Re: How to know what an Index fund actually contains?
Posted: Fri May 15, 2020 1:59 am
vis-a-vis backdating because I really think this is important for people to understand:
No, past returns is not the entire premise behind investing. Investing based on past returns is generally going to put you in the trap of buying high.
I think my example of gold is all you need to see the flaws in backdating(especially over only a single timespan). Backdating can be useful for portfolios, but it MUST be done over multiple timespans with varying start and end dates(lest it show results that are biased towards a specific type of device like anything behing backdated to the current epidemic will be)
In passive investing we diversify over multiple sectors to reduce our risk.
Just to demonstrate how this exact 20 year block has been poor for stocks with the S&P: it want from 1450 in april 2000 to 2500 april 2020. That's annualized returns of only 2.7%.
If we shift back an year, so we avoid the huge tech stock build up and coronavirus bust we're looking at 1300 -> 2900 that's a 4.1% annualized returns.
And if we look at the 10 year returns 1 year ago it was 890->2900, which is a whopping 12% annualized return!
40 year returns to present date are 8.5% but it's worth considering inflation was also higher then. Long term historic real returns(with inflation and dividends adjusted) are around 7% on average(http://www.simplestockinvesting.com/SP5 ... eturns.htm this is 1950-2009 so it's actually missing some of the best returns we've had in the last 10 years)
I hope that demonstrates how massively the range you backdate for can affect returns, and that you consider it carefully when comparing products. Unfortunately I could find no way on the myindex.jp site to adjust the range.
as to the stock split:
I didn't suggest 100% international stocks nor would I do so. I'm not entirely sure what the best mix is though I personally have a higher weighting for domestic than the market cap(just for that currency reason). I have far more developed than emerging though. So I do disagree on the split it has. My personal stock split is 1/4 domestic(higher than market cap for the currency), 1/8 emerging and 5/8 developed. You could just get a "whole world stock" thing though and not worry about the splits or rebalancing.
My fundamental problem with the "balance" index is in the sheer amount of bonds in it, as well as the tiny proportion of developed nations stocks(which is the MOST diversified part of the stock portfolio, has the most stability and has the best historic long term performance, though again, that is not guarranteed). It's an incredibly large amount for someone early in their career, and bonds are by their very nature lower risk and lower return. Also it's called the balance index, but in no way are the stock or bond allocations balanced to the actual market caps.
I'm unfortunately not a very skilled explainer of things. There are some books out there that go a lot deeper into the problems with backdating as well the value of market cap balanced portfolios. "Common sense on mutual funds" by Jack Bogle is one good place to go. It's a bit dry, but Bogle is the man behind Vanguard and he demonstrates this stuff in well explained examples.
edit: finally, curious as to the cause of the even-split 8's performance(outside of just the poor 20-year fit), it's also a lot down to REITS and emerging markets stocks and bonds which for the 20-year span performed extremely well(but again, there is no real guarrantee of this repeating). I can see how on paper this all looks great, but the flip-side of this as that everyone is now having doubts about all of those(both emerging markets and REITs): china trade wars and stock manipulations are looking fishy, and there's talk of another housing bubble. Since in this portfolio these represent oversized parts of it, it does little to protect from these real risks. I'm looking for another tool where I could alter the start and end dates but haven't had much luck :/
No, past returns is not the entire premise behind investing. Investing based on past returns is generally going to put you in the trap of buying high.
I think my example of gold is all you need to see the flaws in backdating(especially over only a single timespan). Backdating can be useful for portfolios, but it MUST be done over multiple timespans with varying start and end dates(lest it show results that are biased towards a specific type of device like anything behing backdated to the current epidemic will be)
In passive investing we diversify over multiple sectors to reduce our risk.
Just to demonstrate how this exact 20 year block has been poor for stocks with the S&P: it want from 1450 in april 2000 to 2500 april 2020. That's annualized returns of only 2.7%.
If we shift back an year, so we avoid the huge tech stock build up and coronavirus bust we're looking at 1300 -> 2900 that's a 4.1% annualized returns.
And if we look at the 10 year returns 1 year ago it was 890->2900, which is a whopping 12% annualized return!
40 year returns to present date are 8.5% but it's worth considering inflation was also higher then. Long term historic real returns(with inflation and dividends adjusted) are around 7% on average(http://www.simplestockinvesting.com/SP5 ... eturns.htm this is 1950-2009 so it's actually missing some of the best returns we've had in the last 10 years)
I hope that demonstrates how massively the range you backdate for can affect returns, and that you consider it carefully when comparing products. Unfortunately I could find no way on the myindex.jp site to adjust the range.
as to the stock split:
I didn't suggest 100% international stocks nor would I do so. I'm not entirely sure what the best mix is though I personally have a higher weighting for domestic than the market cap(just for that currency reason). I have far more developed than emerging though. So I do disagree on the split it has. My personal stock split is 1/4 domestic(higher than market cap for the currency), 1/8 emerging and 5/8 developed. You could just get a "whole world stock" thing though and not worry about the splits or rebalancing.
My fundamental problem with the "balance" index is in the sheer amount of bonds in it, as well as the tiny proportion of developed nations stocks(which is the MOST diversified part of the stock portfolio, has the most stability and has the best historic long term performance, though again, that is not guarranteed). It's an incredibly large amount for someone early in their career, and bonds are by their very nature lower risk and lower return. Also it's called the balance index, but in no way are the stock or bond allocations balanced to the actual market caps.
I'm unfortunately not a very skilled explainer of things. There are some books out there that go a lot deeper into the problems with backdating as well the value of market cap balanced portfolios. "Common sense on mutual funds" by Jack Bogle is one good place to go. It's a bit dry, but Bogle is the man behind Vanguard and he demonstrates this stuff in well explained examples.
edit: finally, curious as to the cause of the even-split 8's performance(outside of just the poor 20-year fit), it's also a lot down to REITS and emerging markets stocks and bonds which for the 20-year span performed extremely well(but again, there is no real guarrantee of this repeating). I can see how on paper this all looks great, but the flip-side of this as that everyone is now having doubts about all of those(both emerging markets and REITs): china trade wars and stock manipulations are looking fishy, and there's talk of another housing bubble. Since in this portfolio these represent oversized parts of it, it does little to protect from these real risks. I'm looking for another tool where I could alter the start and end dates but haven't had much luck :/