As I have written before: Avoiding Hedge Fund Investments is One of the Benefits of Being in the 99%.

This is pretty well understood by most knowledgeable investors, financial planners and investing experts. But funds that charge huge fees continue to get away with it. If you are smart you will avoid them. A few simple investing rules get you well into the top 10% of investors

• seek low fees
• diversify – pay attention to risk of portfolio overall
• limit trading (low turnover)
• use tax advantage accounts wisely (in the USA 401(k)s and IRAs)

From a personal finance perspective, saving money is a key. Most people fail at being decent investors before they even get a chance to invest by spending more than they can afford and failing to save, and even worse going into debt (other than to some extent for college education and house). Consistently putting aside 10-20% of your income and investing wisely will put you in good shape over the long term.

Warren Buffett put his money (a tiny bit for him, just $1 million) on the idea that hedge funds can’t outperform the market given the huge fees they charge. After 6 years he is well up on his bet with his pick (Vanguard S&P 500 index soundly beating a portfolio of hedge funds selected by the opponent in the bet).

I do wonder at what point the huge amount of index investing creates opportunities that can be exploited profitably. I actually think that point has been passed. The question now is can you profitably and reliably find active investing managers that are wise and charge relatively low fees? Passive investing may now account for over 60% of investments in the market.

Also in certain market environments where the market is likely to ignore useful data (bubbles or fads) or where data is questionable and smart digging can provide useful and profitable insight (China may fit this idea now – I pay for actively managed Templeton developing market funds and have for 20 years, I also have Vanguard developing market index type fund – VWO). I think most investors should primarily use index funds (REITs, etc.) but I think the prospects for investors picking their own stocks may be better as more investing is based solely on index funds mass buying and selling.

I am worried about the price level of the overall market now. I am less worried about some stocks; this means I am more comfortable holding Apple, Google, Toyota, Abbie etc. (not so much – Amazon) than I am the S&P 500 right now.

Related: Trying to Beat the Stock Market – Lazy Golfer Portfolio Allocation

Volatile stocks with frequent news provide the opportunity to make money on large changes in price. Amazon is a company an Amazon that often makes headlines. Recently, they have been in the news quite a bit, and savvy binary options traders have been cleaning up.

Binary options are a type of option in which the payoff can take only two possible outcomes. The cash-or-nothing binary option pays some fixed amount of cash if the option expires in-the-money while the asset-or-nothing pays the value of the underlying security.

For example, a purchase is made of a binary cash-or-nothing call option on Amazon at $320 with a binary payoff of $1000. Then, if at the future maturity date, the stock is trading at or above $320, $1000 is received. If its stock is trading below $100, nothing is received. An investor could also sell a put where they would make a payoff if the conditions are met and have to payoff nothing if the conditions are not met.

Examples of big news in the recent past

Amazon Fire Cell Phone – Earlier this year, we watched as Jeff Bezos unveiled the new Amazon Fire 3-D cell phone. As happens in most cases when a company unveils a great new product, we saw this cell phone cause Amazon’s stock price to go through the roof. So, as a trader, seeing the unveiling happen first hand would indicate that the value of Amazon was going to rise, and give the trader unique opportunity to make trades on realistic expectations with this asset.

Jeff Bezos spending spree – The day following the unveiling of the Amazon Fire 3-D cell phone, we watched as Amazon’s stock price plummeted. Why? Well, investors were putting pressure on Amazon to stop the overwhelming spending spree they’ve been on investing in new products and fulfillment centers. And this continues the long term trend of Amazon delaying earnings to invest in the long term. The stock price has done very well, though under some pressure the last year. The level of spending was just too much for some investors.

Jeff Bezos announced that although he understands that the amount of spending is a bit overwhelming, he feels as though it’s necessary for long term production. In the same announcement, he explained that as a result of that spending, Amazon would be generating a loss for the quarter and most likely the next. Because investors don’t buy in on losses, this presented an opportunity to make successful “Put” trades.

Amazon unveils a book subscription service – A couple of weeks ago, Amazon announced a new, “unlimited” (though limited to participating publishers which leaves out many, probably most, popular books) eBook subscription that gave users access to hundreds of thousands of book titles. As a result, the following day we saw a decent increase in Amazon’s stock price. As with the Amazon Fire 3-D cell phone, this presented traders with an opportunity to make informed, successful trades.

Amazon’s Binary Options Candelstick Chart- Source: Yahoo Finance

Earnings reports – Earnings reports offer the ideal window to make some profits, and when Amazon  released its second quarter earnings report, the resulting down trend, was a binary options trader’s dream. Based on the investments into new products and fulfillment centers, investors expected a loss similar to the drop in net income in April 2011. However, they didn’t expect for losses to be so large. In their Q2 earnings report, Amazon posted a loss of $126 million. As a result, Friday brought a dramatic landslide to the Amazon stock chart with shares falling nearly $40 each.

Trading with the news can be very profitable

Although, we talk about Amazon, in this post – this strategy of trading with news, and following the trends that ensue can be applied to any stock. Every day, events happen, such as product launches, earning’s reports, changes to high level management, scandals, all these have an impact on the price of a stock, and if we are ready to trade as these events unfold in real-time, as traders we can make hay as the sun shines.

They key, is to have your finger on the pulse, stay abreast of daily events, and news stories that have a direct impact on stocks, and be ready to trade on the back of them.

Related: Selling Covered Call Options – Google to Let Workers Sell Options Online

This is another interesting portfolio choice. I have discussed my thoughts on portfolio choices several times. This one is again a bit bond heavy for my tastes. I like the global nature of this one. I like real estate focus – though as mentioned in previous articles how people factor in their personal real estate (home and investments) needs to be considered.

Related: Cockroach Portfolio – Lazy Golfer Portfolio – Investment Risk Matters Most as Part of a Portfolio, Rather than in Isolation – Looking for Dividend Stocks in the Current Extremely Low Interest Rate Environment

I don’t really agree with this but I think it is an interesting read. And I do agree the standard stock/bond/cash portfolio model is not good enough.

I would rather own real estate than gold. I doubt I would ever have more than 5% gold and only would suggest that if someone was really rich (so had money to put everywhere). Even then I imagine I would balance it with investments in other commodities.

One of the many problems with “stock” allocations is that doesn’t tell you enough. I think global exposure is wise (to some extent S&P 500 does this as many of those companies have huge international exposure – still I would go beyond that). Also I would be willing to take some stock in commodities type companies (oil and gas, mining, real estate, forests…) as a different bucket than “stocks” even though they are stocks.

And given the super low interest rates I see dividend paying stocks as an alternative to bonds.

The Cockroach Portfolio does suggest only government bonds (and is meant for the USA where those bonds are fairly sensible I think) but in the age of the internet many of my readers are global. It may well not make sense to have a huge portion of your portfolio in many countries bonds. And outside the USA I wouldn’t have such a large portion in USA bonds. And they don’t address the average maturity (at least in this article) – I would avoid longer maturities given the super low rates now. If rates were higher I would get some long term bonds.

View of Glacier National Park, from Bears Hump Trail in Waterton International Peace Park in Canada, by John Hunter

These adjustments mean I don’t have as simple a suggestion as the cockroach portfolio. But I think that is sensible. There is no one portfolio that makes sense. What portfolio is wise depends on many things.

I think something along the lines of this would make sense today for someone living in the USA (but I would vary it a fair bit depending on the person’s situation and it would change in different market conditions)

• 35% Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX)
• 15% Total International Stock Index Fund (VGTSX)
• 10% Vanguard emerging markets fund (VWO), or something similar
• 20% high quality “dividend aristocrat” type stocks
• 10% REIT Index Fund (VGSIX) or direct real estate ownership
• 5% bonds
• 5% cash

I would likely go a bit higher for real estate with direct ownership. As the portfolio was approaching the time withdrawals would be made (retirement) I would want real estate investments to be substantially cash flow positive (and leverage to be limited – hopefully under 50%). I would like primary residence to be without a mortgage or with a very small mortgage.

If I was drawing substantial income from the portfolio I would likely increase cash to at least 3 years of projected need (though even this gets a bit fuzzy as adjusting for expected interest and dividends makes sense to me).

I’m willing to include dividend stocks that don’t meet the dividend aristocrat rules but are similar: (ABBV, INTC even AAPL). I would consider including a bit in pipeline MLPs such as OKS (higher current yields but likely less growth).

Related: Lazy Golfer Portfolio Allocation – Sleep Well Fund Results – Retirement Savings Allocation for 2010 – How to Protect Your Financial Health

Amazon reported earning that were once again very short on earnings given how successful the company has been. Net income increased to $239 million for the 4th quarter (which is by far Amazon’s most profitable quarter since it includes the Christmas buying season) from $97 million last year.

Amazon Prime costs $79 a year (in the USA) and provides free 2 day shipping and access to their streaming video content. Amazon doesn’t disclose the numbers of prime members (that I can find anyway) but educated guesses seem to say 20 million (or more). That would be $1.6 billion a year.

Amazon’s net income for the full year was $274 million. Fees for Prime customers were $1.6 billion (at 20 million members). Amazon is considering raising the Prime price to $99 or $129 a year (25-50%).

While not directly comparable to Costco it is similar. Both are running much of their business just to break even (or at a loss) and Costco manages to take membership fees as profit (along with a very tiny profit on everything else) while Amazon doesn’t even come close to running the rest of their business at break even.

Now you can look at the two fees and say it isn’t the same. Amazon has to pay for shipping on each of the purchases etc. Still it is an odd strategy of charing customers an annual fee and then providing them services almost like a co-op that runs at break even for members.

I really like lots of what Jeff Bezos does. He goes even farther than I do at prioritizing long term benefit over current profit. I can’t think of any other leader that does that and he isn’t really close to me in how far he goes.

Beyond that long term thinking he is much more sensible about financial figures than the extremely over simplified (and even often just wrong) ideas spouted by other CEOs and CFOs. The quarterly report release form the company starts with:

Bezos understand (and makes sure that the company explains) that operating cash flow is a much better measure in many ways than earnings. Bezos is willing to take many actions to bolster long term gains which often hurt current earnings (and also cash flow though he is less willing to drastically undermine cash flow).

Reading reports from Amazon over the years you get the feeling of reading reports from Warren Buffett. The thinking behind the reports both make is very rare among the rest of the senior leadership of our large corporation (who sadly take huge paychecks while providing mediocre leadership or often worse than mediocre).

I love the prospects for Amazon, as a company. I continue to be frustrated by the price of the stock – it is priced so highly it is difficult for me to justify buying. I do hold it in my paper sleep well portfolio, but I am definitely worried about the price. But I see very little else nearly as compelling and on balance find it an attractive, though risky, investment. I see Apple as an extremely good buy at these prices. I see Google more similar to Amazon – very nice prospects but also a very richly priced stock (though I think much more reasonably priced, all things considered, than Amazon).

Related: Amazon Keeps Spending, Sales Growing But Not Income – Google is Diluting Shareholder Equity – Another Great Quarter for Amazon (2007) – Is Google Overpriced? (2007)

Thankfully SEC rules forced disclosure of such financial games in the last few years. Still “Wall Street” often promotes the earnings which pretend though employee costs that are paid with stock instead of cash are not costs to the business.

Google is cash flow positive by billions every quarter. Yet they have issued over 1% more stock each year.

Outstanding share balances in millions of shares

This means Google has given away over 5.2% of a shareholder’s ownership from January 1, 2010 to September 30, 2013. If you owned 100 shares at the end of 2010 you owned .000315% of the company. At the end of the period your ownership had been diluted to .000300% of the company.

When the stock value is rising rapidly (as Google’s has) it proves to be much more costly than if the company had just paid cash in the first place. In Google’s case you would own 5% more of the company and the cash stockpile Google had would be a bit lower (Google had $56,523,000,000 in cash at the end of Sep 2013).

For companies that don’t have cash (startups) paying employees with stock options makes sense. When companies have the cash it is mainly a way to hide how much the company is giving away to executives and to provide fake earnings where only a portion of employee pay is treated as an expense and the rest is magically ignored making earnings seem higher.

Related: Apple’s Outstanding Shares Increased a Great Deal the Last Few Years, Diluting Shareholder Equity – Global Stock Market Capitalization from 2000 to 2012 – Investment Options Are Much More Confusing to Chose From Now – Google up 13% on Great Earnings Announcement (2011)

Since April of 2005 the portfolio Marketocracy calculated annualized rate or return is 8.2% (the S&P 500 annualized return for the period is 7.8%). Marketocracy subtracts the equivalent of 2% of assets annually to simulate management fees – as though the portfolio were a mutual fund. Without that fee the return beats the S&P 500 annual return by about 240 basis points annually (10.2% to 7.8%). And I think the 240 basis point “beat” of the S&P rate is really less than a fair calculation, as the 200 basis point “deduction” removes what would be assets that would be increasing.

In reviewing the data it seemed to me the returns for TDF and EMF were too low. In examining the Marketocracy site they seem to have failed to credit dividends paid since 2010 (which are substantial – over 15% of the current value has been paid in dividends that haven’t been credited). I have written Marketocracy about the apparent problem. If I am right, the total return for the portfolio likely will go up several tens of basis points, maybe – perhaps to a 10.5% return? And the returns for those 2 positions should increase substantially.

Since the last update I have added Abbvie (part of the former Abbot which was split into two companies in 2013). I will sell TDF from the fund (I include it in the table below, since I haven’t sold it all yet).

The current stocks, in order of return:

The current marketocracy results can be seen on the Sleep Well marketocracy portfolio page.

Related: 12 Stocks for 10 Years: January 2012 Update – May 2013 portfolio update – 12 Stocks for 10 Years, July 2009 Update

I make some adjustments to the stock holdings over time (selling of buying a bit of the stocks depending on large price movements – this rebalances and also lets me sell a bit if I think things are getting highly priced. So I have sold some Amazon and Google as they have increased greatly. These purchases and sales are fairly small (resulting in a annual turnover rate under 5%).

I will likely sell out the Tesco position this year (I would like to see a higher price before selling) and may sell PetroChina.

While I am very positive on the companies that I have set the largest holdings for I am less strongly positive on the rest of the stocks (compared the the top stocks now, and compared to the rest of the stocks 5 years ago). This is the reason for a much more unbalanced position size than at the beginning. I am uncomfortable with the price of Amazon but still very much like the company. if I had better candidates in the 2nd tier I would likely reduce the Amazon position size.

I would still consider replacing PetroChina and replacing or eliminating Pfizer. I like both sectors more than I like the companies themselves. Still as part of the portfolio I think they are valuable. I would like a bit more exposure to commodities but I haven’t found the right company to add to this (RYN can help some in the commodities area – they own large amounts of forest land).

I am not altogether thrilled with ABBV, it is very reliant on one huge drug that is losing patent protection (though how big the impact will be is debatable – for various reasons). The company is also not as cheaply priced as I would like, but given all the alternatives adding it makes more sense than not doing so.

In order to comply with the marketocracy diversification rules and deal with not being able to buy Tesco (in marketocracy) I own fairly small amounts of several other stocks in the portfolio (that are included in the marketocracy return). I only have: RYN and USG (less than of portfolio 1% each).

* In order to track performance created a marketocracy portfolio but had to make some minor adjustments (and marketocracy doesn’t allow Tesco to be purchased, though it is easily available as an ADR to anyone in the USA to buy in real life – it is based in England). The portfolio has 7% in cash (only 4% if you figure 3% of the portfolio is in Tesco but not shown in Marketocracy).
** Tesco had a purchase price of $22.55 on Dec 11th 2006 and has paid approximately 40 cents a year in dividends. The current price is $16.84.
*** as noted above TDF and EMF are likely showing lower than actual returns as large dividends from 2010-2013 are not being credited properly.

I ran across this suggested allocation in Eyewitness to a Wall Street mugging which I think has several good values.

• It focuses on low fee, market index funds. Fees are incredibly important in determining long term investment success
• It has lower bond allocation than normal
• It has more international exposure than many – which I think is wise (this suggested portfolio is for those in the USA, USA portion should be lowered for others)
• It includes real estate (some suggested allocations miss this entirely)

In my opinion this allocation should be adjusted as you get closer to retirement (put a bit more into more stable, income producing investments).

My personal preference is to use high quality dividend stocks in the current interest rate environment. I would buy them myself which does require a bit more work than once a year rebalancing that the lazy golfer portfolio allows.

I would also include 10% for Vanguard emerging markets fund (VWO) (for sake of a rule of thumb reduce Inflation Protected Securities Fund to 10% if you are more than 10 years from retirement, when between 10 and 1 year from retirement put Inflation Protected Securities Fund at 15% and Total Stock Market Index Fund at 35%, when 1 year from retirement or retired lower emerging market to 5% and put 5% in money market.

Depending on your other assets this portfolio should be adjusted (large real estate holdings [large net value on personal home, investment real estate...] can mean less real estate in this portfolio, 401k holdings may mean you want to tweak this [TIAA CREF has a very good real estate fund, if you have access to it you might make real estate a high value in your 401k and then adjust your lazy portfolio], large pension means you can lower income producing assets, how close you are to retirement, etc.).

The Lazy Golfer Portfolio (Annually rebalance the fund on your birthday and ignore Wall Street for the remaining 364 days of the year) contains 5 Vanguard index funds

• 40% Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX)
• 20% Total International Stock Index Fund (VGTSX)
• 20% Inflation Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX)
• 10% Total Bond Market Index Fund (VBMFX)
• 10% REIT Index Fund (VGSIX)

Related: Retirement Planning, Looking at Asset Allocation – Lazy Portfolio Results – Investment Risk Matters Most as Part of a Portfolio, Rather than in Isolation – Starting Retirement Account Allocations for Someone Under 40 – Taking a Look at Some Dividend Aristocrats

It is important to keep in mind the data is in current USA dollars, so big swings in exchange rates can have a big impact (and can cause swings to be exacerbated when they move in tandem with stock market movements – if for example the market declines by 15% and the currency declines by 10% against the US dollar those factors combine to move the result down).

The chart shows the top four countries based on stock market capitalization, with data from 200 to 2012. The chart created by Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog may be used with attribution. Data from US Department of Energy.

As with so much recent economic data China’s performance here is remarkable. China grew from 1.8% of world capitalization in 2000 to 6.9% in 2012. And Hong Kong’s data is reported separately, as it normally is with global data sets. Adding Hong Kong to China’s totals would give 3.7% in 2000 with growth to to 8.9% in 2012 (Hong Kong stayed very stable – 1.9% in 2000, 2% in 2012). China alone (without HK) is very slightly ahead of Japan.

The first chart shows the largest 4 market capitalizations (2012: USA $18.6 trillion, China and Japan at $3.7 trillion and UK at $3 trillion). Obviously the dominance of the USA in this metric is quite impressive the next 7 countries added together don’t quite reach the USA’s stock market capitalization. I also including the data showing the global stock market capitalization divided by 3 (I just divide it by three to have the chart be more usable – it lets us see the overall global fluctuations but doesn’t cram all the other data in the lower third of the chart).

Canada is the 5th country by market capitalization (shown on the next chart) with $2 trillion. From 2000 to 2012 China’s market capitalization increased by $3.1 trillion. The USA increased by $3.6 trillion from a much larger starting point. China increased by 536% while the USA was up 23.5%. The world stock market capitalization increased 65% from 2000 to 2012.

Related: Stock Market Capitalization by Country from 1990 to 2010 – Government Debt as Percent of GDP 1998-2010 – Manufacturing Output by Country 1999-2011: China, USA, Japan, Germany

USA, China, Japan and UK represented 47% of world stock market capitalization in 2000 and 55% in 2012. In the second chart I include countries with stock market capitalizations making them 5th through 12th in the rankings.

The chart shows the 5th through 12th countries based on stock market capitalization, with data from 200 to 2012. The chart created by Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog may be used with attribution. Data from US Department of Energy.

This second group of countries accounted for 16% of global stock market value in 2000 and 21% in 2012. So they took 500 basis points of the 800 basis points the top 4 lost, meaning all the other countries picked up 300 basis points. India was the biggest gainer, up 753%, (though that has declined quite a bit this year) then South Korea up 590%, China was up 536%, Brazil up 444%, no other market over $1 trillion in value in 2012 was up over 250%.

As the chart shows this second grouping is pretty tightly packed together, with Canada ($2 trillion in 2012) and France ($1.8 trillion) with a bit of separation at the top. Germany had $1.5 trillion and the rest all were over $1.1 trillion.

Apple’s stock market capitalization soared over $600 billion in 2012 (Apple’s stock market capitalization today is $444 billion). Following Apple in stock market capitalization today are: Exxon is $384 billion, Google $295 billion, Berkshire Hathaway $284 billion, Microsoft $270, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China $256 billion, GE $248 billion, Walmart $247 billion, Chevron $241 billion, China Mobile $228 billion, Nestlé $222 billion.

The data is from the world bank and based on the listed domestic companies are the domestically incorporated companies listed on the country’s stock exchanges at the end of the year. I think that means that for example, Toyota stock (TM) is all counted in Japan (even though you can buy ADRs in the USA on the NYSE). And also Apple (AAPL) is all counted in the USA, even though both of those companies make a large portion of their money in other countries and produce much of there product in factories in other countries.

I would not be surprise to see a collection of the lower stock market capitalization countries increase in the next 20 years at rates higher than the largest (so countries like Brazil, South Africa, Thailand, Mexico, Malaysia, Ghana, Indonesia, Philippines…). I would be surprised if some of the smaller countries don’t do poorly but some will likely do fantastically well and over-shadow the poor performers (from a global investors perspective). I believe China will likely do very well (though being volatile).

The USA also has a chance to do very well – largely due to the international performance of many of the companies based there. I do expect to see a growing number of the top 100 market capitalization companies to be non-USA based companies over the next 20 years (mainly because the dominance the USA has there now is so large and many countries are doing smart things to drive successful businesses in their countries compared to 30 years ago). The USA did many good things, but probably more of the reason for the USA’s success if the bad policies elsewhere (as well as the post WW II position the USA was left in and the smart decision by the USA in the 1950s and 1960 to push science and engineering). Today many countries in Asia and Europe are better focused on the value of science and engineering than the leaders in the USA are. The USA is coasting on the huge science and engineering infrastructure built and nourished earlier.

The “industrial” heritage (represented by the name) is still visible but as the economy has changed the makeup of stocks has moved to reflect the growing importance of services.

The 30 stocks in the DJIA will be:

• American Express Company – AXP
• AT&T – T
• Boeing – BA
• Caterpillar – CAT
• Chevron – CVX
• Citigroup – C
• Coca-Cola – KO
• Du Pont – DD
• Exxon Mobil – XOM
• General Electric Company – GE
• General Motors – GM
• Goldman Sachs – GS
• Home Depot – HD
• Intel – INTC
• International Business Machines – IBM
• Johnson & Johnson – JNJ
• J. P. Morgan Chase – JPM
• Kraft Foods – KFT
• McDonald’s – MCD
• Merck – MRK
• Microsoft – MSFT
• Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing – MMM
• Nike – NIKE
• Pfizer – PFE
• Procter & Gamble – PG
• United Technologies – UTX
• Verizon Communications – VZ
• Visa – V
• Wal-Mart Stores – WMT
• Walt Disney – DIS

Related: GM and Citigroup Replaced by Cisco and Travelers in the Dow (2009) – Bank of America and Chevron replace Altria and Honeywell in the DJIA – Stock Markets Down $30 Trillion for 2008