Tag Archives: apple

Huh? What? Short Attention-Span Investors

Summary Eight seconds. That’s all we, as human beings, use to focus on any one particular thing before being distracted or allowing our minds to wander. The implications of having such a short attention span are immense. The frequency of short-term gains and focus on the here and now prevents many from taking a longer-term view which can help mitigate risks. “The Internet is a big distraction.” – Ray Bradbury Every day I like to do what millions of people around the world do: read up on news. Not too long ago, you’d see open newspapers from crowds of subway-passengers looking for ways to make the commute more tolerable. Now? Seemingly everyone turns on their smartphone, or tablet to absorb the news of the moment. We feel smarter, we feel more educated “knowing” what’s going on in the world around us. One particular story hit me a few months ago on a normal day commuting to work, which I took an excerpt from below: “Humans have become so obsessed with portable devices and overwhelmed by content that we now have attention spans shorter than that of the previously jokingly juxtaposed goldfish. Microsoft surveyed 2,000 people and used electroencephalograms (EEGs) to monitor the brain activity of another 112 in the study, which sought to determine the impact that pocket-sized devices and the increased availability of digital media and information have had on our daily lives. Among the good news in the 54-page report is that our ability to multi-task has drastically improved in the information age, but unfortunately attention spans have fallen. In 2000 the average attention span was 12 seconds, but this has now fallen to just eight. The goldfish is believed to be able to maintain a solid nine.” Source: The Independent Eight seconds. That’s all we, as human beings, use to focus on any one particular thing before being distracted or allowing our minds to wander. We went from 12 seconds (already hilariously low), to an even shorter 8 seconds just a little over a decade later. I shudder to think how short that attention span will get in the next decade, and the next, and the next. We live in a world where there is so much noise, so much distraction, that we simply can’t focus anymore. Investors have mentalities of traders, and traders act like high-frequency algorithms which base decisions on information which is largely impossible to process without advanced computing power. The implications of having such a short attention span are immense, as it results in a complete inability to focus on the long-term, and think beyond the talking point of the moment. People like to watch the behavior of certain exchange traded funds like the S&P 500 SPDRs ETF (NYSEARCA: SPY ), and the iShares Russell 2000 Index Fund ETF (NYSEARCA: IWM ) because that intraday movement feeds our short-term, unfocused addiction to data. Too bad it doesn’t actually help. Short focus also makes discipline harder and harder to have consistently. One of the reasons we purposely designed our alternative Morningstar 4 Star overall rated ATAC Inflation Rotation Fund (MUTF: ATACX ) (rating as of 9/30/15 among 234 Tactical Allocation Funds derived from a weighted average of the fund’s 3-year risk-adjusted return measures) to be quantitative in nature is to force unemotional discipline into tactical risk management. All of the knowledge in the world doesn’t matter if we qualitatively get distracted and can barely focus for more than 8 seconds on any one topic, let alone plan out an asset allocation policy or rotational strategy based on opinion as opposed to math. Focus tends to be what differentiates the great from the good. The temptations, however, are enormous in an instant gratification world where we want to make money every single second, because we can only focus on a few of those seconds before deciding (with conviction) whether something is working or isn’t. To be better at long-term wealth generation, I believe we need to focus first and foremost on what longer-term quantitative analysis suggests matters most. As stated in the summary versions of our award winning papers (click here to download), the major focus for investors and traders shouldn’t be chasing upside, but minimizing downside. The problem? The frequency of short-term gains and focus on the here and now prevents many from taking a longer-term view which can help mitigate risks. What do you do about it? Turn your screens off, shut down your phones, and focus on only those things that have tended to have predictive power. Too much information is a massive distraction, and detrimental to focusing on real wealth generation techniques as opposed to the trade of the moment. Now, where’s that newspaper? Opinions expressed are those of the author and are subject to change, are not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results, nor investment advice. The Fund’s investment objectives, risks, charges, expenses and other information are described in the statutory or summary prospectus, which must be read and considered carefully before investing. You may download the statutory or summary prospectus or obtain a hard copy by calling 855-ATACFUND or visiting atacfund.com . Please read the Prospectuses carefully before you invest. For each fund with at least a three-year history, Morningstar calculates a Morningstar Rating™ (based on a Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return measure that accounts for variation in a fund’s monthly performance including the effects of sales charges, loads, and redemption fees), placing more emphasis on downward variations and rewarding consistent performance. The top 10% of funds in each category receive 5 stars, the next 22.5% receive 4 stars, the next 35% receive 3 stars, the next 22.5% receive 2 stars and the bottom 10% receive 1 star. (Each share class is counted as a fraction of one fund within this scale and rated separately, which may cause slight variations in the distribution percentages.) The ATAC Inflation Rotation Fund was rated against the following numbers of U.S.-domiciled Tactical Allocation funds over the following time periods: 234 funds in the last three years for the period ending 9/30/15. With respect to these Tactical Allocation funds, ATAC Inflation Rotation Fund received a Morningstar Rating of 4 stars for the three-year period. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. ©2015 Morningstar, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein: (1) is proprietary to Morningstar; (2) may not be copied or distributed; and (3) is not warranted to be accurate, complete or timely. Neither Morningstar nor its content providers are responsible for any damages or losses arising from any use of this information. Mutual fund investing involves risk. Principal loss is possible. Because the Funds invest primarily in ETFs, they may invest a greater percentage of its assets in the securities of a single issuer and therefore is considered non-diversified. If a Fund invests a greater percentage of its assets in the securities of a single issuer, its value may decline to a greater degree than if the fund held were a more diversified mutual fund. The Funds are expected to have a high portfolio turnover ratio which has the potential to result in the realization by the Fund and distribution to shareholders of a greater amount of capital gains. This means that investors will be likely to have a higher tax liability. Because the Funds invest in Underlying ETFs an investor will indirectly bear the principal risks of the Underlying ETFs, including but not limited to, risks associated with investments in ETFs, large and smaller companies, real estate investment trusts, foreign securities, non-diversification, high yield bonds, fixed income investments, derivatives, leverage, short sales and commodities. The Fund will bear its share of the fees and expenses of the underlying funds. Shareholders will pay higher expenses than would be the case if making direct investments in the underlying funds. All investing involves risks. Fund holdings and sector allocations are subject to change and should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any securities. Reference to other securities should not be interpreted as a recommendation of these securities. Diversification does not assure a profit nor protect against loss in a declining market. As of 10/21/2015, the fund does not hold any of the following securities in Its portfolio: SPY, IWM The ATAC Inflation Rotation Fund is distributed by Quasar Distributors, LLC. No other products mentioned in this piece are distributed by Quasar.

A Lower-Risk Way To Invest In The Dow

Summary During the average 6-month period over the last 10 years, the Dow-tracking ETF DIA gained 3.98%. DIA shareholders suffered a 38% decline during one of those 6-month periods. A hedged portfolio of Dow component stocks, such as the one shown below, can offer a higher expected return with less than half the drawdown risk. Although cost is a concern when hedging, in our example, the hedged portfolio has a negative cost. Risk Versus Return For The Dow-Tracking ETF Although not as widely-traded as ETFs tracking the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq, according to the ETF Database , the SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (NYSEARCA: DIA ) is among the top-40 ETFs by average trading volume over the last 3 months, and has assets under management of over $11.5 billion, so it holds a place in the portfolios of a lot of investors. Any of those investors who owned DIA in late 2008 and early 2009 saw the ETF drop about 38% within a six-month period between August of 2008 and February of 2009. During the average six-month period over the last ten years, though, DIA investors had a respectable total return of about 3.98%. But as we’ll show below, by using the hedged portfolio method to invest in some of DIA’s top holdings, an investor can get a higher expected return over the next six months while risking a drawdown less than half as large as the one mentioned above. When Stocks Can Be Safer Than An ETF It may seem counterintuitive that you can be exposed to less risk by holding a handful of Dow components than by holding the ETF that owns all of them, but that can be the case when you own those stocks within a hedged portfolio. Although a diversified limits the idiosyncratic risk of owning individual stocks, it doesn’t limit market risk (DIA isn’t as diversified as some ETFs, as it has about half of its assets in its top-10 holdings). But a hedged portfolio limits both. Below, we’ll show how to construct a hedged portfolio out of DIA top holdings for an investor who is unwilling to risk a drawdown of more than 19%, and has $500,000 that he wants to invest. First, though, let’s address the issue of risk tolerance, and how it affects potential return. Risk Tolerance and Potential Return All else equal, with a hedged portfolio, the greater an investor’s risk tolerance — the greater the maximum drawdown he is willing to risk (his “threshold”, in our terminology) – the higher his potential return will be. So, we should expect that an investor who is willing to risk a 29% decline will have a chance at higher potential returns than one who is only willing to risk a 9% drawdown. In our example, we’ll be splitting the difference and using a 19% threshold (half of the 38% drawdown DIA investors experienced in 2008-2009). Constructing A Hedged Portfolio We’ll recap the hedged portfolio method here briefly, and then explain how you can implement it yourself using DIA’s top holdings as a starting point. Finally, we’ll present an example of a hedged portfolio that was constructed this way with an automated tool. The process, in broad strokes, is this: Find securities with relatively high potential returns. Find securities that are relatively inexpensive to hedge. Buy a handful of securities that score well on the first two criteria; in other words, buy a handful of securities with high potential returns net of their hedging costs (or, ones with high net potential returns). Hedge them. The potential benefits of this approach are two-fold: If you are successful at the first step (finding securities with high expected returns), and you hold a concentrated portfolio of them, your portfolio should generate decent returns over time. If you are hedged, and your return estimates are completely wrong, on occasion — or the market moves against you — your downside will be strictly limited. How to Implement This Approach Finding Promising Stocks If we were looking for securities with the highest potential returns, we wouldn’t limit ourselves to just Dow components; instead, we’d consider a much broader universe of stocks. But since we’re concerned with Dow stocks here, we’ll start with the top holdings of DIA. To quantify potential returns for DIA’s top holdings, you can check Seeking Alpha Pro for articles that offer price targets for the stocks, or you can use sell-side analysts’ consensus price targets for them and then convert those to percentage returns from current prices. For example, via Nasdaq , this is the 12 month consensus price target for Dow component and top-10 DIA holding Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS ): You can use that consensus price target as a starting point for your estimate, adjusting it based on the time frame you’re using and whether you think it is overly optimistic or not. In general, though, you’ll need to use the same time frame for each of your potential return calculations to facilitate comparisons of potential returns, hedging costs, and net expected returns. Our method starts with calculations of six-month expected returns. Finding inexpensive ways to hedge these securities Our method attempts to find optimal static hedges using collars as well as protective puts going out approximately six months. Whatever hedging method you use, for this example, you’d want to make sure that each security is hedged against a greater-than-19% decline over the time frame covered by your potential return calculations. And you’ll need to calculate your cost of hedging as a percentage of position value. Select the securities with highest net potential returns When starting from a large universe of securities, you’d want to select the ones with the highest potential returns, net of hedging costs; you can do the same here, starting with the top holdings in DIA, but, in any case, you’ll at least want to exclude any of them that has a negative potential return net of hedging costs. It doesn’t make sense to pay X to hedge a stock if you estimate the stock will return