DOCTOR INVESTING MISTAKES: Top Five PLUS 1 Vital Tip

Posted on June 11, 2025 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™

***

***

By Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

FIVE INVESTING MISTAKES OF DOCTORS; PLUS 1 VITAL TIP

As a former US Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] Registered Investment Advisor [RIA] and business school professor of economics and finance, I’ve seen many mistakes that doctors must be aware of, and most importantly, avoid. So, here are the top 5 investing mistakes along with suggested guideline solutions.

Mistake 1: Failing to Diversify Investment but Beware Di-Worsification

A single investment may become a large portion of your portfolio as a result of solid returns lulling you into a false sense of security. The Magnificent Seven stocks are a current example:

  • Apple, up +5,064%% since 1/18/2008 
  • Amazon, up +30,328% since 9/6/2002 
  • Alphabet, up +1,200% since 7/20/2012 
  • Tesla, up +21,713% since 11/16/2012 
  • Meta, up +684% since 2/20/2015 
  • Microsoft, up +22% since 12/21/2023 
  • Nvidia, up +80,797% since 4/15/2005 

Guideline: The Magnificent Seven [7] has grown from 9% of the S&P 500 at the end of 2013 to 31% at the end of 2024! That means even if you don’t own them, you’re still very exposed if you have an Index Fund [IF] or Exchange Traded Fund [ETF] that tracks the market. Accordingly, diversification is the only free lunch in investing which can reduce portfolio risk. But, remember the Wall Street insider aphorism that states: “Di-Versification Means Always Having to Say Your Sorry.” 

The term “Di-Worsification” was coined by legendary investor Peter Lynch in his book, One Up On Wall Street to refer to over-diversifying an investment portfolio in such a way that it reduces your overall risk-return characteristics. In other words, the potential return rises with an increase in risk and invested money can render higher profits only if willing to accept a higher possibility of losses [1].

IPO: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2025/03/02/ipo-road-show-with-pros-and-cons/

Mistake 2: Chasing Stock Market Performance

A podiatrist can easily fall into the trap of chasing securities or mutual funds showing the highest return. It is almost an article of faith that they should only purchase mutual funds sporting the best recent performance. But in fact, it may actually pay to shun mutual funds with strong recent performance. Unfortunately, many struggle to appreciate the benefits of their investment strategy because in jaunty markets, people tend to run after strong performance and purchase last year’s winners. 

Similarly, in a market downturn, investors tend to move to lower-risk investment options, which can lead to missed opportunities during subsequent market recoveries. The extent of underperformance by individual investors has often been the most awful during bear markets. Academic studies have consistently shown that the returns achieved by the typical stock or bond fund investors have lagged substantially.

Guideline: Understand chasing performance does not work.Continually monitor your investments and don’t feel the need to invest in the hottest fund or asset category.  In fact, it is much better to increase investments in poor performing categories (i.e. buy low). Also keep in remind rebalancing of assets each year is key. If stocks perform poorly and bonds do exceptionally well, then rebalance at the end of the year. In following this strategy, this will force a doctor into buying low and selling high each year. 

STOCKS: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2025/04/18/stocks-basic-definitions/

Mistake 3: Assuming Annual Returns Follow Historical Averages

Often doctors make their investment decisions under the belief that stocks will consistently give them solid double-digit returns. But the stock markets go through extended long-term cycles.

In examining stock market history, there have been 6 secular bull markets (market goes up for an extended period) and 5 secular bear markets (market goes down) since 1900. There have been five distinct secular bull markets in the past 100+ years. Each bull market lasted for an extended period and rewarded investors.   

For example, if an investor had started investing in stocks either at the top of the markets in 1966 or 2000, future stock market returns would have been exceptionally below average for the proceeding decade. On the other hand, those investors fortunate enough to start building wealth in 1982 would have enjoyed a near two-decade period of well above average stock market returns.  They key element to remember is that future historical returns in stocks are not guaranteed. If stock market returns are poor, one must consider that he or she will have to accept lower projected returns and ultimately save more money to make up for the shortfall. For example,

The May 6th, 2010, flash crash, also known as the crash of 2:45, was a United States trillion-dollar stock market plunge which started at 2:32 pm EST and lasted for approximately 36 minutes.

And, investors who have embraced the “buy the dip” strategy in 2025 have been handsomely rewarded, with the S&P 500 delivering its strongest post-pull back returns in over three decades.

According to research from Bespoke Investment Group, the S&P 500 has gained an average of 0.36% in the trading session following a down day so far in 2025. The only year with a comparable performance was 2020, which saw a 0.32% average post-dip gain [2]. 

The most recent example came on May 27, 2025 when the S&P 500 surged more than 2% after falling 0.7% in the final session before the holiday weekend. The rally was sparked by President Trump’s decision to scale back huge previously threatened tariffs on EU —a recurring catalyst behind many of 2025’s rebound. 

Guideline: Beware of projecting forward historical returns. Doctors should realize that the stock markets are inherently volatile and that, while it is easy to rely on past historical averages, there are long periods of time where returns and risk deviate meaningfully from historical averages.

REVENUE BONDS: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2024/12/20/bonds-revenue/

***

***

Mistake 4: Attempting to Time the Stock Market

Some doctors believe they are “smarter than the market” and can time when to jump in and buy stocks or sell everything and go to cash. Wouldn’t it be nice to have the clairvoyance to be out of stocks on the market’s worst days and in on the best days?  

Using the S&P 500 Index, our agile imaginary doctor-investor managed to steer clear of the worst market day each year from January 1st, 1992 to March 31st, 2012. The outcome: s/he compiled a 12.42% annualized return (including reinvestment of dividends and capital gains) during the 20+ years, sufficient to compound a $10,000 investment into $107,100.

But what about another unfortunate doctor-investor that had the mistiming to be out of the market on the best day of each year. This ill-fated investor’s portfolio returned only 4.31% annualized from January 1992 – March 2012, increasing the $10,000 portfolio value to just $23,500 during the 20 years. The design of timing markets may sound easy, but for most all investors it is a losing strategy. 

More contemporaneously on December 18th 2024, the DJIA plummeted 2.5%, while the S&P 500 declined 3% and the NASDAQ tumbled 3.5% 

Guideline: If it looks too good to be true, it probably is. While jumping into the market at its low and selling right at the high is appealing in theory, we should recognize the difficulties and potential opportunity and trading costs associated with trying to time the stock market in practice. In general, colleagues are be best served by matching their investment with their time horizon and looking past the peaks / valleys along the way.

ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2025/05/12/stocks-and-alternative-investments/

Mistake 5: Failing to Recognize the Impact of Fees and Expenses

A free dinner seminar or a polished stock-broker sales pitch may hide the total underlying costs of an investment.  So, fees absolutely matter.

The first costing step is determining what the fees actually are. In a mutual fund, these costs are found in the company’s obligatory “Fund Facts”. This manuscript clearly outlines all the fees paid–including up front fees (commissions and loads), deferred sales charges and any switching fees. Fund management expense ratios are also part of the overall cost. Trading costs within the fund can also impact performance. 

Here is a list of the traditional mutual fund fees:

  • Front End Load: The commission charged to purchase a fund through a stock broker or financial advisor. The commission reduces the amount you have available to invest.  Thus, if you start with $100,000 to invest, and the advisor charges up to an 8 percent front end load, you end up actually investing $92,000.
  • Deferred Sales Charge (DSC) or Back End Load: Imposed if you sell your position in the mutual fund within a pre-specified period of time (normally one – five years).  It is initiated at a higher start percentage (i.e. as high as 10 percent) and declines over a specific period of time.
  • Operating Fees: Costs of the mutual fund including the management fee rewarded to the manager for investment services. It also includes legal, custodial, auditing and marketing fees.
  • Annual Administration Fee:  Many mutual fund companies also charge a fee just for administering the account – usually under $100-150 per year.

Guideline: Know and understand all fees.

For example: A 1 percent disparity in fees may not seem like much but it makes a considerable impact over a long time period. 

Consider a $100,000 portfolio that earns 8 percent before fees, grows to $320,714 after 20 years if the investor pays a 2 percent operating fee. In comparison, if s/he opted for a fund that charged a more reasonable 1 percent fee, after 20 years, the portfolio grows to be $386,968 – a divergence of over $66,000! 

This is the value of passive or index investing. In the case of an index fund, fees are generally under 0.5 percent, thus offering even more savings over a long period of time. 

One Vital Tip: Investing Time is on Your Side

Despite thousands of TV shows, podcasts, textbooks, opinions and university studies on investing, it really only has three simple components. Amount invested, rate of return and time. By far, the most important item is time! For example:

  • Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 in 2009, you’d have $338,103 today.
  • Apple: if you invested $1,000 in 2008, you’d have $48,005 today.
  • Netflix: if you invested $1,000 in 2004, you’d have $495,679 today.

Start prudently investing now and do not wait!

ETFs: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2025/01/06/etfs-alternatively-weighted-investments/

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, this list of investing mistakes is still being made by many doctors. Fortunately, by recognizing and acting to mitigate them, your results may be more financially fruitful and mentally quieting.

REFERENCES:

1. Lynch, Peter: One Up on Wall Street [How to Use What You Already Know to Make Money in the Market]: Simon and Shuster (2nd edition) New York, 2000.

2. https://www.bespokepremium.com

Readings:

1. Marcinko, DE; Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors [Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™] Productivity Press, New York, 2017. 

2. Marcinko, DE: Dictionary of Health Economics and Finance. Springer Publishing Company, New York, 2006.

3. Marcinko, DE; Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors [Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™] CRC Press, New York, 2015.

BIO: As a former university Professor and Endowed Department Chair in Austrian Economics, Finance and Entrepreneurship, the author was a NYSE Registered Investment Advisor and Certified Financial Planner for a decade. Later, he was a private equity and wealth manager

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

SPONSOR: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

Subscribe, Like and Refer

***

EDUCATION: Books

SPEAKING: Dr. Marcinko will be speaking and lecturing, signing and opining, teaching and preaching, storming and performing at many locations throughout the USA this year! His tour of witty and serious pontifications may be scheduled on a planned or ad-hoc basis; for public or private meetings and gatherings; formally, informally, or over lunch or dinner. All medical societies, financial advisory firms or Broker-Dealers are encouraged to submit an RFP for speaking engagements: CONTACT: Ann Miller RN MHA at MarcinkoAdvisors@outlook.com -OR- http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

Filed under: "Ask-an-Advisor", CMP Program, Financial Planning, Funding Basics, Glossary Terms, Health Economics, Investing, Marcinko Associates | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment »

Impact of Performance Fees on Mutual Funds and Physician Portfolios

Posted on April 6, 2009 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™

Join Our Mailing List

More Complex than Realized by Some Doctors

[By Dr. David Edward Marcinko; FACFAS, MBA, CMP™]

[By Professor Hope Rachel Hetico; RN, MHA, CMP™]dave-and-hope4

Physician-investors may find themselves paying advisory fees, brokerage commissions, and other sales charges and expenses. All of these layers of expense can reduce or eliminate the advantage of professional management, if not monitored carefully. Also, fees can have a major impact on investment results. As a percentage of the portfolio, they normally range from low of 15–30 basis points (or .15% to .30%, a basis point is one one-hundredth of one percent) to a high of 300–400 basis points or even higher.

Charges are Universal

All portfolio managers, mutual funds, and investment advisors charge fees in one form or another. Ultimately, they must justify their fees by creating value added, or they would not be in business. Value added includes tangibles, such as greater investment return, as well as intangibles, such as assurance that the investment plan is successfully implemented and monitored, investor convenience, and professional service.

Comparisons Required

Always compare investment performance of funds or managed accounts after fees are deducted; only then can adequate comparisons be made. Also, compare fees within asset classes. Management fees and expenses of investing in bonds or bond funds are much different than the fees of investing in, for example, small companies or emerging market stocks. Whereas 100–200 basis points of fees may be appropriate for an equity portfolio or fund, similar charges may offset the advantages of a managed bond portfolio. With managed bond portfolios, real bond returns have limited long-term potential, because returns are ultimately based on interest rates. For example, if a 3% real (i.e., after inflation) return is expected, 200 basis points in fees may produce a negative after-tax result: 3% real return minus 2% fees minus 10% taxes equals a negative 9% total return.fp-book22

Sales Charges

Mutual funds (and some private portfolio managers) charge sales charges to sell or “distribute” the product. Investors who buy funds through the advice of brokers or “commission based” financial planners will pay a sales load. The many combinations of sales charges fall into three basic categories: front-end, deferred (or back-end), and continuous.

Front-End Fees

Front-end fees are a direct assessment against the initial investment and are limited to a maximum of 8.5%. They usually are stated either as a percentage of the investment or as a percentage of the investment, net of sales charges. For example, a 6% charge on a $10,000 investment is really a $600 charge to invest $9,400 or a real charge of 6.4%. Many low-load funds charge in the range of 1% to 3%. Rather than pay brokers or other purveyors, these fund companies or sponsors use the charges to offset selling or distribution costs. Although rare, some funds charge a load against reinvested dividends.

Deferred Charges

Deferred charges (or back-end loads, or redemption fees) come in many forms. Often, the longer the investor stays with the fund the smaller the charge is upon fund redemption. A typical sliding scale used for deferred charges may be 5-4-3-2-1, where redemption in year 1 is charged 5%, and redemption in year 5 is charged 1%; after year 5, there are no sales charges. Sometimes deferred charges are combined with front-end charges.

Redemption Fees

Certain quoted redemption fees may not apply after a period, such as one year. Funds often use such fees to discourage the trading of funds. Frequently, these charges are paid to the fund itself rather than to the fund management company; or broker. Long-term physician investors actually benefit from this fee structure; short-term shareholders who redeem shares bear the additional liquidation costs to satisfy redemption requests.

Continuous Charges

Continuous sales charges, known as 12b-1 fees for the SEC rule governing such charges, represent ongoing charges to pay distribution costs, including those of brokers who sell and maintain accounts, in which case they are known as “trail commissions.” The fund company may be reimbursed for distribution costs as well. In the prospectus, funds quote 12b-1 charges in the form of a maximum charge. This does not mean that the full charge is incurred, however. For example, a fund with a .75% 12b-1 approved plan may actually incur much lower expenses than .75%. Compared to front-end charges, a .75% per year sales charge of this type could be more costly to investment performance, given enough time.

Sales Loads

Portfolio managers can charge sales loads as well, usually in the form of a traditional WRAP fee arrangement (the investor pays a broker an all-inclusive fee that covers portfolio manager fees and transactions costs). No-load funds can be purchased through brokers or discount brokerage firms. The broker charges a commission for such purchases or sales.

Management Advisory Fees

Private account managers and mutual funds charge a fee for managing the portfolio. These fees typically range between 25 and 150 basis points. Bond funds tend to charge in the range of 25 to 100 basis points, and equity funds charge 75 to 150 basis points. Fees charged by private account managers usually are higher because of the direct attention given to a single doctor client. These managers do not pass along additional administrative costs, however, because they pay them out of the management fee. These management fees come in many forms. Tiered fees can charge smaller accounts a higher fee than larger accounts. Mutual funds often charge “group fees”: a fund family may tier its fee structure to encompass all funds offered by the fund family or by a group of similar funds (such as all international equity funds). Performance fees, although subject to SEC regulations, may be charged as well. A performance fee may be charged if the manager exceeds a certain return or outperforms a particular index or benchmark portfolio.

Administrative Expenses and Expense Ratios

Most private managers are compensated with higher management fees, as mentioned above. Therefore, many private accounts usually do not incur separate administrative expenses. Some management firms charge custodial fees or similar account maintenance fees. Mutual funds incur a number of administrative expenses, including shareholder servicing, prospectuses, reporting, legal and auditing costs, and registration and custodial costs. Mutual funds report these expenses and management fees as an expense ratio—the ratio of expenses to the average net assets of the fund. Expense ratios also include distribution costs or 12b-1 charges.insurance-book10 

Brokerage Commissions

Almost all buyers and sellers of securities incur brokerage commissions. Private “wealth managers” usually provide commission schedules to prospective physician-investors or current clients. Some private managers charge higher management fees and a discounted commission schedule, while others charge lower fees and higher commissions. These combinations of management and commission fees make comparison of prospective managers’ cost structures a difficult task. Most portfolio managers obtain research from brokerage firms, which can affect the commission relationship between broker and manager. Reduced commission schedules exchanged for information are known as “soft dollar costs.” Mutual funds may negotiate similar reduced commission schedules. In this regard, more-competitive brokerage firms can charge lower fees to investors. Commissions are not part of the expense ratio, because they are a part of the security cost basis. Firms with higher portfolio turnover are more likely to have higher commission costs than those with low turnover. Asset class impacts such costs as well. For example, small-cap stocks may be more expensive than large-cap stocks, or foreign bonds may be more expensive than domestic bonds.

Total Cost Approach

To arrive at a relevant comparison of fees among funds and managers, and to see what the total effect of fees on investment performance is, analyze the various charges on a net present value basis. Begin with a given investment amount (e.g., $10,000) and factor in fees over time to arrive at the present value of those fees. Present the comparisons in an easy-to-use table.

Sources of Fee Information

Consult the mutual fund prospectus for fee information. The prospectus has a fund expenses section that summarizes sales charges, expense ratios, and management fees; it does not cover commissions, however. Expense ratios usually are reported for the past 10 years. Commission or brokerage fees are more difficult to find. The statement of additional information and often the annual report disclose the annual amounts paid for commissions. When the total commission paid is divided by average asset values a sense of commission costs can be determined. Private wealth managers disclose fee structures in the ADV I filed with the SEC. Managers must disclose these fees to potential and current clients by providing either ADV Part II or equivalent form to the investor.

Reporting Services

Reporting services, such as Morningstar and Lipper, provide similar information from their own research of mutual funds. These services can be extremely beneficial, because fee information is summarized and often accounted for in the reports’ investment return calculations. This helps the investor and planner make good comparisons of funds. Information services that cover private managers provide information, primarily about management fees.

Assessment

To the extent that online trading, deep discount brokerages, lack of SEC and FINRA oversight, and the recent financial, insurance and banking meltdown has affected the above, it is left up to your discretion and personal situation. Generally, all fess are, and should be, negotiable.

Disclaimer: Both contributors are former licensed insurance agents and financial advisors.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Filed under: "Advisors Only", "Doctors Only", Ethics, Experts Invited, Financial Planning, Glossary Terms, Investing, Portfolio Management, Recommended Books, Research & Development | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »