Frisco Financial Planning LLC

Investment portfolio design with a Christian worldview 

The market bottom: one year later

Here we are, one year and 72% higher (S&P 500 with reinvested dividends) after the market bottom. Here are some choice bits of financial doom and gloom, all from within one week of March 9, 2009:

 

 

 

The above humdinger is courtesy of John Mauldin, a newsletter writer with
over 1 million subscribers.

 

 

"The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know."
-- 1 Corinthians 8:2
"Then the Lord said to me 'the prophets are prophesying lies in my name.  I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them.
They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.'"
-- Jeremiah 14:14

Related post:  Respect uncertainty

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   investing  

But what if something happens to you?

I occasionally get the question: "but what if something happens to you?"

Meaning, if I die or become incapacitated, where will my clients turn for help?

This question is often planted by brokers to imply that because they are employed by a big firm, their clients have a built-in succession plan (brokerage firms stand ready with a replacement, but a "court-appointed" broker typically isn't the type that is sought after).

So, here's the answer:  If I die or become incapacitated, you'll have to find a new financial planner.  Just like if your doctor dies, you'll have to find a new doctor.  Or, if your attorney dies, you'll have to find a new attorney.

A better question to ask yourself is:  "if my broker bails to another firm, do I want to be in the middle of a signing bonus quarrel while each party's attorneys squabble over who I belong to?"

If you are my client, you don't belong to me.  You've trusted me with the privilege of working hard on your behalf.  You are free to leave any time and I hope that the quality of my work acknowledges that I don't take you for granted.

Alas, if you must have a backup plan, here it is:


"Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful."
-- 1 Corinthians 4:2

For more on the "big v. solo" issue, read these related posts:
Small is the new big.  Solo is the new small and The power of one.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   my practice   non-discretionary   simplicity   wall (street) of shame  

Investing lessons courtesy of the Austin marathon

The Austin Marathon makes a pretty bold claim on its website, one that ironically holds some valuable lessons for investors.

Here's the claim:

Deceptively Fast Course

 

The 2010 Austin Marathon is also a Boston Marathon qualifier and consistently produces one of the largest percentages of qualifiers, compared to other Texas Marathons. In fact, a comparison of finish times from the 2008-2009 Marathons of Texas season showed that for the average runner athletes in Austin ran more quickly across almost every age group. 



* The chart above was produced using official results from the indicated races from the 2008 - 2009 Marathons of Texas season. To compensate in differences in course closure times no runners finishing after 6 hours were factored into this chart.

Wow.  Those are some pretty impressive statistics.  If somebody is looking to run their first marathon, this would be a nice course to run it on.  And more experienced runners, those wanting to qualify for the Boston Marathon for example, would really like this course since the times are so much faster.

Or are they?

Lesson #1:  Consider the source

Always be skeptical of data interpretation that is produced by a party that has a vested interest in the outcome.

Lesson #2:  If it sounds too good to be true, it is

There's no logical reason why the Austin course should produce faster individual times than the Dallas course.  The Austin course has three times the vertical ascent and descent and neither is a point-to-point course so the net elevation gain/loss is close to zero on both.  

Lesson #3:  Don't confuse cause and effect

Their claim is that the course is significantly faster and they base this on data that shows that the average times across representative age groups are faster.  The data are true but the conclusion is not.

Lesson #4:  Data can say whatever someone wants them to say

If the course is significantly faster, then runners who finish both races should (at least on average) have faster times.  My cursory examination of the Male 30-34 and Female 35-39 age groups of runners who ran both the 2009 Austin marathon and the 2009 Dallas White Rock Marathon showed a significantly higher proportion of better individual times in the Dallas race, not the Austin race.

Lesson #5:  Logic and common sense are better than statistics

How about this for a better explanation.  The course isn't faster, the field (ie, the group of participating runners) is.  Austin has an extremely fit population while Dallas does not.  Dallas was ranked #14 (Houston was #6) in the 2009 Men's Fitness magazine "fattest cities in America."  Austin was ranked #17 on the same survey's "fittest cities in America."

If you ask a runner who regularly competes in both cities, they will tell you that relative to other runners, they are slower in Austin than they are in Dallas.


Lesson #6:  Most of what you read is incorrect, misleading, or biased.  

"Always start your day with the truth (God's Word)... since you're likely to hear lies the rest of the day."
-- Steve Farrar  

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   investing  

Why the broker fiduciary battle ultimately won't matter

A quiet battle has been going on recently regarding the "broker exemption" to the rule requiring investment advisers to adhere to a fiduciary standard of care with their clients.

The Investment adviser act, a more than sixty-year old piece of legislation, requires registered investment advisers to give advice that is "solely in the best interest of their clients."

Broker-dealer firms are exempted from this requirement and are instead subject to a "suitability" standard of care (ie, unless an investment is ultimately deemed "unsuitable," the broker has fulfilled his legal role, even if, for example, the investment lines his pockets more than another, perhaps, more suitable investment).  

A grassroots effort has emerged within several of the financial planning community's trade organizations to lobby legislation that would "level the playing field," eliminating the broker exemption and requiring all financial practitioners to adhere to a fiduciary standard.  If I haven't just lost you to a fit of narcolepsy, you can read more in this article.

While I support and applaud the effort, l don't believe legislation is required to bring about the desired change to the industry.

Why?

Because the change is happening now and is inevitable, with or without legislation.  The solution is not a fiduciary standard of care.  Who defines what is "solely in the best interest of a client" anyway?

If you asked ten different financial practitioners, you would probably get ten different answers, in the same way that ten different cardiac specialists might diagnose and treat a heart patient's condition in ten different ways.

The real issue is that financial institutions manufacture, distribute, and recommend investment products to the public in an environment of "information asymmetry."  This is not unlike the day long ago when many doctors both wrote and filled prescriptions.

A fiduciary standard won't change the fact that a gross conflict of interest exists when an entity serves as both the producer and recommender/endorser of a product, particularly when that product is one that is complicated and misunderstood by most lay people.

But here's the good news:
  • An alternative exists, namely independent, fee-only investment advisers operating solely in the realm of financial advice, away from the product manufacturing side of the industry.
  • There is an increasing supply of advisers who operate this way as more and more practitioners become disgusted with the industry and start their own practices.
  • There is an increasing demand for these advisers as consumers look for and find the alternative that serves solely their interests.
  • The internet allows both parties to leverage technology and spread the word "virally," causing the new financial order to spread quickly.
Now the bad news:

If you are a financial institution, you need to quickly decide whether you want to be the doctor (advice-giver), the pharmaceutical company (product manufacturer), or the pharmacist (distributor) in this equation and act accordingly (and quickly).  Because the day that you can egregiously "serve" the public in more than one of these roles is disappearing fast.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   my practice   wall (street) of shame  

Fear and greed in the bible

"Do not fear" appears in every book of the bible.

Greed is mentioned more than a few times as well.

There's definitely an investing lesson here...

"So do not fear for I am with you.  Do not be afraid for I am your God.  I will strengthen you and help you.  I will uphold you with my righteous right hand."  -- Isaiah 41:10

"Do not worry about tomorrow for tomorrow will worry about itself.  Each day has enough trouble of its own." -- Matthew 6:34

"A greedy man brings trouble to his family, but he who hates bribes will live."  --Proverbs 15:27

"With their mouths they express devotion, but their hearts are greedy for unjust gain."  --Ezekiel 33:31

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   biblical finance   christian finance   investing  

The power of one

Hire the smallest organization that can effectively deliver the product or service you require.

To safely and cost-effectively fly across the country, a commercial airline is required.
You need a pilot, some mechanics, baggage handlers, and flight attendants to pull it off.

To create and implement an investment and financial plan, you need one person (chosen carefully).

As an organization adds people, it adds complexity, communication challenges, scheduling issues, differences of opinion, layers of bureaucracy and overhead,
and lack of accountability.  You "institutionalize" the organization (a fancy term for "de-personalizing;" good for the organization, bad for the client).

"I don't go to meetings.  I don't write memos.  I don't have staff.  I don't commute.
The goal is to strip away anything that looks productive but doesn't involve shipping [delivering the service to the client]"

"How many handshakes do you need to introduce three people?  Three.  Four people need twice as many, six.  And five people?  Ten.
Coordinating teams of people becomes exponentially more difficult as the group gets larger.  And for important projects in an organization
with something to lose, the group pushes to get larger."

-- Seth Godin from Linchpin:  Are You Indispensable?

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   my practice   simplicity  

Small is the new big. Solo is the new small.

Big financial institutions have planted an idea in many people's heads that bigger is better.

In fact, the word "institution" is defined as "an established organization or corporation," implying stability and permanence.
Examining history, however, leads us to conclude that large financial institutions are anything but stable or permanent.

So, let's take a step back and examine exactly what you are paying for when you engage a financial adviser.

Financial products (mutual funds, insurance policies, annuities, stocks, bonds, mortgages) are commodities.

There is no shortage of excellent financial "tools" available to help solve most financial problems.

Many of the best products can be had at very low cost (in some cases, this is exactly what makes them the best).

Technology now exists that allows you to easily, accurately, and cost-effectively execute a sound investment strategy.

So what's left?  What's worth paying for?

Intellectual capital.
The worldview, experience, education, and insight of a particular person.  Not people, not company, not institution.

Objectivity.
A business model and fee structure that (to the greatest degree possible) eliminates partiality and conflict of interest.

Efficiency.
A low overhead, low bureaucracy environment that strips away as much wasted time, energy, effort, and cost as possible while delivering simple, effective strategies.

So are big companies bad?  Not necessarily.  But small and especially solo financial advisers (who are also independent and fee-only) offer investors a unique opportunity to leave behind a bureaucratic, cumbersome, and short-term, profit-fixated business model in favor of a nimble, independent, long-term focus.  

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   my practice   simplicity  

Performance reporting: another reason to love Folio Investing

Investment performance is something that is over-emphasized by many investment advisers, both by how much time they spend talking about it with clients as well as how much time, effort, energy, and money is spent producing performance reports (performance reporting software can cost into the five figures on an annual basis and many firms employ full-time staff to download and reconcile transactions and report performance).

It is necessary, though, to have a quick and accurate way to measure how your investment accounts have performed over historical periods, and to have a reasonable basis of comparison to know how you are doing.

Another reason to love Folio Investing.

Folio provides its accountholders an easy way to track performance.  It is based on an accurate, time-weighted, measure of performance which is very important.  Many brokerage firms, investment advisers, and personal finance software programs use a dollar-weighted measure.

The difference between the two methods is that a dollar-weighted measure includes the effects of cash flows in and out of the portfolio.  If, for example, you make a large deposit into your account right before the market enjoys a steep run-up, your performance, under a dollar-weighted measure, will be high relative to a time-weighted measure of return.

The time-weighted measure allows you to objectively evaluate the performance of the underlying securities while removing the effect of any inflows or outflows.  It's a more difficult calculation but Folio's system does the heavy lifting for you.

You can also easily change the start and end dates and compare your account's performance to one of many benchmark indices, mutual funds, or individual securities.

The performance shown above is hypothetical and does not represent a real investment portfolio.
John Gay and Frisco Financial Planning LLC receive no compensation or "soft dollars" from Folio Investing or any other brokerage firm.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   folio investing  

Double your gift to Haiti through NCF's matching renewal fund

The National Christian Foundation
 
 
 Double your gifts to Haiti!

You can double your gift to Haiti through the Haiti Renewal Fund at The National Christian Foundation (NCF). Thanks to a generous matching gift from one of NCF's givers, all donations to the NCF Haiti Renewal Fund will be matched dollar-for-dollar up to $2 million and will go to provide long-term support for rebuilding and renewing the country.

Do you need another '09 tax deduction?
All donations made by check or credit card to the Haiti Renewal Fund can also be included as a '09 tax deduction if you give by February 28, 2010.

Please help us get the word out about this incredible opportunity to maximize gifts to Haiti. Post this link (www.nationalchristian.com/haitirenewal) to your website, blog, Twitter account, or Facebook page, or email it to your clients, friends, and family. Together, we can make a powerful difference in rebuilding this devastated country.

Donate now at NationalChristian.com/haitirenewal


 

Donate now at
NationalChristian.com/haitirenewal

TELL A FRIEND!


share this:
FacebookTwitter

 

 
 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   charitable giving   christian finance   generosity  

Roth IRA conversion myth #1: "same tax bracket now and retirement, it's a wash"

Many articles on the subject of Roth v. Traditional IRA boil it down to nothing more than an issue of current v. future tax bracket.

The myth goes that if your tax bracket at retirement is expected to be lower than it is now, don't convert to a Roth, while if your tax bracket is expected to be higher at retirement, do convert to a Roth.

And, if your tax bracket ultimately stays the same, the conversion decision is moot since you'll end up paying the same in tax either way.

The uncertainty of your future tax situation not withstanding, the "wash" only occurs if you pay the tax due from the IRA you are converting,
in which case, the whole decision is reduced to a bet on future tax rates and on your future tax situation, both of which are highly unpredictable
(not to mention, you will pay a penalty in addition to the tax if your conversion and IRA withdrawal occur before age 59 1/2).

If, however, you pay the tax due on conversion from after-tax money, you are essentially converting the future growth on the amount of tax paid from "taxable every year" to "never taxable again" (assuming you meet the holding requirements of the Roth IRA).

Or to put it another way, the amount of tax paid at conversion is a "bonus allowable Roth contribution."

Example:

$100,000 traditional IRA, $25,000 after-tax account, 25% tax bracket now and forever, 7.2% annual investment growth.

If you convert, your $100,000 IRA becomes a Roth and your $25,000 after-tax account goes away.  After 30 years, you have a Roth IRA worth $800,000 (in after-tax terms).

If you don't convert, your $100,000 IRA is worth $600,000 (after-tax), while your taxable account is worth $200,000 assuming a 0% tax rate over 30 years.

It's only a "wash" if you manage to avoid taxes altogether on the original $25,000 after-tax account.  In this example, at a 25% tax rate, the initial $25,000 grows to only $121,104.

Takeaways:

1)  If you can't pay the conversion tax from a taxable account (ie, funds you've already paid tax on, not from the converted IRA itself), don't convert.
2)  Even if you can pay the tax from after-tax $, it still may not be in your best financial interest to do so.  There are other factors involved which may outweigh the benefit illustrated above (future blog post).

This post and all others on the blog are for informational purposes only and should not be considered individual investment or financial planning advice.
Consult your financial planner or tax advisor before making the Roth IRA conversion decision.

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   retirement   roth ira