Tag Archives: investing strategies

How to Become a Successful Long-Term Investor – Part 3 of 3 – The Folly of Market Timing

28 Saturday Sep 2019

Posted by in Alan Greenspan, asset allocation, Average Returns, behavioral finance, bubbles, correlation, correlation coefficient, Dot Com Bubble, finance, finance theory, financial goals, financial markets, Financial Media, Financial News, financial planning, Greenspan, historical returns, Individual Investing, individual investors, Internet Bubble, investing, investing advice, investing information, investing tips, investment advice, investments, Irrational Exuberance, market timing, math, personal finance, portfolio, risk tolerance, risks of stocks, S&P 500, S&P 500 historical returns, S&P 500 Index, statistics, stock market, Stock Market Returns, Stock Market Valuation, stock prices, stocks, Valuation, volatility

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This article is the third and final post in my three-part series on learning how to be a successful long-term investor.  The general theme underlying all of the topics has been developing enough of an understanding of the stock market gyrations and sometimes wild ride to form reasonable expectations at the outset.  Those expectations lead directly into to developing a long-term investment strategy and plan that you are much more likely to stick with through “thick and thin” because you know what is coming.  Of course, you will not know the order in which the ups and downs may come, but you will have a ton of information helpful to be much less likely to lose your nerve or get overly excited.

The last topic will be about “market timing”.  We will delve deeply into the concept and see how very difficult it has been in the past, and, I believe, will continue to be for the foreseeable future.  Now the discussion to follow will be entirely self-contained; however, it might be helpful to take a look at the first two articles to have additional context.  The opening topic was an overview of the history of stock market returns using the S&P 500 Index (dividends reinvested).  Here is a link to that post:

https://latticeworkwealth.com/2019/09/23/successful-long-term-investing/

The second topic was a discussion about the concept of risk.  We explored how it is normally defined, ways that you can gauge your tolerance for risk given the information from the first post, and explored some methods/mindsets to reduce risk in your investment portfolio.  Here is a link to that post:

https://latticeworkwealth.com/2019/09/25/successful-long-term-investor-risk/

So now, we will turn to the topic for the last article.  As mentioned above, we are going to take a look at “market timing”.  In general, the idea of “market timing” is to develop ways to be able to buy stocks when they are very undervalued and also sell stocks right near the market peak to avoid a big downturn.  There are certain variations where an investor is not necessarily trying to time the most opportune time but trade along with the momentum of the stock market and anticipating the next movement prior to other stock market participants.

“Market timing” is notoriously difficult to do.  But you will see considerable time devoted every day to financial market television and periodicals advising individual investors what trades to make.  I would submit that following things and pundits on a daily basis adds to “noise” and “information overload”.  Additionally, for every guest that predicts a big leg up in the market, there will be another guest later in the day who tells you that we are in a bubble and stocks will drop dramatically soon.

Another lesser talked about item is the main guests that are invited to speak on television or are quoted in financial periodicals.  Typically, the guest introduction will be prefaced by this man/woman predicted the last major move in the stock market and we are so lucky to have him/her back again.  While these guests are great to hear from, there is a severe amount of “selection bias”.  What do I mean by “selection bias”?  You will rarely see a guest brought on to be lambasted for a prediction that never came to fruition or was just flat out wrong.  The vast majority of guests on television or market experts in financial articles will be the ones who made a very prescient call on the direction of the stock market.

The promise of “market timing” is still so enticing.  It normally relates to the fear of losing money or the greed of just not wanting to miss the next big bull market trend upward in the stock market.  However, the ability to call the market tops or bottoms has proven to be pretty much a 50/50 flip of the coin (now I am being generous at that).  One of the examples that I love to give is the coining of the term “irrational exuberance”.  The former chair of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, used that new term to state that the stock market was in what he thought was a bubble.  Little do people remember, but he first gave the speech in December 1996 to refer to what would become the Dot.Com bubble and bust.  Greenspan was proven right but the top of that bubble occurred in March 2000.  I use that example because irrational activity in the markets can persist for much, much longer than you might expect.

So, now I know that some people reading this post will be able to point to experts who made the great calls or even their own calls on the direction of the stock market.  Well, I will start off the discussion by showing that “market timing” is indeed somewhat possible.  But it takes much longer periods of time than you might think at first.  Here is how we will proceed in the analysis.  I discussed how the long-term historical average of the S&P 500 Index from 1957-2018 has been 9.8%.  It would seem logical then that, if stock market returns were below that average or above that average for a certain length of time, you could just do the opposite figuring that stock market returns would eventually trend back to that average (in the jargon reversion to the mean).

The problem is, as I briefly mentioned in the last paragraph, that the time period needs to be so long that it is almost untenable for individual investors to practically implement.  In fact, we have to use 15-year annualized returns to illustrate the theory.  So, if the stock market has been below/above trend, we will buy/sell because an inflection point has to come.  Let’s take a look at it graphically to drive the point home:

Fifteen Year Correlation

In the graph depicted above, we have exactly the returns we would like to see.  The blue dots are the past 15 years of stock market returns, and the orange dots are the next 15 years of stock market returns.  The dots are what we would term to have an inverse relationship.  In fact, for all of you somewhat familiar with statistics, the correlation coefficient is -0.857.  Therefore, there is a really strong relationship here that leads us to the promise of “market timing”.  Should we give up on it so early?

The problem with “market timing” is that, for any length of time less than 15 years of annualized stock returns, there really is no relationship (at least no actionable trading of stocks for your investment portfolio).  Let’s take a look at the same concept in the first graph with a look at one-year and three-year current and then future returns:

One Year Correlation

Three Year Correlation

Using the one-year and three-year current and then future stock market returns of the S&P 500 Index, our dots just kind of do not follow a discernable pattern.  Again, for the statistically inclined folks out there, the correlation coefficients are -0.10 and -0.041, respectively.  As always, we won’t get too waded down into the mathematical weeds but a correlation coefficient close to 0 means that there is essentially no correlation/relationship between the two.  To make an analogy, you can think of what is the correlation between birds in your backyard and the number of jars of pickles for sale at your local grocery store?  Well, there should be no relationship whatsoever.  Even if there were, it would not make any sense.  In our case here, there is at least some logic underlying our premise of the most recent return on the S&P 500 Index and the future returns over that same time period.  As we see though, there is really nothing actionable to embark upon for individual investors to properly engage in “market timing”.

Before we totally give up on “market timing”, we can take a look at the same charts but extending the time periods to five years and ten years.  Let’s take a look at those two graphs:

Five Year Correlation

Ten Year Correlation

The correlation coefficient for the five-year chart is 0.028, so we cannot really use that long of a time period either.  I will admit that the ten-year chart looks a little more promising.  We have a graph that looks somewhat more like the fifteen-year graph that I started off with.  In fact, the correlation coefficient is -0.276.  And a negative number is what we want to see in order to try “market timing”.  Unfortunately, the number is really not strong enough to not get caught.  By this I mean, we can see that “market timing” would have worked from 1975-1985 and also from 1990-2001 roughly.  However, 1965-1975 has a grouping of returns that don’t work and 2002-2008 has mixed results as well.  Note that there are less data points because there needs to be at least 10 years of future returns in order to compare the current record of 10-year annualized returns with what the next 10 years of stock returns will end up being.

Overall, we have seen that “market timing” in the short term (even as defined out to five years) does not really have much, if any, predictive power.  Therefore, if you make decisions related to “market timing” based upon how the stock market has performed in any time period five years or less, it is clearly a “fool’s errand” or incredibly difficult to do.  And by the latter, I mean that you can reliably do so over more than one major change in market direction.  The majority of market pundits that you will see or read about have made one correct call which is not nearly enough to judge his/her investing acumen related to “market timing”.

I will close out the discussion of “market timing” by using the Financial Crisis and ensuing Great Recession.  Many folks correctly called (or were proven right without the reason for the bubble matching their investment thesis) this major stock market inflection point.  They correctly saw the unsustainable bubble in housing, the rise of financial stocks, and the buildup of toxic securities like subprime loans.  However, many of those same individuals never changed their investment thesis and failed to tell individual investors to return to the stock market and buy.  Essentially there are still folks that will tell you we are in a bubble.  Now I am not bold and/or grandiose enough to weigh in on the current value of the stock market.  But you need to know that most of the people who call a wicked crash in stocks or a massive bull market do not change their investment thesis prior to the next big turn.

For example, let’s say that you learned about stock investing 10 years or so ago and decided to invest $1,000.00 in the S&P 500 Index toward the end of October 2007.  And yes, this was the absolute worst time to invest in stocks.  Sadly, by March 2009, you would have lost 50% of your investment and have only $500.00 at that point in time.  You might feel great if you listened to someone who called the top and told you that the fourth quarter of 2007 was the absolute worse time to buy stocks.  But I am willing to bet that this same person would not have told you when it was “safe” to invest again.  If you knew to expect bouts of extreme volatility in the stock market beforehand, you could have kept your money in the stock market.  At the end of December 2018, you would have had $1,712.36 using our 13.1% 10-year annualized return over that time.  If the original market predictor of catastrophe told you to just keep your $1,000.00 in the bank you would have $1,160.54 (assuming generously that you could earn 1.50% over the ten years in your bank saving account).  Adjusting the hypothetical investor who simply kept his/her money in stocks back to inflation, he/she would have $1,404.73 (assuming 2.0% inflation over the last 10 years which is higher than was actually experienced).  At the end of December 2018, you would have a bit more than 21% higher in inflation-adjusted dollars than the person who just never invested (or took his/her money out of stocks right at the end of October 2007 but never returned to stocks).

Now I will admit that my hypothetical scenario would have tried the “intestinal fortitude” of the most seasoned professional investors after seeing a 50% market drop over 1.5 years.  My only point with the example is that, even if you could not have held your nerve to remain invested in stocks over the Financial Crisis, the investment pundit(s) who tells you the exact top with a brilliant prediction also needs to tell you when to invest or sell again in the future (i.e. “market timing”).  Rarely will you see such a prognosticator that can totally change their investment thesis to get the next call right.  You are much better off abstaining from “market timing” and sticking to your long-term investment strategy.  Of course, that may indeed call for selling or buying a portion of stocks at certain given points to change your investment portfolio allocation to match your risk tolerance and financial goals.  But trying to utilize “market timing” to be in and out to experience hardly any losses and capture all the gains is just not realistic, so you might as well discard the entire investment strategy of “market timing”.

How Can Investors Survive in a Rising Interest Rate Environment? – Updated

30 Saturday Nov 2013

Posted by in asset allocation, bank loans, Bernanke, bonds, business, Consumer Finance, Education, Fed, Fed Taper, Federal Reserve, finance, financial advisor fees, financial planning, Individual Investing, interest rates, investing, investing, investments, stocks, bonds, asset allocation, portfolio, investment advisory fees, investments, LIBOR, math, MBS, personal finance, portfolio, rising interest rate environment, rising interest rates, risk, statistics, stock prices, stocks, Suitability, volatility, Yellen

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I probably get this question asked of me more than any other these days, especially by retirees.  Investors were once able to place money into bank certificate of deposits (CDs) or into money market funds and easily earn more interest than the rate of inflation.  Unfortunately, the financial crisis of 2008 changed all that in a major way.  While the events surrounding the dark days of the close of Lehman Brothers, the bailout of AIG, and the nearly $800 billion TARP program, were not the sole cause of this phenomenon, they certainly did not help.  The Federal Reserve (Fed) led by the chairman, Ben Bernanke, had to lower interest rates to avoid the credit and liquidity crisis of that time period.  The Fed brilliantly avoided a meltdown and depression.  The side effect is that financial market participants have gotten used to low interest rates.  You will hear the term “taper” thrown about now.  The Fed is not going to raise interest rates yet; rather, they are going to slow their purchase of Treasury instruments and mortgages on the open market.  They are not raising the Fed Funds rate (do not worry about what that is exactly), but, since they were buying approximately 70% of all US Treasuries issued, bond market investors are worried that this demand/supply imbalance will naturally cause interest rates to rise (interest rates have already gone up).  Well, if interest rates will be higher, shouldn’t that be better for bond investors?

An urgent side note to all investors is as follows:  “Beware of financial professionals that recommend dividend stocks or other equities as replacements for your fixed income allocation”.  What I mean by this is that the volatility of stocks is far greater than bonds historically.  Yields may be very low in money market funds, US Treasuries, and in bond mutual funds now.  However, your risk tolerance must be taken into account at all times.  While it is true that many dividend-paying stocks offer yields of 3% or more with the possibility of capital appreciation, there also is significant downside risk.  For example, as most people are aware, the S&P 500 (which represents most of the biggest companies in America) was down over 35% in 2008.  Many of those stocks are included in the push to have individual investors buy dividend payers.  With that being said, stock market declines of 10%-20% in a single quarter are not that uncommon.  If you handle the volatility of the stock market, there is no need to be concerned.  However, a decline of 10% for a stock paying a 3% dividend will wipe out a little more than 3 years of yield.  Individual investors need to realize that swapping traditional bonds or bond mutual funds is not a “riskless” transaction, meaning a one-for-one swap.  The volatility and riskiness of your portfolio will go up commensurately with your added exposure to equities.  Sometimes financial professionals portray the search for yield by jumping into stocks as the only option given the low interest rate environment.  While your situation might warrant that movement in your portfolio allocation, you need to be able to accept that the value of those stocks is likely to drop by 10% or more in the future.  Are you able to handle that volatility when looking at your risk tolerance, financial goals, and age?

The short answer is no to the question posed at the end of the first paragraph.  Before we can answer that question and look at some investment strategies and potential purchases, we need to review how a bond works.  Any bond is simply an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to pay back money to the other party at a later date with interest.  All bonds have what is referred to as credit risk.  Credit risk is simply the risk one runs that the party who owes you the money will not pay you back (i.e. default).  What is lesser know is interest rate risk and inflation risk.  These two risks are usually missed because investors tend to think that bonds are “safe”.  Interest rate risk relates to the fact that interest rates may rise, while you hold the bonds.  Inflation risk means that inflation may increase to a level higher than your interest rate on the bond.  Thus, if the interest rate on your bond is less than inflation, your purchasing power goes down.  The prices of goods and services go up faster than the interest you earn on the bond.

How do bonds work in terms of prices?  Most bonds are issued at a price of 100 which is referred to as par.  Corporate bonds and Treasury notes/bonds are usually sold in increments of $1,000, and municipal bonds are sold in increments of $5,000.  The value of a bond is calculated by taking the current price divided by 100 and then multiplied by the number of bonds you own.  Bonds are sold in the primary market (when first sold to retail and institutional investors) such that the coupon (interest rate) is equal to the current interest rate prevailing in the marketplace at that time (sold at par which is 100).  Bonds can be bought and sold after that issue date though.  If interest rates rise or fall after issuance, how does the price of a bond adjust?  If interest rates go up, bond prices will go down.  If interest rates go down, bond prices will go up.  Why?  It is referred to as an inverse relationship.  Think about it this way.  If you own a bond that has a 6% coupon and interest rates rise to 8%, will you be able to see that bond to other investors?  The answer is no if you decide to hold firm to a price of 100.  Why should another bond investor buy a 6% bond when he/she can just buy a bond with very similar characteristics as yours and earn 8%?  The only way that you can sell your bond is to lower the price such that the bond investor will earn 8% over the course of that bond’s life until maturity which is when the company or other entity has to pay the money back in full).  Luckily for you, the process works in reverse as well though.  If interest rates go down to 4%, you have the advantage.  If you hold a bond with a 6% coupon as in the aforementioned example, bond investors will pay more than 100 in order to get that higher interest payment.  How much more?  Bond investors will bid the price up until the bond earns an equivalent of 4% until maturity.  Why is this important to you as an investor today?

Let’s take a quick look at history.  Most financial professionals are not old enough to remember or have been in business long enough to remember the interest rate environment back in the early 1980s.  In the early 1980s, interest rates on bonds were incredibly high compared to today.  The economy was stuck in a rut of higher inflation and low or no growth which was called “stagflation”.  How high were interest rates?  The interest rate on a 3-month Treasury bill was 16.3% back in May 1981, and the prime rate topped out around 20.5% soon after.  For more information on the interest rates of this time period, please refer to this link:  http://www.mbaa.org/ResearchandForecasts/MarketEnvironment/TreasuryYields&BankRates,1980-83.htm. The Federal Reserve chairman back then, Paul Volcker (Fed chairman prior to Alan Greenspan and the same gentleman as the so-called “Volcker rule” of today), instituted a monetary policy based upon the teachings of the famous economist, Milton Friedman, from  the University of Chicago.  Friedman was really the start of monetarism.  Monetarism is simply the effect of the money supply in any economy on interest rates.  In general, as more money in the economy is available, interest rates will go down.  As less money is available, interest rates will go up.  Why?  Think about it in this manner.  If you have to get a loan from a family member and you are the only person asking for a loan, chances are your interest rate will be lower than if that same family member is asked by 15 different individuals.  So the Fed of that time period began buying all types of bonds on the open market.  The hope was that, as the money supply grew, interest rates would fall.  As interest rates fell, it would give more incentive to companies to take out loans to buy equipment and build plants and also to incent consumers to take out mortgages and buy homes or purchase consumer goods with credit cards.  Needless to say, the policy eventually worked.  It started what most refer to as the great bull market in bonds in roughly 1982.

There are only two ways you can make money when you own a normal bond.  First, you earn money from the coupon paid over the life of the bond.  Second, in a falling interest rate environment, you earn money by selling your bonds at a higher price.  Therefore, you can earn money from interest and capital gains.  In a rising interest rate environment, you can only earn money from the coupon.  What individual investors, and some money managers even, fail to realize is this simple fact of finance.  The yield on a 3-month US Treasury bill today is roughly 0.06%.  No, that is not a misprint!  The yield on these bills has gone down over 16% over the past 30 years or so.  The bond market has never seen such an extended period of falling interest rates.  Now interest rates did not fall in a straight line, but the trend has been toward lower interest rates for decades now.  That anomalous occurrence is coming (has come) to an end.  What can individual investors do then?

There are a number of things you can do to deal with the specter of rising interest rates.  I do not recommend any specific securities to purchase.  However, these investment strategies are something to consider.  They are as follows:

1)       Purchase an ETF that invests in floating rate fixed income securities

Investors are accustomed to bonds issued with a fixed coupon.  Yes, that is the most common.  However, there are other bonds that have an interest rate which is variable over the life of that bond.  Why would a company want to consider this?  There are two reasons why.  The first reason is that some companies need to borrow money from financial market participants constantly and for short periods of time.  The second reason is that certain companies that have liabilities which float over time.  Why?  They may have revenues that float over time as well.  It is much more complicated than that, but I do not want to get too bogged down into the details.  The most commonplace is a financial instrument known as commercial paper (CP) which is an example of the first reason.  CP is any financial instrument with a maturity of up to 270 days.  Firms, such as General Electric or Goldman Sachs, will sell CP to institutional investors for purposes of raising working capital.  It might be to pay short-term bills, or it might be to fund operations until money comes from previous sales at a later date.  Whenever CP is issued, the current interest rate prevails.  There are ETFs out there (only a few right now though, such as the iShares Floating Rate Note ETF – Ticker Symbol:  FLOT) that invest in CPs or other variations thereof.  The ETF will hold these fixed income securities with very short maturities.

2)      Purchase a target maturity bond ETF

 

When you purchase a bond mutual fund, you are pooling your money with other investors.  You do NOT own the bonds that the mutual fund invests in.  The mutual fund firm will calculate the value of their bond holdings each day and divide it by the number of shares outstanding to arrive at the net asset value (NAV) of the mutual fund.  The mutual fund will allow mutual fund investors to buy additional shares at that price or sell shares at that price.  Isn’t that just semantics and really is the same thing?  Absolutely not!  When you own a bond mutual fund, the holdings of the mutual fund are constantly changing.  You will see an SEC yield quoted and a weighted average maturity (WAM) of the bond mutual fund show in years.  If interest rates rise and you need to sell, the NAV of the bond mutual fund will go down.  Since the bond mutual fund needs to earn as much interest for its bond investors as possible, they will constantly take new inflows from investors, interest payments, and principal payments to invest in bonds issued today.  Therefore, the NAV of the bond mutual fund has to go down.  Since you are never holding the actual bonds to maturity, in a rising rate interest environment, you will receive interest payments from the bond mutual fund, but the value of the bonds held by the bond mutual fund will fall gradually, ceteris paribus.

 

Since interest rates have been falling for so long, most individual investors do not know this.  How do you combat that?  Well, BlackRock and other ETF providers have developed a new type of ETF which is based upon a target maturity.  How do they work?  You can purchase an ETF that might be in existence for five years, for example.  The ETF will invest in bonds with five years to maturity and then disband the ETF after five years.  Thus, as a bond investor, you are only subject to default risk.  As you will recall, default risk is the risk that an entity will not pay back the principal and interest on the bond.

 

3)      Purchase a floating rate instrument directly with a credit enhancement

There are fixed income securities sold which have interest rates that are set very frequently.  One of these instruments is known as a put bond or floater.  Put bonds or floaters are fixed income securities that are sold with an interest rate that is “reset” (i.e. adjusted to reflect current interest rates) on a periodic basis.  For example, they might be reset daily, weekly, or monthly.  Therefore, if you own a floater and interest rates go up, you will earn that new interest rate.  If interest rates go down, you will earn that interest rate.  You do not lose your original principal.  The interest rate is always chosen such that the floaters will sell at par.  Now owning a floater that is tied directly to a company, non-profit, charter school, municipality or other entity is a risky proposition.  You are subject to the credit risk of that entity, and they might default.  However, you can get around being exposed to the credit risk of that entity.  It is possible to purchase floaters (most are actually issued this way) which have a credit enhancement.  A credit enhancement is something that the obligor (i.e. the entity that issues the bonds and needs the money) purchases.  The types of credit enhancements are not that important; the concept is more significant for individual investors.  A floater with a credit enhancement means that, if the obligor defaults, the entity providing the credit enhancement will pay the principal and interest then.  Banks and bond insurers offer credit enhancements.  Therefore, when you purchase a floater with a credit enhancement, you are essentially exposed to the credit risk of the entity providing the credit enhancement and not the issuer (i.e. obligor).  Yes, you still have credit risk.

With that being said, there are floaters out there which have a credit enhancement from Bank of America, JP Morgan, US Bank, Wells Fargo, or Assured Guaranty.  The interest rate will be lower than the interest rate that the company itself would be able to get by accessing the bond market directly.  However, it will save you the time of trying to do a credit analysis of a small manufacturing firm with $50 million in annual revenues.  You can contact a middle market or larger full service brokerage firm to see if they offer put bonds or floaters for sale.  If they say no, but they offer Auction Rate Securities (ARS), it is not the same thing at all.  ARS have very different characteristics which rear their ugly head during liquidity crises like the financial crisis of 2008.

4)      Purchase mortgage back securities (MBS)

 

MBS may have a bad name from the financial crisis of 2008.  I am not referring to MBS that invest in subprime loans.  Subprime loans are speculative in nature.  I am talking about mortgages issued to individuals with good credit scores.  You can purchase an MBS issued by GNMA (Ginnie Mae), FNMA (Fannie Mae), or the FHLB (Freddie Mac).  The GNMA is a government sponsored enterprise (GSE), and FNMA and FHLB are sometimes referred to as “quasi” in nature.  These MBS essentially purchase thousands of mortgages that meet certain requirements in terms of size of the loan and credit of the borrower.  The mortgages are pooled together and sold to investors.

These securities are essentially pass through instruments.  Pass through instruments mean that the principal and interest payments flow through to the owners of the MBS.  Why might you want to own these?  In a rising interest rate environment, people with mortgages will not refinance their mortgages.  Why would you get rid of your 4% 30-year fixed rate mortgage and change to a 5% 30-year fixed rate mortgage?  As interest have been falling over the past several decades, it has been advantageous to refinance ones mortgage to a lower rate.  There are bond mutual funds that invest in MBS.  However, they fall subject to the same phenomenon that I mentioned above.  You are investing in a pool and do not own the MBS directly.  If interest rates go up and you need to sell that bond mutual fund, the NAV on the bond mutual fund will go down.  You can inquire at your local brokerage firm about MBS.  Now if your broker or Financial Advisor talks to you about collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) being the same thing basically, that is not the case.  CMOs do offer different characteristics which may be attractive, but they are much harder to analyze.

 

5)      Purchase bank loan ETFs with a floating rate

Most corporations borrow money from banks with a floating interest rate.  The interest rate adjusts at certain points and is calculated as a spread over some benchmark interest rate.  The most common benchmark is LIBOR and specifically 3-month LIBOR since many bonds reset quarterly.  Banks will package these loans together and sell them as syndicated loans to various interested institutional investors.  The advantage of these securities is that the interest rate will move up in a rising interest rate environment.  Additionally, most corporate treasurers will enter into an agreement, called an interest rate swap, to change the corporation’s payments into essentially a fixed interest rate.  The complexity of the interest rate swap is not important to discuss in great detail.  The point is that the corporation will then have a fixed interest payment and knows how much they will have to pay over time.  Thus, there will be no surprises if interest rates spike.  Therefore, you are exposed to the credit risk of the corporation for each bank loan.  Remember though that there is diversification in each of these syndicated bank loans because the ETF’s investment advisor will buy many bank loans to diversify the default risk of any one corporation.  One example of an ETF is offered by PowerShares and is called the PowerShares Senior Loan Portfolio ETF (BKLN).  A number of closed-end mutual funds offer similar products.  However, you should always be aware of the management fee assessed by the advisor overseeing the investments.  The expense ratio for many of these closed-end mutual funds is significantly above 1% which tends to offset the benefit of owning such a security because your investment returns will be lower as a result.

6)      Consider purchasing bonds issued by international firms or different countries

 

International firms and different countries have bonds that sell at different interest rates.  The nice thing about these bonds is that they are affected by different factors or the economy may be in a different stage than the US.  It is akin to the multiverse concept of Mohammed El-Erian of PIMCO.  El-Erian tells investors that the global economy is not simply something that is changing in one direction or in one way.  Rather, he states that different countries or regions can be moving in the same or opposite directions at any given time.  Furthermore, bonds issued outside of the US provide diversification to your investment portfolio.  It is the concept of not “having all your eggs in one basket”.  It is one other option for you.  There are countries which are in the process of lowering interest rates, so you can benefit from the interest rate payment and capital gains then.

 

One other thing you can do is to just reduce your duration.  Duration is simply the time it takes for your bonds to mature.  Under normal market conditions, bonds with shorter maturities have lower interest rates than bonds will longer maturities.  Believe it or not, that is not always the case though.  When short-term interest rates are lower than long-term interest rates, bonds with shorter maturities are less sensitive in terms of price movement than longer maturities.  I do not consider this an investment strategy really.  It is just a way of lowering risk.  As previously mentioned, when you hear financial professionals speak about searching for yield in other ways like investing in dividend stocks or MLPs (master limited partnerships), that is not investing in fixed income securities.  Given your risk tolerance, you should have a set allocation to fixed income securities.  You might decide to replace some of that allocation with a higher level of other stocks or other instruments.  However, that is a choice, and you are normally increasing the risk of your portfolio.  I am not saying that is good or bad.  I am simply saying that implementing this strategy comes with tradeoffs.