Financial Jungle

The Public Be Damned… you may quote me: Screw ‘em.

That was the remark from legendary value manager, Marty Whitman, cursing fickle investors for fleeing his Third Avenue fund in favour of the more glamorous technology stocks. The exodus shaved his Third Avenue fund’s assets under management from $50 billion to $38 billion in 1998 and 1999. But guess who’s having the last laugh as the Third Avenue fund is enjoying a 9.95% average 10-year run. Compare that to S&P 500’s 5%!

Marty Whitman has always believed in his value philosophy, which is why he invests the bulk of his wealth alongside investors’. With so much at stake, he can also afford to focus on his long-term objectives in the face of short-term adversities. For Third Avenue, giving Whitman the pink slip is never an option given his revered status. Not to mention Whitman basically runs his own show at the firm.

Other mutual fund managers? Hmm…. not so lucky. Several quarters of persistent lousy performance and you’re out!

So why are mutual fund companies so fixated on short-term returns? Don’t look around. Look at ourselves. We’re the culprits. I once had a colleague, who’s brilliant at what he does, but he said to me, “I pick my RRSP mutual funds based on last year’s performance.” This is how most of us are wired, which is why fund companies are so wildly successful at promoting products catered to our myopic views.

According to an article by Martin Gale, most managers’ interests aren’t aligned with investors’. Judging from how managers are compensated, it’s no wonder why 80% of managers fail to beat the market. They’re not paid to beat the market!

It’s simply not good enough to invest with the manager with the most morningstar stripes. In addition to a strong track record of eclipsing the market, the manager must also “eat his own cooking.” After all, if the manager refuses to eat his poison, why should you?

In 2006, Boston Business Journal surveyed 75 locally based fund filings and discovered that 37 funds had zero dollar invested by their own managers. If a manager doesn’t invest the bulk of his wealth in his own funds, then he’s simply a well-compensated employee whose paychecks depend on MER and assets under management (AUM), not investors’ return. The easiest way to grow AUM is by selling the hottest trends; the ones that made the most money last year. Think back at the height of the Internet bubble. What attracted weak money? Nortel or oil stocks? Fast forward 8 years, which one enriched investors handsomely?

I recently came across an interesting article on Reaping What They Sow. The Denver Business Journal came up with a list of US fund companies where managers were investing heavily in their own funds. The article doesn’t go into performance, so I decided to do a little digging on the top 3 firms: Marsico Capital, Jenus Capital, and Cambiar Investors.

• Marsico Capital has 6 funds under managment: Focus, Growth, 21st Century, International Opportunities, Flexible Capital, and Global. All have beaten their respective benchmarks. 2 funds have 10+ year histories. Managers invest an average of $900k in the funds.
• Jenus Capital has too many funds to list. But their 38-year-old flagship fund, Jenus Fund, has beaten S&P500 by 2.4% a year. Managers invest an average of $675k in Janus mutual funds.
• Cambiar Investors has 3 funds under management: Large-cap, Small-Cap, and International. All have beaten their respective benchmarks. Managers have an average of $559k invested.

If you don’t recognize these U.S. firms, I’m sure you have heard of Warren Buffett, Jim Rogers, Eddie Lampert and George Soros. They, too, have their skin in the game.

Robert Rodriguez was voted by CNN Money as the best manager of our time. Since the mid-1984, his FPA Capital has shattered the S&P 500 with a 3.9% winning margin. He’s a smart dude, but guess what. He’s also the largest shareholder of his fund.

You might recognize value-investing firm, Tweedy Browne. Their flagship $6.7 billion Global Value fund has beaten the MSCI EAFE index by 4.5% a year since 1993. The current managing directors, retired principals and their families, and employees have $91.6 million locked up in the Global Fund.

MorningStar International-Stock Fund Manager of the Year winner, Hakan Castegren, invests over $1 million of his money in his Habor International fund, which commands twice the EAFE index’s 20-year annualized return.

Looking north of the border, there’s Irwin Michael, whose Fundamental Value fund trashed the TSX by a whopping 6% a year since 1990. He invests his family’s savings in his funds.

Don’t forget Francis Chou, whose Chou Associates and Chou RRSP have compounded returns of 12.4% and 10.6% respectively, despite being somewhat of balanced funds.

What about Wil Wutherich? He’s a new to SteadyHand, but not new to wealth management. His Small-Cap fund annualized 17% over a short history so far. Wil Wutherich is also stuffing his money where his mouth is.

Although 80% of “professional” money managers underperform the market, keep in mind that real professionals have skin in the game. While picking a manager with a large stake in his own funds alone doesn’t guarantee extraordinarily results, at least it weeds out the uncommitteds; the ones not paid to beat the market.

As mentioned in my High Yielding Dividend Stocks Flexing Muscles post, 12 independent studies concluded that investing in high yielding dividend stocks was a winning strategy for much of the previous century. Despite the overwhelming evidence, all the studies were predominantly US and UK based, so I decided to roll up my sleeves and conduct my own research in Canada.

To begin, I queried for all Canadian dividend mutual funds with at least 15-years of historical data from GlobeFund. I then manually weed out funds with too much bond or foreign content; so, only dividend funds with at least 75% common stocks, and 80% Canadian contents made the list.

Here are the final 7 funds along with their 15-year compounded return and Management Expense Ratio (MER):

1. PH&N Dividend Income (Return=14.28%, MER=1.11%)
2. RBC Canadian Dividend (Return=13.08%, MER=1.73%)
3. Scotia Canadian Dividend (Return=12.03%, MER=1.67%)
4. TD Dividend Growth (Return=11.51%, MER=1.94%)
5. CIBC Dividend (Return=9.37%, MER=1.96%)
6. Investors Dividend (Return=8.27%, MER=2.87%)
7. Mavrix Dividend & Income (Return=8.08%, MER=2.14%)

Not surprisingly, lower MER funds tend to churn out stronger performance over time. However, I don’t see the benefit of paying for MER when an investor can easily emulate these dividend funds with a handful of core holdings, and then build on them as the portfolio grows.

The average annual return for the group is 10.95%, but if I remove the MER component, gross return jumps to 12.87%. It’s worth reiterating that a typical dividend fund has a bond allocation, so a pure dividend play would see over 13% in return. For comparison, TSX’s total return over the same period is 11.27% before tracking error, or a difference of 1.60+% compounded over 15 years. Over the next 3 years or so, I anticipate financial stocks to rebound and resource stocks to cool, which would widen the lead even more.

For other benefits of dividend investing, please check out my post on Top 10 Reasons For Dividend Investing.

If it looks like an index, quacks like an index and charges you 2.5% in MER, it’s a closet index fund.

A closet index fund describes a mutual fund that’s a copy-cat, look-alike, mirror image, carbon copy or whatever you call it, to the underlying benchmark. Typically, these funds hold remarkably similar stocks under the hood. You’ll find little differentiations between buying a closet index fund versus a vanilla index fund, but there is one big dirty secret that fund companies won’t tell you; closet index funds charge you about 2.5% in management expense ratio for doing practically nothing. When the portfolio looks virtually identical to the market, the manager has a daunting task of consistently overcoming the 2.5% disadvantage every year. It’s in investors’ best interest to stay away from closet index funds.

Here is one example of a closet index fund. Compare the top holdings between RBC Canadian Equity and TD Canadian Index. It’s bad enough that RBC Canadian Equity fund managers imitate the TD Canadian Index fund, but the fund also trails the benchmark by 3.14%/year over the previous 15 years.

TD Canadian Index

RBC Canadian Equity (a.k.a. closet index fund)

Here are 3 methods to spot a closet index fund:

1. Repeat what we just did. It’s less scientific, but looking under the hood works reasonably well. Visit www.globefund.com or www.morningstar.ca, type in the mutual fund name, and compare the top holdings with an index fund, such as the TD Canadian Index e-Fund. If they look similar, then it’s a potential closet index fund.
2. Another easy way is to compare the charts between the fund and the benchmark. Here is an example of comparing RBC Canadian Equity with the benchmark, and another example with ABC Fundamental-Value . Make sure you select “S&P/TSX Total Return” from the Compare vs. Benchmark drop down.
3. The advanced method is to get the R-Squared value, which reveals how much of the price movements are due to fluctuations of the underlying benchmark. It’s a number between 0 and 100; the greater the value, the closer the fund follows the index. I’m typically suspicious of R-Squared values greater than 90. Unfortunately, FundScope is the only site that I know of which offers R-Squared information, and there’s a $39.95 annual fee. If you know of a free site, please share.

Further readings on closet index funds:
- Closet Indexing by Canadian Funds Watch
- Closet Index Funds, Investors Don’t Ask, Funds Don’t Tell by Will McClatchy
- Beware of the Closet Index Fund by O’Reilly

The Dividend Guy is rightfully scolding IGM’s Investors Dividend fund for milking $291,117,000 a year in mutual fund fees. I’m both proud and guilty of being an IGM Financial shareholder. I’m proud because IGM has been steadily increasing revenues, profit margins, earnings and dividends, while maintaining Return on Invested Equity above 20%, and decreasing debt levels. I’m guilty because the prosperity rides on the backs of investors’ ignorance. Let’s face it. By analyzing Investors Dividend’s top holdings, one can easily conclude that the Investors Dividend fund is nothing more than a closet index fund with a tilt toward dividend paying stocks. Even an amateur like myself can assemble an index look-alike portfolio. Heck, pay me 1/100th of $291,117,000, and odds are favouring me to beat this fund over the long-term.

Not only is the Investors Dividend the largest mutual fund in Canada, the MER is also a whopping 2.88%. So much for economies of scale. To appreciate just how much investors are forgoing with the MER, let’s compare the performances between Investors Dividend and the TSX total return. The 5-year compounded returns are 9.71% and 12.43% respectively, or a difference of 2.72%. Peculiarly similar to the MER, the point is investors are better off buying cheap index funds and ETFs, rather than enriching IGM Financial with a jumbo MER for inferior performances.

Here is a totally unoriginal idea. Don’t buy this mutual fund. Buy the company that operates the fund. Buy IGM Financial. At 400 shares, this position is spoiling me with $684 worth of dividends per year, and this money is coming out of the $291,117,000 pot. I’m a guilty IGM shareholder, and you can give me some virtual spanking.

Canadian Capitalist is graciously hosting the third Canadian Tour of Personal Finance Blogs. There is no way I am passing up this opportunity to be mentioned in his blog. This will be my second participation to this tour. Enjoy!

Organizing your portfolio into neatly divided asset classes appears to be the sensible thing to do, but what if your financial advisor is offering you only a half-baked solution? Take my friend, Mel, for example. He and his wife walked in to a bank seeking an optimal way to invest a $10,000 windfall. The advisor had them fill out a Know Your Client form to learn their financial goals, risk tolerance, investment knowledge, time horizon and financial position. Based on his assessment, the advisor recommended a 70/30 split between equity and bond funds commanding a hefty 2% in management expense ratio (MER.)

What’s wrong with this picture? Like typical young couples, Mel and his wife still owe an approximate $200,000 worth of mortgage. Since homeowners pay mortgage interests with after-tax money, a 5% mortgage rate is costing Mel 7.14% of pre-tax income - assuming he’s in the 30% tax bracket. None of these bond funds could have guaranteed that rate, especially after MER. Why lend his money to a bond fund, only to borrow it back in his mortgage at a higher rate? He may as well pay down the mortgage instead of buying bonds.

The problem with the financial industry is that it’s not in their best interest if you pay down your mortgage. It’s a double-whammy for them:

• They stop collecting mortgage interests from you.
• They stop collecting MER on the bond fund.

A better solution – in my opinion – is to reduce the scope of your portfolio. Instead of investing $3,000 in bonds, pay that toward the mortgage. A dollar saved is a dollar earned. Paying down your mortgage is equivalent to earning 7.14% guaranteed. The net result is a reduced $7,000 portfolio invested 100% into equities. Sounds scary at first, but simply imagine the other $3,000 is invested in your mortgage. 7.14% guaranteed is a yield on steroid, that no one else can match.

80% of actively managed mutual funds under-perform the benchmark over a long period.

Although there is a truth to this adage, one has to peer beneath the surface instead of simply painting over the entire mutual fund spectrum with the same brush. There is always a flip side to a story. If you’re up to the challenge, read this long article on how closet index funds are contaminating the statistical finding.

Occasionally, the underperformance of fund managers vs. the index is trotted as evidence of the efficiency of the market. However, this confuses the absence of evidence with evidence of the absence. A new study suggests that closet indexing accounts for nearly one third of the US mutual fund industry. Stock pickers account for less than 30% of the market, yet they have real investment skill.

Before going further, I’d like to emphasize that I’m a proponent of passive investing. ETFs and index funds are the way to go if you’re looking for something easy, effective, cheap, and tax-efficient. While I don’t deny the merit of passive investing, I believe the market is very inefficient, and investors do get blind sided by the occasional market bubbles. Remember the TSX losing half of its value during the dot com carnage?

The correction taught us a lesson that performance isn’t everything. Let’s throw in a simple example of choosing between investment A and B. Investment A has a chance of making $100, but you must risk $50. Investment B has a chance of making $90, but you must risk $20. Investment A has a higher expected return, but investment B has a higher risk-adjusted return. Below is a comparison of TSX versus Chou RRSP over a 21 year period. You can see clearly that Chou RRSP’s line is much smoother. Since the manager, Francis Chou, is a renowned deep value investor, he builds a margin of safety on all his purchases. With this process in place, Francis Chou tends to give you a more consistent and steady return as evidenced by during the tech bubble. As a bonus, Chou RRSP did come out ahead of the index and with less risk/volatility.

This is not a post against passive investing. Remember that passive investing is not a religion. You can buy good quality actively managed funds like Chou RRSP without letting go your index funds and ETFs.

Disclosure: I have held Chou RRSP for 2 years, and am planning to pick up Chou Associates soon. This is not a recommendation to buy.

Source:
- Chou RRSP (GlobeFund.com)

Darren Rowse from ProBlogger is hosting another get-together among bloggers. The mission is to write a top 5 list on any topic relevant to the blog, and the winning price is a cool $1001. But more importantly, I want to elevate Financial Jungle’s presence in the blogging ecosystem, and mingle with fellow bloggers who share similar interests.

A discussion over at MillionDollarJourney prompted me to do a little digging into Market Growth GICs offered by Canadian banks. Many investors are risk-adverse, while not wanting to relinquish the growth potential of the stock market. This is why Market Growth GICs are so seductive. Investors’ original principal is guaranteed regardless of what the market is doing, while the performance is linked to the market indices tracked by the products. Being a cynic, I’ve investigated and uncovered the following five gremlins of Market Growth GICs:

1. No Dividends – They stole my precious!
Although Market Growth GICs do track the underlying index, investors forgo the dividends issued by the securities along with the juicy dividend tax credits. As an example, the iShares S&P/TSX 60 ETF rewards their investors with 1.66%, which isn’t available to Market Growth GIC investors.

2. Higher Tax Rate - Give it to us and wrrrriggling! You keep nasty chips.
Since Market Growth GIC investors don’t actually own a piece of the index, gains on GICs are taxed as regular income instead of the more favourable tax treatments from conventional capital gains. For instance, if you’re in the 40% tax bracket, you owe 40 cents for every dollar made in GICs, while you owe only 20 cents in ETFs.

3. No Tax Deferral - NO! That would kill us. Kill us!
Taxes are due each year with GICs, while you can defer capital gain taxes for as long as you hold the ETFs. Let’s do a quick example. If you start with a $1,000 GIC that returns 10% each year, you keep only 6% after tax. Compound this to 5 years and you’re left with only $1,338. On the other hand, you can zoom ahead with ETFs by deferring taxes until the very last year, and are left with a generous $1,488.

4. Capped Return – Don’t follow the light.
A five-year Market Growth GIC offered by TD Bank caps the cumulative return at 60%. This is an annualized compounded return of 9.8%, which is the approximate long-term return for stock markets. As a result, investors have no upside potential relative to the index, while the down side relative performance is –9.8%.

5. No Capital Tax Loss Saving - Stupid fat hobbit, it ruins it.
In the event the market is still down after five years, the principal protection feature kicks in and you recover your loses, however you waive the tax-loss saving to offset capital gain taxes of your other investments.

Principal protection to me is an illusion, because inflation alone will erode the future purchasing power, which is ultimately what you’re trying to protect. If maintaining purchasing power is your objective, stop fooling around with Market Growth GICs, and buy a traditional a 5-year GIC instead at 4.47%. If you still want some exposure to the stock market without exposing yourself to market setbacks, segregated funds are good alternatives. Even though they’re somewhat expensive, you’re compensated with other benefits, which include estate planning advantages, automatic reset of death benefit guarantee, and creditor protection. An example of a segregated fund is CI Signature Dividend GIF which has a price tag of 4.18% MER.

Further readings:
- TD Canada Trust Market Growth GIC.
- How Segregated Funds Protect Your Investments (CI)
- How segregated funds work (Million Dollar Journey)

ps. thank you Canadian Capitalist for bringing this event to my attention.

Tourists have to plan many things like car rental coupons or rent a car by mail. Online surfing for travel information shows many companies offering many things which travelers demand. Discounted and cheaper national car rental facilitates it travelers by all means. Others like hertz car rental and quick car rental suggest advance booking online or through mail for the travelers ease.

Value investors will be pleased to learn that Pat Naccarato, manager of the successful AIC Value fund, is now sharing his value wisdoms on the Market Call segment of BNN. Okay, I can hear some people giggling. BNN guests are often stereotyped as talking heads by many investment forums, but I believe each guest should be evaluated on his own merits.

Deep value investors are a rare breed, because they’re natural contrarians who go against the crowd. It is the ability to think independently that helps them hunt for out-of-favour gems when no one is looking. There are plenty reasons to like Pat Naccarato. It is not because he outperformed S&P 500 13 out of 15 years, or that I’m holding many of his current recommendations. It is the way he rationalizes his investment philosophies. Pat puts capital preservation as his number one priority. He emphasizes one way to keep your risks in check is to buy companies at or near their book value, because book value is a more stable yardstick over earnings. Try avoiding companies with high Price/Book ratio such as the old Nortel, which managed to fall by 90% twice! Pat doesn’t spend much time worrying about returns, because you can’t worry about what you cannot control, but everyone can always manage their risks.

Despite having Dows and S&P hitting new highs, Pat is still able to find many bargains out there. During the segment, he commented on homebuilders, financials and furniture makers. Although he didn’t mention one specifically, one homebuilder off the top of my head is DR. Horton. Over the past 10 years, DHI traded between 0.93 to 2.11 Price/Book. It is now trading at 1.09, which is both near its historical low and its book value. DHI also sports a handsome 2.65% dividend yield, the highest among the major builders, as well as a low Price/Earning of 10.10. Pat is also excited about Internet bank, IndyMac Bancorp, whose stock tumbled for no apparent reason except that it’s in the same general sector as sub-prime lenders. IndyMac is yielding 6.50% backed by a healthy payout ratio of 38%.

The $250 millions AIC fund started gaining traction since Pat took over as the portfolio manager sometime in 2005. I might consider investing a small portion inside my RRSP to receive his quarterly and annual commentaries.

To learn more about Pat Naccarato, check out the following links:

• Pat Naccarato’s Profile
• BNN Market Call Segment 12:30pm - available till May 2, 2007
• Morningstar Report on AIC Value Fund
• GlobeFund Report on AIC Value Fund

I don’t know about you, but I’m frightened by universal life insurance. Once you sign the dotted line, it becomes a life-long commitment that comes with a hefty early termination fee. The existing term insurance policy which we currently hold is pretty flexible, since we are free to adjust the insurance premiums in accordance to our needs.

For instance, if we allocate $400 per month of spare cash, we can purchase a million dollar policy with $100, and invest the remaining $300 into any securities of our choice. Should we be lucky enough to self-insure later on, we can cut off the insurance premiums, and invest the full $400.

Insurance can be too complex of a topic to explain over the dinner table by an insurance agent. I recommend taking the materials home, and spending some time doing a little critical and independent thinking. Since insurance agents are generally commissions driven, it is in your best interest to consult an independent financial advisor to verify if this is the right product for you.

How does a universal life insurance policy work?

When you buy universal life policy, not only are you paying for your insurance premium, you’re also contributing to an investment portfolio. In effect, the insurance company is underwriting your insurance and managing your retirement nest egg simultaneously. For instance, the company takes your $400 spare cash, and split it between the insurance premium, administration fee, and investment contribution. The company then offers you a limited list of investment vehicles. Sounds like a rip off if they charge you the extra administration fee and reduce your investment options, but …

What are the benefits?

1. The portfolio grows tax-free. This is similar to RRSP and RESP, where you can switch between different mutual funds without triggering capital gain taxes. This is different from a taxable account where capital gain tax can cut into your capital. The smaller the capital you have, the less it will compound.
2. The portfolio and the face value of the insurance policy go to the beneficiaries tax-free when you pass away.
3. Unlike taxable accounts, there are no probate fees. This can save as much as 5% of your total assets.
4. The portfolio is creditor proofed. This is useful for anyone concerned about lawsuits. (Does anyone know if RRSPs are creditor proofed too?)
5. The portfolio can be used as a collateral for loans. The loans can be repaid by the policy, but that will reduce the death benefits.

What are the key drawbacks?

1. Again, the investment options are limited, and often expensive.
2. You are committed to buying insurance for life even when you have no more dependents.
3. Early termination fee is steep.

Am I better off with universal life insurance?

To find out if universal life is better, we need to explore the alternatives. Most Canadians don’t max out their RRSP. If you still have RRSP contribution room, then I think you’ll get better bang for your bucks by contributing your free cash flow into RRSP. Since the $300 is after-tax money, the pre-tax equivalent is $400 if you’re in the 25% tax-bracket. Most payroll departments let you deposit pre-tax income directly into your RRSP brokerage account. Next step is to pick an investment vehicle, and what’s a better way to show off your patriotism by investing in the Canadian TSX index. Since you’re investing on your own, you’re able to shop around for the cheapest index fund or ETF. The cheapest Canadian index fund that I am aware of is the TD Canadian Index e-series fund with an MER of 0.31%, while the cheapest ETF is iShares’ XIU with an MER of 0.17%. Since XIC trades like regular stocks, you’ll have to pay transaction fees to buy. Refer to my previous post on Interactive Brokers.

As a comparison, Sun Life universal life insurance policy offers their version of the Canadian index fund with MER of 1.50%.

Let the race begins

If you invest pre-tax $400 worth of TD Canadian Index fund (MER = 0.31%) inside RRSP and assuming the market compounds at 10% over the next 30 years, your portfolio balance will grow to $6,413 before tax. The highest marginal tax rate for British Columbia is 43.7%. If you liquidate the entire RRSP account at once, you’ll receive at least $3,636 after-tax. This is the worst-case scenario, since the RRSP can be transferred to the surviving spouse tax-free. The freedom you enjoy with a term life insurance is you can terminate the policy once your dependents leave the nest. By then, you won’t need supplemental insurance. This unleashes bonus cash flow to excel your RRSP portfolio further. I have not factored in the probate fee, since it depends on the lawyer and if your beneficiaries are willing to handle the paper work.

If you invest after-tax $300 worth of Sun Life Canadian index fund (MER = 1.5%) over the same 30 years, you portfolio will grow to $3,467 tax-free. Based on my understanding, this is on the optimistic side for two reasons. First, I’m ignoring the administration fees. Secondly, the insurance company withdraws portions of the portfolio to offset your rising insurance premiums. Please feel free to complete my math if we have an insurance expert here.

What if I have no more RRSP contribution room?

If you’re in a high tax bracket, pay down your mortgage. This strategy saves you in the neighbourhood of 5%, or 8.33% before-tax assuming your marginal tax-rate is 40%. Although this not as sexy as Sun Life Canadian Index fund’s 8.5%, it is a guaranteed return instead of a projected return.

Is universal life good for anything?

My opinion is that universal life is third in line after RRSP and mortgage. It cannot be emphasized enough. I’m not a certified financial planner nor an insurance expert. Materials are presented here for discussion only.