By Brett Carson | U.S.News & World Report LP
Risk is an integral part of investing. Generally speaking, it is the
counterbalance to return. Although we hear many money managers and
advisors talk about "risk management," it is a rather ambiguous phrase.
Today,
risk and volatility
are often used interchangeably, which is an overly simplistic
definition promoted by academia. However, a
recent memo published by
Howard Marks, the Chairman of Oaktree Capital Management, does a
fantastic job at providing a more accurate description.
Marks may not be familiar to the average investor but he is highly
respected among the world's best money managers, including Warren
Buffett. In short, risk carries many different forms and cannot be
completely quantified. Here are a few key points I took from his memo,
titled, "Risk Revisited."
1. Volatility is not risk. Academia has defined
risk as volatility because it can be measured. It is a foundational
concept underlying the majority of financial models. Stocks are often
assessed using their betas, or their fluctuations, in relationship to
the market. In fact, beta has become perversely ubiquitous with risk.
This fallacy often lulls investors into a false sense of security and
is usually coupled with a woeful lack of understanding of risk. For
example, the utility sector's beta is about half that of the Standard
& Poor's 500 index (depending on the time frame measured). It would
be a grave mistake to assume that by purchasing a utility, one is
exposed to half of the risk of the market.
2. Risk is the potential to lose money permanently. Continuing
with the utility company example, there are a plethora of risks
associated with stocks. Volatility may provide a modicum of insight into
the overall risks. However, it dupes the investor by failing to account
for anything company specific. If the market were to drop 10 percent
because of a
geopolitical conflict, volatility or beta might do an admirable job of forecasting the utility company to decline roughly 5 percent.
Yet, it fails to predict the impact falling natural gas prices or a
change in legislation may have on any particular company. Additionally,
if the entire market declines from a global macro event
, capital is not
permanently lost. A patient investor can usually wait for a recovery.
Only when you sell the investment do you realize an actual loss. When
something fundamentally alters a company's business, the risk has the
potential to be permanent.
Think about what the iPhone did to BlackBerry or what the iPad has
done to personal computers, or PCs. Beta, volatility and even crystal
balls failed to predict these fundamental shifts.
3. Risk is necessary. Attempts to predict the
future will most often lead to failure. However, an investor can
understand how the risks relate to each company without necessarily
predicting the exact outcome. Great investors are astute at thinking of a
range of possible outcomes and selecting investments that have more
ways to win than lose.
If I own a company that sells natural gas, I have to consider the
range of outcomes if gas prices will rise, fall, or remain flat over
coming years. Clearly, there is risk should prices fall or even stay
flat. However, if I feel the stock is appropriately accounting for this
risk, and I can envision a number of paths toward higher prices in the
future, my downside could be limited and potential reward attractive. As
the popular adage goes, "
There is no such thing as a free lunch." Smart
investors take on a measured amount of risks, which cannot be captured
by a stock's historical volatility.
4. Nobody knows the unknown, but some investors don't know this. If beta is a reasonable indication of
market risk,
then one can reasonably estimate performance given a forecast of the
overall market. However, most investors realize this is a loser's game,
as nobody knows where the market will be in the near and long term.
Unlike the earlier gas price example, there are an infinite number of
interconnected and complex unknowns or "black swans" that could impact
the market. These could be wars, terrorist attacks and disease
epidemics, among other possibilities. None of these risks can be
captured by historical volatility metrics like beta.
5. Prudent acceptance of risk is superior to shunning the unknown. Given
the widespread reliance on beta as a measurement of risk, modern
portfolio theorists have concluded that certain asset classes and
subsets of asset classes offer higher returns, while others offer more
safety. Eugene Fama and Kenneth French famously touted their
three-factor model used to predict expected returns while they were both
professors at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business.
Small-cap stocks are considered risky and thought to offer long-term
returns in excess of safer large-cap stocks. If this theory were
accurate, though, shouldn't every investor allocate a large
portion of a portfolio to small caps?
Of course, the answer is "No." Return is not guaranteed. It is merely
possible. A smaller company may face more risks than a larger company,
none of which can be precisely known. If the smaller company
successfully mitigates those risks while growing their business, the
investor ought to be more handsomely rewarded. Regardless of the
expected return, the risks remain immeasurable and the outcomes
unknowable.
Some investors are highly conservative and often shun risk. However,
this leaves an investor vulnerable to the risk of missed opportunities.
Just as it would be imprudent to place all of one's eggs in the
proverbial
small-cap
basket, it would be a mistake to shun risk all together. A far more
logical approach is to assess the returns needed by the individual and
expose the portfolio to risks the investor can tolerate.
Risk must be taken or there will be no return. If an investor has a
short time horizon, they should wish to avoid illiquidity risk, but they
may be comfortable with leverage risk or credit risk. On the other
hand, just because
an investor has a high risk tolerance does not mean
it is smart to take unnecessary risk. The ideal portfolio manager should
have a ceaseless desire to understand the risks facing his or her
investments, while simultaneously acknowledging he or she can only be
sure the future is unknown.
Posts
Now do you think you may have made a mistake?