Category: Your Money

Practice Not As Important As Thought For Success

practice-makes-perfect

Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Outliers” popularized the “10,000 hour rule,” which suggests that many people who have reached the top of their fields got there, in large part, due to practicing for 10,000 hours.

In the new paper, published in Intelligence, the authors conclude that practice can only explain one-third of the variation in sucess in chess and music, and probably other fields as well. One player in a 2007 study, for example, “took 26 years of serious involvement in chess to reach a master level, while another player took less than 2 years to reach this level.”

They suggest that other factors together explain the lion’s share of success, such as intelligence, starting age, personality, and other genetic factors.

Source: Popular Science

Pick your risk factor: value or momentum?

The Capital Spectator has a gem of a piece out:

The term “investing” is a misnomer when it comes to managing money. It’s really a job of choosing a set of risk factors that will produce an expected result. The real challenge is deciding which risk exposures are appropriate and how to manage those risks. But you can’t engineer risk away to nothing in a portfolio, at least not without incurring unbearable expenses. In the end, you can only earn a risk premium as the result of bearing risk and managing it in a way that suits your specific risk tolerance and return requirements.

We had written about this almost a year ago, saying that there is no such thing as “risk free.” Capital and risk are joined at the hip:

The conversations I have been having recently typically ends with “I don’t want to take any risk right now, let me wait and watch.” And therein lies the rub – there is no such thing as “risk-free.” Not in life, not in investing. The total risk in this world is a constant – we only transform it by our action or in-action.

This is where our investment themes come into the picture. By investing across different strategies, you get the benefit of balancing out strategy-specific risks. Worried about choosing between momentum and value? Why not choose both? Keep reinvesting your returns and the winning strategy will automatically become a larger part of your portfolio by the magic of compounding. You can begin by checking out how different strategies have performed here.

Source: The Illusion Of “Investing”

Related:

Weekly Recap: Purpose of Love

world equities 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

The Nifty clocked in +3.98% (+5.83% in USD terms) this week.

Major
DAX(DEU) -3.52%
CAC(FRA) -0.95%
UKX(GBR) -1.42%
NKY(JPN) +2.92%
SPX(USA) +0.58%
MINTs
JCI(IDN) +1.42%
INMEX(MEX) +0.53%
NGSEINDX(NGA) -1.53%
XU030(TUR) +0.95%
BRICS
IBOV(BRA) -1.80%
SHCOMP(CHN) +0.08%
NIFTY(IND) +3.98%
INDEXCF(RUS) -7.29%
TOP40(ZAF) +1.02%

Nifty Heatmap

NIFTY heatmap 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

Index Performance

index performance 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

Top Winners and Losers

DLF +18.24%
ADANIENT +19.21%
YESBANK +23.27%
GLAXO -13.03%
DRREDDY -5.88%
GODREJCP -5.62%
Dash for trash?

ETFs

BANKBEES +10.22%
PSUBNKBEES +7.31%
NIFTYBEES +4.07%
JUNIORBEES +3.97%
INFRABEES +2.87%
GOLDBEES -1.01%
Infrastructure finally caught a bid! Banks rallied.

Advancers and Decliners

advacers and decliners 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

Investment Theme Performance

High beta names caught a bid. IT stocks corrected towards the end of the week on a strong rupee.

Sector Performance

sector performance 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

Yield Curve

yield Curve 2014-02-28.2014-03-07

Thought for the weekend

Could one of the “purposes” of love be to make couples crazy enough to ditch their current partners first? The overwhelming evidence from our genes and from the history of human societies is that something is driving breakups just as powerfully as that same mechanism, or some related one, drives people to get together in the first place.

Source: What if the purpose of love is to get us out of relationships, not into them?

Stock Market ≠ Economy

Economic statistics hit your inbox almost on a daily basis. Markit has its “flash” numbers ready 15 days before the “final” numbers. Government/RBI press releases about the GDP, CAD, etc come out once a month. And then there are expert forecasts about how the numbers are going to look on an annual basis, etc. And then there are bloggers and commentators who slice-and-dice the data to read the tea leaves. But should equity market investors care?

“An economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn’t happen today.” – Evan Esar

If you are not trading interest-rate or currency derivatives, and if you truly are a long-term equity market investor, then growth rates hardly matter. Data show that there is very little correlation between GDP growth and stock market returns. In a 2012 paper titled “Is Economic Growth Good for Investors?”, Jay R. Ritter from the University of Florida actually found a negative correlation between GDP growth per capita and inflation-adjusted stock returns. From the abstract:

Economic growth comes partly from increased inputs of capital and labor, which don’t necessarily benefit the stockholders of existing companies. Economic growth also comes from technological change, which does not necessarily lead to higher profits if competition between firms results in the benefits being passed to consumers and workers. Realized growth has both an expected and unexpected component. Apparently investors overpay for expected growth, and this over-payment more than offsets the benefits of unexpected growth.

“If you spend more than 13 minutes analyzing economic and market forecasts, you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” – Peter Lynch

In fact, seasoned investors have time and again advised us to keep economists away from the trading floor. Here’s a gem from TRB:

Stocks trade based on three things: sentiment, valuation and trend. Yes, economic data feeds into these things, but it is up to the trader or investor to determine their combined favorability, an economist does not do that sort of work. The reality is that there is no such positive correlation over various periods of time between economic data and stocks in any given country.

And recently from AWOC:

The economy and the stock market are two different animals. The economy matters much less to stock market returns than most professional investors would have you believe. Economic data lags, gets revised, has seasonality and is just generally hard to use when making investment decisions for all but a very small percentage of investment professionals.

I am all on board to keeping a 36,000 foot view on growth trends, credit cycles, bank balance-sheets etc. It allows you to develop an understanding of sector rotations and position your portfolio beta. But knowing the minutiae might actually be of negative value to your investment process.

Sources:

The Seersucker Theory

We have always been skeptical about forecasting experts. However, skepticism about forecasts is nothing new. Lao Tzu, a 6th century poet is quoted as saying: “Those who have knowledge don’t predict. Those who predict don’t have knowledge.” The Little Book of Behavioral Investing has an entire chapter dedicated to explaining why Forecasting is a Sham. And yet, people are willing to pay heavily for expert advice. They generally ignore available evidence and continue paying for forecasts.

sucker

As J. Scott Armstrong so eloquently put it: “No matter how much evidence exists that seers do not exist, suckers will pay for the existence of seers.” This is the Seersucker Theory.

Its not that experts are useless. But expertise beyond a minimal level is of little value in forecasting change. This conclusion is both surprising and useful, and its implication is clear: Don’t hire the best expert, hire the cheapest expert.

However, we often fool ourselves into believing that the more we pay for advice, the better it is. Armstrong goes on to say: One explanation is that the client is not interested in accuracy, but only in avoiding responsibility. A client who calls in the best wizard available avoids blame if the forecasts are inaccurate. The evasion of responsibility is one possible explanation for why stock market investors continue to purchase expert advice in spite of overwhelming evidence that such advice is worthless.

The whole paper is worth a read and raises some important questions about our own beliefs.

Source: The seer-sucker theory: the value of experts inforecasting