Why Periodic Buying of Stocks is Smart to Built Wealth: An Australian Example

Posted by on

One of the strategies that goes with diversification and patience is periodic investing. To put it another way, regular contributions into equity accounts and buying stocks can earn excellent returns over the long-term as measured in years. This is because with regular investing, an investor is able to pick up stocks on the cheap when markets are down. Not only that but the investor is able to accumulate more stocks for the same monthly investment in a portfolio. Of course, when markets are soaring equity prices will be higher and the investor will buy less of the same share for the same amount. This process is called dollar-cost averaging.

But over time, due to the effect of compounding the overall portfolio can generate great returns as shown in the Australian example below.

Before we get to that, below is an excerpt on the concept of “dollar cost averaging” from an article at Capital Group:

One way to avoid futile attempts to time the market is with dollar cost averaging, where a fixed amount of money is invested at regular intervals, regardless of market ups and downs. This approach creates a strategy in which more shares are purchased at lower prices and fewer shares are purchased at higher prices. Over time investors pay less, on average, per share. Regular investing does not ensure a profit or protect against loss. Investors should consider their willingness to keep investing when share prices are declining.

Retirement plans, to which investors make automatic contributions with every paycheck, are a prime example of dollar cost averaging.

Source: How to handle market declines, Capital Group

The following chart from Vanguard Australia shows the benefits of periodic investing:

Source: Vanguard Australia

Related ETFs:

  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF (EWA)
  • SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY)

Disclosure: No Positions

The Power of Diversification Illustrated With Australian Equities: Chart

Posted by on

Diversification and patience are two of the free and simple strategies for success with equity investing. Patience requires  not only holding stocks when the market is soaring but also the ability to withstand during dramatic and painful declines. Diversification on the other hand is easier to follow and implement with one’s portfolio. It is always wise to hold a variety of different assets across regions or countries than to won a concentrated basket of stocks.

The following chart from Vanguard Australia shows the power of  diversification over the 30 years from 1992 to 2021:

Click to enlarge

 

Source: Vanguard Australia

Australian equities were the top performers in just 3 out of those 30 years. The chart clearly shows no asset earned the best return year after year year consistently.

Related ETF:

  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF (EWA)

Disclosure: No Positions

Why Time in the Market is More Important Than Timing the Market

Posted by on

I have written many times before that time in the market is more important than timing the market, if that is even possible. It is worth repeating this concept especially during volatile market times as more investors tend to think about bailing out of the market. The problem with this idea is while it is easy to get out at any time to cut down further losses it is not easy to say the least of figuring out when to get back in. Since nobody knows when the market would turn for the better it is foolish to hope that one can predict this. For example, for the past few weeks many experts have been trying to identify “the bottom” of this market in a futile exercise.

Staying invested during good and bad times is important because even just missing the best few days will lead to a much lower return as shown in the chart below:

Click to enlarge

Source: How to handle market declines, The Capital Group

An excerpt from the above piece:

Even missing out on just a few trading days can take a toll. A hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the S&P 500 made in 2012 would have grown to more than $3,790 by the end of 2021. But if an investor missed just the 10 best trading days during that period, he or she would have ended up with 44% less. (emphasis mine)

Another important fact to remember is that the best days seem to be closer to the worst days and vice versa. This makes it even more difficult to time the market. When the market plunges say 5% one day an investor that sells out will inevitably miss the say 3% surge that may follow in the next few days.

A recent article at Vanguard UK makes this point very clear. From the article:

Another reason for clients to stay invested and not time the market is that, historically, the best and worst trading days have come close together, making it difficult to avoid one without the other. Last week was a perfect example of that, with US share prices surging on the day of the Fed’s rate-hike announcement, followed by a plunge the next day.

Remember also that some of the best trading days have occurred during periods of long market downturns, as shown in the chart below. Missing those key trading days lowers long-term returns.

Again, please note, that the returns data shown below only cover the 500 biggest listed companies in the United States and is in US dollar terms. However, the US market accounts for well over half the world’s shares by value and it’s a similar picture in other currencies.

Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. Sources: Vanguard calculations, based on data from Refinitiv using the Standard & Poor’s 500 Price Index. Data between 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2021.

The bottom line for investors is that sticking to your long-term investment strategy may be the best route to investment success.

Historically, investors with patience and a long-term perspective would have benefitted more from staying the course than trying to time the market when things get choppy.

Source: Keep perspective when markets are volatile, Vanguard UK

So the key takeaway for investors is that it is wise to simply stay put during adverse market conditions and focus on the long-term by ignoring the day to day noise and other distractions.

Related ETFs:

  • iShares MSCI UK Index Fund (EWU)
  • SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY)

Disclosure: No Positions

Sources of Tax Revenue in the US vs. OECD Countries

Posted by on

While researching on capital taxes around the world recently, I came across the below interesting graph that shows the sources of tax revenue in the US compared to the OECD countries. Tax revenues come in various categories such as Individual Taxes, Corporate Taxes, Property Taxes, etc. But they differ significantly in terms of reliance on each of these taxes by the US and other OECD countries.

Click to enlarge

Source: Taxes in the United States, Tax Foundation

I wrote an article about this fact many years ago. The US collects more taxes from individuals than from corporations as shown in the chart above. This is policy is highly beneficial to investors of corporations. By paying less taxes, corporations are able to keep more of their profits or pass it on to their owners in the form of dividends and share buybacks. OCED countries on an average raise nearly double the US rate in the form of Corporate Taxes.

Property Taxes are nearly double in the country relative to the OECD average. Property Taxes vary widely even within a state or a city. These taxes are used as a form of catch-all revenue sources by local governments. Any need for funds such as adding a new library to building a stadium to establishing a park and everything in between is easily achieved by adding them to property taxes owed by a owner of a property within the jurisdiction. Of course such levies are first put through a ballot for approval from voters. In addition, since annual property taxes are in the thousands of dollars just adding a dollar here and dollar there for some requirement can easily generate millions in additional revenue.

The American economy is a consumption-driven economy. Hence taxes on consumption are kept low when compared to OECD countries. High taxes on consumption such as consumer goods for example can slash demand. So lower consumption taxes indirectly encourages consumers to consume more of goods and services.

Which US Stocks Performed Better During the 1970s ?

Posted by on

In the 1970s, the US economy was suffering from Stagflation. This was period of high inflation and unemployment. Many experts are predicting the current economic condition could lead to a similar scenario. If the US economy enters into a period of stagflation, which stocks will perform better?

According to a report by Marko Gränitz, “During the 1970s, when inflation rates were very high, the 20 percent of stocks with the lowest valuation – as measured by price-to-earnings ratios – performed significantly better than the highest-valued stocks.”

Click to enlarge

Source: “Stagflation, then and now“, by Marko Gränitz, guest author at LGT, May 18, 2022 via Investment Office

Here is an excerpt on Stagflation from an article at AP:

Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing countries imposed an oil embargo on the United States and other countries that supported Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Oil prices jumped and stayed high. The cost of living grew more unaffordable for many. The economy reeled.

Enter stagflation. Each year from 1974 through 1982, inflation and unemployment in the United States both topped 5%. The combination of the two figures, which came to be called the “misery index,” peaked at a most miserable 20.6 in 1980.

Stagflation, and especially chronically high inflation, became a defining feature of the 1970s. Political figures struggled in vain to attack the problem. President Richard Nixon resorted, futilely, to wage and price controls. The Ford administration issued “Whip Inflation Now” buttons. The reaction was mainly scorn.

Source: Worry about stagflation, a flashback to ’70s, begins to grow, AP

Related ETF:

  • SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY)

Disclosure: No Positions