On GameStop and other hyped investments and specifically the military.

A certain investment on everyone’s lips around the office. A “sure bet” to make 10x your money. News picking it up everywhere and social media buzzing on how much everyone has made (or is going to!). No, I’m not talking about GameStop going “to Mars”, I am talking about the crypto-currency madness that was the end of ’17 and the beginning of ’18. And despite making some people a lot of money, it left just as many (and perhaps more) losing out on thousands.

Fast forward to 2020 and the COVID crash. The initial numbers were staggering, and with the elderly seemingly far more effected, I started hearing people talking about perhaps the largest transfer of wealth in history. Oil futures hit negative numbers and people piled into Robinhood for more “sure bets” that the market will collapse soon. People were talking nonstop about buying puts on some industries and calls on others, but a month or so after, it all was quiet as the market largely resumed what it was doing in regards to many industries. Those that screamed loudest about the next “sure thing” nonstop just a day ago would suddenly not engage me in conversations about investing at all. Just like the time period above, some active investors made money and many did not.

So, 2021 is upon us and we are off to yet another “sure bet” as history keeps repeating itself, this time with GameStop, BlackBerry, AMC, and a few others. Another “sure thing” and “we’re all going to be rich!” mixed in with some “screw Wall Street!” sentiment and pictures of people making money, quickly followed by outrage and frustration of certain trading apps refusing trades and seeing plenty of pictures and stories of people buying at $450+ the other day and panic selling around $300 as it closed the week at ~$310 after hours. I actually just finished reading this post from someone who lost $7 MILLION, his family, house, everything… went to rehab and is now back to playing with options:

All of this, to me, is a fascinating look on the psychology of money and a time where I just have to put in my two cents. It’s not new that people largely want instant gratification over the long term slog. It’s witnessed in diets, finances, substance use and abuse, social media (ping! here comes the dopamine), and many other facets of our lives. On top of instant gratification is the term that is getting more and more familiar – FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out). None of this has really been new in the world, but there is a particular statistic that pops up with FOMO. The people affected by FOMO most are by far millennials, who experience and let it dictate their life in some way at a staggering ~70% from the various surveys that have been done in the last decade!

So what does any of this have to do with the military?

The military force is overwhelmingly filled with millennials, especially at the “first line supervisor” levels who are in a position to be extremely influential to their troops. Keep in mind that many times these troops are seeing absolute independence for the first time in their lives and a paycheck that is 100% disposable income as the food/housing requirements are covered by the government. So all in all, you have the perfect storm of young adults that are more impulsive and are usually under-educated in finances, immediate leadership that is still just as impulsive AND has a proven response to FOMO (and is likely under-educated in finances as well), money to burn, and the desire for instant gratification.

It has been a little sad watching people throw money into this “cause” with no research at all. To me though, it is even MORE upsetting that these same people often talk up how they doubled their entirety of savings (typically somewhere around a $1K investment) and now they can do X, Y, Z that they could not do before. I even heard someone go on a 10 minute+ rant about the situation where Robinhood restricted trades and how he lost out on a “free $60” that you would think from how he went on, was a life or death situation for him. All this brings me to my final point…

I truly hope that nobody in the military in normal circumstances is out there in a position where $1-5K makes such a staggering difference in their lives, especially after they have been in a while. The military essentially gives us the NBA equivalent of a 3-1 lead when it comes to finances where outside of specific and awful situations, we got this in the bag! We don’t have to pay for any healthcare related expenses, get housing either provided or paid for, and have either a free food option on base, or money given to us specifically for food expenses. Our actual base pay is 100% discretionary and in nearly every locale beats the median income (after accounting for housing/food allowances, but NOT counting the free healthcare or tax free statuses of those “allowances”) as a 5-6 year E-5 – which is not a tough thing to achieve.

If you are going to be throwing money into something high risk like crypto, GME, and whatever else is inherently risky and speculative, make sure it is money you are 100% comfortable losing and teach those you supervise to be similarly conservative. Looking at this whole fiasco, I was actually tempted to join in after last weekend (when GME closed at approx $60), but seeing it jump to over $100 pre-market discouraged me from doing so. Even had I gone in with $1-2K of play money, I likely would have sold it after seeing 25%+ gains over a day. Had I held for any reason and had the luck to sell it off at the peak (of nearly 500) I would have turned my $2K into $10K – minus taxes. So what does this actually do for me long term? Well, personally, I’m somewhere between 10-14 years from my retirement and at a 7% increase, it would have turned to somewhere between $20-25K… nearly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. So please, do not miss the forest that is TSP/IRA maxing goals for the trees of a couple thousand dollars overnight.

International investing and why you should seriously consider it.

COVID-19 has put a lot of ‘active’ investors in interesting positions. In February and early March, I started hearing about people pulling money out of the market into cash/bonds and waiting for the big crash that has yet to occur for them. Many are still waiting to jump back in while the SP500 has nearly recovered from the initial drop at the end of February… Now I am not saying that the market will NOT crash again, but if you are doing monthly contributions to your TSP/Roth/other accounts, over time you
will statistically win out over trying to time the market.

After the drop, from March onward, chatter about gambling in options/”investing” in 1-2 week short positions has proliferated my space. From overhearing office discussions about what the next “sure winner” is, to Facebook posts about how NOW is the time to invest, followed by various Robin Hood referral links, these speculators popped up everywhere I looked.  It really reminded me of the crypto craze of ’17-18…and just like the crypto craze, these discussions died out as quickly as they started, with the market volatility absolutely destroying these self-proclaimed “active investors”.  On the flip side, many of us that continued with automatic contributions into the market have since come out ahead of where we were in February, but a lot of questions have now been popping up on what the current TSP fund balance should be as well as where new contribution money should go and ‘the market’ in general.

Because of that, today I want to talk about diversification – specifically in international stocks.  These are definitely part of ‘the total market’ and should be included in your portfolio in addition to various US only funds and indices. However, if you ask around the office, or even google search where you should invest, you will definitely see and hear the following advice:

“Just put it in an SP500 index mutual fund/ETF”
“Only the C/S funds matter for the TSP”
“International stocks are pointless, most US companies in the SP500 do overseas business anyways”
“The SP500 always outperforms international stocks”
“You don’t need the L fund because of its worthless exposure to international stocks”

I get it, we are working for the US government and, more specifically, the Department of Defense.  Patriotism is high and Europe/Asia/Africa are places we go to police instead of seeing them as viable economic options.  People look back at the last decade and see that, on average, developed markets have not fared as well as the US stocks and further cement that “home country bias” (yes, it’s a real investing term) in their heads.  However, that does not mean you should listen to these people! You should DEFINITELY consider investing in international stocks and equities.

To start, let’s put an end to the myth that the US companies do significant enough business overseas to ignore extra diversification.  Based on Morningstar data in 2018, the SP500 generated roughly 62% of their revenue in the US and thus 38% overseas.  Meanwhile, a broad ETF such as the Vanguard Total International Stock ETF generated 15% of their revenue in the US and a whopping 85% overseas – or a difference of 47%… That is HUGE!  Additionally, international stocks represent nearly 44% of the global market, so if you “diversify” entirely in the SP500, that is what you are leaving off the table. After seeing the above, Alex Bryan, a CFA and the director of passive strategies for North America from Morningstar, recommended the following last year:

“I think a small allocation of about a quarter to a third of your portfolio shouldn’t have a huge impact on the overall portfolio’s volatility because, even though that one piece of your portfolio might be a little bit more volatile, because international stocks aren’t perfectly correlated with U.S. stocks, the diversification benefits help offset that added volatility.” (1)

Although the SP500 HAS been quite profitable for the last 10 years, let’s jump into our time machine and take a look at the data from 2001-2010.

https://content.schwab.com/web/sip/long-term-benefits-of-global-diversification/1809_SIP_Performance_Chart-4.png

As you can tell, developed and especially emerging market stocks absolutely crushed the SP500 index with the former more than doubling your return, while emerging markets multiplied that same return 11.3 times over!

Furthermore, from 2000-2009, US stocks lost 33.75% while emerging markets gained 89.22%. (2)

If 2001-2010 is simply “too long ago” for you to care, consider the following data from 2005 to 2018:

https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/images/Viewpoints/II/int_investing_myths_2019_chart_1.jpg

The SP500 in the meantime returned the following: 

2005 – 4.91%. 2006 – 15.79%. 2007 – 5.49%. 2008 – (-37%). 2009 – 26.46%.
2010 – 15.06%. 2011 – 2.11%. 2012 – 16%. 2013 – 32.39%. 2014 – 13.69%.
2015 – 1.38%. 2016 – 11.96%. 2017 – 19.42%. 2018 – (-4.38%).  (3)

Even with the GREAT gains you see above, the SP500 was a loser every time compared to the top international markets of the same year. Naturally, picking the winner every time is a fool’s errand. If someone could do that consistently, they would likely be the richest person in the world!  However, this hopefully shows you that international investing is definitely not something to be ignored and by investing into international funds, you get a slice of that green, money pie. Let me say it again…

The SP500 was a loser every time compared to the top international markets of the same year.

Additionally, you can see that the periods between the US market outperforming international markets are very cyclical even going as far back as 1972: 

https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/images/Viewpoints/II/int_investing_myths_2019_chart_2.jpg

Fidelity (another investing powerhouse) recommends a range of 30-50% of exposure in international markets and finds that going back THIRTY years through 2019, the best stock markets have all been OUTSIDE of the US (4).  They have also mocked up a portfolio going as far back as 1950 through 2019 with their recommended 70 US/30 Intl portfolio, and you can see that the returns are the same as just the SP500 and suggests that international equity exposure may decrease portfolio risk over the long term:

1950 to 2019US PortfolioInternational PortfolioGlobally Balanced Portfolio 70% US/30% Int’l
Annualized returns11.30%10.30%11.30%
Standard deviation14.30%15.10%12.80%
Sharpe ratio0.490.400.55
Hypothetical “globally balanced portfolio” is rebalanced annually in 70% US and 30% foreign stocks. US equities: S&P 500 Total Return Index; Internationalequities: MSCI ACWI ex-USA Index. Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P., Fidelity Investments (AART), as of April 30, 2019. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. All indexes are unmanaged. Please see disclosures for index definitions.

A recent Vanguard piece from June of this year (5) showed their own “in-house” simulation (from data current as of March 2020) that suggests the global non-US annual equity returns will beat out US-only equity returns by roughly 3% for the next 10 years.  Of course this is by no means a crystal ball, but Vanguard is yet another heavy hitter in the financial world that encourages international investing.  Coincidentally, their research further supports that having a 20-50% international market exposure reduces volatility as well:

https://advisors.vanguard.com/caas/articles/FAS008330/The-maximum-volatility-reduction-benefit.jpg

The same article also references a few of the world’s largest companies that are NOT part of the US, but are likely well known to you regardless.  These are companies like Alibaba and Tencent from China, Nestle and HSBC from Europe, as well as Toyota, and a few other international companies that account for the top 50 largest stocks in the world.  Lastly, the article compares annual yields between the US and non-US equities which results in a difference of .65%, which should definitely be significant enough for anyone and everyone to consider an international portfolio.  As you can see in the graph above, Vanguard also recommends adding an allocation between 20-50% to international equities.

With that in mind, the TSP actually changed the I fund back in 2019 to mirror the MSCI EAFE (Europe Austral-Asia, and Far East) EX US – which includes both developed AND emerging markets (the “EX US” means US specific corporations are completely exempt from this fund). The TSP is now also including nearly 35% exposure in the L funds for 2055, 2060, AND 2065 options (6).  If you also look at the L2050, you can even see a bump in the I fund when they rebalanced these positions in 2019, roughly following the recommendations made above by Fidelity, Vanguard, AND Morningstar (as well as the majority of the big market heads).  

At the end of the day, it is your portfolio and your choice to make.  However, I believe that you should at least be well informed about the choices you make instead of listening to everyone that comes along that shows good returns (to include myself!).  Ultimately, the data does show that increasing your exposure to international (non-US) markets reduces your overall volatility due to diversification and can increase your returns to boot – which is definitely a good thing!

1) https://www.morningstar.com/articles/937958/should-you-bother-investing-abroad (if you are having issues viewing this, check the cached text version here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PJdFAAHdKDsJ:https://www.morningstar.com/articles/937958/should-you-bother-investing-abroad&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1&vwsrc=0

2) https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/etfs/601057/10-best-emerging-markets-etfs-for-a-global-rebound

3) https://www.slickcharts.com/sp500/returns 

4) https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/investing-ideas/international-investing-myths 

5) https://advisors.vanguard.com/insights/article/fourreasonstoembraceglobalinvesting6) https://www.tsp.gov/funds-lifecycle/

6) https://www.tsp.gov/funds-lifecycle/