully and thoughtfully (with the help of many here...) built a solid boat (at least I think so...). We are currently in a storm... Yet, this too shall pass.

Ironically, in a way, I think that all of this angst and thrashing and generally counterproductive activity can be good since it will lead to market inefficiencies (i.e. they can only lose money...). Somebody is going to benefit and I am hoping that that will be me :D
"The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning."-C.S.Lewis, The Last Battle
User avatar
Shakespeare
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 23396
Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:25
Location: Calgary, AB

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Shakespeare »

"Financial engineering" is designed to benefit the broker, not the client.
Sic transit gloria mundi. Tuesday is usually worse. - Robert A. Heinlein, Starman Jones
HardWorker
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2564
Joined: 31 Dec 2006 10:49
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by HardWorker »

Shakespeare wrote:The time when the mass media promotes short funds is the time to go long. :mrgreen:
"When your cab driver say it's time to buy stock X, it's time to sell stock X".
User avatar
optionable68
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1919
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 18:47
Location: GTA

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by optionable68 »

HardWorker wrote:
Shakespeare wrote:The time when the mass media promotes short funds is the time to go long. :mrgreen:
"When your cab driver say it's time to buy stock X, it's time to sell stock X".
Image
3-time winner of FWF Annual Stock Market Predictions contest
sydney2
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 949
Joined: 05 Sep 2005 19:35
Location: Burlington Ontario

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by sydney2 »

Shakespeare wrote:"Financial engineering" is designed to benefit the broker, not the client.
I agree also Our non-registered is 60/40...but our rrsp's are more equity based and I have no plans to change the portfolio, as we start to draw down on them, the dividend payers help make up the difference. I am getting more immune to the volatility and view a lot of it as just noise....if we had panicked and sold in 2008, instead of buying up some of the oversold equities, we wouldn't be where we are today, there are some great buys out there right now, with good yields.
User avatar
adrian2
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 13333
Joined: 19 Feb 2005 08:42
Location: Greater Toronto Area

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by adrian2 »

optionable68 wrote:death-to-equities-8-13-79.jpg
Interesting to note from the graph was that the Business Week's pronouncement did not coincide with the bottom of equities; that came about 3 years later. That's a nerve wrenching wait for many people. :roll:
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki
“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.” [Richard P. Feynman, Nobel prize winner]
User avatar
newguy
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8088
Joined: 10 May 2009 18:24
Location: Montreal

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by newguy »

adrian2 wrote:
optionable68 wrote:death-to-equities-8-13-79.jpg
Interesting to note from the graph was that the Business Week's pronouncement did not coincide with the bottom of equities; that came about 3 years later. That's a nerve wrenching wait for many people. :roll:
And I bet the inflation adjusted bottom(what the story was about) came even later.

newguy
$seeker
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 222
Joined: 16 Aug 2006 07:25

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by $seeker »

Here is some more neat financial engineering for you
http://www.macquarieprivatewealth.ca/da ... cation.pdf

Sounds a little like what Ray Dalio is doing but wondered what would be wrong with the 16+% return with the much lower volatility and drawdown as summarized on page 22.
This looks like the Holy Grail no?
I do not own this or have any connection with this co. Just looking at the strategy
User avatar
IdOp
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3873
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 11:27
Location: On the Pacific sea bed, 100 mi off the CA coast.
Contact:

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by IdOp »

"Financial engineering" is designed to benefit the broker, not the client.
They[1] dance with[2] the ones[3] that brung them.

[1] The financial engineers
[2] work for
[3] the purveyors of packaged pecuniary products
Thorn
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 49
Joined: 07 Aug 2011 15:55

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Thorn »

As a retired defensive investor, I have found that a careful reading of many structured products places all the advantages in the seller's hands and none in the investor's.

For me, anything beyond corporate bonds, common shares and selected ETFs (broad, passive, non-leveraged, low-fee) entails unacceptable risk as I am unwilling to spend the time needed to understand the products, especially when seasoned professionals often indicate that they can't understand them either.
mudLark
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1038
Joined: 27 Jun 2006 18:47

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by mudLark »

StuBee wrote:As for me, I will be patient... I have purposefully and thoughtfully (with the help of many here...) built a solid boat (at least I think so...). We are currently in a storm... Yet, this too shall pass.
Yabbut, it presently seems likely that the storm is propelling us into the doldrums.

Certainly the storm will pass and certainly we will eventually drift out of the subsequent calm; when is the real question. ISTM that many 60 somethings (and their portfolios) will be DOA.

With an increasing dearth of leverage in a Europe and North America desparate for real (as opposed to financially engineered) growth, many of the old rules are going to fail before this storm abates. Figuring out new rules for the "new normal" is the long-term (5 to 10 years) investors' challenge.
User avatar
StuBee
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2944
Joined: 21 Sep 2010 11:08
Location: SW Quebec

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by StuBee »

mudLark wrote:Certainly the storm will pass and certainly we will eventually drift out of the subsequent calm; when is the real question. ISTM that many 60 somethings (and their portfolios) will be DOA.
If you are content with zero real growth on FI and if from your Equity you limit yourself to spending the income then arguably, you should do all right.

In my case, for this to be possible, I have chosen to spend the majority of my FI before my age 65 (I am currently 50, not yet retired but able to retire in about 3 years) and then replace this source of financing with CPP (actually QPP), OAS and, about 15K$/year DB (in todays dollars). At age 65, my source of income will be 50%-60% "pension" and 40% to 50% dividends. All of this will be sufficiently split between me and my wife such that we will pay very little income tax.

In addition, at that time, about a third of our capital (basically our entire Foreign Equity component with whatever remaining FI) will be available for "catastrophic events".

Needless to say, I have been working at this plan for close to two decades...
"The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning."-C.S.Lewis, The Last Battle
User avatar
northbeach
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1016
Joined: 07 Mar 2005 18:22
Location: The County

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by northbeach »

StuBee wrote:
mudLark wrote:Certainly the storm will pass and certainly we will eventually drift out of the subsequent calm; when is the real question. ISTM that many 60 somethings (and their portfolios) will be DOA.
If you are content with zero real growth on FI and if from your Equity you limit yourself to spending the income then arguably, you should do all right.
In my case, for this to be possible, I have chosen to spend the majority of my FI before my age 65 (I am currently 50, not yet retired but able to retire in about 3 years) and then replace this source of financing with CPP (actually QPP), OAS and, about 15K$/year DB (in todays dollars). At age 65, my source of income will be 50%-60% "pension" and 40% to 50% dividends. All of this will be sufficiently split between me and my wife such that we will pay very little income tax.
In addition, at that time, about a third of our capital (basically our entire Foreign Equity component with whatever remaining FI) will be available for "catastrophic events".
Needless to say, I have been working at this plan for close to two decades...
I am more or less relying on the same logic; we are currently retired.
However, dividends can be cut sharply if things get nasty.

From: http://www.dividendgrowthinvestor.com/2 ... ssion.html
During the 1920’s, annual dividends on the Dow Industrials ranged between 3.90 points in 1921 to 6 in 1927. In 1928 and 1929 annual dividends increased to 9.80 and 12.80 respectively. After that dividends did decrease to as low as 3.40 points in 1933. For those who bought all of their stocks in 1929 the decrease in dividend income would have been over 70%.
Hopefully, things will never get this nasty.
User avatar
StuBee
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2944
Joined: 21 Sep 2010 11:08
Location: SW Quebec

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by StuBee »

northbeach wrote:From: http://www.dividendgrowthinvestor.com/2 ... ssion.html
During the 1920’s, annual dividends on the Dow Industrials ranged between 3.90 points in 1921 to 6 in 1927. In 1928 and 1929 annual dividends increased to 9.80 and 12.80 respectively. After that dividends did decrease to as low as 3.40 points in 1933. For those who bought all of their stocks in 1929 the decrease in dividend income would have been over 70%.
Hopefully, things will never get this nasty.
This, actually, is what I was referring to in my notion of "Catastrophic event". Fortunately, over that 4 year period (1929-1933) Cost Of Living decreased by about 30%. So, real dividends "only" decreased by about 50% and progressively so over a 4 year period. However, it took about 15 years for the dividend flow to fully recuperate in real dollars. I am able to accommodate a 30% to 50% real cut with recuperation over a 10 to 15 year period. I have chosen to mix historical reality with optimism :D .
"The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning."-C.S.Lewis, The Last Battle
Taggart
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 6893
Joined: 05 Dec 2005 07:34

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by Taggart »

northbeach wrote:
However, dividends can be cut sharply if things get nasty.

From: http://www.dividendgrowthinvestor.com/2 ... ssion.html
During the 1920’s, annual dividends on the Dow Industrials ranged between 3.90 points in 1921 to 6 in 1927. In 1928 and 1929 annual dividends increased to 9.80 and 12.80 respectively. After that dividends did decrease to as low as 3.40 points in 1933. For those who bought all of their stocks in 1929 the decrease in dividend income would have been over 70%.
Hopefully, things will never get this nasty.
I prefer to look at real returns data (when I can obtain it) rather than nominal:

From page 188 of Robert Shiller's excellent book, Irrational Exuberance (second edition) which I've just started to read for the first time ever:

"Recall that between the stock market peak in September 1929 and the bottom in June 1932, when the stock market fell 81% as measured by the real S&P index, real dividends fell only 11%."
User avatar
northbeach
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1016
Joined: 07 Mar 2005 18:22
Location: The County

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by northbeach »

Hard to believe Shiller's claim of an 11% decrease in real terms.

From the article I quoted, dividends fell 70% from around 12% down towards 3.4% and cost of living decreased by about 30% in the same period.

Doesn't seem to jive with Robert Shiller's numbers. I would tend to believe Shiller, but how can there be such a divergence.
User avatar
newguy
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 8088
Joined: 10 May 2009 18:24
Location: Montreal

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by newguy »

northbeach wrote:Hard to believe Shiller's claim of an 11% decrease in real terms.

From the article I quoted, dividends fell 70% from around 12% down towards 3.4% and cost of living decreased by about 30% in the same period.

Doesn't seem to jive with Robert Shiller's numbers. I would tend to believe Shiller, but how can there be such a divergence.
Look it up.

http://www.econ.yale.edu/~shiller/data.htm

newguy
BRIAN5000
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 9063
Joined: 08 Jun 2007 23:27

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by BRIAN5000 »

This looks like the Holy Grail no?
No this is the Holy Grail.

http://valueweightedindex.com/IndexComp ... omparison/

The index continually rebalances towards the cheapest stocks according to various measures of value, resulting in a portfolio that should benefit significantly from the pricing inefficiencies within the relevant universe over the long term. The index consists of a much more diversified portfolio than a market cap weighted index
This information is believed to be from reliable sources but may include rumor and speculation. Accuracy is not guaranteed
User avatar
northbeach
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1016
Joined: 07 Mar 2005 18:22
Location: The County

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by northbeach »

From page 188 of Robert Shiller's excellent book, Irrational Exuberance (second edition) which I've just started to read for the first time ever:
"Recall that between the stock market peak in September 1929 and the bottom in June 1932, when the stock market fell 81% as measured by the real S&P index, real dividends fell only 11%."
Using the data from the Shiller spreadsheet, the decrease in real dividends was 39% from the peak to 1934.

link was provided by newguy http://www.econ.yale.edu/~shiller/data.htm

Not really sure which number is more relevant, 11% to the June 1932 bottom or 39% to 1934 after the market had already begun to recover.

Probably not best to speculate and just hope that the future will be benign.
User avatar
StuBee
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2944
Joined: 21 Sep 2010 11:08
Location: SW Quebec

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by StuBee »

northbeach wrote:
From page 188 of Robert Shiller's excellent book, Irrational Exuberance (second edition) which I've just started to read for the first time ever:
"Recall that between the stock market peak in September 1929 and the bottom in June 1932, when the stock market fell 81% as measured by the real S&P index, real dividends fell only 11%."
Using the data from the Shiller spreadsheet, the decrease in real dividends was 39% from the peak to 1934.

link was provided by newguy http://www.econ.yale.edu/~shiller/data.htm

Not really sure which number is more relevant, 11% to the June 1932 bottom or 39% to 1934 after the market had already begun to recover.
From a "living off of dividends" perspective, the 39% decline would be the more relevant number. The 11% decline (to 1932) provides unfortunately only part of the picture.
"The term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning."-C.S.Lewis, The Last Battle
mudLark
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1038
Joined: 27 Jun 2006 18:47

Re: Thou shalt not split 60/40

Post by mudLark »

northbeach wrote:...just hope that the future will be benign.
:roll:
Post Reply