Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the restrict-user-access domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home1/portfol1/public_html/wp/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114

Deprecated: Class Jetpack_Geo_Location is deprecated since version 14.3 with no alternative available. in /home1/portfol1/public_html/wp/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114

Deprecated: preg_split(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($limit) of type int is deprecated in /home1/portfol1/public_html/wp/wp-content/plugins/add-meta-tags/metadata/amt_basic.php on line 118
investing | Portfolio Yoga

Guest Post: Single Stock Portfolio

Serendipity the occurrence or development of events by chance in a happy or beneficial way. For me, meeting Sameer as his family lovingly calls him was no different. Its been 8 years of learning from some one who has an innate ability to question (with data) and think out of the box. Its a pleasure for me to have him co-write this post (my contribution is just the narrative, the real deal is his data and numbers). 

If you are on Twitter, you should by now be used to ism’s of every kind on how to go about building wealth in markets.

Bhave Bhagwaan Che say Investors who follow Price without really explaining how one reduces the number of stocks from hundreds to something more meaningful and easy to execute.

Buy Stocks for the Long Term say Classical Fundamental Investors without mentioning how to find stocks that will still be around 10 years from now let alone have generated wealth.

Financial Planners on the other hand say, don’t worry about Portfolio or Returns but about whether you can reach the goal. 

Everyone loves to talk about stocks and why not. Stocks are more volatile, Stocks can be storified and Stocks finally are about their underlying Business and it’s easy to make a case for or against a stock. Add to it, it makes for good party talk. 

So, What is a good portfolio?

A good portfolio is something that contains just the right amount of stocks and yet is diversified enough to provide protection from the vagaries of nature. 

Charlie Munger whose quotes you will find tough not to come across for example has a portfolio that consists of just 3 stocks. Thes stocks he holds, Berkshire Hathaway, Costco and Wells Fargo. A caveat though – Gurufocus shows his portfolio as 3 but omits Berkshire and instead has Bank of America. 

When you look at the number you may tend to feel that this is an overly concentrated portfolio but if you dig deeper you know that though Berkshire Hathaway is a single stock, it’s actually made up of more business and variety than what many indices can provide. 

When we invest in real estate, we don’t diversify. We make a commitment that is most of the time larger than our Networth in a single investment. Never do we worry what if I have picked up the wrong location and one that will go down in value. While it’s true you cannot really compare a house with a stock, even in the world of investing there are options where you can safely invest 100% of your net worth and be diversified enough even though you hold a single ticker symbol.The Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund for instance.

From Mutual Fund advisers to Asset Management Owners, I am yet to come across someone who will suggest that a portfolio can be diversified by holding just one fund. On the other hand, I have come across Advisors who suggest their clients to buy 2 of everything – Large Cap, Mid Cap, Small Cap, Multi Cap and for good measure a couple of thematic / balanced funds.

In a way, this is a hedge for Career Risk. In 2017, Client is happy seeing the returns of the Small Cap fund while in 2019, the large cap funds would have given him solace and in March of 2020, the Balanced Funds would have proven their worth. Client is Happy, Distributor is Happy and of course the AMC is happy. What more can you ask for? 

But, when it comes to stock, how many stocks should you hold? Well, it depends – if you are betting on say Nano Cap Stocks, the more the better for the odds of success is low but it provides the optionality when a few stocks hit the jackpot. But if you are betting on large cap stocks, do more stocks add value or just another number 

Vijay Mallik has a post (2015) where he says that you need nothing more than 30 stocks to be well diversified

https://www.drvijaymalik.com/2015/05/how-many-stocks-you-should-own-in-your-portfolio.html#.Xv1MBkerrC0.twitter

Well known Financial Advisor and Planner, D Muthukrishnan on the other has this to say about how many stocks to hold

This month I completed 1 year on Single stock investing.  Yes, you read that right – the entire portfolio is composed of a single stock. This post is a note on experiences – the good and the bad of holding just one stock as against a portfolio composed of multiple stocks. 

What do I mean by a Single Stock Portfolio?

Well, it means what you think it means – the whole portfolio consisted of just one stock at any point of time unless I went to cash in which case, it would be Zero stocks.

But isn’t such a portfolio risky? Well, it depends.

Prashanth a couple of days ago ran a poll asking whether a portfolio of just 3 stocks invested in 10% of Networth was more Riskier than 30 Stocks invested across 100%

Though it can be argued either way, the distinction is pretty clear – a 30 stock portfolio may offer diversification but when you invest all your money is more riskier than a 3 stock Portfolio that is diversified across just 3 stocks. 

Among the many manifestations of risk 2 of them are well known

1) Market Risk – The part of risk that comes because of the market. In March when the bottoms of the market fell off, stocks regardless of their fundamental strength took a tumble. You can view this as being similar to collateral damage suffered by Innocents during a War. Unfortunate and rarely can be avoided

2) Stock specific risk – This is the risk where you have a much better control. A fundamental investor would say that given that he knows the company better, he is able to reduce the risk even though other factors – Market Risk for example can cause the stock price to cause quotation risk.

One way to limit the impact of Market Risk on any given portfolio is by having a trailing stop that exits the whole portfolio on breach of certain levels. Larger the portfolio, tougher is to execute. On the other hand, with a one stock portfolio this becomes fairly easy – the number of decisions you need to take is just one.

This is similar to trading say a Dual Momentum Strategy using Nifty and Liquid Bees with the only difference here being that instead of Nifty we are long a single stock.  

In most diversified portfolios, you may find that on any day the number of winners and losers tend to be in line with the broader markets. On days when the markets bullish, you find a lot of your stocks to be doing well and when markets are bearish, most of the portfolio stocks 

This is not too different in a single stock portfolio where unless there is company specific news, one tends to observe that stock is up when markets are up and stock is down when markets are down.

The key to ensuring that the portfolio doesn’t destruct itself is by ensuring that the stock is chosen with a certain amount of care to eliminate the risk of getting caught in stocks that can go up in flames in no time at all.

One year generally is too small a time frame to analyze any strategy let alone a strategy that is dependent on the fortunes of a single stock at any point of time but 2020 is not any normal year and while its too early to say that we have seen all we need to see, the correction and the recovery has been something that we have never seen in the past. In the US, a technical correction like the one they saw in 1987 took 3 months for recovery vs just a month this time around even though much of the country is closed and the Virus seems not to let up regardless of how strictly people are quarantined either.

Almost every Entrepreneur is by nature holding a portfolio of just one stock – the company he owns. In fact, for most, its 100% of their networth and more given that in addition to owning the business, their debt is backed by personal guarantees and personal assets. While theoretically they have a greater knowledge of the business than we as shareholders can claim to, they also suffer from the illiquidity of not being able to exit when the tide turns around.

The way to become rich is to put all your eggs in one basket and then watch that basket.

Andrew Carnegie

In a way, the single portfolio is similar. We place our bets on a single stock and then watch the stock very carefully. There is this risk that some news may come out either during the trading day or post close and one that could know the steam out of the stock and that risk gets magnified since instead of our exposure being 5 or even 10%, it’s 100% which means a death blow from which one can not easily recover.

But this is actually rare even though news would suggest it to be normal. Take for example the recent case of Luckin Coffee. The stock fell 80% when it disclosed that an internal investigation has found that its chief operating officer fabricated 2019 sales by about 2.2 billion yuan ($310 million).

But this did not happen with the stock trading at an all time high. Rather, the stock as you can see in the chart below was already down 50% from it’s all-time high. This is not a one off either as history shows that rare are the occurrences where the stock reverses immediately from an all time high without giving the slightest of opportunity. As with everything, there are exceptions to the rule – Vakrangee for instance gave barely breathing space to any investor before getting locked in lower circuits.

It goes without saying that there is ample amount of Luck involved. But where it isn’t really speaking for Luck plays the role of a catalyst that can change fortunes a great deal. So, how has been the performance. The chart below provides a visual of the same. Do note that at any point of time my allocation was limited to 50% which means that true stock return would be double. But given that allocation was my choice, it’s important to be true to the objective which in this case is to try and observe the Pro’s and Con’s of such a strategy.

Net Asset Value of the single stock portfolio

Risk as you know can be defined in many ways but one of the best ways is to measure the draw-down from the peaks. This provides us with an ability to understand how much we lost at any point of time. 

Maximum Draw-down seen at any point of time since Inception

As soon as I started, the portfolio hit a draw-down of 8% and one that was reclaimed by the end of August. As the NAV shows, the strategy equity kept moving higher without deep interruptions till we got bit by Corona. The stock I was in breached the pre-existing stop and the portfolio went to cash. 

I will not go deep into the stock selection strategy other than saying it’s based on Montecarlo based evaluation of historical draw-downs and tries to select a stock that provides max buck for the risk taken. Exits happen when the stock draw-down goes below a certain quartile that has already been seen in historical data as the point after which risk starts to balloon up but not so much for the reward. 

It’s a strategy that I am sure most will not be comfortable with, but also a strategy that allows you to understand the nature of the market better than what you could accomplish by being long 100 stocks at any point of time. Diversification in itself reduces but never can eliminate risks as we have seen time and again. 

If you have any questions, do ping me on Twitter or better still, Portfolio Yoga Slack Channel. If you are not there, do join using this link (Portfolio Yoga Elite Slack

Its the Quantum that is Important

Real Estate has given some crazy returns in the last few years and there is not denying that. We can always pick and chose stocks that have maybe given even better returns, but the big question is, are they even comparable.

While there is always the case of stocks like Infosys / Wipro / Motherson Sumi, the net results if one looks at the Index itself is not as promising.

Even taking the most optimistic scenario that is used by most fund managers (investing in 1979), the returns come to some 17%. On the other hand, I know of properties that have (at current market prices) given a return of similar proportion for a much longer time.

But as usual, I am digressing from the subject on hand. On Twitter and elsewhere, I constantly hear about investors making 2x, 4x, 10x their investments in certain stocks.

The returns are fabulous if one were to put it, but the question is, is the return really worthwhile in money terms?

Let me give a example of my own. In 1997, I bought a certain company called Indo Count Industries. It was a penny stock at that point and remained one for a very long time. In fact, when markets collapsed in 2008 / 09, this stock traded at around 2.50.

Things started to change in 2013 and in 2014, this stock galloped 800%. This year, it has already gone up 80%. For me, this stock is near to a 100 bagger. Theoretically speaking, I should actually be able to retire on just this stock alone.

But as usual, there is a caveat. I invested 700 bucks (in 1997) and today while its worth 65,000, the sum is pretty low for thinking of any dream purchases, let alone retiring.

Lets assume instead of buying Indocount I had bought some real estate (of course, I could not get something for 700, so amount of investment would need to be higher) and it became a 100 bagger, I could actually have retired for a comfortable life.

The key difference is the amount of investment that is required / invested when it comes to the stock market vs the investment we do when we enter into real estate.

In Real estate, not only do we invest every Rupee we have got but actually leverage ourselves by taking on loans that magnify our returns.

When it comes to investing though, we rarely invest what we can (our Liquid Networth), let alone investing it all and then adding some leverage on top of it.

The key reason is the lack of conviction. While we are convinced that Real Estate markets shall not drown us, we aren’t so sure when it comes to the stock market.

The reason we aren’t convinced that stocks comes down to the fact that most of the time, we are clueless as to how to analyze companies / investment and even when we are, having either burnt our own hands or seen the destruction suffered by others, we worry too much about what if it goes wrong.

A friend of mine has a couple of crores in investment in real estate while having a couple of lakhs into the market. Even if his investment in the market doubles / quadruples, the returns are literally are literally a drop in the bucket so as to speak when compared to what the returns (a big IF) that are generated if his real estate investment doubles.

Of course, I am not advocating real estate. I strongly believe that while we may not see a crash of the kind we saw in US, the forward returns from Real Estate will be pretty low (and this even before Indexation) for the foreseeable future.

On the other hand, if India grows in the way countries like United States / South Korea / South East Nations / China have grown, there is a lot more to look forward to.

But you will only build wealth if you not only invest significantly but also be willing to stay through it through thick and thin. But that requires a lot of discipline since its not easy to stick to our process when the times are tough.

At PortfolioYoga, we introduced a Asset Allocator model sometime back. We believe that rather than invest everything when the markets are high, it makes sense to have a lower exposure and increase the exposure if market gets cheaper. Else, while returns will be lower than complete exposure shall provide, at the very least, you shall be able to sleep well at night.

Big money, both in markets as elsewhere, is made by those willing to bet it big. That of course does not mean take un-necessary risks. But with the right risk models, you should be able to build your wealth without having to go through the pain of having your investment stuck with no way to exit in a hurry as is the case with asset classes like Real Estate.

keep-calm-and-bet-it-all-2

 

 

Trusting financial Intermediaries

In response to a tweet of mine, Anupam Gupta (b50) tweeted this

They key question is, should we trust those who claim to work on our behalf while having a business model that goes against that very logic.

Lets start of with the much hated Stock Broker. A stock broker was one who in earlier days allowed persons to buy & sell securities for a small commission. The commissions which were huge in those days steadily has crept downwards with advent of technology and more competitors.

Its general knowledge that its very tough (will not say impossible since there will always be guys who claim to make a living out of it) to make money trading the markets, especially on the intra-day time frame. Yet, almost all big brokers send daily flush of SMS calls asking their clients  to Buy ABC, Short ZYX and so on and so forth.

How many brokers have you come across who shall say, well, the way to wealth generation is not by trading but by buying and holding shares of good companies over a long period of time (I kind of disagree with my own statement out here, but I hope you get the point). How many brokers advise you to just do a SIP on Nifty Bees since the probability is high that the returns you generate by doing that is way bigger than what you can achieve on your own.

On the other hand, I come across statements such as, Invest only that money in the markets that you can afford to lose. Its no wonder that people invest a Lakh in stocks and goes out and invests a Crore in Real Estate. Worst case, he knows that the land is his no matter what happens.

For the not so sophisticated investors, there is another way to get into markets – Mutual Funds. But just like most financial products, even this needs to be Sold. So, the mutual fund distributor also becomes a kind of Financial Advisor.

A financial advisor generally makes his money by charging a X% of fees on the total assets he manages. But since most of us would not want to pay from our pocket, the advisor instead advises on funds where he gets the biggest commission. And since tail commissions are low, lets churn the portfolio every time there is a new fund offering. After all, buying at 10 is cheaper than buying a fund with a NAV of 100, Right?

In India, Insurance is not seen as a hedge but as a way to save (Invest). Its no wonder then that most Insurance Advisors (agents really) advise one against buying Term life policies and instead go for Endowment / ULIP plans where the commission paid is much higher. Even after accounting for the risk coverage, the return is so low that is makes zero sense, but hey, I get back my money here seems to be the logic.

And finally we have the Financial Advisors who claim to help you trade / invest in markets for a small monthly / quaterly fee. What I find amazing about these guys is that all of them want you to pay up in advance regardless of the results. Not a single guy says, Here is the way I do business. I advise you on what to Buy / Sell for X months. If you feel the advise is worth it, pay me XX so that I continue for the next Y months, else, no worry.

Nope, every one of them wants you to trust them with your money while not trusting you for one second. Do you really think they work for your benefit?

And finally, Portfolio Management Schemes. I have tweeted on it quite a number of times and every time i look at those numbers, I wonder who would want to invest in a product that under performs all the time. Most PMS model is build upon generating brokerage. If, and that is a big IF, they do end up making some money, they want a cut of it as well.

Almost all models in the financial sphere is out there to get a cut of your savings. There are of course, many honorable guys out there who do business which is worth for both the client and himself. But they are so far and so tiny, that you rarely hear about them, let alone learn more about them.

As the saying goes, “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch

We spend our lives trying to save every rupee we can, but what use is it, if we allow ourselves to stumble upon when the it comes to making the money earn for us.

Atrocious Targets

Yesterday, a market analyst in a interview to CNBC claimed that Nifty was heading to 6750 based on his analysis of the Index. A few months back, another Analyst claimed that Nifty shall move way higher than what it was trading at that point of time. Going back further, I remember a Analyst mincing no words and being certain as hell that Nifty would reach a number that was last seen in 2009.

Other than these, there have been predictions of Sensex at 100,000 by Mark Galasiewski, editor of Elliott Wave International’s Asian Financial Forecast who gave a time line for the target to be achieved by 2024 (Link).

Dow Jones has also seen outlandish targets, the most bullish being Dow 40000 (Book link) to Dow going back to 1000 & even 400. And this target has been repeated since time immemorial so as to say (Link).

Over a long enough time frame, the only way markets can go is Up (unless the world goes into a never ending cycle of deflation) which means that no matter how high a target is seen, it is just a matter of time before the same is achieved.

But the key question is, are any of these prophecies actionable? And the simple answer is a even simpler No.

So, the question that comes up is, what is the need for these outlandish targets when they themselves know very much that its one thing to throw a random number as a target and quite another to be actually be able to take advantage of the same.

What I find is that most of these targets are bandied about by people who are happy to sell Tips / Newsletters while the real money managers generally prefer wiser counsel. Of course, the negative side of listening to fund managers is that you are always a perma-bull regardless of the state of the market.

While it makes sense to be bullish when valuations are cheap and attractive, once markets have moved way higher, there is need to be cautious and reduce the amount of exposure to the market. In fact, in a recent Interview, Hedge Fund manager Samir Arora said that 2015 was more of a Long / Short year (Link)

For a investor, shorting is not possible and hence the best alternative would be to have exposure that varies based on factors such as future growth and current valuation.

Our own Asset Allocation Model (Link) and our Model Portfolio’s (Link) are in a way designed for just that kind of thought process. We believe that even the lay investor can generate above market returns with simple strategies and without having to pay a leg and foot to fund managers who at end of the day aren’t any much wiser than us.

 

 

 

 

Cigarette and Investment

Today, by a sudden hunch I wanted to know what if some one who smokes had invested a equal amount of money into the shares of the leading tobacco company (ITC). How would the Investment fare and what would be the current value.

And before I say anything, let me say that I neither smoke nor have invested into ITC shares, so no point sending me the joke below 🙂

Lady: Do you smoke?
Guy: Yes I do.
Lady: How many packs a day?
Guy: 3 packs.
Lady: How much per pack?
Guy: $10.00 per pack.
Lady: And how long have you been smoking?
Guy: 15 years
Lady: So 1 pack is $10.00 and you have been smoking 3 packs a day which puts your spending per month at $900. In 1 year, it would have been $10,800. Correct?
Guy: Correct.
Lady: If 1 year you spend $10,800, not accounting for inflation, the past 15 years puts your spending total at $162,000. Correct?
Guy: Correct.
Lady: Do you know if you hadn’t smoke, that money could have been put in a step-up interest savings account and after accounting for compound interest for the past 15 years, you could have by now bought a Ferrari?
Guy: Oh. Do you smoke?
Lady: No.
Guy: Then where’s your fucking Ferrari?

Of course, there are several caveats in such a study. For instance, there are smokers who smoke a stick or two a day and then there are those who smoke 2 or even 3 packs a day. To be conservative, I took a smoker who smoked around 5 cigarette a day and did not smoke on week ends. That comes to a neat 10 packs per month.

I tried searching for data on what ITC charged per cigarette over the years but could not find any such statistic. Good friend Kora Reddy came to my aid with the starting number (1995). Since I know the current price, I just incremented the price over the years (CAGR of around 12.5%). This is clearly not the true price, but definitely something that could be used for the test.

ITC has over the years given Bonus as also split the face value of the stock. Since that would complicate things too much, I used adjusted data (adjusted for Splits / Bonus but not for Dividends). In 1995, ITC was traded physically and getting odd lot shares may have been tough. And prices would definitely not be the one I used (post split), but, once again, idea is to get a rough number than a very accurate one.

The concept was simple. When you buy say 10 packs for the month, you also buy shares for the same amount. So, in affect, every time one smokes a pack of cigarette, the amount that gets debited is more or less equal to 2 packs.

Starting from 1995 till end of 2014, I assumed a person would have smoked around 2400 packs (10 per month * 12 months * 20 years). The total amount spent on that comes to around 82,500.

If the same amount was invested in ITC shares, he would have bought approximately 1316 shares. If one uses the last investment price (Dec 1, 2014), the value of his portfolio comes to around 4.79 Lakhs. Since the investment is staggered over such a long period, using XIRR, I get a return of 19.97%. That is actually better than Gold or Nifty. Food for thought, eh?

So, the next time you buy a pack or carton of cigarette’s do think about calling your stock broker as well. Who knows, you may actually end up a millionaire due to your bad habit.

Exception to the rule

Today I read a tweet by a person who claimed that he was posting his ledger just to showcase to those who believed that “Day traders loose” that its indeed possible to make good money trading purely on intra-day scale. While I have not met him, I do take his word on faith and assume that he is indeed pretty successful in trading the markets on pure intra-day basis. And there is this friend of mine who has build a fortune (by his standards, not Fortune’s) by just being street mark and networking with the right folks.

In November of this year, a 4 year kid fell 230 feet and survived (Link). Lots of people make money in Casino’s as well despite the known fact that “the house always wins”. And this without having to do card counting.

I know plenty of long term investors who have not been able to out-perform a simple Buy & Hold returns of Nifty and even worse, many have fallen by the way side having lost a major part of the money in stocks that today are no longer even available for trading.

Vastu / Astrology are seen as bunkum, but I can show you guys whose careers have changed because of a change in the direction of the door. And there are enough people who strongly believe that homeopathy can cure a lot of diseases.

The single thread between all of them is that they are all exceptions to the rule. If no one ever made money (in short term if not over years) trading on intra-day scale, people would never try to do such stuff. And if no one won in a casino, they would have to shutter for lack of clients.

But exception to the rule does not mean that its easy for others as well. If day trading was really easy, I would doubt anyone would want to work anywhere else when you can literally make mind-boggling returns on capital (Day trading requiring very little capital is the biggest attraction).

If access to news / information ensured a success in markets, the richest folks would be those who have the first access (think of people working at Newspapers, Television studios).

If all our problems can be solved by simply changing the direction of the door, well, you should have seen that happen long back and by now we would be living in a state of Nirvana.

Beating the market is very tough and very few people are able to do that consistently year after year. There is no magic wand that can let you make tons of money without you having some amount of expertise. And the guys who have achieved that success, its not due to luck but more due to hard work and persistence. If you were to read about Sachin Tendulkar or Tiger Woods, the common thread between these guys were the fact that they were not only in the right place at the right time but also that they put efforts more than what others did and as Robert Frost would say, that made all the difference.

success-is-not-easy-11tcc04

Process vs Outcome

A lot of things in life are based on the concept of following the right process which ensures or is said to ensure the right outcome. Study hard parents say so that you can get into the best college – a direct relationship being there between marks scored and the fact that a high score shall get one into a top notch college.

A employee works hard hoping to claim his spot when a higher position opens up or to be able to claim a higher bonus. Again a direct relationship.

In the financial markets though, such a direct relationship is always difficult to establish. Buying a good company may decrease the probability of total loss of capital but never can guarantee a good return especially when its damm difficult to really say what is a good company and what is not. In 2007, I doubt if any Analyst openly said that Bear Stearns or Lehman were bad companies. After all, Lehman was a 150+ year old company that had survived through every crash and cycle that came about in those years. Bear Stearns was a 80+ year old company.

The thought for this blog came by this article – How we made nearly $1 million on Apple stock (Link).

The story is about how a couple bet (and not a big sum) on Apple and since they have sat on it for the last 16 years have now made a fortune (or sort of depending on what you call a fortune). Nice pleasing story especially since it deals with immigrants, their emphasis on buying a good company, etc, etc.

But is it a good lesson to learn for a ordinary investor? I guess not for not only does this story has its heuristic bias faults – Survivor Bias to start with but also the investors here did break major rules relating to investing. The fact that they came out good does not make the path something others should consider to the the path of the successful.

Lets start with the fact that even after overlooking things like Taxes, the guys have not made a Million (Realized + Un-realized). But since a Million bucks sounds nice, the copy editor maybe decided, this is how I attract more eyeballs.

Coming to the faults of the investment itself. The success is the outcome of breaking two golden rules of investment.

1. Never place all your eggs in a single basket. While the report does not detail whether they had invested in other shares as well, the gist seems to be that this is their only investment – Zero Diversification. In other words, they bet their money on a single stock and it turned out to be a great investment. If it had failed (as it has for hundreds of thousands of investors), they would have lost a small sum of money (that maybe not have been even significant enough to materially change their lives).

2. Not cutting one’s losses (Stop Loss). In the aftermath of the burst of the tech bubble in 2000, the stock of Apple fell by 65% and what did our savvy investors do? Nothing. The stock fell by 61% in 2008 / 09 and once again, our investors stayed put.

This also reminds me of a the following conversation between Barry Ritholtz and James O’Shaughnessy in Bloomberg Radio’s “Masters In Business” programme.

“O’Shaughnessy: “Fidelity had done a study as to which accounts had done the best at Fidelity. And what they found was…”

Ritholtz: “They were dead.”

O’Shaughnessy: “…No, that’s close though! They were the accounts people who forgot they had an account at Fidelity.”

So, is the moral of the story being not to act and hope that the stock will eventually bounce back? I say, lack of exit strategy is one of the biggest reasons that dud shares have only retail investors as their majority investors (even the promoters bail out after a certain period of time).

Is then Buying and Forgetting the right way to deal with the volatility that comes with investments? My limited experience in markets tells me that, this cannot be true. Yes, there will be occasional stories of such success, but then again, who would want to write a story about a guy who was disciplined enough to stay with a great company that just managed to go under when the economy tumbled.

Similar stories can be read about Entrepreneurs as well. The story generally starts with how the guy started out in a Garage and now has build his company to the current multi million / billion level. What is left unsaid that 9 out of 10 ventures fail.

Luck plays a great deal in a lot of our ventures including investments in the market. The following picture by Michael Mauboussin shows the same pretty nicely.

Luck

Hind-sight is always 20/20. While much of the world looks at the results, to me, the process is as much important too.

In the field of investment, if you do not have a process, the outcome will generally be one of failure unless you are that 1 in a Million who got Lucky 🙂

One in 10,000