Tag Archives: events

Building An IKEA Portfolio

Originally Published on March 16, 2016 If you get someone to build an IKEA sideboard – you know, one of those flat-pack conundrums that involves trying to work out what a cartoon character is doing with a hammer, a drill and forty-three assorted metal dowels – they immediately place a higher value on it than anyone else would, even if it goes on to develop an alarming 45-degree tilt. This is the IKEA effect . It’s associated, sort of, with a more general behavior that’s been known about for years – the endowment effect – in which possession of an item immediately causes us to value it more highly. Just imagine what the impact might be if you build your own portfolio, no matter how wonky it might be. Well Endowed The endowment effect was originally demonstrated in an experiment by Daniel Kahneman, Jack Knetschand Richard Thaler , who gave half of a graduate class a college-themed mug and then invited them to trade with the other half. Little trading occurred, because the valuations set by the mug-possessors far outstripped those set by the mug-less. Somehow, mere possession of a mug was enough to endow it, in the eyes of the possessors, with a value that made no sense to an outsider. In part, this looks like status quo bias – people like to stick with what they know. In combination, it’s not hard to see how these issues could cause problems in other sorts of markets. If we overvalue items of any kind – stocks, say – merely because we possess them, then we’re likely to find it difficult to sell them whatever the circumstances. Status quo bias and the endowment effect are among the culprits proposed for loss aversion, our tendency to hold onto loser stocks regardless of their underlying worth. Building Bears There are three underlying odd behaviors associated with the endowment effect. The first is the obvious one – that sellers and buyers place radically different valuations on the same thing, an effect that holds even when we adjust for negotiation strategies (i.e., put in a low bid as an anchoring point). The second is the mere ownership effect – merely owning something is enough to increase the perceived value of the object. And the third is a reluctance to trade at any price – some people simply don’t want to be parted from their belongings, no matter how tatty or valueless they appear to be to everyone else. The IKEA effect is clearly related to these effects, but there’s also something else going on. For instance, if you expend effort at Build-A-Bear to help your child with the creation of their very own growly playmate, you don’t then expect the store to reduce the price of your ursine friend because you’ve spent your time making it. In fact, you probably pay more, and do so happily, because your added input increases your estimate of the value of the critter. Justified Prior research suggests that the more effort we put into some activity the more we value the outcome – a behavior known as effort justification . So if you’re inclined to do lots and lots of research into stocks before buying, you’re likely to end up suffering from both effort justification and the endowment effect. Now, that doesn’t automatically mean your efforts aren’t worthwhile; but it would strongly suggest that the more work you put into deciding to buy a stock, the more likely it is that you’ll end up biased towards it and against alternate views. We have perhaps all met people who know every single detail of their favorite shares but completely miss the big picture; Polaroid was a great investment all the way up to the point that digital photography took off. You could analyze the company’s numbers till the end of time, but you still wouldn’t have seen the digital cliff coming. Failed Erections However, the research into the IKEA effect adds a second factor: the research suggests that the effort expended in all this work has to result in some level of success. A failed attempt to erect a chest of drawers is more likely to cause feelings of regret than an increased level of attachment. It’s hard to be happy with yourself if your furniture keeps on collapsing around you. In ” The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love ,” the researchers Michael Norton, Daniel Mochin and Dan Airely found that: “Participants saw their amateurish creations as similar in value to experts’ creations, and expected others to share their opinions. We show that labor leads to love only when labor results in successful completion of tasks; when participants built and then destroyed their creations, or failed to complete them, the IKEA effect dissipated”. Interestingly, they then go on to show that this isn’t simply an effect experienced by novices: experienced do-it-yourselfers also got caught up in the pleasure of admiring their own creations. Effort justification appears to be behind this – the more effort that people put into their successful creations, the more in love with them they became. Overvaluation Now, because the experiment used pre-packed components from IKEA, they didn’t allow for any customization. Every creation was a clone of every other creation. Yet still, participants habitually overvalued their output apparently because of the effort they’d expended in making it. If this research translates into a more general problem, then the issue for investors is starkly obvious. Overvaluing our investments simply because of the sheer amount of effort we’ve expended in figuring out that they’re worthy of our capital would trigger confirmation bias. We’re likely to miss future changes in prospects because we’re deliriously happy that all of our research efforts have resulted in a successful investment: we’re less likely to acknowledge evidence that points to the fact that things are going wrong, because we can always summon up a battery of figures to show that critics are idiots who haven’t done the necessary detailed work. Life Choices The idea that less is sometimes more, and that if you actually have to spend weeks of your life analyzing a company in order to determine whether or not to invest in it is probably an indication that you shouldn’t, is anathema to some investors. And, to be fair, people who do this for a living should expect to do this level of research and will either be successful or be culled by the invisible hand passing their money to less gullible people. But for most of us, with limited time and resources, if we have to commit so much time to analysis that we end up suffering from the endowment effect, we’re probably looking at the wrong stocks. Building an IKEA wardrobe is fine and well, but equating its value with something created by a craftsman is stupid and biased. And, more importantly, it’s a pointless waste of a life.

Singapore ETFs In Focus Following Policy Easing

In a surprise move, the monetary authority of Singapore (MAS) eased policies on April 14, 2016. The step was taken to boost economic growth which halted in the first quarter of 2016. Notably, the Singapore Monetary Authority uses currency as a key tool to ease monetary policy rather than interest rates and resorted to a flat slope, budging from the prior target of a 0.5% annualized gain in the currency. However, no changes were made to the center of the band or the width, which is usually +/- 2%, per barrons.com. The preliminary estimates revealed that the economy grew 1.8% year over year in the first quarter of 2016, maintain the pace seen in the previous two quarters and slightly above 1.7% growth expected by the market. Sequentially, growth was flat on a seasonally-adjusted annualized basis, declining from 6.2% growth recorded in the fourth quarter and falling shy of the market expectation of 0.2% growth . MAS expects the economy to expand more moderately over the rest of the year. External shocks due to the slowdown in its major trading partners caused the worry. And if this was not enough, consumer prices in Singapore declined in February for 16 months in a row. So, the authority had to react to arrest the downtrend and revive this export-centric economy. The move instantly lowered the value of Singapore dollar which recorded the biggest plunge in eight months. Many analysts are speculating further policy easing given the dour economic scenario. Market Impact Though Singaporean stocks and the related ETFs have surged so far this year, the recent central bank comments point to the fact that the economy is reeling under pressure. China Renminbi devaluation and the recent weakness in the U.S. dollar also acted as headwinds to the Singaporean currency. Export-centric Asian economies like Singapore were thus forced to depreciate their currencies to stave off competitive pressure (probably) and rev up their exports while growth issues in China marred investing prospects of countries with close trade ties. However, the present situation is a bit dicey with the monetary easing opening room for growth while submissive central bank comments making investors wary. So, it is better to stay on the sidelines at the current level, wait for some definite improvement and obviously better entry points. The large-cap fund covering this economy’s equity market – iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (NYSEARCA: EWS ) – had a solid stretch in the last three-month period (as of April 14, 2016) gaining 16.9%. It has a Zacks ETF Rank #3 (Hold). We have briefly highlighted the ETF tracking the country below. EWS in Focus EWS is easily the most popular Singapore ETF on the market as it has about $550 million in AUM and an average daily volume of 1.8 million shares a day. The product charges 47 basis points a year from investors. With 28 stocks in its basket, this fund from iShares puts more than 50% of its total assets in the top five holdings, suggesting higher concentration risks. The financial sector actually makes up roughly half of the portfolio, leaving around 18% for industrials followed by 14.5% for telecommunication. EWS pays a solid yield of 4.06% annually (as of April 14, 2016), implying that it may be an income pick if payout levels hold. Original Post

Healthcare Stocks Can Heal From Pricing Scares

By James T. Tierney, Jr. Click to enlarge Fears of price controls for drugs and the crisis at Valeant Pharmaceuticals have infected the US healthcare sector. But we believe that the sector isn’t fatally ill and that investors can still find companies that offer solid growth potential. During the first quarter, healthcare was the worst-performing sector in the S&P 500 Index, falling by 5.5%, compared to the market’s 1.3% gain. At the same time, the iShares NASDAQ Biotechnology Index dropped by more than 20%. Price Controls: Fact and Fiction So what happened? Let’s start with the comical explanations. The presidential election cycle continues to be a source of peculiar promises. Donald Trump surprised investors on February 7 by saying that he would negotiate $300 billion of price concessions for the US government from drug companies. But the math doesn’t quite add up; total industry revenues from federal spending were only $143 billion in 2014. That didn’t stop the headlines, which spooked investors. Some concerns were real. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced a proposed rule that would change how they pay for drugs that are not self-administered. There will be a demonstration project to assess the impact of the proposed changes starting later this year, and it will probably run for a couple of years. The initial plan involves reimbursement changes for the providers (hospitals and physicians), rather than changes for the drug companies themselves. These proposals have raised concerns that drug-price controls may be introduced at some point. In our view, the repeated price-control scares are a red herring. Investors need to focus on companies with products that can deliver meaningful benefits for patients. Those that can’t meet these conditions will have a challenged future—price controls or not. Growth Stocks Lagged Market rotation was also a driver of underperformance for the healthcare sector in the first quarter. Generally speaking, investors sold last year’s winners such as Internet stocks and biotech companies, and bought the underperformers, including utilities and energy. In addition, value-related industries in the US market performed better than growth-oriented sectors like healthcare. But style winds can be deceiving. While we understand why more economically exposed cyclical sectors bounced back strongly as recession fears faded, in reality, the world is still in a slow-growth mode. So don’t expect all boats to rise—and growth will likely still be scarce. In these conditions, a sector like healthcare should be well positioned over time, given global demographic trends, as people are living longer and tend to need more pharmaceutical products as they get older. In addition, untapped treatment areas such as cancer and Alzheimer’s disease hold long-term promise for companies that can crack the code and discover effective treatments. Valeant Crisis Shakes Industry Against this messy backdrop, the troubles at Valeant Pharmaceuticals (NYSE: VRX ) have shaken the industry. Valeant’s controversial business model was driven by acquisitions, cost cuts and aggressive price increases. This year, the company’s shares have tumbled more than 65% amid a series of scandals that put it in the eye of the drug-pricing storm, with company executives being called upon to testify before a Senate and House of Representatives committee. Valeant’s high debt levels have raised fears of default, after the company missed its filing deadline for its 10-K report. The most surprising thing about Valeant’s predicament is how the fallout has spread over the rest of the healthcare industry. The increased focus on drug pricing—and negative sentiment around acquisitions—has been more profound than expected. We believe that this fallout will eventually diminish, and quality companies will prosper again, but the rebound will take time. Prescription for Investing Success So what should investors do? Don’t give up on healthcare stocks. It’s very easy to get distracted by the intense noise across the industry. But healthcare stocks offer equity investors defensive positioning and solid growth potential, even in a tough global economy. Companies with solid fundamentals that aren’t really vulnerable to recent developments can be found. Equity investors should focus on identifying companies with solid earnings growth potential and drugs that offer a differentiated and meaningful medical benefit. It’s also important to make sure that drug-pricing structures are in line with the benefit delivered by the product, and that the company’s business model is based on volume growth rather than aggressive price increases. We believe that these guidelines are a prescription for success in the healthcare sector—where many stocks are currently on sale. The views expressed herein do not constitute research, investment advice or trade recommendations and do not necessarily represent the views of all AB portfolio-management teams.