So Sunday morning Joellyn and I embarked on a masonry project where we made up some concrete, moved rocks and then reset the rocks in the concrete while trying to work the little bit of chicken wire that runs along the bottom of the fence into the concrete. What does this have to do with investing you may ask?
On Sunday a reader left a comment in response to my writing about owning foreign equities asking "doesn't it depend on what foreign equities you own?" Well yes it does.
The work in the pen required heavy lifting of many bags of concrete and adding more heavy rocks to the fencing. The idea of gravitating toward more foreign exposure more narrowly than just owning iShares MSCI EAFE Index Fund (EFA) requires a different type of heavy lifting. As a quick note EFA blends away a lot of attributes of the smaller, healthier countries, provides a lot of exposure to Japan and big Western Europe and tends to correlate much closer to the US market than many single country funds.
The concrete needed to be mixed, the rocks that were already there needed to be moved, more rocks, where needed, had to be hauled in from elsewhere on our property, everything needed to be set and then everything needed to be properly cleaned up; there were no short cuts.
If you believe your portfolio needs to become progressively more foreign then you need to learn the dynamics of many other foreign countries, figure the role that these countries can play in your portfolio, figure out how to access those countries and then follow those countries effectively; there can be no short cuts.
I realize there are time considerations, that people in general just may not want to devote this much energy to this and of course I may be wrong about the need for more foreign but this is how I see it. Of course there will be the hard core (or maybe not so hard core) passive investors who say this is just speculation and not investing.

I doubt I will change anyone's mind on this subject if I have not already done so but for a similar view from a different voice check out this week's Connie Mack show, specifically the segment with Andrew Lo from MIT and a half dozen other places. The simplistic takeaway from the interview is that things like buy and hold and using broad based index funds are not wrong but they need updating.
This may be a tie in with my views about markets and investing evolving. I have been writing about this as long as I have been writing. Over reliance on well it's always worked before is a bad idea. The status quo might be comfortable but are you willing to bet your future that it will be correct?
The picture is from the fence's earliest days.





12 comments:
Keeping with the investment blog concept:
There will be a break-out. The dogs will get out again-take it to the bank. Will it be a "black swan" event? Keep us advised..
Roger,
this weekend I also heard your june 10, 2007 big picture. It was a contrast from today since in 2007 you were getting to a defensive position where the market was below the 200dma.
I agree with you that if you invest in any company must be familiar with the company and must study the competitive advantage of that company locally as well in the international arena. Recently I invested in TOMTOM, the us equivalent is Garmin. Garmin is a good company with little debt however TomTom is a company with huge debt but has more potential for growth since it merged with a satellite map company in 2008. So getting into the mechanics of the choice there is lots of lifting (learning). Thanks for the post since it outlines that in making a choice in a security is not easy but lots of thought must be involved even if you only trade that security on a daily basis.
Best,
Jeff from Milan Italy
In prior posts you have commented on the prospects of Chile and Peru as natural resources driven economies. Do you see much of a difference in their ETFs? Thanks
Do you see much of a difference in their ETFs?
I'm sorry I don't follow exactly, difference in what?
Generally those two countries should benefit from a robust commodity market. I would think the ETFs will be proxies for that effect if that is what you are asking. Whether they are the best proxies is in the eye of the beholder.
I am afraid people have the idea that these dogs are the object of all of your parental energies versus just pets. If you are OK with that - then I suppose we have only to wait to see pictures of the dogs dressed up in cloths.
As a parent, I highly recommend the real thing, if only because at some point children stop messing on the rug.
i can nip your rude comment in the bud, i expect to outlive my dogs. dogs are not proxies for children--no one expects to outlive their children.
hit the bricks.
I see Hussman threw a little cold water on the golden cross today, at least without a strategy to get out near the peaks and to control whipsaws. More in line with your thinking, it seems, Roger.
Roger, I've been studying convertible bonds as an option for the income side of my portfolio. There are several listed on quantumonline that are companies I can understand which would have a home in my portfolio in several years, if the fundamentals of the company did not change. What is the downside of owning these instruments? I don't see them promoted by any advisors. What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sam
IMO individual converts can be very complicated. Aside from figuring the company out (not the most complicated aspect of the product) there can be all sorts of weird trading triggered by arbitrage, there also can be complexities in the conversion process.
I owed CEFs in this space and they ended up wilting badly in the crisis. SPDR has an ETF that I would want to give more time to season before I would consider it.
The Dogs Escape Committee is meeting right now. They might hide a tunnel for the small dogs under their water dish.
Watch it, you're sounding a bit like Neiderhoffer ... XD
Victor or Roy?
Post a Comment