Portafogli e Strategie (investimento) Portafoglio, asset allocation, retirement

[paradossista]

In sintesi: keep it simple funziona anche se ci confrontiamo con gli investitori istituzionali. Restando in tema degli investitori istituzionali, ed i costi elevati per gli investimenti esotici, vedi il post #93.

Investors who placed assets in a completely liquid, low-cost, diversified portfolio of index funds have been consistent top performers.
As the following chart highlights, over periods that include the bursting of the internet bubble, the great financial crisis, the market drop during COVID, the downturn in 2022, and many strong rallies in between, a Simple Global Index Fund Portfolio that was rebalanced back to allocation targets only once a year on January 1st has produced returns that consistently rank among the top 25% of endowments – 14 out of 14 consecutive 10-year periods in a row.

Top Quartile Endowments vs. Simple Global Index Fund Portfolio (10-Year Rolling Periods Ending Fiscal June 30th Year Ends)

The Simple Global Index Portfolio (SGP) portfolio is not an actual fund, index, portfolio, or security. The following are the SGP asset mixes of the over various time-periods:

The Road Less Traveled – Simple Alternatives - Fiduciary Wealth Partners

A different type of edge – a simple investment alternative.

fwpwealth.com

 

[paradossista]

Si deve metabolizzare il concetto di diversificazione: diversificando attraverso strumenti a basso costo si è certi (ex ante) che non si avrà il portafoglio migliore, ma si è anche certi che non si avrà il portafoglio peggiore.

Although diversification can be critical to survival, investors don’t really like it. When we diversify it says that we are uncertain about the future rather than confident, it also means that – after the fact – our portfolio has always performed worse than it might have done.

E si torna agli insegnamenti su cosa sia il rischio, vedi post #153.

Investors can be susceptible to thinking about the average return of an asset class at a group level (XYZ hedge fund category has produced a 7.8% return over the past decade), but really we should care at least as much about the individual paths taken by the funds within that grouping (5% of the funds in XYZ hedge fund category lost more than 50%). The second piece of information feels more important than the first.

I perdenti non fanno notizia.

High risk, highly fragile investment strategies – whether they be complex, leveraged hedge funds or concentrated equity portfolios – are constantly lauded when they produce extraordinary returns with rarely a mention of the many, many other similar strategies that were carrying similar risks but failed to survive.

Di solito considero molto poco intelligenti i "vincenti" che non ammettono di essere stati aiutati dalla fortuna. E men che meno li prendo come dei modelli da imitare.

The successful survivors have inevitably enjoyed incredible luck, but it is our tendency to ascribe those outcomes to agency and skill rather than a dice roll.

Bisogna capire che ogni asset ha un suo ruolo nel portafoglio, e spesso per gli asset più difensivi sono più i momenti in cui sono nell'angolino piuttosto che al centro della pista da ballo.

Any investment is only as good as our ability not to make bad choices while we own it.

Ogni investitore sopravvaluta la propria attitudine a prendere decisioni intelligenti di fronte a rendimenti scarsi, eppure ogni investimento attraverserà momenti di performance deludente. Pochi di noi sembrano preparati a questa dolorosa realtà.

Molto spesso la decisione migliore è non fare nulla, cioè non modificare il proprio portafoglio.

To benefit from the power of compounding returns over the long-term, we need to survive the temptation to make poor decisions along the way.

Questo è un grande vantaggio competitivo che ha il piccolo investitore rispetto ai gestori attivi dei fondi di investimento.

The lessons about the challenges of dealing with our own behaviour applies to private and professional investors alike, but for professional investors not only do they have to worry about themselves, they have to worry about their environment. This means not only considering their own behaviour, but also the decision making of their clients and their employer. It is no good making a great investment decision if you might lose your assets or job before it comes to fruition.

For a professional investor there is a requirement to make decisions where they can survive the weakest link in the chain. It might be their investments; it might be their own psychology, or it might be their environment.

Non critico i gestori che sono attivi solo in apparenza, perché discostarsi relativamente poco dal benchmark è un modo per preservare il proprio posto di lavoro ed il proprio stipendio. Critico invece chi ci investe, perché l'investitore potrebbe ottenere un risultato migliore scegliendo strumenti indicizzati al benchmark a basso costo.

There is often a lot of cynicism about fund managers running ‘closet trackers’ or making decisions that seem to be designed for managing their own career risk. While such choices might not look compelling from an investment perspective, it is a rational activity for an individual looking to survive their environment.

Investors Must Survive

In his book on the concept of ergodicity, Luca Dellanna writes of his cousin who was a highly talented skier in his youth, but had a potential future in the sport cut short by a succession of injur…

behaviouralinvestment.com

 

[paradossista]

Chi non ha figli e non desidera averne ha un percorso finanziario diverso dalle altre persone.

“Most childfree folks are going to want to die with zero. The way I say it is, if my nephews get $10,000 or $100,000, that’s fine, but if they get $1 million, I made a mistake, because I probably should help them throughout their life,” Zigmont says.

Many advisors run Monte Carlo simulations to try to ensure clients don’t run out of money late in life. “And for our clients, we have to do the inverse,” Zigmont says.
Clients don’t literally aim to die with nothing. “We actually set up what we call a safety net for dying with zero, which is a plan for long-term care, put off Social Security till 70, and then we put aside some cash for cushion,” he says.

Zigmont wants clients to have a long-term care plan in place by the time they’re around 45; that could mean insurance or setting aside money, he notes.
One of the big issues for childfree people is who’s going to make decisions for them when they cannot.

Childfree Planning Turns Traditional Advice on Its Head | ThinkAdvisor

People without children by choice are an underserved, underrepresented and sometimes mistreated population,” advisor Jay Zigmont says.

www.thinkadvisor.com

 

[paradossista]

Le ultime tre amministrazioni statunitensi hanno portato il deficit governativo degli USA a livelli molto elevati rispetto alle amministrazioni precedenti. Non è stata una scelta legata alla congiuntura economica ma una scelta politica condivisa. La crisi finanziaria del 2008 è stata la miccia che ha innescato il fenomeno.

 

[paradossista]

Along with a friend, David Lewant, in 2019, I wrote the first-ever guide to bitcoin and crypto for financial professionals for the CFA Institute Research Foundation. And I think that piece still stands up well today. It’s about 64 pages. It talks about the fundamentals of crypto. The reason I like it is it had to run a gauntlet at the CFA Institute Research Foundation of people who liked crypto and people who hated crypto. And as a result, I think it treads that line between what’s good about this new technology and what’s bad about this new technology. I think it’s a good place to start because one thing that plagues the crypto universe is that depending on who you talk to, it’s either the greatest thing since sliced bread and is going to cure all the world’s evils or it’s rat poison squared, as Warren Buffett said, and a tulip bulb and going to zero. And of course, the reality is somewhere in the middle. And what I really like about that document is because of the editorial inputs and having to run through a wall of skeptics, it has a nice balance between pro and con. And fortunately, it’s free.

https://www.morningstar.com/podcasts/the-long-view/34947adf-2bd1-442a-879d-11e6602d426b

Ecco il documento:

https://rpc.cfainstitute.org/-/media/documents/article/rf-brief/rfbr-cryptoassets.pdf

 

[paradossista]

E' una considerazione interessante, è quando siamo "troppo rilassati" che incappiamo negli errori. Un'altro tipico esempio è quando ci facciamo male nel ripetere una operazione già fatta altre mille volte, in un momento di bassa concentrazione o di distrazione.

And I do recall that the research suggested it was people who had more knowledge of investing and maybe there was a false sense of security, like when we hear about when there are car accidents—most of them happen within five miles of our home. Because we’re comfortable, we’re used to being in that space and we might just take our eye off the ball or something when we’re driving. Maybe it’s similar to the sophisticated investor who really believes in their own skills.​

Questo spero sia chiaro a tutti, in un caso del genere siate sospettosi e ricontattateli voi attraverso i canali ufficiali. Non fatevi sopraffare dall’emozione o dalla distrazione del momento, potrebbe costarvi cara.

Arnott: I think that’s a great point that anything that you’re receiving from a call or an email or a text, you have to automatically be skeptical, even if it looks like it’s a legitimate communication. So, if we go back to the example of you receive a text or an email from your bank that appears to be legitimate, saying your account has been hacked, your card has been stolen, what would be the best approach to take to handle that? Instead of engaging with the email or the text, would you want to call your bank directly using the number on your debit card?
Stokes: Exactly. So, if it is card related, flip that card over and call that number. Even if it looks like it’s coming from that number, it’s so easily spoofed is the term they use. So don’t trust the number as an indicator of legitimacy. Anytime you get a contact email, text, voice, and it’s from somebody that you do do business with, don’t engage with it. You can’t know for sure that that’s Amazon or that that’s Bank of America. If you have an account, an online account with any of these companies that are potentially trying to be impersonated, go to that account. If it’s a website, login. If it’s an app, login. If you have a relationship by phone, you know what the number is, go find it off your account paperwork. But just don’t trust those incoming communications right now.​

Oramai riceviamo spesso chiamate indesiderate di call center anche se siamo iscritti al registro pubblico delle opposizioni. Io quando ricevo chiamate da numeri che non ho in rubrica, anche se non vengono segnalate in ingresso come spam, subito mi si rizzano le antenne. A seguire segnalo il numero come spam se dopo avere risposto alla chiamata mi rendo conto che è un call center oppure parte uno di quei messaggi pre-registrati che pubblicizzano un prodotto o un servizio.

It’s important, if you get a text that’s clearly it’s a scam attempt, of course, you don’t want to engage with it. But at least with Apple iPhones right now, you should get a prompt that says this caller, or this number isn’t in your list, report it. And you say, “report it,” and then you can pick one—a half a dozen options like it’s political spam, or it’s general spam, or it’s a scam attempt. And click the scam attempt—whatever the terminology, it isn’t quite that—but they, in real time, the companies behind texting, can add that information into their algorithms to be able to stop those attacks from hitting other people. It’s pretty cool to be able to do that. So reporting is important.​

https://www.morningstar.com/podcasts/the-long-view/fae0bfa3-723c-4ac8-a84b-6c4a5797343a

 

[paradossista]

Il problema sta tutto qua, che ci si basi su dati storici o su previsioni in ogni caso cerchiamo di tracciare un ipotetico futuro inconoscibile.

Assuming we could forecast returns, volatility, and correlations, portfolio construction would just be a math problem.

Perciò l'unico approccio valido è essere umili e consapevoli che potremmo prendere delle cantonate.

What does this all mean? It means that when we develop our forward estimates of returns, volatilities, and correlations for our asset allocation models, we must be very humble about our asset class return predictions (as distinct from relative returns within an asset class where we believe factor models work). Our estimates are likely to have a high degree of uncertainty and error. By contrast, we can be bolder in our estimates of volatility because volatility tends to be more range bound and our mistakes are less likely to be extreme. Finally, we should be bold with our correlation predictions because there is both room for improvement over using the mean and correlations appear to be more predictable. Investing our time in building good correlation prediction models has the potential to yield the most benefit.

Forecastability and Portfolio Optimization

 

[paradossista]

Un portafoglio globale 60/40 è su nuovi massimi.

 

[paradossista]

La creazione di un nuovo sistema monetario globale basato su CBDCs va avanti passo dopo passo, vedi anche il precedente post #100.

Forty of the world's leading commercial banks have joined a G7-dominated pilot scheme with the New York Fed and leading central banks from Europe, Korea and Japan for a new digital currency platform designed to speed up and enhance cross border payments.
The Agora project involves seven central banks in total and will aim to see if so-called 'tokenised' bank deposits can be used in combination with tokenised central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) in a faster and more advanced system.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/top-commercial-banks-join-g7-led-central-bank-digital-currency-trial-2024-09-16/

 

[paradossista]

Come si suol dire … tra il dire e il fare c’è di mezzo il mare. Io credo che in Italia, con il fenomeno demografico in corso (vedi post #147), forse sarà sempre più difficile ottenere un adeguato supporto agli anziani (domanda>offerta). Un dubbio che mi pongo è se e quanto si svilupperà un business di cura agli anziani con un livello differenziato per capacità economica (es. non sei più autosufficiente ma hai un bel gruzzolo da spendere: ecco qua per te il pacchetto superior per una assistenza adeguata in una struttura privata, in una località relativamente vicina).

And she also talked a little bit about actually having clients who have needed long-term care. Many of them have had the funds to either have insurance or self-fund insurance. She talked about one client in particular who had a gold-plated long-term-care insurance policy that was going to pay him a very rich benefit, but unfortunately, he lived in a rural area where to secure in-home care for him so he could stay in his home, they weren’t finding people to deliver that care. That was just a really common-sense dimension of this, that we do have a caregiver shortage, and I think especially in some of these nonurban areas, that it can be difficult to find people to deliver care. That was just good food for thought about the practical implications of needing long-term care.​

https://www.morningstar.com/retirement/christine-benz-5-things-i-learned-about-retirement-planning-my-new-book