UPDATE: The NASDAQ, Elon Musk and Twitter

By Staff Reporters

***

***

The NASDAQ composite booked its best day in more than a week after investors snapped up technology and communications shares on Elon Musk’s disclosure of a large stake in social media platform Twitter Inc. The NASDAQ, Dow industrials and S&P 500 all rose for a second straight trading day.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

What happened:

  • The NASDAQ Composite COMP, +1.90% finished up 271.05 points, or 1.9%, at 14,532.55. That’s the largest daily percentage gain since March 24, 2022, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
  • The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.30% added 103.61 points or 0.3%, closing at 34,921.88.
  • The S&P 500 SPX, +0.81% closed up 36.78 points, or 0.8%, at 4,582.64.

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

***

***

Understanding Stock Market Performance Benchmarks

Join Our Mailing List

An important role in monitoring investment portfolio progress

By TIMOTHY J. McINTOSH; MBA, MPH, CFP®, CMP™ [Hon] 

tim

Performance measurement has an important role in monitoring progress toward any portfolio’s goals.  The portfolio’s objective may be to preserve the purchasing power of the assets by achieving returns above inflation or to have total returns adequate to satisfy an annual spending need without eroding original capital, etc.

Whatever the absolute goal, performance numbers need to be evaluated based on an understanding of the market environment over the period being measured.

So, here is a brief review for our ME-P readers, doctors and subscribers; after a good market day today.

17,666.40 +305.36 +1.76%

Time-weighted Returns

One way to put a portfolio’s a time-weighted return in the context of the overall market environment is to compare the performance to relevant alternative investment vehicles. This can be done through comparisons to either market indices, which are board baskets of investable securities, or peer groups, which are collections of returns from managers or funds investing in a similar universe of securities with similar objectives as the portfolio.  By evaluating the performance of alternatives that were available over the period, the investor and his/her advisor are able to gain insight to the general investment environment over the time period.

The Indices

Market indices are frequently used to gain perspective on the market environment and to evaluate how well the portfolio performed relative to that environment.  Market indices are typically segmented into different asset classes.

Common stock market indices include the following:

  • Dow Jones Industrial Average- a price-weighted index of 30 large U.S. corporations.
  • Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index – a capitalization-weighted index of 500 large U.S. corporations.
  • Value Line Index – an equally-weighted index of 1700 large U.S. corporations.
  • Russell 2000 – a capitalization-weighted index of smaller capitalization U.S. companies.
  • Wilshire 5000 – a cap weighted index of the 5000 largest US corporations.
  • Morgan Stanley Europe Australia, Far East (EAFE) Index – a capitalization-weighted index of the stocks traded in developed economies.

Common bond market indices include the following:

  • Barclays Aggregate Bond Index – a broad index of bonds.
  • Merrill Lynch High Yield Index – an index of below investment grade bonds.
  • JP Morgan Global Government Bond – an index of domestic and foreign government-issued fixed income securities.

The selection of an appropriate market index depends on the goals of the portfolio and the universe of securities from which the portfolio was selected. Just as a portfolio with a short-time horizon and a primary goal of capital preservation should not be expected to perform in line with the S&P 500, a portfolio with a long-term horizon and a primary goal of capital growth should not be evaluated versus Treasury Bills.

***

Healthcare job expense deductions

***

While the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500 are often quoted in the newspapers, there are clearly broader market indices available to describe the overall performance of the U.S. stock market. Likewise, indices like the S&P 500 and Wilshire 5000 are capitalization-weighted, so their returns are generally dominated by the largest 50 of their 500 – 5000 stocks. Although this capitalization-bias does not typically affect long-term performance comparisons, there may be periods of time in which large cap stocks out- or under-perform mid-to-small cap stocks, thus creating a bias when cap-weighted indices are used versus what is usually non-cap weighted strategies of managers or mutual funds. Finally, the fixed income indices tend to have a bias towards intermediate-term securities versus longer-term bonds.

Peer Groups

Thus, an investor with a long-term time horizon, and therefore potentially a higher allocation to long bonds, should keep this bias in mind when evaluating performance.Peer group comparisons tend to avoid the capitalization-bias of many market indices, although identifying an appropriate peer group is as difficult as identifying an appropriate market index.

Furthermore, peer group universes will tend to have an additional problem of survivorship bias, which is the loss of (generally weaker) performance track records from the database. This is the greatest concern with databases used for marketing purposes by managers, since investment products in these generally self-disclosure databases will be added when a track record looks good and dropped when the product’s returns falter. Whether mutual funds or managers, the potential for survivorship bias and inappropriate manager universes make it important to evaluate the details of how a database is constructed before using it for relative performance comparisons.

***

investing

***

Channel Surfing the ME-P

Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.

The Author

Timothy J. McIntosh is Chief Investment Officer and founder of SIPCO.  As chairman of the firm’s investment committee, he oversees all aspects of major client accounts and serves as lead portfolio manager for the firm’s equity and bond portfolios. Mr. McIntosh was a Professor of Finance at Eckerd College from 1998 to 2008. He is the author of The Bear Market Survival Guide and the The Sector Strategist.  He is featured in publications like the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, Investment Advisor, Fortune, MD News, Tampa Doctor’s Life, and The St. Petersburg Times.  He has been recognized as a Five Star Wealth Manager in Texas Monthly magazine; and continuously named as Medical Economics’ “Best Financial Advisors for Physicians since 2004.  And, he is a contributor to SeekingAlpha.com., a premier website of investment opinion. Mr. McIntosh earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Economics from Florida State University; Master of Business Administration (M.B.A) degree from the University of Sarasota; Master of Public Health Degree (M.P.H) from the University of South Florida and is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER® practitioner. His previous experience includes employment with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Florida, Enterprise Leasing Company, and the United States Army Military Intelligence.

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.

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(TM)

Learn the “Right” Investing Lessons from 2013

Join Our Mailing List 

Understanding the Recency Effect

Lon JeffriesBy Lon Jefferies MBA CFP® www.NetWorthAdvice.com

The year 2013 was viewed as a very positive one by most investors; especially physician-investors.

The S&P 500 index (measuring large cap U.S. stocks) was up 32.39% for the year.

However, the reality is most other asset categories didn’t come close to keeping up with the pace set by U.S. equities.

For instance:

  • Foreign Stocks (IEFA): 22.46%
  • Emerging Markets (IEMG): -2.77%
  • Real Estate (IYR): 1.16%
  • US Government Bonds (IEF): -6.09%
  • US TIPS (TIP): -8.49%
  • Corporate Bonds (LQD): -2.00%
  • International Bonds (IGOV): -1.37%
  • Emerging Market Bonds (LEMB): -6.73%
  • Commodities (DJP): -11.12%
  • Gold (GLD): -28.33%

In Hindsight

In retrospect, the way to maximize your gain last year would have been to hold a completely undiversified portfolio consisting of nothing but U.S. stocks. The danger going forward is to learn the wrong lesson from 2013. Investors always have the temptation to fall prey to the Recency Effect, continuing and exaggerating the behaviors that worked in the recent past believing the environment we’ve just been through will be permanent.

The Long-Term Benefits of Diversification

Many will abandon their investment strategy because it didn’t give them the absolute best result last year, failing to recognize the long-term benefit of diversification. I’d argue that a better perspective is to remind yourself that the definition of diversification is that you always dislike a portion of your portfolio.

Always Laggards

Even in the most widely prosperous market environment, a truly diversified portfolio will have an element or two that lags the market. In fact, if at any time a portion of your portfolio isn’t generating negative returns, you should be concerned about a lack of diversification in your investment strategy.

Allocate Assets Now

Now is an ideal time to review your asset allocation and remind yourself why we diversify. Modifying your allocation with a focus on what happened in 2013 would be similar to guessing a coin flip will land on tails because it did on the previous flip.

Stock Market

Assessment

The correct lesson to take from 2013 is that over time, a well-diversified portfolio is capable of producing sufficient returns to help you reach your investment goals while minimizing risk.

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:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Product Details  Product Details

Challenging Standard & Poor’s 500 Index

Join Our Mailing List

Dr. Jeremy Siegel Opines

[By Staff Reporters]56371606

According to Financial Advisor News – an electronic trade magazine on March 17 2009 – Standard & Poor’s underestimate the earnings of its S&P 500 Index. So says, Jeremy Siegel PhD, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business and author of Stocks for the Long Run.

The Dilemma

The problem started when the Wall Street Journal ran an op-ed piece by Siegel that argued Standard & Poor’s uses a “bizarre” methodology for calculating the earnings and P/E ratio for the S&P 500. In it, Siegel explained that the earnings of S&P 500 companies are currently treated equally, but should instead be weighted in proportion to their market capitalization. Market capitalization weighting, he noted, is used to measure the S&P 500 returns. Such a system gives larger weight to the earnings of a company such as Exxon-Mobil, and lower weight to an S&P 500 member such as Jones Apparel.

Siegel’s Example

For example, “a 10% rise in Exxon-Mobil’s price would boost the S&P 500 by 4.64 index points, while the same fall in Jones Apparel would have no impact since the change is far less than the one-hundredth of one point to which the index is routinely rounded,” Siegel wrote.

fp-book10

Outcome

As a result of the above, if capitalization weightings were applied to 2008, the earnings of S&P 500 companies would have been $71.10 per share instead of $39.73 per share.

S&P’s Support

In response, an S&P official said Siegel’s argument “fails the test of both logic and index mathematics.”

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:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details

Product Details  Product Details

Fiduciary Burden of Participant-Directed Investment Plans

Join Our Mailing List

An Emerging Issue for Physician-Executives

[By Jeffery S. Coons; PhD, CFP]

Managing Principal-Manning & Napier Advisors, Inc

fp-book1

The goal of designing a participant-directed investment menu should be to provide enough diversification of roles to allow participants to make an appropriate trade-off between risk and return, without having so many roles as to create participant confusion. 

Medical Administrative Burden

Ultimately, the burden on plan administrators and physician executives is to adequately educate employees and is largely driven by the investment decisions we require them to make in the plan, with more choices necessitating a greater understanding of the fundamental differences between and appropriate role for each choice.  The logical questions that arise when selecting options on a menu are:

  • Are there clear differences among the options?
  • Are these differentiating characteristics inherent to the option or potentially fleeting?
  • Are the differences among options easily communicated to and understood by the typical plan participant?
  • Most importantly, if participants are given choice among these different options, can the decisions they make reasonably be expected to result in an appropriate long-term investment program?

Fiduciary Concerns and Liabilities

All this adds up to additional fiduciary concerns for the health care entity and plan sponsor. 

For example, can the typical participant understand growth and value as concepts when even the experts can not agree on their definitions? The use of style based menus for self-directed plans bring this issue to the forefront. What about investment strategy?  What choices are we expecting the participant to make when offering growth and value styles for one basic asset class role? 

Finally, beyond the responsibility to provide effective education, what other fiduciary issues are associated with style categorization for a participant-directed investment menu?

Effective Style Communications

Consider whether the differences among manager styles can be effectively communicated to the average participant.  Because the general style categories of “growth” and “value” are not well defined, we are expecting the participant to understand how the manager is making investments in a fundamental manner and the differences in risk/return characteristics of these alternative approaches.  This exercise is difficult for investment professionals and trustees, so it will be even more unlikely to be properly understood by an average participant.

Given Assumptions

Let’s assume for the moment that there is an effective means for understanding the different risk and return characteristics of two managers investing in what is ultimately the same basic asset class.  When allowing the choice of these two differing approaches, what decision can the participant make?  There are four possibilities:

  1. Select the single manager whose investment philosophy makes the most sense overall to the participant;
  2. Time the decision of when to move from one management philosophy to another;
  3. Split the allocation between the two managers; or,
  4. Give up from confusion and do not participate in the plan.

We have already discussed the difficulty of the first choice, so let’s consider the second possibility.  This decision is an extremely risky choice that typically leads to poor or even catastrophic performance. 

Why?  Timing decisions such as this are typically based upon recent past performance, which is cyclical in nature.  In essence, investors generally chase after yesterday’s returns and invest in funds after their period of strong relative performance.  The strong flows into S&P 500 Index funds and growth/momentum firms of today were preceded by flows into value/fundamentally-oriented investment firms a few years ago. 

In fact, a Journal of Investing academic article in the Summer of 1998 (“Mutual Fund Performance: A Question of Style”) found that mutual funds changing their investment style had the worst performance of any style individually.

Allocation Choices

The next choice is to split the allocation between growth and value.  While this approach may mean that the participant will not under-perform significantly when any one style is out-of-favor, it also means that the participant will generally never out-perform either.

Nevertheless, by combining two halves of the same basic universe within an asset class, it is likely that the basic performance of the asset class will result (i.e., index-like returns).  Since the participant is paying the higher expenses of active, value-added mutual funds, the end result is likely to be index-like returns less the significantly greater fees and consistent under-performance over the long-term.

Assessment

While there may be participants who can handle the investment process, the previous discussion illustrates why it remains an open question whether educational efforts and typical menu choices provided by plan fiduciaries will be adequate from a regulatory and legal standpoint.

However, while it is unreasonable for participants to select the single best manager, it is reasonable for trustees to choose managers by defining investment policy and objectives that focus on characteristics like broad asset classes. 

And; do you think that by creating an investment menu that removes soft, overlapping, and largely qualitative distinctions such as style; plan sponsors can take a significant step toward mitigating the potential for participant confusion that inevitably could lead to litigation?

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:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

 

Product Details  Product Details

%d bloggers like this: