A potential advantage of Dollar Cost Averaging (DCA) versus Lump Sum investing is that it may benefit “smaller” investors. That is, individuals without extensive investment portfolios nor having excess cash on hand to invest 100% on day 1. While Lump Sum may theoretically provide better performance, the reality is that investors tend not to be able to invest everything up front.
You are talking to your local golf pro and she mentions a great stock to invest in. Do you have $5000 or $10,000 sitting in your bank account to immediately purchase shares?
Or, is your investment portfolio of sufficient size and diversity that you can quickly sell one of your underperforming holdings to invest in this new opportunity?
If the answers are “not really”, you are a smaller investor.
If I look at the RRSP bank-loan business in February each year, very few investors have excess cash available for purchasing new investments. Small investors are the norm, not the exception.
“So Lump Sum may not be practical for most investors?”
Yes. At least in the way most studies compare Lump Sum to DCA.
Studies tend to compare buying 100% of an asset on (say) January 1, 2018 versus buying in equal portions over (say) 24 months. Maybe that is $12,000 up front versus $2000 very second month for two years. In those studies Lump Sum tends to win out.
However, most investors do not have $12,000 sitting there just waiting to be invested. If you need to save for 6-9 months before being able to invest, you should factor that into the calculations.
There is also the opportunity cost in what you did with your finances during that two year period. Did you borrow to be able to buy 100% on day 1? Did you forgo other opportunities or incur other costs, just to have the $12,000 available? What about the lost return on any assets you liquidated to invest?
Might it have been better on your life to invest $1000 per month or $2000 bi-monthly over two years?
“How does DCA and behavioural finance impact the ‘smaller’ investor?”
We will also discuss this in future episodes. As DCA is very much related to investor behaviour.
DCA promotes good investing practice, especially for investors with limited capital. If investors use DCA, they may begin to make automatic deposits on periodic bases. If you consistently invest $200 a month, you may feel the financial pain for a month or three. But then it becomes like your internet, cell phone, rent, etc. You adjust in other lifestyle areas and do not notice the deductions.
Investing becomes more of a painless process. Rather than scrambling to find lump sums to invest.
“Can I actually invest with $200 per month?”
Maybe. Maybe not. It depends on the investments.
DCA is well suited to passive investing. If you buy index mutual funds, you should not pay transaction costs. And most fund companies allow for subsequent purchases in very low dollar amounts. Perhaps $500 or $1000 minimum on the initial investment, with subsequent investments as low as $50 or $100.
If you purchase exchange traded funds (ETFs), they may have lower annual costs than mutual funds. Not always. But often. However, you will pay a (say) $9.99 broker transaction fee on every purchase. If you are investing $100 at a time, you do not want to pay $10 in broker fees.
To reduce costs, you can store your periodic deposits in your investment account. Then purchase when you have a critical mass. Or, there may be so-called “no-transaction fee” ETFs available from your online broker. That eliminates the fee to buy or sell. Though, there are potential pitfalls with these “no-transaction fee” offerings.
For more information on this overall topic, please read “Investors and Dollar Cost Averaging”. We will also discuss how DCA promotes investing consistency, discipline, diversity, and quality, in the coming episodes. Topics that are crucial for any investor, but especially those with limited capital.
In Episode 44, it seemed that Lump Sum investing is superior to Dollar Cost Averaging (DCA). One aspect was the ability to actively time asset and market fluctuations under a Lump Sum approach. However, DCA does help investors to smooth market volatility and better manage investment risk in their portfolios.
Smoothing market volatility versus actively timing fluctuations. Which is more prudent for investors?
“In the long run, Lump Sum tends to outperform DCA. What about shorter time periods?”
That is a big problem with Lump Sum. Over short to medium time periods, there can be lengthy down markets or substantial price volatility. As we see in the video, short to medium may be 5-20 years before the markets recover to where they were post-crash.
Short given that the markets have been around for more than a century. But quite lengthy for the average investor if they invest 100% at a peak.
“Lump Sum may work in the longer term. But what about meeting my short term objectives?”
This is a related issue to the first point.
If you are 20-30 years old and your only investment objective is to accumulate wealth until retirement, you may have 40 plus years before beginning to draw down invested capital. That lengthy time frame allows younger investors to withstand market volatility, even if it is prolonged.
This is why younger investors tend to focus on higher risk (with higher return) assets.
But, even for younger investors, not all financial objectives have 40 year horizons. What about saving to buy a home in 3 years? Your child’s education in 10? Or, you are now in your late 50s and retirement needs may be 15 years away?
Had you bought into the Dow Jones Index in 1965, it would have taken until 1983 before it began to appreciate in value. With lots of volatility in that period.
The same is true in late 2008. Had you been fully invested back in 2000, all your gains would have been gone. And it would take until 2012 before recovering.
For those whose financial objectives matured in that time frame, they may not have experienced any positive returns.
“Why do professional asset managers not exploit short terms market peaks and troughs?”
That is the question.
We covered some of the data in “Episode 38: Investor Behaviour”. It is amazing how just a few days of missing market moves upwards can negatively impact portfolio growth. Even strong money managers will have difficulties exactly picking the “right” time to enter and exit markets.
Add in a variety of other factors. If you ever watch the “talking heads” on television. How often do they correctly predict market changes? Not as much as the non-professional believes they do.
Or behavioural factors, such as “herd mentality”, that may lock most analysts and money managers into a tight box. For example, 10 analysts cover a company. Consensus Earnings Per Share (EPS) for the next year is $5.00 per share and the consensus share price is $200. You see that 9 of the analysts are in a tight band, between $4.75 and 5.25 EPS. Yet the 10th analyst forecasts $1.00 EPS and a $40 share price.
Now, if analyst 10 is correct, a star may be born. Though analysts tend to only be as good as their last forecast. However, if analyst 10 is wrong, Starbucks may have a new barista.
So, what tends to happen in the real world, is that the analysts fall in line. Analyst 10 may forecast a little light, but will be much closer to the consensus. And what happens if the actual EPS is $1.00? Nothing. Analyst 10 just tells his boss that it was the company’s fault. His analysis was accurate. Just look at how 9 other analysts came up with pretty much the exact same conclusions. Bonuses for all!
And yes, there are a few analysts that have built a reputation for contrarian opinions. Marc “Dr. Doom” Faber is one who always comes to mind. But, it is often better to stay within the herd, rather than get picked off one by one for faulty predictions no one else agrees with.
“How can DCA help me manage my investment risk?”
DCA does exactly what is says. It builds an investment portfolio by dollar cost averaging over time.
You invest a fixed dollar amount on a periodic basis. Say, $1000 (plus $10 transaction fee) every 3 months.
Perhaps a stock trades at $100 on January 1, 2019. Your $1000 gets you 10 shares. April 1, the stock trades at $125. You can only purchase 8 shares. July 1, the stock trades at $90.91 and you buy 11 shares. October 1, it trades at $83.33 and you buy 12 shares. On December 31, the share price is $110.
Had you been able to invest $4000 in a single lump on January 1, you would have 40 shares with a value of $4400. For a nice gain of 10%.
Had you used DCA, you would have bought proportionately fewer shares in up markets and more shares while they were “on sale” in a down. Under DCA, you would have 41 shares instead of 40 at year end.
A simple example. In an up market, under DCA you would have less than 40 shares. Regardless, it does help smooth out asset volatility (i.e., investment risk).
From the data in the video, you can see markets (nor assets) seldom appreciate in a straight line. Smoothing out market volatility may be more prudent than trying to actively time market fluctuations.
For a little more information on this sub-topic, please refer to “Why Use Dollar Cost Averaging?”. We will also flesh out how DCA helps manage portfolio risk in subsequent episodes.
Another issue is funding. In the real world, few investors have cash sitting around on January 1 to finance an initial lump sum investment. That lack of ready capital is also a potential positive for DCA. Something we will discuss in “Episode 46: DCA: ‘Smaller’ Investors”.
What are the advantages of a Lump Sum investment strategy versus Dollar Cost Averaging (DCA)? A comparison of long-term asset performance, the ability to actively time markets, and transaction fees.
“Assets appreciate over time. So the sooner I invest, the better. Right?”
Yes, investable assets have historically appreciated over the long run. That is a big argument for Lump Sum. You invest 100% on day one, then let the wealth accumulate.
Under a DCA strategy, you may spread out your purchases over many months. The less time you own the asset, the less time it can grow.
Of course, in the short to medium term, markets do experience significant volatility. Which may temper the benefits of investing everything up front.
“Is Lump Sum investing better for investors who like to actively time markets?”
Yes. In the short to medium term, financial markets can be quite volatile. If you possess the market timing skills to exit at short term peaks and reinvest at the troughs, then lump sum works very well.
Of course, the inability for professional money managers to accurately time markets is a key factor in their habitual underperformance versus benchmarks.
We discussed this issue in “Episode 38: Investor Behavior”. Even being out of the market for only the 5 or 30 best days out of 13,870, had a substantial negative impact on asset growth.
“What about investment fees and expenses under a Lump Sum approach?”
Transaction costs tend to be lower under a Lump Sum strategy.
Perhaps you have $12,000. With Lump Sum, you invest everything at once. Most online brokers today charge flat fees, regardless of volume traded. That $12,000 invested in 1200 shares of ABC will cost you (say) $10 in transaction fees.
However, if you spread that purchase equally over 12 months, using DCA at $1000 each month, then you will pay $120 in fees. If you want to purchase $500 monthly over 24 months, fees rise to $240. That can add up in a hurry, especially for smaller investors who may only be able to invest $100 each period.
“Why is there a debate on this?”
Good question.
In the long run, Lump Sum should outperform DCA. It may be preferable for active investors who like to time market fluctuations. And Lump Sum tends to have lower transaction costs, something that is important for investing success.
How do you build an efficient and effective investment portfolio? What type of investment accounts to open? Are there other methods to build wealth over time outside your own accounts? What is the “Lump Sum versus Dollar Cost Averaging” debate?
To date, we have covered investor profiles and how they drive the target asset allocation. We have also reviewed the asset classes, different types of investment options, and whether to actively manage your assets or not. We can now take all that knowledge and begin to construct an investment portfolio.
In Episode 43, we consider the following questions:
“What type of investment accounts should I open and where?”
We discuss where you should maintain your investment accounts.
With your current financial institution, where you have your chequing account? Should you consider a speciality or independent brokerage house? Or with a mutual fund company?
“What about tax-efficient accounts?”
We look at the differences between taxable and tax-efficient investment accounts.
For most investors, annual and cumulative contribution limits are often high enough that taxable accounts are not needed. But that will vary between jurisdictions.
“Will I need a margin account?”
There are pros and cons to setting up margin accounts versus cash accounts.
A margin account allows you to leverage your portfolio. In an up market, leverage can be useful as it boosts returns. However, in a down market, or where the investment in question declines in value, that can create problems.
“What other investment options may exist?”
Often, employers provide employee pension plans. These may be defined benefit, where upon retirement you receive predetermined periodic payments from the pension plan. Or defined contribution, where the employer (and perhaps employee, as well) makes periodic monetary contributions into the plan. Upon retirement, the employee receives the value of the total contributions and investment return growth.
Employers may offer Employee Stock Purchase Plans (ESPP). Or stock options to key employees.
You may be able to invest directly with public companies, with no transaction costs. Direct Stock Purchase Plans (DSPP), convertible assets, warrants, and options, are a few examples.
Finally, there are often Dividend Reinvestment Plans (DRIP) for investments you acquire. The DRIPs allow investors to automatically reinvest any distributions (e.g., dividends) into the investment, rather than receiving cash.
There are many reasons to invest utilizing a Dollar Cost Averaging (DCA) approach.
However, for DCA to work well, you must invest in quality assets.
I have mentioned this in prior DCA posts, but want to emphasize it separately.
Long-Term Quality, Quality, Quality
Did I say quality?
You need to identify high quality assets with above average long-term growth potential.
Then, during down cycles, you will be buying at sale prices with DCA.
But if you invest in poor quality assets, falling prices may not indicate a sale. Instead, they may be a harbinger of things to come. Things such as permanent price reductions, delistings, bankruptcies, etc. Things investors strive to avoid.
DCA is a good strategy for quality assets.
For inferior investments, it may lead you to throw good money after bad.
Quality – An Elusive Concept
“What am I reading this for?” I hear you ask. “I need to learn how to identify quality!”
Yes, I realize that if you knew how to separate the investment wheat from the chaff, you would already be a millionaire and have no need for wealth management blog posts.
And therein lies maybe the number one problem in investing.
How to find quality assets and avoid the dross.
Not an easy thing to do for a variety of reasons, including: efficiency of financial markets; sheer number of analysts and investment researchers; expertise of the average investor versus a trained professional; differing access to information between amateurs and professionals; time available for the average investor to research.
For DCA, I suggest you stick with ready-made diversified assets that provide some long-term safeguards against asset specific risks. Mutual fund and exchange traded funds (ETFs) are my favourite options for cost-effective diversification.
Yes, each fund will have a few dogs. But they will also have a few superstars and a host of average performers which will nicely offset the losers.
If you already have accumulated a fair bit of wealth, you can create your own diversified portfolio. There are plenty of solid companies or assets out there that can fit nicely into a portfolio. But you will need to do more research and monitoring than with investing in funds.
Some assets provide much better portfolio risk reduction benefits than others. Building an efficient and effective overall portfolio is more important than the individual investments held within. Be sure to spend time understanding diversification. Proper diversification will help you create a strong portfolio.
Quality – An Ever Changing Concept
About 125 years ago, I could have given you the name of a strong industry in which to invest. No major competition, long history of earnings, no current threats in sight. Sounds to me like a quality industry to invest in. And it was.
Then along came Benz, Daimler, Ford, etal., and the horse and buggy industry went the way of, well, the horse and buggy.
I remember the Beta versus VHS video tape battles. Beta was deemed superior in quality, but VHS won the war. Then came along dvds and VHS video tapes joined the 8-Track on the scrap heap. Or what about the revolutionary Sony Walkman? A great money maker for Sony. Then came the iPod, which changed the game.
The world is not static. It is constantly in flux.
What was a quality product today, may not be tomorrow.
So many examples in recent history. Look at the timeline of Eastman Kodak. Began in 1888. Joined the Dow Jones 30 in 1930. Remained there for 74 years. A dominant and innovative company. “By 1976, 85% of all film cameras and 90% of all film sold in the US was Kodak.” However, by 2004, falling fortunes saw it removed from the Dow 30. In 2012, Kodak filed for bankruptcy.
What was an inferior company today may catch fire tomorrow.
For example, in 19xx, ABC developed a new product. Not a success. The first quarter of the next year ABC posted its first quarterly loss and laid off 20% of their employees. In April, the co-founder of ABC was removed from all operational involvement with ABC. In the year after the co-founder’s departure, ABC traded in the USD 15-20 range. That compared quite unfavourably to the USD 25-30 range it had traded at since it opened in September 19xx.
Not a good company to invest in. Corporate losses, large layoffs, founder ousted, share price down 33-50%.
A dog to avoid.
But what if I add four additional bits of information?
The years were late 1984, early 1985. The company, Apple. The product, the Macintosh. The co-founder, Steve Jobs.
In June 2019, Apple is trading in the USD 195 range. Nice growth from USD 15-20 in mid-1985.
But wait, like a late night infomercial, there is more.
Since 1985, there have been 4 stock splits.
Say you invested USD 1600 on June 3, 1985 at USD 16.00 per share, you acquired 100 shares. An actual price that date.
As at June 10, 2019, adjusted for stock splits (but ignoring cash dividends paid or reinvested in additional shares), your USD 1600 investment grew to 5600 shares worth approximately USD 1,100,000 today.
Not a bad return on an inferior company when you invested in 1985. Not a bad return at all.
And yes, sadly for the majority of investors out there who missed the boat, that is a true story.
Unless you have the special skills to find the next Apple, hedge your bets. Invest in a variety of assets with funds. You may not get all the superstars, but you will avoid the dogs.
Equally important? Always bear in mind that quality can change over time. Eastman Kodak, less than 50 years ago, was seen as a dominant, innovative, leading company. Much like Apple is viewed today.
I have mentioned this a few times in different posts. Index funds see changes in their portfolios over time. As previously strong companies fade, emerging companies replace them in the index.
In 2004, the Dow 30 removed Eastman Kodak, AT&T Corporation, and International Paper from the index. Kodak joined the Dow in 1930. AT&T in 1916. International Paper in 1956. Long time participants in an index of only 30 top companies. They were replaced by American International Group (AIG), Pfizer, and Verizon. AIG was then replaced by Kraft Foods in 2008, which in turn was replaced by UnitedHealth Group in 2012.
Even in an index of 30 companies, there can be significant shifts over time. Buying an index fund is not like owning the same company forever.
Quality Must Be Continually Monitored
As quality of an asset can change over time, you must review your portfolio on a periodic and consistent basis.
As an aside, the perceived quality can also change over time. Look at the major fluctuations in value of gold, residential real estate, oil over the last 10-20 years. Has the quality of the asset risen or fallen at various points of time? Or has the perception of value changed during those periods based on other factors?
Often perception becomes reality in the short-term, whether it makes sense or not. But over the longer run, the facts usually shine through.
We will consider portfolio monitoring later in detail.
Both for actual quality shifts as well as perceived changes.
For now, know that you must monitor your holdings to ensure that you do own superior products with long-term upside potential.
Under-performing assets must be assessed as to whether the poor results are temporary or permanent. If permanent, changes must must be made. If temporary or due to incorrect perceptions, perhaps there is the opportunity to increase your position at a discounted price.
Again, a little easier said than done.
Hopefully though, I can pass on some tips to improve your assessments.
What To Do About Poor Quality
If investing in individual, non-diversified assets, you will likely acquire your share of under-performing investments. No one gets them all right.
You also run a risk with funds, especially if they are actively managed or in specialized sectors. But if you are trying to match a specific market using low cost index funds that adequately track the market, your risk of under-performing the benchmark is small.
Yet another reason to like passive investing in low-cost index funds.
There are tactics to deal with your losers. We will look at these down the road. Stop-loss orders, setting downside limits for reviews are two popular approaches.
I think that is all I want to say about DCA for the time being.
Next we will start to look at useful acquisition tactics for long-term success.