Category: blog post

The content from the January 14, 2020 Ottawa Share Club meeting is posted

The material presented at the OSC meeting on January 14, 2020 is now available.

It includes Michael’s review of the Ottawa Share Club fantasy growth and income portfolios, Geoff’s 2019 year in review by sector and Brad’s material on a trade in the OSC fantasy growth portfolio.

More here on the OSC member and guest page.

The 2019 Ottawa Share Club fantasy growth and income portfolios are posted

The 2019 Ottawa Share Club fantasy portfolios are published.

The fantasy growth portfolio had a total return of 21.8% for the year. More here.

The fantasy income portfolio had a total return of 17.8%. More here.

These portfolios will be reviewed at the January 14, 2020 Ottawa Share Club meeting. The related deck will be posted on the OSC members’ page after the meeting.

My 2019 annual portfolio review has been posted

I have completed my 2019 annual portfolio review. Results were very good, and well ahead of plan.

All asset classes rose in value and I took profits in late November on holdings returning over 20% in 2019.

Now I have cash to deploy in 2020.

More on the year in review here.

Our household investment plan has been updated

I have updated our household investment plan which was last updated December 31, 2018.

The format has been greatly simplified and abbreviated. This format came from an investment plan I drafted for a friend of mine to consider for his portfolio. It occurred to me this simplified version is sufficient (subject to improvements of course).

My new investment plan is here.

The September 2019 OSC fantasy growth and income portfolios are posted

It’s been a good year to be an investor so far.

The Ottawa Share Club fantasy growth portfolio is up nearly 14% year-to-date. The portfolio report can be found here.

The Ottawa Share Club fantasy income portfolio is up about 13.5% year-to-date. The portfolio report can be found here.

I broke the same investment rule again….

I once again broke my investing rule of trading only once per quarter (if at all). What to do when two rules conflict with each other? I tried to err on the side of lower risk. I re-balanced early as one asset class breached a target threshold.

More here.

My second quarter 2019 portfolio review is posted

I have completed and posted my Q2 2019 portfolio review. We’re up 9.8% so far and things are looking good notwithstanding some possibly growing headwinds.

Read my full review here.

I broke one of my own investment management rules….

I have to make a confession. I broke one of my investment rules. I traded in May instead of in June when I normally would.

I typically trade only quarterly, but this time was different. I only lasted two months.

What was the trigger? One of our stocks has been soaring past single-holding thresholds lately and I thought I’d like to re-balance on a high note.

Find out more here.

Why I am not changing my portfolio now that the yield curve is no longer inverted

New reports indicate the yield curve in the US is no longer inverted. Since many suggested that when the yield curve did recently invert it was time to raise cash by selling risky equities, what are they saying now?

Presumably it’s time to put cash back to work in risk-on trades.

I’m not making any changes to my portfolio, just like I didn’t when the yield curve inverted.

My reasons are much the same as before, but in reverse:

  1. My cash levels are largely unchanged through the inversion and return to “non-inversion” so I don’t need to make adjustments
  2. I already have good exposure to riskier equities: for example about 20% in technology stocks
  3. I have nearly 50% in equities now, and am slightly overweight, so I don’t need to add more
  4. Markets remain at the higher range of valuations compared to historical norms so I see no reason to increase equity exposure
  5. I don’t know which risk-on stocks to buy as I like the ones I already have and don’t feel compelled to add to them
  6. It is unclear if there is likely going to be a recession anytime soon so I can’t make a case to change my portfolio accordingly, even if I was so inclined (which I am not)
  7. It’s not cleat to me what a yield curve “un-inversion” might be forecasting, if anything
  8. i am assuming, without evidence to the contrary, that the chance of recession in the near term is as likely as ever, so there is no obvious signal to make any re-allocations
  9. Odds are there won’t be a recession in the near term as most indicators, including the yield curve, don’t point to one
  10. The US Fed could still surprises by lowering interest rates, and the Bank of Canada is signalling a pause in raising rates, both of which could help equities
  11. If I did buy more risk-on equities would I then “have” to sell them if the yield curve re-inverts?

i know it’s very boring but staying the course is working well for me. My portfolio is up about 7% so far this year. That’s well ahead of my 4.5% annual goal.

 

Why I am not changing my portfolio even though the yield curve has inverted

On Friday it was reported that the yield curve in the US inverted for the first time since the last (great) recession. This is supposed to be a reliable harbinger for a future recession in 12-18 months.

What does it mean when the yield curve inverts?

It means the US short-term interest rate (as measured by the 3 month Treasury Bill rate) is now higher than the long-term interest rate (as measured by the 10 year Treasury Bill rate). An inversion like this is generally regarded as a negative market/economic sentiment that can affect economic and market behaviour.

The yield curve inversion has sent some scurrying to make changes to their portfolios by raising cash, selling riskier stocks and becoming more defensive (buying utilities, telcos, REITS and consumer staples equities).

Why I am not scurrying to do anything on the news:

  1. I already have some cash (about 10% of my portfolio, including high-interest savings and short-duration bonds maturing later this year)
  2. I already have good exposure to defensive equities: ~18% utilities + ~11% consumer defensive + ~6.5% communications services + ~3.5% real estate = ~39.0% defensive
  3. I have less than 50% of our total portfolio in equities so a market downturn should be offset somewhat by non-correlated holdings in fixed income, cash and bullion (this was true in 2018, when my portfolio returned ~+1% in spite of equity drawdowns in Canada and the US)
  4. If I sell something to raise cash there could be tax consequences in our non-registered accounts, due to potential capital gains being taxed
  5. I don’t know which non-defensive equities to sell to raise cash – I like all my holdings for the long haul or I wouldn’t own them
  6. Recessions tend to be short and I believe my long-term portfolio is structured well for riding out short-term events
  7. An inverted yield curve has reportedly accurately predicted upcoming recessions eight times (by some sources) since 1968 but, if on January 1, 1968, I bought and held the S&P 500 (^SPX) I would have made a return of 2.81K% in spite of the eight recessions (including the Great Recession of 2008-09)
  8. According to Forbes, the chance of a recession in the next year is always about 27% (based on their data pointing to 16 recessions since 1960) and today the chance is 30%, hardly more than average
  9. If the chance of recession is 30% next year there is also a 70% chance there won’t be a recession next year which means, based on probabilities alone, I should be buying risk-on stocks
  10. If the US Fed surprises by lowering interest rates, that could change the situation immediately
  11. I don’t know how to time when to start re-buying the risk-on equities I am supposed to sell now – presumably when the yield curve corrects to non-inversion

I am not saying a recession won’t happen in 2019-20. It may well.

What I am saying, as a long-term investor who buys, holds and monitors a portfolio of retirement assets designed for all markets, who relies primarily on asset allocation rules when making security weighting decisions, and who makes limited and selective trades intended to improve overall portfolio quality, I don’t react to news like this.

Do you?

 

 

 

Maybe the US president does affect markets after all

Many thought when Donald Trump became US president markets would react badly. How wrong was that?

Tax cuts and de-regulation have provided a boost to markets. However trade policy has also provided uncertainty. Rising interest rates, often not good for equities, have been seemingly offset, so far, by low unemployment and inflation and rising corporate profits.

With the most recent events in Washington, including Trump’s out-of-left-field tweet announcing an immediate troop withdrawal in Syria, followed by resignations by Defence Secretary Mattis and US anti-ISIS Envoy McGurk, Trump asking if he can fire Fed Chairman Powell, Trump associates being indicted and convicted by Mueller and other prosecutors, the Trump foundation closure due to inappropriate use of funds, the government shutdown that Trump said he would be proud of, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin’s calls today to top banks to check on their liquidity (was that even a problem?), to name a few, may mark a tipping point where the unpredictable deeds of Trump and his administration start to affect consumer and business confidence as well as market sentiment.

Investors have to be scratching their heads and wondering where all this is going and how much damage the seeming chaos might bring. 2019 doesn’t look like it will get much better with unresolved trade issues with China and others, the ongoing Mueller investigation and with the Democrats taking a majority role in the House of Representatives, where they will have the power of subpoena to conduct ever more investigations into Trump et. al. No one knows what tweet will next emanate from Trump’s fingers.

Powell is signalling a slowing of interest rate increases for next year. That might help markets settle. But forecasted profit growth is also slowing for 2019, same for global growth. Trump’s erratic behaviour seems to be amplifying uncertainty.

I can’t help thinking 2019 will be more volatile than 2018 as the drama, or do I say crisis, south of the border plays out.

We certainly live in interesting times.

Update: The Washington Post has a piece about how investor expectations may be adjusting to the reality of a Trump presidency.

 

More on sequence of returns risk

Sequence (of returns) risk is something I mentioned in my recent piece about my upcoming third quarter portfolio review. Sequence risk is a major factor in my planning as our household heads into retirement in the near future.

Looking at the current valuation of the S&P 500 vs. underlying gross national product is a bit sobering.

More on this here.

Previewing my next quarterly household portfolio review

September brings my next quarterly portfolio review and my next, self-imposed, securities trading window (I only trade four times a year). I have been giving a fair bit of thought this summer to what’s next for our portfolio.

Here’s a preview of my thinking….

 

 

 

 

 

My latest article on secular trends and investing has been published in Canadian MoneySaver

Canadian MoneySaver published my latest article on thematic investing in the July/August 2018 edition.

This time I discuss the investment opportunities in alternative energy. While there are headwinds in the short to medium term, long term this theme offers considerable potential, especially in Asian markets.

See more here (paywall): Canadian MoneySaver

My Q2 2018 portfolio review has been published

I’ve published my second quarter of 2018 portfolio review. In it I discuss my current take on managing our household portfolio, some of the trades I’ve recently made and my thoughts for the rest of the year.

See my review here.

The June 2018 OSC content has been published

The material from the June 12, 2018 Ottawa Share Club meeting has been published. It includes:

  • Peter’s slides presented by Brad and Eric on the use of advisors through the investment lifecycle.
  • Peter’s appendix about the difference between a dealing representative and an advising representative.
  • Margot Pomerleau’s slides on how to work with a financial advisor.
  • A pamphlet from Margot Pomerleau’s firm on the complaints process for retail investors in Canada (bonus material).

See all the content here.

Breaking my own asset allocation rules

I have a confession to make. I have broken my own asset allocation rules with my second quarter trades.

I bought more equities even though I was already a bit overweight in them.

Why did I do this?

My reasoning is as follows:

  • I have a relatively low target equity weight to begin with (46% of our portfolio)
  • I had a lot of cash on hand (way over 10% of our portfolio)
  • I have more cash becoming available due to savings, bond maturities, dividends and interest in the next 12 months or less
  • quite a bit of that cash was in our TFSAs and I wanted to get that money working at better than than bond returns since the returns are tax free
  • bond yields are still not that attractive in spite of rising rates (~3.1% yield-to-maturity on a five-year investment grade corporate bond)
  • there are a lot of relatively good deals in consumer staples, utilities and telecommunications right now – several companies are off their highs and are trading at reasonable multiples
  • these three sectors are pretty defensive and could do OK in a recessionary environment
  • I only bought high quality equities with relatively low risk and often decent dividends (with one or two exceptions)
  • I did not add any new positions, just added to our existing holdings to increase their position size to something more in line with our average position size
  • Next quarter is another opportunity to review our portfolio and decide if we should trim some of the big gainers, especially in technology, which are starting to become more dominant single positions in our holdings

What I bought (all in our TFSAs):

  • Algonquin Power (AQN) – initially bought in my Canadian TFSA and journalled to my US TFSA to get the dividend that is paid in US dollars without conversion back to Canadian dollars
  • Bell Canada Enterprises (BCE)
  • Fortis (FTS)
  • Loblaw (L) – has a relatively low dividend
  • ONEX (ONEX) – this is an exception as it is a growth stock with a very small dividend in the multi-sector holdings industry
  • North West Co (NWC)
  • Telus (T)

I also bought some bonds:

  • CALLOWAY-I 3.985% 30MY23
  • FAIRFAX FINL 4.5% 22MR23
  • CANADIAN WESTERN BANK Maturity Jun 16 2022 Coupon 2.737

So, after this investment “spree,” our weightings vs. targets are as follows:

Asset Type Planned Actual Variance
Equities 46.0% 51.9% 5.9%
Bonds 36.0% 29.6% -6.4%
Bullion 9.0% 9.1% 0.1%
Total Cash/Near Cash 9.0% 9.4% 0.4%
TOTAL 100.0% 100.0%

All in all, we’re still in a pretty conservative posture and continue to have flexibility with cash levels if needed.

More to come in early July when I publish my Q2 portfolio review.

Brad’s updates to Steven Brown’s retirement forecaster tool are now available

Brad updated Steven Brown’s Retirement Forecaster Excel spreadsheet tool (version  2.7.2). The changes are as follows:

Version 2.7.2 provides support for defined benefit (DB) pension plans with a Bridge Benefit (such as the Fed Government or Ontario Teachers) and the accompanying DB Survivor pension. Detailed input instructions are provided on the Instructions sheet, under the Instructions section.

You may access the material on Brad’s page here.

Secular trends fantasy portfolio launch

I’ve launched a new fantasy portfolio on the money4retirement.ca website to track secular, or thematic trends for investors.

A secular trend is:

An investment trend associated with some characteristic or phenomenon that is not cyclical or seasonal but exists over a relatively long period.

The rationale for doing this and the initial portfolio structure is presented here.

The first secular trends fantasy portfolio tracking report (and its benchmark) is presented here.

I’ve also added a new menu option called “Secular trends and investing” on the site for quick access.

The eCommerce secular trend made news today

WalMart, the once-stodgy bricks and mortar retailer, made news today with its largest acquisition ever – $15B US for 75% of eCommerce retailer Flipkart in India.

It reportedly beat out Amazon for the deal.

WalMart shares dropped 3% on the news.

Amazon’s shares rose 1%.

Softbank appears to have done very well. Other players were involved including Alphabet, Microsoft, Tencent Holdings and Naspers.

The deal hasn’t fully closed yet….

More from Bloomberg here.