Does Low Volatility Put Your Portfolio At Risk?

Does Low Volatility Put Your Portfolio At Risk?

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, January 27, 2012: Issue #1695

The stock market gyrated so wildly in 2011 that many investors finally threw in the towel.

How else can we read the massive equity fund redemptions that occurred in the second half of last year?

But, apparently, the market has taken its anti-anxiety medication. After last year’s gut-wrenching swings, U.S. stocks have been surprisingly tranquil. For 13 straight days, the Dow has moved up or down less than 100 points.

This is good news for bullish traders and bad news for those who have been making money trading the VIX. Let me explain…

The VIX is the ticker symbol for the CBOE Market Volatility Index, a popular measure of volatility in S&P 500 index options. According to The Wall Street Journal, this so-called “fear gauge” has fallen 20% to levels unseen in six months.

Why? One reason is that the U.S. economy appears to be getting back on its feet. Despite all the pessimism in the Eurozone, U.S. corporations are busy reporting yet another quarter of all-time record profits. (Just how long will mom-and-pop investors ignore this salient point?)

The Dow is up almost 500 points for the month. Fund companies report that money is flowing back into equities again. Yet the calm makes some investors nervous. I hear many analysts crying out that the market is about to plunge again.

Deluded, Ignorant, or Both

Let’s start with the straightforward declaration that anyone who claims to know “what the market is going to do next” is, by definition, someone who is ignorant, deluded, or both. The market will rise or fall next week or next month based on next week’s or next month’s news. Yesterday’s news has already been discounted. (As Legg Mason’s Bill Miller likes to say, “If it’s in the papers, in the price.)

Moreover, there’s no historical evidence to show that a market pause generally precedes a correction. And the data go back pretty far.

For example, market analyst Mark Hulbert has loaded the Dow’s daily returns – all the way back to its creation in 1896 – into his statistical software. For each trade date since, he calculated the Dow’s trailing volatility and then looked to see if the stock market performed any different following periods of low volatility than it did at all other times.

The short answer? Nope. He came up empty. Perhaps that’s the reason for the old Wall Street saw: “Never sell a dull market short.”

There are two things to conclude here:

• The hair-raising volatility that made trading (going long) the VIX like taking a tootsie roll from a toddler is over, at least for now…
• The other important takeaway is that traders and investors have no historical reason to believe that the recent pause portends a market downturn ahead.

Sure, a spike in oil prices, a hedge fund blow-up or a nasty surprise from across the pond could change that in a nanosecond. But bolts out of the blue are just one of the many short-term hazards of trading and investing.

For now, the market is taking a breather. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t about to get a second wind.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Why Most of the Investment Advice You’ve Heard is Wrong

Why Most of the Investment Advice You’ve Heard is Wrong

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Friday, January 20, 2012: Issue #1691

A conversation with a friend last week sounded numbingly familiar.

“I just can’t seem to win for losing in the stock market,” he confessed. “Five years ago, my broker had me fully invested in stocks and I took a drubbing. Then when things were bottoming out a couple years later, he talked me into making my portfolio more conservative. As a result, I didn’t get much of a pop on the rebound. Now he’s trying to get me to reshuffle again. But I’m too scared to do anything.”

Since he was a friend, I felt obliged to tell him the truth: He’s getting lousy investment advice. Not because his broker failed to outguess the market… but because he’s guessing at all. As if that wasn’t bad enough, there’s a good chance that the advice he’s getting is tainted by self-interest.

Here’s what I mean…

It still astonishes me that the vast majority of investors – even ones who have been active for decades – still don’t understand that stock market success has nothing to do with figuring out the economy.

Look back at history. There’s no correlation between economic growth and stock market performance from year to year. Equities routinely plunge during the good times and rally during the bad. If you know this – and truly understand it – why would you invest your money based on someone’s economic forecast?

The same is true of market timing. It’s easy to look in the rearview mirror and see when you should have been in the market and when you should have been out. But when you look ahead, it is always a blank slate. No guru or trading system can change that.

Even if you could somehow divine what the stock market was going to do next – which you can’t – you still wouldn’t know which stocks would outperform and which ones would lag.

The only way to determine that is to look at business fundamentals. Companies that are doing all the right things – increasing sales, compounding earnings at high rates, growing market share, improving operating margins, paying down debt, buying back shares – will post superb returns, regardless of what the economy or stock market are doing. And those that are doing the opposite – experiencing flat or negative sales, lackluster earnings growth, small margins, high interest costs and diluting existing shareholders with new stock issues – will be laggards.

In short, stock market success is about analyzing businesses not investing in some self-styled expert’s macroeconomic forecast. Yet that’s exactly what the mass media and much of the investment advisory industry encourages people to do every day.

The media does it to attract viewers – and thus advertisers. The advisory industry does it sometimes out of ignorance but often just to justify its fees. This is especially true when you have a transaction-based relationship with an advisor where the more you trade the better he or she is compensated. Trust me. That doesn’t generate satisfactory long-term returns.

Every time you hear a pundit talk about “the new normal,” the rally just ahead or the prolonged economic slump we’re likely to endure, understand that you’re listening to opinions that are no more helpful than a weather forecast for three weeks from Sunday.

Both pieces of advice are worthless. But one is a lot more expensive – and harmful – than the other.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Is Your Investment Advisor Capitalizing on Your Fear?

Is Your Investment Advisor Capitalizing on Your Fear?

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist

Monday, January 16, 2012: Issue #1687

Make no mistake. Investors are petrified right now. And they’re telling their investment advisors about it.

The question is: “What is he or she doing in response?” If the answer is adjusting your asset allocation, focusing on your long-term investment goals, or doing a bit of handholding, you probably have a good one.

But if they’re preying on your emotional state with unsuitable investments or all-or-nothing advice, beware.

The story is as old as equity investing itself. When times are good, investors get complacent, take too much risk and generally regret it. When times are bad, investors become anxiety-ridden, take too little risk and generally regret it. Seasoned advisors know this and try to keep you on the right track. But less knowledgeable or less scrupulous advisors may try to take advantage of your worries.

For instance, your investment advisor may recommend that you load up on variable annuities in this uncertain environment. Not a good idea. Some annuities are right for some people. They offer tax-deferred compounding (like an IRA) and a principal guarantee. But the typical annuity is ridiculously expensive, offers mediocre insurance coverage, restricts your investment choices to so-so mutual funds, lacks liquidity and comes with enormous surrender penalties.

Too many investors learn these things about annuities after they’ve plunked for one. Hence, you’ll often hear investors complain that they are “stuck in an annuity” for several years. Investigate these insurance contracts before you invest. On the whole they are oversold, frequently misrepresented and completely inappropriate for many folks.

Another sign that you have a misguided (or unethical) investment advisor is if he suggests that you abandon proven investment principles. For example, if your investment plan is based on a broker’s economic forecast or market timing advice, good luck. You’re going to need it.

No one can accurately predict the economy with any consistency. And it wouldn’t really matter if they could. Stocks routinely rally during the bad times and sell-off during the good ones. If your investment advisor doesn’t know this, you shouldn’t be using her. If she does and is still trying to convince you to flee the market, that’s even worse.

Also beware investment advisors who are paid on a transaction basis and therefore have an incentive for you to trade more frequently. Some brokers today are telling their clients that the old rules no longer apply, that you need to jump in and out of the market and from stock to stock. For a commission-based broker, this can be entirely self-serving advice. And it is almost certain to end badly… at least for the client.

I know it’s tough to buy – or just hang in there – when the outlook is dark. But look back at history. The market was a screaming “Buy” after the crash of ’87, the bear market of 1990, the tech wreck of 1994, the Asian Contagion of 1997, the 2000 to 2002 bear market, and even during the depths of the financial crisis in 2008.

If you’re using an advisor who insists that “this time it’s different,” you might reasonably examine his experience, his ethics and his disciplinary history. And seek out more-qualified advice.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Why the Gold Slump is Not Over

Why the Gold Slump is Not Over

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, January 09, 2012: Issue #1682

Not long ago, my colleague Mark Skousen asked a roomful of attendees at an investment conference how many of them owned gold. Virtually every hand in the room went up.

“And how many of you have ever sold any of your gold?”

Virtually every hand in the room came down.

For many investors, gold is their “forever investment,” the one asset they never plan to sell. That could be a mistake, a big one.

I can assure you that the institutional investors who have bid gold up the last few years consider the metal a “hot date,” not a long-term marriage. And that bodes ill for prices in the short to medium term.

Yes, I was bearish on gold a year ago. But I’m more bearish on it today. After all, the trend is your friend.

True, gold went up in the first half of 2011 and didn’t peak until August. But take a look at a five-month chart.

It’s not a pretty picture.

Of course, gold is hard to value under the best of circumstances. It has very few industrial uses. It generates no earnings, pays no dividends, accrues no interest and provides no rental income. That means the best any of us can do is guess where it’s headed next.

So why am I guessing it will be lower? Let me count the ways:

1. Gold is a wonderful inflation hedge. But the metal is up more than five-fold over the last 12 years and inflation is still not a problem. Is it not conceivable that inflation could tick up and gold – having already discounted this – moves lower?

2. Gold is a great performer in an economic crisis. But we already had the crisis. It ended in 2008. Things are getting slowly better, not worse.

3. With gold prices still in the stratosphere and the value of the rupee falling, India – the world’s biggest consumer of gold – is likely to experience a pronounced drop-off in demand this year. Not good.

4. Gold is now well above the marginal cost of production. New mines are opening and old mines are re-opening. It’s Economics 101. Greater supply depresses prices.

5. If you believe the gargantuan debt load that Washington has run up will cause gold to rally from here, you may want to think again. Japan’s debt load as a percentage of GDP is more than twice ours and the end result has been disinflation, not inflation. Why will it be different this time? Indeed, George Soros and several other major speculators are openly forecasting outright deflation. That would not be good for gold.

6. Note that while gold ended the year up in 2011, gold shares dropped 16%. Already, equity investors are taking a dim view of the sustainability of gold’s advance. I think they’re right.

7. Investment demand for gold has soared in recent years. Seven years ago, it made up just 16% of total demand. Today it’s more than 40%. But hedge fund managers who piled into gold, unlike Mom and Pop, have no emotional commitment to the metal. These are hair-trigger traders. When the primary trend turns unequivocally south, you can bet these guys will dump gold faster than a freshman girlfriend.

I’m not suggesting that anyone bail out of gold. You should hold at least 5% of your liquid assets in gold and gold stocks, and perhaps more. But if you’re one of those folks I meet who has 30%, 50% … even 80% in the barbarous relic, you’re really sitting at the roulette table at 3 AM.

No one can say unequivocally that the bet won’t pay off. But there could be a steep price to pay if it doesn’t. The last time gold was a bubble, investors were down more than 60% two decades later.

As Mark Twain said, “History may not repeat itself. But it rhymes.”

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

The Best Buy Signal of 2012

The Best Buy Signal of 2012

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, January 02, 2012: Issue #1677

Investors are scared right now and it’s not hard to see why.

Economic growth is anemic. Unemployment is high. Banks are saddled with toxic assets. Problems in the Eurozone continue to fester. Residential real estate is sinking in a mire of short sales and foreclosures. And both federal and state governments – not to mention consumers themselves – are drowning in a sea of red ink.

We have all heard these negatives repeated daily and cycled endlessly in the national media.

However, these reports often leave out or play down the good news: Inflation is low. Short-term rates are near zero. Energy and food prices are declining. Emerging market economies – which are end markets for the developed world – are still booming. Corporate profits are at an all-time record – and have been for seven quarters now. And stock valuations are low. (The S&P 500 has historically traded at an average of 16 times earnings. Today it’s less than 14 times earnings.)

Last year I shared another key insight with you. It has always been a positive indicator for stocks when the Dow yields more than Treasury bonds.

This makes sense when you think about it. Shares are riskier than bonds. Investors should demand a higher yield. Yet almost never since 1958 have stocks yielded more than Treasuries. Today they do, however. The 10-year bond yields just two percent. The Dow yields 30 percent more.

If you’re still not convinced that equities are a good place to be in 2012, let me draw your attention to one of the strongest indicators of all…

Contrarian Investing Works

It’s a truism that no one consistently predicts the stock market. (That’s why money manager and Forbes 400 member Ken Fisher calls it “The Great Humiliator.”) However, there’s a straightforward system that offers a reasonable prospect of timing the market reasonably well in the future.

A 25-year study published last year in The Journal of Financial Economics found that if you had simply invested in the S&P 500 when equity fund flows were negative (redemptions exceeded new investments) and into 90-day Treasury bills when fund flows were positive (new investments exceeded redemptions) you would have substantially outperformed the market while spending nearly half the time in riskless T-bills.

In other words, contrarian investing works. This system would have you do the very inverse of what the great mass of investors is doing. (It turns out they have god-awful instincts, so it pays to buck the consensus.)

Bear in mind, if you’d followed this system, you wouldn’t just have earned higher returns than being fully invested. You would have done it with far less risk, spending nearly half the time in riskless T-bills.

I mention this because the Investment Company Institute recently reported that investors are yanking billions out of equity funds virtually every week and pouring the money into ultra-low-paying money market accounts. The Wall Street Journal further reports that “investors have continued to consistently pull money from U.S. equity funds since August.”

I’m trying to contain my glee. Who says no one rings a bell in the stock market?

The fear and pessimism about both the economy and the stock market are way overdone and fully discounted in current stock prices. If you can’t be stirred by low interest rates, low inflation, low valuations and record profits, you really should ask yourself two important questions:

1. Is logic or emotion governing my decision making about my portfolio?

2. If I don’t invest in stocks – the greatest wealth creator of all time – how am I going to meet my long-term financial goals?

We’ll talk more about these issues in the weeks ahead. But, for the record, I think 2012 will be a good year for the stock market and – although virtually no one expects or believes it – perhaps even a barnburner.

Good Investing,

Alexander Green

Why This Market Truism Just Isn’t True

Why This Market Truism Just Isn’t True

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, December 5, 2011: Issue #1657

In my first book, The Gone Fishin’ Portfolio, I made a confession that startled some readers…

I retired from the investment services industry while I was still in my early 40s, but many of my clients had not become financially independent. This was not because I advised them poorly. I dealt with my clients honestly and gave them the best advice and service I could.

Yet, in many ways, they operated at a disadvantage. Some had a poor understanding of investment fundamentals. Others found it impossible to commit to a long-term investment plan. Many were simply too emotional about the markets, running to cash at the first hint of danger.

Contrarian instincts are rare, too, I learned. Few people are emotionally stirred by low stock prices. But every time there was a correction, a crash, or financial panic, my Scottish blood would surge, my pulse would rise, I’d rub my hands together, and start buying.

My clients, on the other hand, often did just the opposite, sometimes because they were too nervous but often because they bought into the old chestnut that a good investor doesn’t buy into a market downturn.

“The trend is your friend,” they’d say. Or “Don’t try to catch a falling knife.” This is surely the conventional wisdom in some quarters, but it’s not particularly wise. Here’s why …

For the last several months, traders have obsessed over problems in the Eurozone and the strength (or perceived weakness) of the U.S. economy. Taking a decidedly downbeat view, the market had a pretty horrendous November. But sentiment can turn on a dime and stocks can put on a furious – and completely unexpected – rally.

If you don’t already own stocks, it’s tough to catch the train after it has left the station.

Yet many gurus, including growth-stock advocate William O’Neill and his widely read publication Investor’s Business Daily, often insist that you shouldn’t but a stock unless the market itself is in a confirmed uptrend.

That may make sense in theory, but it often fails in practice. For instance, on page one each day, that paper reports whether the market is in a confirmed uptrend or downtrend. (And sometimes hedges, using language such as “Uptrend Under Pressure.”)

As we all know, this has been a volatile year for the market with the major indices bouncing up and down repeatedly. But you could hardly have chosen a worse strategy than to wait until the market was in a confirmed uptrend before buying. All that meant was that you bought into every short-term spike and then hit your trailing stops over and over again. (It must feel like banging your head against the wall.)

The Oxford Club has hit a number of its stops this year, too, sometimes protecting profits, other times protecting principal. But by buying great companies when the market was under pressure, we ended up with a lot of attractive entry points and plenty of both realized and unrealized profits.

True, if stocks go into a secular bear market, you can end with losses no matter how well you timed your entry points. However, you can never know whether a market drop is merely a correction or something more ominous until you are looking in the rear-view mirror.

You have to stick your neck out occasionally, pick your spots and buy stocks. If you don’t, what are you going to do? Buy bonds yielding 2.5 percent? Hold a money market paying less than one-tenth of one percent? It’s tough to beat inflation or meet your financial goals that way.

Let me make one thing clear, however. It’s most definitely a mistake to buy a troubled company that’s in a downtrend, no matter which way the broad market is heading. (That only works for those with exceptionally long time horizons – and often not even then.) But buying great companies when the broad market is a downtrend gives you a chance to obtain good prices on fine long-term investments and take advantage of tradable short-term rallies, too.

The next two months are traditionally one of the strongest periods for the stock market. No one can say, of course, whether that tradition will hold. But it’s a reasonable strategy to buy great companies when the market is down.

If your goal is to sell high, you have to start by buying low. And market corrections – like the one we’ve seen lately – give you an excellent opportunity to do just that.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

The Best Trade You Can Make in November

The Best Trade You Can Make in November

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Thursday, November 24, 2011: Issue #1650

In December 1996, I sold some shares of Best Buy (NYSE: BBY) to offset gains elsewhere in my portfolio.

I still consider it the most boneheaded investment move I ever made. A year later, the stock was up more than five-fold. A few years further on, it was up more than thirty-fold.

The worst part is that I didn’t dislike the business prospects for Best Buy at the time. Quite the contrary, in fact. I sold it only because I had substantial capital gains and was cleaning out my portfolio to offset them.

I don’t always do that any more. And you shouldn’t necessarily, either. Despite what your tax advisor may tell you, you should never sell an investment for tax reasons alone. Nor do you have to.

Here’s why…

The IRS allows you to offset realized gains with realized losses each calendar year. If you do, however, you must wait at least 30 days before buying the same shares back. (Otherwise you run afoul of the wash-sale rule.)

Offsetting gains at the end of the year is often a sensible move. Most stocks aren’t appreciably higher 30 days later. And if you still like them, you can buy them back then.

There is a risk, however, and it’s called the January effect. The first month of the year is traditionally a strong one for the market. A lot of pension and IRA money gets invested early each year. Plus, there’s often a rebound from the tax-loss selling that goes on each December.

If a stock you own soars in January, there’s a natural reluctance to buy it back. The temptation is to wait until it comes back down. But what if it doesn’t? You’ve taken a limited loss but sold an investment with unlimited upside potential.

There’s a way around this problem, however. And you can take advantage of it – but only if you’re willing to move this week.

In late November each year, I look at my entire portfolio for any companies that are trading below my entry price but NOT near my trailing stops. If I still like a stock, I often make the decision to double down on it for 30 days.

Why? Because I can sell the original shares at the end of December for a tax loss. And if the stock rallies in January, it’s not a problem. After all, thanks to my purchase in November, I own the same number of shares as I bought originally.

What if you don’t have the cash to double down on your position? Use margin. Again, I’m recommending this only for a 30-day period. Your margin interest charge will be minimal.

The risk, of course, is that your shares will be worth less in late December and you will have a paper loss on the second purchase.

However, just the opposite may happen. Remember, the January effect is often preceded by the Santa Claus rally, the tendency of the stock market to do well in the second half of December. As a result, you could end up with a smaller loss in your original shares and a paper gain on your second purchase.

(The Santa Claus rally is never certain, of course, and another reason why you should only add to those companies whose earnings prospects remain strong.)

Bear in mind, when selling for tax purposes, the IRS requires that you buy those identical shares AT LEAST 30 days before you sell the others. So if you want to use this strategy for 2011, you must act this week.

If we have the traditional mid-December to early February rally, you’ll thank me. And then perhaps again on April 15.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

Warren Buffett Just Said “Buy!”

Warren Buffett Just Said “Buy!”

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Investment Strategist
Monday, November 21, 2011: Issue #1647

If you needed heart surgery, you’d try to find the most talented heart surgeon around.

If you were about to be subjected to a full audit by the IRS, you’d hire the most capable tax advisor you could find.

And if you needed investment advice? I hope you’re not one of them, but I know some folks who would read financial blogs by complete unknowns, take hot tips from friends and colleagues, or listen to a sales pitch from someone selling insurance or other financial products.

Big mistake. It makes a lot more sense to listen to the world’s smartest investors, instead. And one of the very best – if not the best – is Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett. (Ten thousand dollars invested in Berkshire Hathaway when Buffett took the helm in 1965 is worth well over $65 million today.)

And thanks to disclosures last week, we now know what Buffett has been doing during the last few months of crazy market activity. He’s been buying.

Specifically, Buffett has plowed $10.7 billion into IBM. He has increased his stake in Wells Fargo from 361.4 million shares to 352.3 million shares. He has boosted his Dollar General stake to 4.5 million shares from 1.5 million. And he has increased his holdings in insurer Torchmark to 4.2 million shares from 2.8 million.

There are a few interesting things to note here. The first is that while most investors have been either running to cash or nervously sitting on their hands lately, Buffett has been actively capitalizing on fresh opportunities. You should be doing the same.

Second, it’s worth mentioning that Buffett has generally avoided technology stocks like IBM. But upon reading not some super-secret briefing but rather the firm’s annual report, he learned that IBM enjoys an entrenched position providing technology services to major businesses.

Buffett likes companies with a “moat” like this and has famously said that his favorite holding period is “forever.” Indeed, he recently told The Washington Post that “IBM fits all my principles … it’s something we’d like to own indefinitely.”

Then there’s the price he paid for IBM. I often get emails from readers who are baffled that I sometimes recommend companies trading at or near their highs. Buffett bought IBM as it hit new highs – even as the broad market was cratering. Indeed, the stock has more than doubled since the depth of the 2008 recession.

Buffett’s response? He says the fact that IBM has doubled doesn’t bother him. Indeed, over the years he could have bought the firm at a tiny fraction of its current price. “What matters is what the company does in the future,” says Buffett.

There are a number of important lessons here:

1. As Buffett often points out, you should be greedy when other investors are fearful.

2. You shouldn’t be reluctant to modify your investment approach a bit (as Buffett has with one of his first significant forays into technology).

3. You shouldn’t fret about how much cheaper a stock was in the past if the business is sound and growing today.

And when it comes to investment advice, history shows it pays to listen to the best of the best. That’s one reason we’ve owned Berkshire Hathaway in our Oxford All-Star Portfolio for well over a decade.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

Will You Fall Prey to “Headline Risk”?

Will You Fall Prey to “Headline Risk”?

by Alexander Green, Investment U Chief Wealth Strategist
Friday, September 2, 2011: Issue #1592

In the last couple of months, millions of investors have done a 180. It happens all the time. And – just as in the past – they will surely come to regret it.

The story is as old as equities themselves. When the market is an uptrend, investors focus on opportunity and considerations of risk go out the window. When the market is in the tank, they focus on risk and forget about opportunity.

This is the very opposite of what you should be doing.

During my 16-year career as an investment advisor and portfolio manager, I used to show new clients a 200-year chart of the stock market and ask them to identify the best buying opportunities.

Invariably, they pointed to the periods when the market had cratered.

I asked if they would be willing to step up and take advantage of such opportunities in the future. Most nodded vigorously and assured me that they would.

Few actually did.

Why? Because you can never imagine the news backdrop that will accompany a major stock market decline.

When the market recovered – as it always does – these same investors kick themselves for not scooping up bargains when stocks were cheap. Yet when the market declined again, they would generally react the very same way.

Nothing could be simpler than to say, “buy low, sell high.” But pulling the trigger when times are tough isn’t easy.

How to Avoid Headline Risk

It’s easy to fall prey to “Headline Risk.” Here’s what I mean…

On August 9, national newspaper and television headlines shouted that the Dow had plunged 634 points the previous day. That was not an insubstantial drop. It amounted to a 5.5 percent decline in the index.

Yet few sources reminded investors that the Dow was still up 66 percent (excluding dividends) from the market lows 2 ½ years ago. Or that the drop wasn’t even in the top 50 for largest daily percentage losses.

Similarly, the media made a big deal about the market sell-off the week of August 1 to 5 representing an evaporation of more than $4 trillion in world equity values. That’s a big number. (Unless you’re a Congressman, apparently.) Yet the total value of all stocks worldwide is approximately $55 trillion. And, for the overwhelming majority of investors, these were temporary paper losses.

Where was the context? There wasn’t any. The media needs sensationalism to grab viewers’ attention. Newspapers, magazines and television shows aren’t interested in helping you reach your financial goals. They’re interested in helping their marketing departments sell advertising. Sensationalism does just that.

Understand this and you can inoculate yourself against “Headline Risk.” Scary headlines create strong emotions. But strong emotions are usually the prelude to bad investment decisions.

Flee common stocks – the greatest wealth creator of all time – and where will you go? Into 10-year Treasuries yielding 2 percent? Into money market accounts paying next to nothing? Into gold which has already risen six-fold in the past 10 years? Into residential real estate which is mired in a sea of foreclosures?

High quality stocks are still your best bet to meet your long-term financial goals. National headlines are screaming just the opposite, of course, just as they have during every major buying opportunity of the past 75 years.

The truth is your greatest risk is not market fluctuations. It’s that your money fails to keep up with inflation – or that your investment portfolio kicks the bucket before you do.

Consider that before extravagant headlines prompt you to do something foolish.

Good investing,

Alexander Green

The Best Buy Signal in 53 Years

The Best Buy Signal in 53 Years

by Alexander Green, Investment U’s Chief Investment Strategist
Thursday, August 25, 2011: Issue #1586

Just weeks before the stock market made a dramatic bottom in early 2009, I wrote an Investment U column entitled “One of The Best Buy Signals in 51 Years.”

It was one of our most widely read columns that year – and syndicated many other places, as well.

I have no idea how many readers acted on my analysis at the time. After all, the financial crisis was in full swing and investor sentiment – to quote Jed Clampett – “was lower than a hog’s jaw on market day.”

But those who bought stocks on this signal made gobs of money in the months that followed. After all, the market essentially doubled between the lows of 2009 to the highs earlier this year.

Now – for only the second time in 53 years – this uncanny signal is flashing again. Here’s what it is and why you should take advantage of one of the best and most accurate signals in stock market history…

Market Yields: Stock vs. U.S. Treasuries

In the first half of the twentieth century, investors found that if you bought stocks only when the market’s yield exceeded the yield on 10-year Treasuries, you would have been in for every single major rally.

The returns were huge – and the system made perfect sense. Stocks are riskier than bonds, market participants reasoned, so they should yield more to compensate for greater volatility and the likelihood of occasional losses.

The system worked like a charm until 1958. Then it stopped cold. Why? Because for the next 50 years, stocks never yielded more than Treasuries.

Public companies began using their cash flow to fund operations and acquisitions rather than paying out dividends to shareholders. With stock yields sharply lower, most analysts reasoned that the indicator was dead, that the yield on stocks would never again top bonds.

And, indeed, it took a full blown financial crisis but two and a half years ago to finally happen again. With the luxury of hindsight, we can see that was yet another superb buying opportunity. And today it’s happening yet again thanks to both the tremendous rally in government bonds and the socking that stocks have undergone. For only the second time since 1958, stocks are yielding more than bonds.

Granted, it’s a squeaker. As I write, the 10-year Treasury is yielding 2.07 percent. The S&P 500 yields 2.16 percent. Of course the S&P 500 Index was only created in 1957. It was the Dow that investors used in the first half of the last century. And the yield on the Dow is more than 50 percent higher at 3.24 percent.

History Says… Stocks Are a Terrific Long-Term Buy

If history is any guide, that means stocks are a terrific long-term “Buy” right now and Treasuries – which have become a complete bubble and a table-pounding “Sell” in my estimation – are due for a long period of underperformance.

True, GDP growth is likely to be anemic in the months ahead. But – shocking and surprising most investors – stocks (and especially dividend-paying stocks) should do exceptionally well.

There are no guarantees in the world of stock market investing, of course. But as Patrick Henry famously said, “I know no way of judging the future but by the past.”

Good investing,

Alexander Green

Editor’s Note: So how can you capitalize on the best buy signal in the last 53 years? As Alex said, it’s important to focus on dividend-paying stocks… And the best way to read Alex’s favorite picks and his regular market commentary is to join The Oxford Club…