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.