Psicologia e mercati Il tempo e non il timing determina il successo dell' investimento azionario

[alingtonsky]

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Don't get mad, get even: That sentiment could be a powerful motivator for shellacked shareholders who are reeling from the stock market's collapse.


Spooked investors may be tempted to sell into periodic rallies at this point, in an effort to at least recoup some losses. But that hopeful strategy is full of flaws. Selling into a rally is for traders, not investors. It shreds long-term plans and puts you on a hair-trigger defense.

You lose sight of the fact that time in the market, not timing the market, determines financial success. Investment horizons that were considered in years become measured in minutes, pushing you into panicked decisions you wouldn't make in a calmer situation.
"Investors think 'I'll get out now and then I'll get back in when this market has bottomed,'" said Scott Kays, an investment adviser in Atlanta.
"They're fooling themselves," he added. "You're changing your strategic allocation because of a change in your circumstances. That's market timing, and I've never seen anybody do that consistently."
Grit and bear it
Market timing sure sounds appealing. You can be out of stocks during bad periods and ride the gravy train when the bulls are in charge. Indeed, a timer with perfect pitch who correctly guessed every market fluctuation between 1926 and 2004 would have turned $1 into a cool $20 billion, according to a University of Michigan study for investment adviser Towneley Capital Management. But the probability of being right even 50% of the time is nearly zero.
"You can't control the markets, and you can't control getting in and out at the right time," said Christine Fahlund, a senior financial planner at mutual-fund giant T. Rowe Price Group. "If you knew how to do that, you wouldn't be in the predicament you're in today."
In truth, if you haven't sold by now, with the U.S. market down by more than one-third in the past 12 months, this is no time to throw in the towel.
You might feel safe and smug in cash, especially if stock prices tumble further. But what happens when the market improves? You will have locked in your losses, selling low instead of buying low.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...-0D03-465B-8333-5D2EB07E7213}&dist=TNMostRead

 

[alingtonsky]

That was then...
"People should say 'Today, this is my investment capital,'" said Lou Stanasolovich, head of Pittsburgh money manager Legend Financial Advisors. "Forget about what you had at the peak. We can't do anything about yesterday."
The price of panic is high. Sticking with stocks through volatile market downturns typically leaves you with more money after a couple of years than selling would.
For example, the U.S. market tumbled more than 12% over three weeks in October 1997 in response to the Asian currency crisis. T. Rowe Price calculated two outcomes for a $50,000 portfolio of 70% stocks and 30% cash and bonds. In one scenario, the investor did nothing as stocks tumbled. In the other, the portfolio went to all cash and bonds on the second day of the crisis.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...-0D03-465B-8333-5D2EB07E7213}&dist=TNMostRead

 

[alingtonsky]

The investor who did nothing saw the value of the portfolio fall sharply, to $46,296, but two years later it had grown to $63,934. The investor who dumped stocks lost less at first, but after two years the portfolio was worth just $54,720.
Moreover, market recoveries typically start strong. The average return for stocks in the 12 months following the end of a bear market is 45%, but if you sat out the first six months of the rally in cash, that 12-month return becomes just 12%, according to a Charles Schwab & Co. study.
"A lot of the recovery tends to occur in the first few months," said Mark Riepe, head of the Schwab Center for Financial Research. "If you wait until the all-clear sign to get back in, you'll have missed out on a lot of the gain."
Compare two hypothetical investors. The first put $10,000 into a Standard & Poor's 500 fund at the end of December 2002. The post-Internet bubble, post-9/11 bear market had already bottomed out, but it still had several rocky months to go before anyone knew the worst was already over. Meanwhile, another investor held off until the end of September 2003 and the full-fledged return of the bulls.
The first investor would have had $14,760 by the end of September 2008. The investor who waited would have $12,866, according to investment researcher Morningstar Inc.
So by staying sidelined for nine months until the coast was clear, you'd have given up about $1,900, or 40% of the market's gains.
Said Riepe: "You've got to decide: Are you out, are you in, are you part of the way in? Tie it back to your plan, as opposed to having it driven by some psychological factor. At the end of the day, the market doesn't care what your gains and losses are."
"The pain of loss is why this is so uncomfortable," added Donald MacGregor of MacGregor-Bates Inc., a researcher and consultant on judgment and decision making.
"Should I sell? Should I take what I've got? What they're looking at is the value of their portfolio available to them now versus the potential regret they might feel if they don't sell," McGregor said. "Selling is the only action they can take that gives them some control. And it's all about control."
(by Jonathan Burton)

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...-0D03-465B-8333-5D2EB07E7213}&dist=TNMostRead