|
Printable version |
From: | "G Stolwyk" <stolwyk@wave.co.nz> |
Date: | Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:05:11 +1200 |
Readers,
Please refer to the Disclaimer at the
beginning of my previous post of June 28, 2001, time 22.24 hours: "
LEARNING TO INVEST:.....(1).
4. Risk/Reward ratio. Risk Tolerance.
Spreading of Risk.
By " risk ", I am referring to the
chance of lower or higher share prices. There
is upward risk if the chance of a rising share
price due to certain factors, is greater than the
downside risk.
The level of
risk is difficult to quantify as there are two requisites
involved:
All matters about
the company are at present truly transparent.
Future real
profitability, level of competition and all positives and negatives are
known. In such a hypothetical case, the risk
will approach zero.
Obviously, in the
convoluted markets, the precise risk is impossible to
predict: It is already difficult
to interpret the announcements issued by a company, the quality of the
accounts and to assess the level of experience and honesty of a new
Board.
From now on, when I use the word " risk",
it refers to a perceived risk which can lead to lower
share prices. We can try to reduce this risk and hereby make the
reward more certain, or, if we accept the increased risk, we want a much higher
potential reward.
The perceived risk in investing in
Bonds tends to be much lower than the risk associated with an investment in
MMD!
But one would expect a lower reward or return
to the Bond investor.
Therefore, the higher the
perceived risk level, the greater the need to
reduce this to manageable levels and thus obtain a much greater reward!
" Investment
Styles "- See item ( 1 ), to some extent differentiate
perceived risk levels associated with these styles. In practice, I would have to
be a Value Investor to be a Growth Investor. The latter will be interested
in real growth and not "
pseudo growth ".
Being a stock
picker, my investments will show several perceived
levels of growth and risks
associated with my stocks.
When I invested in
SKC, it was a good value
stock as the price at that time @ $ 6 was too
low, considering that this stock had excellent
growth prospects and the dividend yield was
high! I had reduced the risk by buying SKC at a
perceived low price!
Ideally, a stock picker
will apply all the
necessary investment styles
needed to produce an income. His / her risk tolerance can be
medium if applied to the total
investment. Those with little risk tolerance will deposit their cash in the
Bank.
While I invest in any
companies in some countries, another stock picker may
select some stocks
from one sector as
he perhaps feels that he could " ride a cycle ", eg. he would have
bought shares in some International
coal stocks before the start of that particular cycle, two years
ago.
Such an investor may not
sufficiently spread his
risks by investing too much in one sector!
I have QBE which was bought at the start of a new
Insurance cyle with rising premiums; the risks are somewhat
higher here than perceived for SKC.
I own MMD but as the
risk was high, I only made a
small investment in this biotech stock.( I don't include this
in my portfolio of stocks and keep it separate ).
I am a long term holder and if a new stock
is selected I would look for a stock with a potential 70% increase over
the next two years or higher still where the risk is higher.
These potentially large increases in share
prices are needed to counteract future losses and lesser growth rates of
the longer held stocks, and hence result in a good overall earning
rate and income!
I need underpriced or undervalued
stocks to do that!!
Spreading
the risk and reducing it by investing in a number of various stocks, sectors
and currencies, is a main issue when
investing!
Too much
reduction of risk by buying too many stocks, can lead to
overall less growth or income. I don't approve of that
method!
Surprisingly, the time spent on "looking at stocks", is not that
great, once a certain level of expertise is achieved! After all, adding a new
stock to the portfolio does not occur that often!
5. Investment
Methods.
5.1 Weighting by
countries.
One may see
an article boasting that the company, fund or investor has outperformed a share
index by x%. Many directors' bonuses are determined on that basis. The share
index will have some poorly performing socks
which drag down the index.
Outperformance of
an index is a poor yardstick and it will be more appropriate to compare the
performance with their peers of the sector! That may not always be possible
in NZ. Other performance methods are also being used.
Larger companies can be more attractive at times
while the mid - cap. companies may stand
out at other times. As interest rates decline, Banks can
be popular and the converse may apply as the rates rise. The various
currencies move and present additional risks.
The stock picker will identify the
countries to invest in. One, Australia has about double the
growth rate of NZ. Commentators have suggested that the world sees
Australia and NZ as one market. That is not the way, I see it!
They don't know that Australia has many large
interests in Europe and the US and a large international mining sector.
Mind you, the effects of a continuing slowdown in the Far East must and will
have an impact on Australia and NZ.
Australian GDP growth
rates are similar to those of the US and were much higher than
those of the Euro-zone since about 1993.
Source: " The Australian
dollar.........", an important report from the ANZ ( On the
Egoli site: " News and views " ).
There is no precise advice as to how much
investment should be in NZ, Aus., GB or Europe, the US and other
countries.
Some investors play the more riskier countries
and exchanges. My opinion is that no more than 25%
would be in NZ, 40 % in Australia and 35% in the remaining destinations.
Taxation matters need to be looked into.
If invested in a NZ or Australian
fund with investments in say GB, then I would
class it as such. At this stage, I have as yet not achieved these
goals.
Gerry
( To be
cont.).
|
|