This Time It's Personal Finance

I have taken some time to clarify my investment style for this blog and for myself without making any specific investment recommendations.

• Value, concentrated investing – While many seek the diversification of the full market portfolio, I speculate on a few investments I believe to be a great value. Growth companies have historically underperformed value stocks as investors systematically overestimate growth. Earnings growth regresses to the mean, and value typically is a better investment. A purely quantitative black-box strategy could evaluate the entire market and find value stocks. However, I am examining a company’s strategic position, financial statements, and conference calls. A portfolio of a small basket of investments that are in different sectors will get most of the benefits of diversification.

• International exposure – Most investors in any given country have a home bias. While there are barriers in understanding and in regulations to investing in other countries, it seems excessive. I seek to invest a high percentage of my investments outside the United States in emerging markets. In the cases where I cannot buy individual stocks, I buy exchange traded funds that give exposure to a particular country or region.

• Liquidity is not all that important – Most of my investments are fairly liquid at this point in time since I am unable to invest in private equity and venture capital. However, I am willing to make illiquid investments if I am compensated for that illiquidity. You can maintain liquidity on tap with credit lines at a very low cost to maintain.

• Leverage – At this time, I have cheap access to credit to borrow against investments in my portfolio. While leverage increases risk, I am in a great position to assume that higher risk. With a greater base of assets, my return on equity will be higher assuming my asset’s returns are greater than my borrowing rate.

Thanks to Dave Albrecht for asking me to write about my investing philosophy

Secular Bear Market

If you watch CNBC you see talk of a rally in the markets regularly, but the truth is the market has done basically nothing since 2000 other than stay within a fairly narrow range. You would have been better off keeping your money in treasuries. This has happened before, from 1966 to 1982, real returns on on the S&P 500 were negative. From 1982 to 2000, it was good to stay long since the market was going up dramatically. Is that the best strategy for a secular bear market like this one, 2000-????

I would say that it is not if you want to beat inflation. First, if you are going to invest in the market, remember there is more than one market. The United States is a large country, but it is far from the only market to invest in. Emerging markets such as Brazil and India have seen stellar returns from 2000-2008. Exercise caution when buying into these developing countries though. They can only maintain high levels of growth for so long and their growth is dependent on a fast pace of reforms and opening their economies to outside investment. Your portfolio needs a wide variety of asset classes and countries represented. This secular bear market is likely to persist, the average is 17 years. The idea of secular bear and bull markets raises interesting questions of what causes long term trends in valuation and growth. I suspect much of it is based on changes in technology and industrial organization. I believe that the 1982-2000 boom was largely fed by technology helped in part by economic reforms to open trade and lower taxes. What could cause the next secular bull market? Nanotechnology, advances in space travel, low cost alternative energy, something else