Although a naïve comparison appears to favor the integrating approach to multi-factor strategy construction, after taking into account both quantitative and qualitative considerations, many investors—those seeking transparency, diversification, minimal governance oversight, and low fees—may find mixing is a more sensible choice.
With the rapid development of single country ETFs, capturing factor alpha at the country level may prove to be an efficient, practical alternative to individual stock selection. In this study, we look at how effectively our internally-developed EM stock selection model can guide country overweights/underweights. Back testing shows that stock-level factor alpha can indeed be captured at the country level.
The traditional 60/40 model no longer can be expected to deliver the same type of results. A new model is for investors to move toward more of a risk-parity portfolio, with assets more equally divided among stocks, bonds and these new alternatives.
Tech and financials led the recent selloff, as headline noise and regulatory risks spooked investors. But strong corporate fundamentals, including earnings growth, should ultimately drive stock returns.
While somewhat at odds with today’s big-data, warp-speed approach to life and work, thoughtful craftsmanship—the product design and implementation elements that are tangible, measurable, and impactful—can create positive, persistent results in portfolio performance.
In biblical tradition, the four horsemen of the apocalypse are a quartet of immensely powerful entities personifying the four prime concepts – war, famine, pestilence and death – that drive the apocalypse. For today’s investors, the equivalent is historically high equity valuations, historically low bond yields, increasing longevity and, as a result, the increasing need for what can be very expensive long-term care.
There is much more than meets the eye when comparing ETF indexes, even within the same space (large, small, midcap, etc.). We take an objective look at this area, and some of the findings are quite interesting.
2017 turned out to be a better year for the stock market than most investors surmised. For 2018, we yet again see investors avoiding one of the longest post-war bull markets in history and continuing to ignore the fundamentals driving markets higher.
Some are real. Others are random.
In reading Larry Swedroe’s article, Slaughtering the High-Dividend Sacred Cow, it strikes me that high-dividend stocks are far from “sacred cows” and need not be slaughtered. Instead, his value-advocacy piece ignores the enhanced risk-adjusted returns and the much lower drawdowns that can be found in a diversified basket of high-dividend stocks.