🔍
How Much Risk Should You Take? - YouTube
Channel: Ben Felix
[0]
Risk is more than an important part
of investing. The whole concept of
[4]
a financial market exists on the basis that
taking risk can result in financial gain. If
[9]
you do not take risk in financial markets,
you expect very low returns. Of course,
[14]
with risk also comes the potential for
loss. Elroy Dimson of the London School
[19]
of Economics said “Risk means more
things can happen than will happen”.
[24]
In other words, risk means that there is a
distribution of outcomes, and you will not
[29]
know which outcome you actually get until it
happens. As much as we like to think that we
[34]
can understand risk, the possible distribution
of outcomes is beyond our ability to comprehend.
[39]
While we are not able to control or
predict the distribution of outcomes,
[43]
we are able to choose the type and amount
of risk that we take with our investments.
[48]
I’m Ben Felix, Associate Portfolio
Manager at PWL Capital. In this
[53]
episode of Common Sense Investing,
I’m going to tell you about risk.
[63]
To start this discussion, I need to introduce two
types of risk. The first type of risk is called
[72]
idiosyncratic risk, which may also be referred
to as company specific risk, or diversifiable
[77]
risk. Idiosyncratic risk is not directly related
to the market as a whole. Individual stocks will
[84]
typically move to some extent with the market,
but they may also fluctuate due to their specific
[89]
circumstances. Think about Volkswagen’s share
price plummeting after their emissions scandal.
[94]
There is no reason to expect a positive
outcome for taking on idiosyncratic risk.
[99]
It may work out in your favour, but it may
result in substantial and unrecoverable
[104]
losses. Idiosyncratic risk can be diversified
away. Owning all of the stocks in the market
[110]
eliminates the specific risks of each
company. What is left is market risk.
[114]
Market risk is the risk of the market as a whole.
It cannot be diversified away. For taking on the
[121]
risk of the market, investors do expect a positive
long-term return. When you invest in one stock,
[127]
or one sector, you are getting exposure to
both market risk and idiosyncratic risk,
[131]
but the idiosyncratic risk can easily dominate
the outcome. The most reliable long-term outcome
[137]
would be expected when idiosyncratic
is diversified away. Practically,
[142]
this simply means owning a globally
diversified portfolio of index funds,
[145]
an idea that is not new to anyone
who has been watching my videos.
[148]
Most investors do not own a 100% equity
portfolio. Portfolios will typically consist
[155]
of some mix between equity index funds and bond
index funds. Long-term outcomes are uncertain,
[160]
but we know that over the past 116 years
stocks have outperformed bonds globally,
[165]
while bonds have been less volatile.
A portfolio becomes less risky and has
[171]
a lower expected return as the
allocation to bonds increases.
[175]
The decision about how much risk
to take is driven by the ability,
[178]
willingness, and need to take risk.
[181]
Equity market risk has tended to
pay off over long periods of time,
[185]
and the distribution of outcomes
also tends to narrow. For example,
[190]
over the 877 overlapping 15 year periods from
1928 to 2015, the US market outperformed risk-free
[198]
t-bills 96% of the time. The ability to take
risk is primarily driven by time horizon and
[204]
human capital. We have been talking about risk
as an unpredictable distribution of outcomes.
[209]
A more tangible definition might be the
probability of not meeting your goals.
[213]
For a young person with lots
of remaining earning capacity,
[217]
the market underperforming t-bills hardly affects
their ability to meet their goals - in fact,
[222]
it would be a good opportunity for them
to buy cheap stocks. On the other hand,
[227]
a near-retiree taking substantial losses
in the years leading up to retirement would
[231]
be devastating to their ability to meet their
spending goals. In general, it is sensible to
[236]
take less risk for goals with short time horizons
and more risk for goals with longer time horizons.
[242]
Even with an unlimited ability to take risk,
most investors are constrained by their own
[247]
willingness to take risk. An investor may look
at the history of market risk and decide that
[253]
it is too volatile for their preferences.
The MSCI All Country World Index was down
[259]
33% in Canadian dollars between March
2008 and February 2009. That’s a pretty
[265]
big drop. In his book Antifragile, Nassim Taleb
introduced what he calls the Lucretius Problem:
[271]
we tend to view the worst historical
outcome as the worst possible outcome,
[275]
but that is nowhere near the truth. If a 33% drop
scares you, you would need to be comfortable with
[281]
the potential for a far deeper decline to be
confident investing in a 100% equity portfolio.
[287]
The need to take risk brings us back to goals. If
someone wants to spend $5,000 per month adjusted
[295]
for 2% average inflation for a 30-year retirement,
they would need about $2.5 million dollars to be
[300]
able to afford to take no risk. They could hold
cash in savings deposits and deplete their assets
[306]
over time without any volatility. Most people
do not accumulate enough to fund a risk-free
[311]
retirement, so they must introduce some level
of risk to increase their expected returns..
[313]
The right amount of market risk in a portfolio
is sufficient to hopefully meet the goal for
[318]
the assets without introducing the potential
for catastrophic failure due to large declines
[323]
at the wrong time. There are rules of thumb out
there, like having 100 minus your age in stocks,
[329]
but they have little basis. Truly there is no
optimal answer, but there is little debate that
[335]
expected returns and expected volatility
are highest with a 100% equity portfolio,
[338]
and investors will add in bonds to match their
ability, willingness, and need to take risk.
[343]
How do you handle risk in your portfolio?
Tell me about it in the comments.
[348]
Thanks for watching. My name is Ben Felix
of PWL Capital and this is Common Sense
[353]
Investing. I’ll be talking about a lot more
common sense investing topics in this series,
[357]
so subscribe, and click the bell for updates.
Most Recent Videos:
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage





