Tuesday, 2 February 2010

International diversification

I've recently added a pie chart to my portfolio page showing the breakdown internationally and (within the UK) the split between shares and bonds. At the moment it looks like this:











The UK represents a scarily large proportion of that pie, given that I'm attempting to be well diversified. But appearances can be deceptive. I've rated shares like GlaxoSmithKline, British American Tobacco and Diageo as "UK shares" just because they are listed in London. But in fact the huge majority of their revenue comes from abroad. So even if the UK economy tanked, these companies would still do well.

I've attempted to come up with a more accurate picture by dividing up the UK shares according to the source of their revenue, and then allocating that to the other slices of the chart. The result looks much healthier:











Although this looks like I'm now rather overweight in UK bonds, that is no bad thing while I still have a mortgage denominated in sterling. It suggests a good home for my next investment is in Asia or Emerging Markets.

Monday, 1 February 2010

Inflation

Today I'm going to talk a bit about inflation. I was recently asked whether I thought investing in gold is a good hedge against inflation. In short, my answer is "yes, but I think there are better alternatives". I'll try to cover as many alternative approaches as I can here, and work out roughly what return an investor might expect, and what risks they might run. As with everything on this blog, this is all my own opinion, it's not intended as investment advice, and you should use it at your own risk.

In my examples I'm going to work out the expected return for a taxpayer paying tax at 20%, assuming two different rates of inflation: 3% (which is pretty much what I expect) and 8% (as a reasonably plausible worst-case scenario).

Physical cash
I'll start with an option which is almost certainly not smart: holding physical cash. Under the mattress for instance. You earn no interest, but there are no associated costs. Every £1 of your money will still be there in 10 years time, but inflation will have reduced its purchasing power. Assuming 3% inflation per year, your £1 will only be worth 74p in real terms. Your annual real return (i.e. after inflation) using this method is minus RPI.

Expected real return: (0 - RPI) e.g. -3% / -8%
Risk: moderate (theft, fire)
Flexibility: very high

UK-based Savings account
The best-buy savings accounts tend to pay an interest rate roughly equal to the Bank of England base rate. If you put your money in a UK-based savings account, and switch accounts regularly to take advantage of the best rate, you can probably earn a return roughly equal to the base rate.

But would that be more or less than the rate of inflation? In normal circumstances you would expect the BoE base rate to exceed the rate of inflation. Most people would rather consume goods today, rather than next year. The rate of interest is the reward for delaying consumption. If the rate of interest is lower than the rate of inflation, then in real terms the interest rate is negative - people are being penalized for delaying consumption. That might prevail for a period, but over the long run you would expect the real interest rate to be positive. In recent times the real interest rate has been approximately 2%.

Tax muddies the water here. If the rate of inflation is 8%, the base rate is 10% (and you earn this in a savings account), then your real return is +2%. But if you pay tax at 20%, then your real return is zero.

Expected real return: ((BaseRate * (1 - TaxRate)) - RPI) e.g. 1% / 0%.
Risk: Low. zero capital risk (assuming you spread your money around enough to benefit from the government savings guarantee) but you run the risk that the BaseRate may fall below RPI, or that banks may pay less than the BaseRate on their savings.
Flexibility: very high

UK gilts
Buying government gilts gives you an almost identical return to a UK savings account. If you stick to short-dated gilts there is minimal price risk, and it removes the risk that you might not find a savings account paying the BoE base risk. On the other hand, buying and selling is slightly harder than just withdrawing cash from your account.

Expected real return: ((BaseRate * (1 - TaxRate)) - RPI) e.g. 1% / 0%.
Risk: Zero.
Flexibility: High

NS&I savings bond
National Savings and Investments offer a 3-year and 5-year index linked savings bond, paying (RPI + 1)% - and it is tax free.

Expected real return: 1% in all circumstances e.g. 1% / 1%
Risk: Zero (guaranteed by government)
Flexibility: Low. Your cash is tied up for at least 3 years.

Gold
Gold is an interesting case. Over the very long term you would expect it to track inflation, but over the short run the price is extremely volatile. There are also costs associated with it - holding physical gold involves significant dealing costs, and even holding it through an Exchange Traded Fund will usually incur an annual charge of 0.4%. Capital gains are also subject to tax unless you hold physical gold that is legal tender in the UK (e.g. gold sovereigns).

Expected real return: (0 - fees - tax) e.g. -0.4% / -0.4% (assuming you keep below the threshold for paying capital gains tax and hold it through an ETF.
Risk: High. The gold price is extremely volatile.
Flexibility: High. If you hold through an ETF you can sell some of your shares at any time to realise cash.

Sterling corporate bonds
Corporate bonds will typically pay a rate of return higher than the BoE base rate. An investment grade corporate bond might pay around 1% more than base rate. The tax situation and overall return is similar to that of a savings account, but there is greater risk (companies can default on their debts, although if you hold high-quality bonds that is extremely rare - Lehman Brothers is the only recent example that springs to mind). There is also greater volatility if you hold longer-dated bonds, since these will fluctuate according to economic circumstances.

Expected real return: (((BaseRate + 1) * (1 - TaxRate)) - RPI) e.g. 1.8% / 0.8%.
Risk: Moderate. Your capital is at risk (albeit quite a low risk) and there can be short-term fluctuation in bond prices. There is also the risk that bond yields may fall below inflation.
Flexibility: High. You can sell your bonds at any time.

Foreign currency savings, gilts, bonds
I'm not going to cover all of these in any great detail. Anything denominated in a foreign currency brings the serious disadvantage of currency risk. Theoretically, over the long term, exchange rates should be determined by the relative rates of inflation in two countries. Therefore, If inflation in the UK is 8%, and the rate in the US is 3%, then in one year the pound should fall by 5% against the dollar. However, investing your money in the US should earn you a lower rate of interest, since you would expect the interest rate to be 5% lower in the US. So in theory these should cancel out, and you will be no better or worse off investing abroad. In practice, however, exchange rates fluctuate far more than this, and therefore you are exposing yourself to substantial currency risk for (in theory) no greater rate of return.

Expected real rate of return: identical to similar UK investment.
Risk: High. Exchange rates can be very volatile.
Flexibility: High.

Inflation-linked annuity
If you are at or close to retirement age, an annuity might be a sensible choice. Current inflation-linked annuity rates for a couple aged 65, with the payout to the surviving spouse reduced to two-thirds after the first spouse dies, are about 2.9%. You would then have to pay tax on that income, so that would equate to about 2.3%. You can try out other numbers here: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/tables/bespoke/Annuities.

Expected real rate of return: n/a since capital is used up, but pays a post-tax income of ~2.3%.
Risk: Low.
Flexibility: Zero.

Shares
Finally, lets get onto shares. To predict the return from shares you have to make a lot of assumptions, but here goes:

  • Let's assume that publicly listed companies form a roughly static percentage of the total economy.
  • Let's assume that profit margins at publicly listed companies are roughly static.
  • Let's assume that new capital investment in the stock market is negligible compared to the total market size (bit of a stretch).
  • Let's assume that the UK stock market is a reflection purely of the UK economy (this is simply wrong, because it is very diversified internationally).

At the moment you can earn a dividend yield of about 3.5% on the FTSE100. If the assumptions above hold true, then the earnings of the FTSE100 should increase at a rate of (inflation + GDP growth)%. The real rate of return to the shareholder is therefore GDP-growth + dividend-yield - tax. There is no dividend tax for a basic rate taxpayer, and provided you keep below the capital gains threshold, your return is therefore GDP-growth + dividend-yield.

Expected real rate of return: GDP-growth + dividend-yield, e.g. 6% / 6% (assuming 2.5% GDP growth)
Risk: High. Share prices are very volatile.
Flexibility: High. You can cash in shares at any time.

Summary
There are clearly a lot of choices here, and different options suit different people, but in my opinion there are some options that are inferior in every respect. I rate gold as one of these, and can see no circumstances in which it would be preferable to hold gold rather than an NS&I Savings Bond (unless you are speculating rather than investing).

The investments I rate as worthwhile are:

  • UK savings account, for maximum flexibility while still roughly keeping pace with inflation. If banks stop offering such generous rates you could switch into short-dated gilts.
  • NS&I Savings bond, for a guaranteed above-inflation return, with no risk and no tax, at the expense of flexibility.
  • Inflation-linked annuity, if you are of retirement age, cannot afford the risk associated with shares, and are willing to sacrifice capital for an inflation-linked income.
  • Shares, if you can afford to tie up your funds for the long term (at least 5 years) and have the temperament to ride out the volatility.

Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Shareworld and I part company

After 6 weeks or so of writing for shareworld we've agreed it isn't really working out, and therefore I'm returning to this blog as the main repository for my investment thoughts.

One thing I did do to shareworld which I think needs a permanent repository is an at-a-glance portfolio page. I've therefore created one here:
http://www.danieltebbutt.com/portfolio.html
I'll be updating this regularly - it's autogenerated from my portfolio tracking script, so I can re-publish it at the press of a button.

Wednesday, 20 January 2010

Berkshire Hathaway convinces me again

After looking at a whole bunch of US shares, I've returned to the only one I currently hold: Berkshire Hathaway. I still think it's cheap, I still think it's a great company, and I see no reason to go elsewhere. I doubled my holding today, making Berkshire almost 17% of my portfolio.

Full details here:
http://www.shareworld.co.uk/index.php/dan/articles-2/berkshire-hathaway.html

Saturday, 16 January 2010

US shares - updated

In August I looked at a handful of US shares to see what I might like to invest in once my US$ exposure vanished. That time has now come, and from now on I am ready, willing, and able to invest in US shares. If they're cheap, that is.

In August I thought fair value for the S&P 500 was 900, and it's since risen from 1000 to 1136. At that sort of price I need to be very selective. Every share I looked at in August has increased - some more than others. Amazon seems to be the best performer, rising 50%, and I thought that was ludicrously expensive to start with!

In August I thought Google, Amazon and Coca-Cola were all over-valued - they've only got more so.

I thought Microsoft and McDonalds were cheap, and they've since recovered to what I consider fair value.

I thought GE and Johnson & Johnson were cheap, and they remain so (although they're pricier than they were).

I'll be taking a closer look at some of these in the next few weeks. Johnson & Johnson doesn't fit particularly well in my portfolio, since I already hold GlaxoSmithKline. Microsoft and McDonalds offer a bit more variety. It's difficult to say whether General Electric fits well or not, since it's already so diversified.

Friday, 15 January 2010

Zirax possible de-listing

I must say I'm feeling pretty smug about getting out of Zirax at 5.75p (even though it crystallised a 50% loss). On Wednesday they announced that their largest shareholder (M. Baranov, who directly or indirectly controls 67.2% of the company) has requested a general meeting on which to vote on de-listing from AIM:
http://www.investegate.co.uk/Article.aspx?id=201001130700064528F

In order for the motion to be carried, it needs the consent of 75% of the votes cast at the general meeting. This is AIM rule 41 (you can see all the AIM rules here: http://www.londonstockexchange.com/companies-and-advisors/aim/documents/aim-rules-for-companies.pdf). Note that is 75% of the votes cast, not the total voting rights - if 11% of the shareholders don't bother to vote, then Baranov can get the motion passed purely based on his own holdings.

Zirax's major shareholders (from the Zirax website: http://zirax.com/major-shareholders.html) account for 90.2% of the voting rights, and I think we can assume all of these will exercise a vote, so Baranov will need some support. But I can't imagine he would ask for a general meeting without knowing which way the vote will go - so I assume he has support from Andosov, Pennygold or Metropol, each of which on their own would probably be enough to swing the vote his way.

I have no desire to hold shares in an unlisted company (especially one with Zirax's history of financial mismanagement) so I'm glad I'm no longer a shareholder. If I was, I guess I'd be selling out right now at about 2p.

Further shareworld articles

So far in January I've written 3 further articles for Shareworld.

A look at the supermarket sector, keeping an eye on whether my investment in Tesco remains a sensible hold.
http://www.shareworld.co.uk/index.php/dan/articles-2/supermarkets.html
I plan to continue holding Tesco shares, and I'm debating adding a few more to the pile.

A look at Next's share buybacks, where they appear to have unerringly purchased their own shares at the wrong time over the last 3 years.
http://www.shareworld.co.uk/index.php/dan/articles-2/next-share-buybacks.html
Since I wrote the article they've spent another £45m buying 2.2m shares and reducing the share capital of the company by a further 1%.

A review of my portfolio performance over the last two year vs the FTSE 100, taking account of sharepicking, market timing, yield and volatility. Thus far I'm modestly outpeforming on all counts - but 2 years is far too short a time to draw any meaningful conclusions, so the jury is still out on whether I'm skilful or just lucky.
http://www.shareworld.co.uk/index.php/dan/articles-2/2008-2009-review.html