kcchongnz blog

How to invest, individual stocks or mutual funds kcchongnz

kcchongnz
Publish date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015, 03:54 PM
kcchongnz
0 408
This a kcchongnz blog

I have written a four-part series on the stock market crashes in the United States and at home as shown in the links below.

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kcchongnz/73543.jsp

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kcchongnz/73675.jsp

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kcchongnz/73859.jsp

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kcchongnz/74057.jsp

The articles describe how the stock market ran up during which investors had accumulated huge amount of wealth and then almost all lost what they had made, or more, during the market crashes which inevitably followed the previous euphoria.

The final article below deliberates how an individual investors could have capitalized the market cycle using the example of the most recent crash during the US Subprime Mortgage Crisis in 2008 to build long-term wealth. It was shown that a portfolio of stocks using established fundamental investing strategy had make extra-ordinary of compounded annual growth rate of 35.6%, more than twice that of the broad market of 16%. On the other hand, speculating basing on hypes and fads can result in heavy losses during the same period.

 http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kcchongnz/74098.jsp

So one may be tempted by the good return from the stock market for building long-term wealth and for retirement. What are the investing choices he has in Malaysia?

 

Individual stock investors

New investors looking to invest for in the equity market are usually faced with two main options - mutual funds/exchange traded funds or individual stocks. First we will look at the performance of individual stocks picking by retail investors.

Brad M. Barber and Terrance Odean  in their paper “The behaviour of individual investors” in the link below shows that individual investors trading on their own under-performed the market due to information asymmetry, overconfidence, sensation seeking and action chasing, failure to diversify, easily influenced by rumours, tips, media and internet forums etc.

http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/odean/Papers%20current%20versions/behavior%20of%20individual%20investors.pdf

Another study by a Boston based consulting firm, Dalbar Financial Services in its 2014 report, “Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behaviour” which measures the effects of investors decisions to buy, sell and switch into and out of mutual funds, shows that an average US equity mutual fund investors achieving average annual returns of 5.02%, compared with the 9.22% of the S&P500 index over the same period. To put that into perspective, an investor invested $100,000 in the S&P500 20 years ago would today have a total portfolio of around $583,500-compared with only $266300 for the average investor. This huge chasm was attributed to investors’ trying to time the market and thus failing to keep their money in stocks for the entire time period.

Below shows a chart in JP Morgan’s 1Q 2014 Guide to the markets.

 

 

Based on their analysis, the average investor had a 2.3% annualized return over the 20 years from 1993 to 2012, way underperformed the market return of 8.4% during the same period. This return is not even enough to pay for the annual interest rate if one engages in margin financing investing in the stock market.

 

Managed or Unit Trust Funds

Among the benefits of investing in unit trust funds mentioned are:

  1. Unit trust funds provide full-time, highly qualified and skill professionals who conduct economic research and fund management which otherwise may not be available to the ordinary investors. The fund manager has instant access to real market information, coupled with the funds’ research facilities, experience and investment skills, the fund manager is supposed to be in a better position to make more informed investment decisions.
  2. Shareholders benefit from a level of low-cost diversification, and hence reduction of investment risk made possible by the amount of pooled investment dollars that most individual investors would not be able to achieve.
  3. Unit trust offers investors a simpler, more convenient, less time-consuming method of investing in securities than trading individually. You will be relieved from the burden of administrative paper work, investment research and analysis of the investment portfolio. All administrative work is done by the manager and does not require any active participation on the part of the unit holder.

 

The Return of Managed Funds

Michael Jensen (1968),, a top finance academic researcher examined the performance of 115 mutual funds in the United States found no evidence that on average, they were able to predict security prices well enough to outperform a buy-the-market-and-hold policy. It also mentioned that there was little evidence to show that any of the individual fund was able to significantly better than that was expected from mere random chance. The interesting thing was that the conclusions hold even when they measure the fund returns gross of management expenses, meaning that the funds were not even successful enough in their trading activities to recoup even their brokerage expenses. Other academic research such as Grinblatt and Titman (1989), and Burton Malkiel (1995) which comprehensively evaluate fund performance, provided the consistent conclusions that managed funds do not outperform broad market benchmarks as evidenced by their negative risk-adjusted excess returns.

 

Given the benefits of investing in managed funds as discussed above, especially the full-time, highly qualified and skill professionals who scour the markets for stock-picking opportunities, and the fast and abundant information plus other resources they have, how come they fail to deliver and consistently under-performed the market?

 

The underperformance of mutual funds/unit trusts

There are a host of reasons why the vast majority of funds are destined to continue their underperformance in relation to the broad market as detailed below.

  1. Market efficiency

The inability of the fund managers as a whole to beat the market is best explained by the efficiency market hypothesis which postulates that in an efficient capital market, current market prices reflect all available information about a security and the expected return based upon this price is consistent with its risk. As a result, it is impossible for an investor to consistently beat the market and profit from it.

In US, there are thousands of well qualified and experienced professionals watching over the market every second. As a consequence, any market mispricing would have been quickly arbitraged away by eagle-eyed professionals in a matter of seconds; low price stocks bidden up, and high price stocks sold down almost instantly. Hence in an efficient market, it is hard to find bargain stocks and harder for anyone to outperform.  

 

  1. Management fees and expenses

The under-performance of the mutual funds/unit trusts can be mainly attributed to the costs of investing in them. The following link is a very good read and an eye opener for anyone wishing to invest through mutual funds/unit trusts.

http://www.forbes.com/2011/04/04/real-cost-mutual-fund-taxes-fees-retirement bernicke.html

The article explained in detail about the six different costs involved in investing in mutual funds: expense ratio, transaction costs (brokerage commissions, market impact cost, and spread cost), tax costs, cash drag, soft dollar cost and advisory fees. The total cost per year, according to the author, can add up to about 4% per annum, which is equal to 40% of a long-term return of equity investment. How could one manage to get a reasonable return after all these exorbitant costs?

 

  1. Agency problems

Career risk

For a fund manager to try to beat the market, obviously he has to do something which is extra-ordinary and something different from what other fund managers are doing, like investing heavily in a stock which he thinks will rise sharply in price in the future but others don’t see. Well if he is proven right in his decision and actually outperformed the market, he probably will get a praise from his boss or his investors, well done, and that is what you are expected to do, right? But what if he is wrong and the fund loses heavily? You will be quite sure that he will get fired or his investors will desert him..

 

Closet indexing and over-diversification

Another reason for the underperformance of managed funds is closet indexing and over-diversification. Many managers exhibit similar qualities to lemmings. They will follow each other off the cliff rather than risk being different and thinking independently.

 

A concentrated portfolio of the best ideas for only ten to twenty stocks can do well above average, especially the fund manager can analyze them well. But, unfortunately, it can also has the chance to do well below the average, especially for the short term. In this aspect, short term can even mean a period of two to three years. In this case, most investors would have run away from the fund.

 

Asset under Management

What do you think it is better for the fund managers; to make extra-ordinary return for the investors by doing something extra-ordinary and risk desertion of investors or get fired if the outcome is below expectation, or to increase their fund sizes and hence the total amount of asset under management by pleasing the investors and following the crowd?

 

  1. They’re human

One would expect fund managers are emotionally calmer as they handle other people’s money, not theirs. But that has been proven often untrue. They are human too and influenced by the sentiment in the market. They tend to follow the crowd and chase hot stocks of the day too with the aim of beating the market, or simply to join in the fun. Cash holdings are always low during market euphoria and very high at market lows, fund managers are as prone to panic as anyone and most are too spooked to dive in during times of panic.

But surely there must be individual fund managers who could beat the average of the market. Unfortunately, several research studies tracked the investments of these large, “professional” managed fund allocators such as foundations, endowments and pension funds and analyzed their decisions to hire and fire investment managers. Most fund managers were hired due to good recent performance and those who were fired had recent underperformance of the market. The results weren’t pretty.

In the years following hire and fire decisions, the recent fired managers significantly outperformed the market while the recently hired didn’t show any performance at all.

Individual investors make even worse decisions. A research shows the best performing stock mutual fund in the 2000s made 18% annually compared to the S&P of minus 1%. Yet the average investor in the same fund managed to lose 11%per year over the same period. Why?

After every period in which the fund did well, investors piled in. After every period in which the fund did poorly, investors ran for the exits. The average investor managed to lose money in the best performing fund purely by buying and selling the fund at just the wrong times.

What about the performance of unit trusts investing in Bursa? I do have some interesting results which we will discuss in the next article.

For questions and discussions, please contact me at

ckc15training2@gmail.com

 

KC Chong (22nd April 2015)

Discussions
2 people like this. Showing 17 of 17 comments

Lan Yong How

thank you very much for your invaluable advice.If I don't have so much money to cover all the 100 reits,which are the top picks you recommend?

2015-04-22 17:18

NOBY

In order for 50% of the fund managers to outperform the index, there must be 50% others who under-perform. A manager that outperforms this year may not continue outperforming the next 5 years. What are your chances of finding a fund manager that can beat the market year in year out for a long period or the next Warren Buffet or Joel Greenblatt ?

This phenomenon is more prevalent in more efficient markets like the US. In fact in US, ETFs are becoming increasingly popular due to the vast under-performance of active fund managers. An ETF (exchange traded fund) does not attempt to outperform an index but merely to mirror its performance. It is an ideal investment tool for an investor who has a long term investment horizon since these management fees charged by active funds are the one of the main reasons of under-performance in the long run.

For me, ETFs are a quick and easy way to get exposure to a certain market. They have low upfront cost (nothing more than brokerage you pay vs exorbitant service charges if you buy through agents) and low loading costs (low management fee - normally less than 1% of fund NAV).

2015-04-22 17:38

chyokh

If you invest in unit trust, you pay 5% service charge when you buy. After that they deduct 1.5% annually as management fees quietly without you knowing it. Wonder why your fund is losing money or under performing even though the market has gone up? They show you all the "good" past performance and nice charts of their funds but the performance has not taken into account of the fees. It is downright misleading for the ut companies and agents to market their funds using these past performance charts.

2015-04-22 22:47

bsngpg

I asked my friends who invest in Bursa, 10% beat the broad mktg, 30% making positive return but less than the broad mktg and 60% are losing money to Bursa.
About the same %(1:3:6) was quoted by the 40 year experience sifu in Bursa, Mr Len Yan, in one of his article published in Nanyang sometime ago.

I also asked my friends who invested in Public Mutual, almost all are making 6-10% annual return from Public Mutual in reasonable timeframe.

2015-04-22 22:50

kcchongnz

]Posted by ks55 > Apr 22, 2015 04:29 PM | Report Abuse

For the 50 sen Unit Trust unit you buy, 5 sen goes to agents (so called CFP). Another 45 sen keep with the Unit Trust Manager to invest. Sure make money? Bullshit.

Just find out how many people lost their hard earned money putting in PRS.
Just find out how unit trust that participated in PRS got removed. Unit Trust really sucks.

Don't believe you just read Public Mutual Annual Rpt to see how much it sucks. ]

Good comments. Just to let you know that you can invest in unit trust by yourself in the FundSuperMart platform without going through unit trust agent. The sale charge is lower at 2%, I think, much lower than your 10%. Which fund charges so high? May be some overseas special investments for high net worth investors. Nothing is free in this world.

2015-04-23 08:57

kcchongnz

Posted by ks55 > Apr 22, 2015 04:43 PM | Report Abuse

Those who are not confident to invest direct in stock market, my advise is leave your money in EPF.

The above is a very sound advice, in my opinion.

2015-04-23 09:29

repusez

the new generation of unit trust investor will invest through online unit trust resellers like fundsupermart or eunit trust, for one their sales charges are capped at 2% and during promo 1% or lower. Good thing is that you can monitor the funds online and do switching without the help of agents and commision.

for public mutual even though the offer online transaction but the charges is still at 5-6% and they don't show u the performance of your fund, u need to manually calculate yourself. can go to morningstar or lipper fund to compare performance of all the funds

most also buy PRS for the 3K tax relief, again public mutual charge 3% but online reseller offer 0% sales charge on selected fund house.

2015-04-23 09:56

kcchongnz

Posted by NOBY > Apr 22, 2015 05:38 PM | Report Abuse

For me, ETFs are a quick and easy way to get exposure to a certain market. They have low upfront cost (nothing more than brokerage you pay vs exorbitant service charges if you buy through agents) and low loading costs (low management fee - normally less than 1% of fund NAV).

Good comments. If I were to invest in overseas market, i will do the same thing too.

2015-04-23 10:43

kcchongnz

Posted by bsngpg > Apr 22, 2015 10:50 PM | Report Abuse

I asked my friends who invest in Bursa, 10% beat the broad mktg, 30% making positive return but less than the broad mktg and 60% are losing money to Bursa.
About the same %(1:3:6) was quoted by the 40 year experience sifu in Bursa, Mr Len Yan, in one of his article published in Nanyang sometime ago.

I also asked my friends who invested in Public Mutual, almost all are making 6-10% annual return from Public Mutual in reasonable time frame.


Unbiased and excellent comments. We will deal with the Public Mutual Fund soon, with facts.

2015-04-23 11:28

chyokh

You should ask your friends who invested in Public Mutual overseas funds especially the China funds. Just ask them how much they have lost in 5 years. It will open your eyes.

2015-04-23 12:58

NOBY

Frankly speaking Public Mutual used to be good, but as their market share increase, they need to keep launching new funds to keep up with the inflow. They have so many Malaysian funds which frankly invest in almost the same thing. The only fund which I see may have some value are their small cap funds, but the fund has been closed for some time.

For me, if I m looking for outperformance, I will typically go for small cap funds as the investment universe of these funds are less efficient hence the long term returns have higher chance of outperformance. If you buy a big cap fund which buys mostly the stocks on the index and charges you a 2% annual management fee, how can you hope to outperform the index ?

2015-04-23 13:19

chyokh

Public Mutual always launched their new funds at the market peak because this is the best time to get SALES as investors are at their most optimistic. The investors who buy their new funds will always be buying stocks at their peak prices. Shortly after, the market corrects and PM and its agents will somehow manage to convince these investors to look at the long term 3-5 years, if possible, keep it there forever. 1.5% x 5 years = 7.5% management fees to PM and agents. Somehow, PM always win. Do I need to tell you who are the losers? If the market crashes, they will tell you to practise dollar cost averaging. Put more money in to support their bad investment decisions. More sales and service charges again to the winners!!
The timing of the launching of PM new funds corresponding to market peaks is so accurate, I have been using it as a signal to get out before the market crashes.

2015-04-23 13:44

kcchongnz

[Posted by NOBY > Apr 23, 2015 01:19 PM | Report Abuse

Frankly speaking Public Mutual used to be good, but as their market share increase, they need to keep launching new funds to keep up with the inflow. They have so many Malaysian funds which frankly invest in almost the same thing. The only fund which I see may have some value are their small cap funds, but the fund has been closed for some time.

For me, if I m looking for outperformance, I will typically go for small cap funds as the investment universe of these funds are less efficient hence the long term returns have higher chance of outperformance. If you buy a big cap fund which buys mostly the stocks on the index and charges you a 2% annual management fee, how can you hope to outperform the index ? ]


Good comments above. But what do you think is think is Public Mutual and his agent’s interests, to build big funds and lots of funds to get more fees for assets under management, or to try hard to earn more return for unit holders by investing in small capitalized stocks and risk being wrong? Whose interest will they care if there is a conflict?

2015-04-23 13:56

NOBY

Actually the only selling point for public mutual these days are that they have the largest market share. Their funds have been underperforming their peers for the past few years.

2015-04-23 15:40

kcchongnz

Posted by ks55 > Apr 23, 2015 04:11 PM | Report Abuse

kcchongnz -- Can you please tell us why out of 19 funds removed from PRS scheme, 13 belongs to Public Mutual?

Why these funds were removed?
How bad were they underperformed?
How if these funds were to compare with REITs at the time they were launched and the day they were removed ?
If hard to get the statistic for that day, using today's value also can.

This is to prove my theory that Unit Trust can never be a better alternative to direct involvement with REITs, albeit high entry commission and annual management fees they charged.


ks55, unfortunately I am not involved in the unit trust industry now. I was a licensed financial adviser before and did know and would able to find out then, but not now. Sorry can't help.

By virtue that REITs investing is a direct investment without all those problems and fees described in this article, i do believe that Reits will perform better than UT.

2015-04-23 16:50

chyokh

coldrisks, you can get the info from P Mutual website and they will announce in all the major newspaper about new funds launching.

2015-04-23 21:49

skpwatcher

Bsngpg ==> i agree with ur frens feedback on unit trust returns. Mine are doing fairly well above 10%. I was in the 60% 'loser' group n decided to let the professionals do it. Well, no regrets on moving to unit trust investmt as it meets my ROI. Good decision and i am still holding onto them except one.

Chyokh ==> i also invested into a China fund for 4.25years. I was in the red or 4 years but the last 3mths, it rebounded and i made 6% compounded return YOY before i sold in Feb 15 to pay for something. If i held till now, it would have been 8% compounded YOY.

Lets put it this way, we need patience in investing in unit trust. If cannot wait n can do better with other investment instruments, by all means, take that path.

2015-04-27 10:57

Post a Comment