Make better decisions. Get better results.
 

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Can Investment Books Cost You Lots of Money?

I recently spent some time at my local Barnes and Noble looking at the shelves of investment books. I found many of the titles to be comical (even funnier than "The Naked Portfolio Manager," if you can believe that!). There was a consistent theme with each book that I thought was dangerous though. Let's look at some of the titles:

1. "Fire Your Stock Analyst: Analyze Stocks of Your Own"

2. "The 100 Best Stocks You Can Buy"

3. "(You) Invest Like a Shark"

4. "(You) Day Trade Online"

5. "(You) Get Rich with Options"

[With the last three titles, I have added the word "you" in parenthesis.] Two things are implied when you purchase these titles. Number one: The information each book offers is useful to you for the purposes of making investment decisions. Number two: You, the investor, can apply this information effectively to improve your investment results. With this analysis, I will ignore the first assumption and concentrate on the second.

On page 54 of "The Naked Portfolio Manager," I write about a study conducted by a scientist named Hillel Einhorn about three pathologists. The pathologists were asked to look at a series of slides and evaluate nine specific risk factors affecting Hodkinson's disease patients. All of the slides were of deceased patients. The question that Einhorn was studying was whether the pathologists could use their analysis of the nine risk factors to determine the patients' life expectancy with any degree of accuracy.


Einhorn found that the pathologists were able to accurately assess the nine risk factors, but were not able to use those risk factors to make accurate predictions about life expectancy. Using their risk assesments, Einhorn developed a model that was reasonably accurate in predicting how long the patients survived after the biopsies were taken.

How does this apply to the aforementioned investment tomes? Even if the information in the books is useful, there's no guarantee that the average investor, who is subject to emotional decision-making (picking stocks based on emotion), will be able to use the information effectively. The great thing about "naked strategies," which eliminates human error, is that you don't need specialized knowledge or expertise to apply them. Brilliant men have created the model for you. I have listed several of these models in the book and given references as to where you can find more models. All you need to do is follow them. That's one of the things that sets the information in "The Naked Portfolio Manager" a part from other books.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Bob at 1 Comments

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

How Sweet Briar Plans to Beat The Smartest Guys on Wall Street


Last week, I had the opportunity to visit Sweet Briar College and review the progress the students are making in developing their "naked strategies," or rules-based methods for portfolio management.

Many of the ladies had the makings of really great models. I was especially intrigued by a model developed by Heather McPheeters and Andrea Jones designed to capitalize on opportunities in the currency markets. Lindsey Davis and Morganne Young also both seemed to have an excellent grasp of how to apply statistical prediction to making investment decisions.

I learned a lot by watching the presentations. On pages 6 and 7 of The Naked Portfolio Manager, I draw a clear distinction between judgment-based decisions (using your head or emotions to determine the course of action) and statistical-based decisions (using you head to create a rules-based method and then letting the method determine the course of action). By subordinating judgment to a set of rules, human error is reduced to a minimum. The review session gave me a chance to reinforce this concept.

After the presentations, the Professor and I had the opportunity to talk. He's confident that the models the students created will compare favorably with the top performing mutual funds and he said he's looking forward to tracking the results in 2010. While several of the students made excellent presentations, there was one young lady who demonstrated an incredibly profound grasp of rules-based strategies. More about her tomorrow.

[By the way, if your reading this at Sweet Briar and you don't have a copy of The Naked Portfolio Manager yet, I think the bookstore still has a few copies!]

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Bob at 0 Comments

Thursday, July 2, 2009

So what exactly are you so upset about?

Continuing with the "Emotional Brain" from my previous post, Cordelia Fine explains that researchers cannot tell the physiological difference between when a person is either excited, afraid or angry.

She gives us this formula: Emotion = Arousal + Emotional Thought.

So when a person hits a 100 to 1 shot at the race track, or discovers his brand new car has been vandalized, or runs into an old flame who tells him she is available, that person has the same physiological reaction. The racing heart and the increased breathing are no different. What is different are the person's emotional thoughts.

This can cause some rather strange results. Cordelia points out a study in which a group of young men were told to do some strenuous exercise and then watch an erotic film. Some of the men watched the film immediately after exercising; others after a brief rest and still others after an extended break. The men who watched the film after only a brief rest reported the film was much more stimulating than the other two groups.

Researchers theorized that the men who had watched immediately after exercising attributed their racing hearts and accelerated breathing to the exercise. Those who had an extended rest had time for their heart rates and breathing to return to normal prior to watching the film. But those with just a brief rest actually confused the physical arousal from the exercise with their thoughts about the film.

As I read this chapter from Cordelia's book A Mind of its Own, I couldn't help but think of Abraham Lincoln and the letter he wrote to General Meade after the battle of Gettysburg. The defeated Confederate Army had retreated, but when they reached the Potomac River, they had to stop and wait for the river, swollen from the rains, to subside before they could cross. Demoralized and their supplies depleted, the Army of Northern Virginia could have been routed had Meade pressed them. But instead he hesitated and Lee escaped. Lincoln was furious with Meade for what he thought was an opportunity to crush Lee’s Army and end the war immediately. He wrote Meade a letter dated July 14, 1863 in which he severely chastised Meade for his inaction. But President Lincoln never sent the letter. It was found in his office after his death. Lincoln ultimately found the General who could get the job done.

Decision-Making Best Practice #3 (similar to #2): Learn from Lincoln. Avoid making important decisions when you are upset or angry. High emotions can only confuse or cloud your decision-making.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Bob at 0 Comments

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Do you make unemotional decisions?

Injecting emotion into the decision-making process hardly ever leads to the best result. But surprisingly, Cordelia Fine suggests emotions play a huge role in human decision-making in subtle ways that few people understand.

Studies show that something as minor as the weather can influence how people feel about things totally unrelated. For example, in one experiment, as Fine describes in her book A Mind of its Own, a researcher (posing as a salesperson) gave shoppers a small gift. The same shoppers were later questioned about their opinions on the particular brand of car or television they personally owned. The results were compared to a control group, who were not given the small gift. The group that had received the small gift rated their car and television significantly higher, suggesting that the mood lift created by the gift had a meaningful influence on how they made their rating.

In another test, a group of people were selected to either play or referee a computer tennis game. The selection process was supposed to be at random, but researchers rigged the selection so the subjects always ended up being the referees. The person playing the tennis game was in fact a "stooge."

In the game, there were a large number of balls remarkably close to the line. Prior to refereeing the game, the subjects met the players, and in some cases, the stooge acted in an extremely obnoxious way. In other cases, the stooge acted in a polite and kind way. Guess how those calls that were close to the line went?

When the stooge was obnoxious, she lost a lot of the very close points. When she was kind, the referee called the close points in the favor of the player.

Decision-Making Best Practice #2: Before you make an important decision, check your emotional state. If you are angry, sad, euphoric, or what-have-you, try to postpone the decision you need to make until you are in a more normal state.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Bob at 0 Comments