Summer is upon us, in case the nation-wide triple digit temperatures hadn’t already made that abundantly clear. The second quarter of 2012 is now behind us, making it a good time to reflect on the year so far. Friday’s rally showed that even minor progress out of Europe still possesses the power to send markets scurrying, as multiple markets put in their best trading day of the year (or for several years, in some cases). The ups and downs throughout the month didn’t do much to satisfy bulls or bears, though the mini-rally was definitely not what many CTAs were hoping for. All the big macro-economic fears are still in place (it’s not like anyone expected Europe to solve their debt woes anytime soon), so the direction of the rest of the summer is still anyone’s guess. As we head into the pre-4th of July weekend (expecting picnics and barbecues aplenty), here’s our weekend reading material:
- SEC brings fraud charges against Phil Falcone (Reuters)
- JP Morgan’s “fail whale” trading losses may total $9 billion (New York Times)
- 7 equations for managing your retirement money (MarketWatch)
- Innovative tracking of the Colorado wildfire (Time)
And just for fun…
- Why most tomatoes taste terrible (Science Magazine)
- Your guide to the upcoming Tour de France (SB Nation)












Dear Mom…
Working in finance, you learn not to talk shop too much with family members. It’s a little easier for us to avoid typically. They ask us for a stock recommendation, we say we don’t do stocks, they get a blank look on their face, and we change the subject. But seriously, talking finance with family members can be the headache from hell when you’re working in it day in and day out. Take the following conversation one of the people in our office had with their under 50 mother – a necessary one, but facepalm status nonetheless:
Translation: she doesn’t really know what’s in there or why, so she’s just repeating the excuse given to her by her adviser. The excuse itself bears scrutiny, though: Time. Funny word, that. Unfortunately, most of us don’t have time, but will instead be forced to work overtime in the big picture just to make ends meet during retirement. US News and World Report states:
All that time you thought you had? Well, you may have an additional ten to twenty to wait – not out of choice, but necessity. That’s not the kind of time you want to have.
The whole concept of having a lot of time before you retire feeds into the ideas guiding your investment portfolio. When you have time, the buy and hold strategy looks pretty attractive. But how, exactly, is that working out? Well, had you started using this strategy back between 1993 and 1996, it might have been a winning strategy for you over a ten-year period. However, if you look at the chart below, you’ll notice that the ten-year rolling return for an investment in the S&P 500, used here as an imperfect proxy for stock exposure, actually dipped into negative territory for a full two-year time period.
Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.
The more interesting thing to note, though, is the blue line – managed futures performance per the Dow Jones Credit Suisse Managed Futures Sub-Index. Assuming a world where this index were investable (it’s not), you’d notice that managed futures rolling ten year returns are actually increasing relative to the same measure for stocks. In fact, the average 10-year rolling return for managed futures was 99%, while the average for stocks was 79%. And as a gloating aside – note that the managed futures line never once dipped into negative territory the way stocks did.
To be fair, past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, and managed futures, because of the risks involved, is never going to be right for every investor. The illustration above is not a perfect representation – it’s just a snapshot that we hope makes you think about “time” and planning a little differently. It’s not that we don’t think you should look at investing over the long-term, because we do. Managed futures investments should have a minimum timeframe of three to five years, in our opinion. What we’re saying is that even when you do look at the long term, there are still potentially better options than the traditional investments you’ve been looking at. Even if you do want to invest with longer timeframes, you can do better than a traditional buy and hold approach.
Sigh. Oh, Parents. We’ve become them, in many ways – nagging them to look at their portfolios, chasing around rugrats of our own. We’re suddenly in a position to be giving them advice – just make sure you’re listening to the advice you dole out as well.