To find an in depth article for each step, just click on the “Pasadena Financial Planners Sitemap” link at the top of this page and look for the articles numbered from 6 to 10. Note that you can reach us by using the contact form below. Please enjoy reading this article. Thank you!

6 – Personal Investment Strategy

Given the extremely large number and variety of available securities, investors need a rational basis to select among them. Without rational selection criteria and a good understanding of which factors are more or less likely to increase risk-adjusted returns, investors will make poor decisions based on false assumptions.

We will begin with the presumption that portfolio investment strategy would focus on broad-based, market oriented financial investments that can be acquired economically and held inexpensively in your portfolio for an extended period. We will provide a set of recommended investment vehicles and percentage allocations including a recommended minimum number of investment positions within each particular area. Consideration will be given to domestic versus international, value versus growth, small versus large capitalization, and other investment vehicles that may move the portfolio away from a broad market orientation. Of course, investment cost and tax implications will heavily influence these recommendations.

Consideration will be given to your existing investment portfolio to determine what parts should remain and what should change. We will discuss a transitional plan for those parts that we recommend to change, and our recommendations will consider the cost and tax implications of making such changes. When appropriate, recommendations will also address adjustments that counterbalance any financial concentration that you may have elsewhere in your portfolio.

7 – Investment Management Fees

Even with optimal investment strategies, there is still substantial room to improve upon net investment performance through continued and vigilant focus on controlling investment costs and tax realization. The investment fees extracted by the financial securities industry are grossly excessive. Excessive costs imposed on “retail investors” have increased substantially during the past several decades on both a total cost and a percentage of returns basis.

At the same time industry deregulation, market innovation, and increased competition have provided many new and useful mechanisms for investors to manage their assets in a much more cost- and tax-efficient manner. It is not hard to cut your investment costs, but you have to be conscientious and vigilant. I will help you to become an extremely cost-conscious investor, and I will help you to remove all those hands that may currently be in your family’s financial wallet.

For your current asset holdings and for new investments we will model details of taxation and investment expenses in the projections. Recommendations will be provided which are designed to reduce investment costs, to reduce and defer tax recognition, and to shift tax realization toward lower tax rates.

Recommendations for new investment will focus on very low cost, passively managed investment vehicles. A very wide variety of very low cost cash, fixed income, and equity investments are available through low cost channels, and there is no reason to purchase more expensive vehicles that are not expected to provide any better return or risk reduction.

8 – Insurance Risk Management

The world is fraught with numerous potential risks – financial and otherwise. Insurance can be purchased for a wide variety of situations, but the issue is always value and affordability. Many people could spend all their investable capital on insurance and have nothing left to invest and build a financial cushion for the future. Therefore, we can discuss a budget for insurance expenses and your preferences for risks you are willing to bear and risks you wish to ensure.

While value, affordability, risk exposure, and risk tolerance should affect insurance purchase decisions, insurance is often sold and purchased emotionally. The issue is where to set a rational rather than emotional balance between expected risk and return.

9 – Efficiency of Personal Investing Strategies

Time in life is the most precious and perishable asset that a person has. It should be spent enjoyably and efficiently. Scientific investment strategies that rely on relatively efficient financial markets allow people to minimize their time commitment to personal financial planning and personal investment management. Yet, on average, you can still expect to obtain optimal risk-adjusted portfolio returns that are near the market’s return

We recommend an annual review of your personal finance and investment plan on approximately the anniversary of your initial plan. At that time we will update your personal financial planning model and recommend any appropriate changes. In the interim, we can work together to implement recommendations that you accept and to perform other financial planning services that you want.

10 – Independent Investment Counselors and Financial Advisors

Pick financial planning and registered investment advisors solely to obtain objective and high quality advice. Specific investment advice is potentially of high quality, if it is carefully customized to your particular needs and is given by an adviser who is very knowledgeable, highly competent, and completely independent. If you agree with the advice being given, then buy the recommended financial products through the most inexpensive channel possible.

We do comprehensive personal financial planning exclusively. We do not sell securities and do not hold assets in custody. We do not sell insurance, nor do we provide accounting services or legal advice. However, as part of our business development and networking efforts we make efforts to become acquainted with high quality professionals who can provide specialized assistance. In developing a plan for you, part of our focus will be on providing you with recommendations on how to acquire appropriate professional services both easily and economically.

See: Personal Financial Planning Pasadena CA >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Concerning my compensation, I perform services solely on a hourly fee or fixed fee for services basis, and only under a contract agreed upon with you. You do not have to pay any form of asset fee. Furthermore, to avoid all conflicts-of-interest, I do not accept compensation or commissions of any kind from the financial industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Pasadena Financial Planning

Benefit from the best fee only investment advisor helping for those in the West Los Angeles area, including Altadena, Arcadia, Baldwin Park, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Glendale, Glendora, Hollywood, Irwindale, La Canada Flintridge, and Pasadena.

This is one of the “10 Steps in the Right Direction” that make up The Pasadena Financial Planner‘s personal financial planning and personal investment management process. For a summary of these ten steps, see “Your Family Financial Planning.” To find an in-depth article for each step, just click the Pasadena Financial Planning Services Sitemap link at the top of this page. Also, you can reach us by using the contact form below. Please enjoy reading this article. Thank you!

You can significantly improve your net risk-adjusted investment returns by lowering your investment fees and taxes. Cut your investment expenses and capital gains taxes to the bone!

This very important financial planning step focuses on investors’ net or realized investment returns, after investment costs, fees, and capital gains taxes are taken into account. Net investment returns are those investment returns that individual investors could actually spend on themselves and their families.

Post-Financial Crisis Commentary Concerning:

Investment Strategy and Investment Expenses

NOTE: The best personal financial planning rules endure and shouldn’t vary due to financial crisis or market cycles. The article below was written several years ago and requires no revisions. Given the subsequent credit crisis that we have suffered through, these more recent comments in this colored box were written simply to emphasize the enduring wisdom of the detailed original discussion that follows.

Cutting your investment costs to the bone has been, is, and always will be the single most reliable method for individual investors to increase their long-term net investment returns. The financial crisis did nothing to knock investment cost cutting out of this number one effectiveness position for individual investors. Investment cost cutting is always the first and best lever to use to improve long-term net portfolio returns. If anything, the dot com securities market implosion and the several years subsequent credit crunch crisis gave investors two more opportunities to become aware of the corrosiveness of excessive investment costs.

There is no other investment indicator that is as reliable as lower costs in producing better net investment performance. Unless you make a point of slapping them away, so many little silk and woolen hands will stay in your investment wallet and keep taking “a little bit” here and “a little bit” there in terms of:
1) sales loads to pay brokers and advisors who induce you to buy investments with higher costs;
2) ongoing 12b-1 sales fees that pick your pocket year after year;
3) higher fund management fees to pay for active management activities that inevitably fall short of passive benchmarks — especially as the time period increases;
4) higher portfolio churning and turnover which leads to higher hidden costs;
5) high percent-of-assets advisory fees that compound costs, because advisors try to beat-the-market to justify their fees — inevitably falling short over time on average; and
6) a myriad of other one-time and recurring industry fees that bleed away value related to your taxable retirement asset accounts.

Millions of individual investors have started paying attention to investment costs. This has been demonstrated by massive investment asset shifts from higher cost to lower cost investment vehicles in recent years. When securities market values stagnate, people inevitably begin to look more at reducing their costs to improve their net returns. But, the truth is that they always have been looking for the lowest cost investments — and they always should in the future. There is no credible evidence that professional investors can pick winners that do well enough to overcome their higher costs. Over and over again, the investment research literature has demonstrated the opposite: The less you pay in investment expense, the more you keep!

If you have not already done so, it is time for you to wake up about investment costs. Net investment performance short-term and long-term is a zero sum game across all investors. Long-term the global securities markets tend to reflect the value of the global economic development and growth that underlies the markets. Over the long run, securities markets act as an allocation mechanism to distribute this underlying economic value to debt holders and to enterprise shareholders. Along the way, if you keep giving away some of your ownership share to the industry through higher investment costs, that long-term economic value will just end up somebody else’s pocket. While the financial industry attempts valiantly to minimize and obscure the effects of their unjustified investment costs, the corrosive is always there, damaging your family’s long-term welfare. If you own assets, then you are a profit center for the industry. Get real. There is no “partnership” between the industry and individual investors.

(By the way, the number two investment return improvement lever for individual investors is tax-aware investing, including optimization of long-term capital gains, maximum use of tax-advantaged retirement accounts, and optimal investment “tax location” decisions regarding their asset allocation. See other articles in the Sitemap)

.

EACH AND EVERY YEAR, the average individual investor spends about 2% to 3% of their TOTAL investment portfolio ASSETS on excessive investment management fees, unnecessarily high securities trading costs, unjustifiably high investment custody fees, and completely avoidable usually short-term capital gains investment taxes. Where do you think a lot of those multi-billion dollar Wall Street broker bonus payments are coming from? Directly or indirectly from your taxable financial assets and retirement financial assets is the answer. In aggregate, brokers don’t add value. Some clients seem to win on occasion, but most just keep losing, while the brokerage house always takes its cut of the action. (See: “Excessive Investment Costs are a huge problem for individual investors” published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor.)

These wasted investment costs mean that the average individual investor typically gives away between 1/4 and 1/3 of his or her annual investment returns to the securities and financial services industry. In aggregate across all individual investors, these investors will get nothing in return.

Well, that is not entirely true. In exchange for paying more to engage in high tax and high cost active investment management strategies, participating investors will be taken on a much wilder investment roller coaster. Unpredictably, active investors may experience more dramatic ups and downs. On average, in addition, they will suffer inferior investment performance due excessive investment costs and unnecessary capital gains tax payments.

The cumulative long-term impact on personal investment portfolios is simply staggering. Across all investors, these excessive costs are a complete waste. In fact, excessive investment expenses are simply an incredible wealth transfer to the securities and financial services industry. The associated and unnecessary capital gains taxes are just a wealth transfer from individuals to the government.

It is difficult to identify another industry that charges so much and promises so much to their customers, and yet ends up delivering so little in terms of added-value to their customers. Until individual investors wake up to the fact that they are paying far more than is necessary for so little in return, they are far more likely to have dramatically diminished investment portfolio assets during their lifetimes.

For more information about the value of reducing your investment expenses and controlling your capital gains taxes, see these articles on “Cost Control and Investment Performance Improvement,” which are published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor.

Human greed, personal investment ignorance, financial advisor compensation incentives, and the securities industry’s beat-the-market sales mantra are far too strong and too well-aligned for investment performance chasing by individual investors ever to end.

Unfortunately, The Pasadena Financial Planner has no expectation that the causes of excessive investment costs and wasted capital gains taxes will ever change. This beat-the-market investment management shell game rubbish will continue as long as individuals believe that they can get better risk-adjusted performance than the other guy does at no real cost to themselves. Naive investors will continue to use superior historical performance as a false indicator of what will happen in the future. They will be continually be disappointed, but only if they ever bother to check their results against the net investment yield of a low cost, low tax passive index investment strategy.

Naive individual investors, often abetted by their financial advisors, will continually pay excessive fees to investment money managers whom they hope will beat the securities markets for them. Yet, investment research studies indicate that there are no reliable ways for individual investors to identify, before the fact, superior active investment managers from within the crowd of mutual fund money managers.

The excessive management fees that are charged across the industry virtually guarantee that individual investors will not be able to hire money managers at a profit. The average mutual fund management expense ratio is about two times higher that the apparent value-added of the average investment fund money manager.

In addition, these excessive management expense ratios still do not include the much higher portfolio trading costs and higher capital gains taxes that go along with an actively managed mutual fund. Furthermore, most high cost actively managed mutual funds are sold through financial advisors who add no value in the selection process. Nevertheless, these investment counselors will still charge you a front-end sales load or a back-end sales load and will also add an annual 12b1 fee on top of the management expense ratio. What a deal!

Particularly during the last two decades of the 20th century, the fees extracted by the financial securities industry have increased substantially on both a total and a percentage of returns basis. What has the value-added been? In aggregate, the value has been negative. Furthermore, as a bonus, unwitting participants in active investment management strategies experienced a much wilder investment ride and took greater investment risks than were necessary.

Total mutual fund expenses and mutual fund management expense ratios have not decreased. To cut your investment fund costs, you have to do it yourself.

If you pay attention to the statements of mutual fund industry trade groups, you may hear claims that mutual fund investment fees have come down (slightly) as a percentage of investor’s assets during the last couple decades. However, what the fund industry fails to explain is that almost all of the new mutual funds that it keeps introducing have higher than average management expense ratios. If the mutual fund industry could get you to pay higher investment expense ratios, it would and it does when it can.

The mutual fund industry does this by launching numerous new mutual funds with high expense ratios. Then, after the fact, the mutual fund industry only promotes new funds and old funds that happened to have done well. The mutual fund industry knows that nothing sells better than the implication that superior past performance, as displayed in performance charts and with 4-star ratings and 5-star ratings, will continue. While this very selective marketing process hints that superior past performance will continue into the future, the legal small print always tells you not to count on it. For more information about the problems associated with immature mutual funds, see this article “Choose Mature Noload Mutual Funds” published on our sister website, Best No Load Mutual Funds.

Even though it is just a chimera, the mutual fund industry is counting on individual investors to extrapolate superior past performance into the future. The mutual fund industry and its supposedly “independent” financial advisors, who only promote mutual funds with sales loads and four stars and five stars, both know that these funds are easier to sell to naive investors. The fee revenues are too good to do anything else instead, such as educate investors not to extrapolate past performance. For more information about selective mutual fund marketing, see this article “How Morningstar Ratings for Mutual Funds Are Used As a Marketing Tool” published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor.

Note that the mutual fund industry will not dispute the fact that the total amount of fees that they collect has risen many times over. Invested assets have increased many times over due to investor savings and new investments and to investment asset growth and appreciation. When you charge people a percentage of their appreciating assets, then total industry fees have to go up in proportion, as well.

Percent of asset fees are a revenue and profit gravy train for the financial services industry. However, you might want to stop and ask why the industry deserves a percentage of your assets each and every year. They are YOUR assets, are they not? Why just give them away without getting incremental value in return?

Mutual fund management expense ratios have only come down because some investors have shifted their assets into low cost noload mutual funds.

If you looked more carefully at the numbers, you would find that mutual industry claims of reduced management expense ratio percentages are based on aggregate data across all types of mutual funds. These aggregate data combine both: a) the much higher costs of actively managed mutual funds with sales loads and b) the much lower costs of no load index mutual funds. The primary reason why the average mutual fund expense ratio has come down in the past, albeit only slightly, is that a substantial minority of all individual investors has gotten smarter about excessive investment costs.

More cost-conscious individual investors and certain of their more helpful financial advisors and some more cost conscious institutional investors have been redirecting increasing proportions of investment assets under their control into lower cost funds. These transfers of assets into lower cost no load mutual funds pulls down the overall management expense ratio percentage for all mutual funds.

Furthermore, returns on low cost, no load index mutual funds have been better on average than actively managed funds. Therefore, these noload mutual fund assets have appreciated more rapidly. Low cost no load mutual fund assets will also tend to be greater, because an investor’s full dollar gets invested into a noload mutual fund. Sales loads siphon away about a nickel of each dollar at the outset to pay the financial adviser through a sales load. These sales loads diminish the total amount of actively managed investment fund assets compared to noload mutual funds.

Therefore, the actions of some investors to seek lower costs have held down the growth of management expense ratio percentages and other costs. The mutual fund industry did not cause the average mutual fund investment expense ratio to come down (ever so slightly). They have been trying to push up your costs – and their revenues and profits in the process.

If you start taking investment cost cutting much more seriously, you will not be alone. The industry will not do it for you. You have to lower your investment costs yourself.

Management expense ratios and trading costs are also excessive for exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

Concerning exchange-traded funds (EFTs), you may hear the argument that ETF management expense ratios are lower than mutual fund management expenses. This is another false industry comparison. Due to the structure of ETFs, virtually all exchange-traded funds are passive index funds. Unfortunately, newer exchange traded funds that have been introduced to the securities markets increasingly have carried higher management fees and have tracked narrower and more esoteric indexes. This ETF Balkanization defeats the important goal of achieving a broadly diversified portfolio economically.

As a quick summary, here is why almost all ETFs are passively managed index funds. Since the composition of an ETF’s portfolios is known daily, an actively managed exchange-traded fund’s strategy would be exposed and would be gamed by other market participants. That is why it took until 2008 for just a few somewhat actively managed exchange-traded funds came to the market. On the contrary, actively managed mutual fund portfolios are not known to other market participants in real-time. Therefore, actively managed mutual funds can pursue their investment strategies without other professional traders knowing their strategy and trading against them.

Since ETFs are almost all passively managed index funds, then their management expense ratios and all other expenses should be compared with very low cost passive index alternatives – both mutual funds and ETFs. When you look at the management expense ratios of most ETFs you find that there almost always is a much lower cost index mutual fund or ETF that you could purchase instead.

Furthermore, since ETFs are traded on securities exchanges much more easily than mutual funds, the daily volume of ETF trading has exploded, when compared to total assets that are invested in ETFs. Mutual funds, which get priced once daily, are traded excessively by some performance chasing investors, but the amount of these trades is no where near the volume for ETFs. Furthermore, due to the mutual fund trading scandals early in this century, restrictions have been placed on short-term mutual fund trading, which occurs at the expense of longer-term mutual fund investors.

If you do not buy and hold very low cost, broadly diversified ETFs, you can easily drive up your costs through excessive brokerage fees.

ETF brokerage fees are far more likely to sink investors’ returns, than investors’ clever trading bets are to increase their exchange-traded fund returns. If you decide to invest in ETFs, you should understand the real danger of excessive exchange-traded fund trading. Only a small portion of ETFs are very low cost and are broadly diversified. The rest of these ETFs are just high priced index funds that focus on narrower and narrower securities market segments.

The more you trade ETFs, the worse you are likely to do. Remember that exchange traded funds are a brokerage industry response to the mutual fund industry. ETFs have allowed securities brokers to capture some investor assets that otherwise would have be invested in traditional mutual funds.

With a few notable exceptions, most mutual fund companies try to push up their fees by implying that their actively managed funds will beat the market. In aggregate this claim is false, and the more you spend the less you are likely to get. In the same vein, brokers selling ETFs may point to lower ETF management expense ratios and the supposed superior tax efficiency of ETFs.

However, most ETFs still have excessive expense ratios and carry the heavy added burden of brokerage trading fees. Excessive trading can easily negate any supposed ETF tax advantages. ETFs only make sense as an alternative to mutual funds, if you buy only very low cost, broadly diversified ETFs from a discount broker, and then you hold them for the long-term without trading

To obtain better net investment returns, individual investors must carefully control both visible investment management fees and more hidden investment trading costs and associated capital gains taxes.

At the same time that investment management fees and costs were rising dramatically, industry deregulation, market innovation, and increased competition provided many new and useful low cost investment fund mechanisms for investors to manage their assets in a far more cost-efficient and tax-efficient manner. Just because most other individual investors and their financial advisors seem not to have a clue about optimal investment strategies does not mean that you need to be clueless, as well. You do not have to play this game. You will not be alone, if you decide to stop listening to the siren song of superior returns and then cut your costs to the bone so that you actually have a better chance of really obtaining superior returns.

Adopting investment strategies based on scientific finance is the first part of investment cost and investment tax reduction. Low cost, passive index fund investment strategies are inherently more cost-efficient and far less risky. This is not surprising, because a fundamental goal of investment research has been to discover those strategies which maximize personal economic welfare on a risk-adjusted returns basis. It is time to pay attention to this research and to stop listening to the securities industry’s siren songs about superior investment returns.

Individuals can adopt very low cost passive index investment strategies and avoid the charade of paying much more to get inferior investment results. Furthermore, when you stop playing this game, you also stop exposing yourself to many unnecessary and uncompensated investment risks along the way. In addition, you save a lot of your valuable time. For more information about why passive investment strategies are advantageous, see this article “Passive individual investors are “free riders” who benefit from the higher costs of active traders” published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor.

The conflicts of interest between individual investors and the financial services industry continually threaten the investment portfolios of individuals and their families.

Focusing on investment cost reduction can also draw your attention to the potentially very negative personal financial impacts of biased and sub-optimal advice. The financial services industry offers products and services for investors to buy at prices that include the market value of the investment securities plus the costs and profits related to the sale and transaction. Often the true cost of the industry’s markup is obscured or hidden.

Investors need to understand that their interactions with the financial markets through these industry intermediaries are a “zero-sum game.” In and of itself, the securities industry does not create any value for you. Of course, the markets serve extremely valuable price setting and capital allocation functions within the global economy. Nevertheless, the competition between professional investors largely drives and achieves these important capital allocations functions.

Before investment costs and capital gains taxes are considered, at best, the securities markets are a “zero sum” game from the point-of-view of the interests of individual investors.

I say “at best,” because the demonstrated naivete and mistakes in personal investment management of millions of individual investors, makes it likely that their involvement in the securities markets is already a slightly “negative sum” game even before they pay such high investment fees and costs. However, when excessive “retail investor” costs and taxes are considered, then a significant portion of investors’ potential returns are simply swept away by the financial securities industry.

Particularly with the abnormally high market returns of equities-based securities during the last two decades of the 20th century, many investors became very lax about managing their investment costs and capital gains tax realization. Double digit returns made costs seem like “just few percent” and not very important. Following the dot-com stock market crash and the deflating of the equity securities asset bubble, many investors need to make cost cutting and investment tax reduction a much higher priority.

The most effective strategy you have to improve your investment returns is to cut you investment costs and investment taxes down to the bare minimum. Once you commit to this mission across your lifetime, you may discover another financial miracle. When you refuse to pay more than the bare minimum needed to buy very broadly diversified investment funds, then financial advisors who add no value will figure out that you are not an easy mark and move on. Then, you might actually have a better chance of finding a financial advisor who will provide advice that is actually in your best interests!

.

See: Financial Planning Consultants in Pasadena California >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Concerning my compensation, I perform services solely on a fixed fee or hourly fee for services basis, and only under a contract that would be agreed upon with you. You do not have to pay any form of asset fee. Furthermore, to avoid any conflict-of-interest, I do not accept compensation or commissions of any kind from the industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Investment Advisors in Pasadena California

Find help from the best independent financial advisor in SoCal. We can serve clients locally and remotely in these and other cities: Pomona, Rancho La Tuna Canyon, Studio City, Sun Valley, Sunland, Glendale, La Crescenta, La Tuna Canyon, Monrovia, Montrose, South Pasadena, and Temple City.

This is one of the “10 Steps in the Right Direction” that make up The Pasadena Financial Planner‘s personal financial planning and personal investment management process. For a summary of these ten steps, see “Your Family Financial Planning.” To find an in-depth article for each step, just click the Sitemap link at the top of this page. Also, you can reach us by using the contact form below. Please enjoy reading this article. Thank you!

Without a rational personal investment system based on scientifically verified investment management strategies, individual investors will make inferior decisions based on false assumptions.

Given the extremely large number and variety of available securities, investors need a rational basis to select among them. Thousands of brokerage firms and investment management companies compete for the investment assets of individual investors and their families. Unfortunately you cannot rely upon securities industry personnel to tell you what is the best investment strategy for you. You can be much more assured that they will tell you to do what benefits them and the profits of their investment management companies. Unfortunately, many financial services industry personnel will say or suggest practically anything, if they think it will help to close the sale more quickly.

There are many investment advisors and investment counselors who provide good advice. Unfortunately, it is often very difficult to tell good advice from not-so-good advice. Most securities industry personnel are trained to sell and are not trained to make the best investment decisions on your behalf. They are trained to inspire trust and develop a rapport with you. Many simply do not know how to provide advice that is in the best interests of their clientele. If they are just trained to sell to you, why should they know what is in your best interests?

In addition, there is also an incredible amount of historical performance chasing and unnecessary investment risk taking that goes with individuals’ investment money. Unwittingly or otherwise, many investment counselors and individual investors pursue highly inferior personal investment management strategies.

There is not reason to guess or to wing it, when your investment money and future retirement is at stake. There is a very large body of statistical investment research that can instruct any interested person about what tends to work and what tends not to work with personal investment strategies.

If you can not find scientific evidence to verify a personal investment management strategy, then just do not do it. Do your research and find out what works and what does not. For more information about scientifically based personal investment strategies, see these articles on “Personal Investment Management.” These articles are published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor.

The best investment strategy for lifetime personal finance and retirement planning

To cut to the chase about what tends to work best with investment strategy and retirement planning, The Pasadena Financial Planner has concluded that all forms of active management that cannot be cost justified should be driven out of personal investment strategies. Individual investors need to choose a comfortable, very low cost, low tax, risk-adjusted market investment strategy and let it run over time. Maintenance should be minimal and low cost, and the urge to chase “beat the market” mirages should be heavily restrained. Investors’ strategies should focus on broad-based, market-oriented investment funds securities (mutual funds and ETFs) that can be acquired economically and held inexpensively for an extended period.

Buy the cheapest, most broad based investment mutual funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs). Buy and hold them. Otherwise get on with your real life. For more information about scientifically based personal investment strategies, see these articles on “7 Ways to Pick the Best Noload Mutual Funds and ETFs.” These articles are published on our sister website, Best No Load Mutual Funds.

Three key concepts are important to consider when deciding on the best investment strategy for your personal investment portfolio.

First, the current price of a security represents the market’s consensus about its potential future value, given the various advantages and disadvantages that all investors see in holding or selling that security. As such, the current security price is a weighted average valuation forecast of events that might or might not occur. Market prices are the best available assessment of forward-looking, risk-adjusted fair market value.

Through securities market prices, a wide array of investors with differing predictions and varying concerns essentially “vote” on the expected or likely future value of a security through its current price. Investors’ evaluations of the value of securities may vary widely. What one person might see as a great bargain, another might consider grossly overpriced. Without this divergence of opinion over current securities values, there would be no trading of securities. Given the immense volume of securities trading that occurs daily across the world’s securities exchanges, it is clear that there is no shortage of significant differences of opinion about current market values.

Second, securities prices represent the current valuation consensus on a risk-adjusted basis. Risk refers to the expected size and likelihood of future up or down price variations or volatility. As such, not only do prices reflect expected returns, they also reflect the panoply of concerns, optimism, risks, and euphoria about how a wide range of factors might affect the price in the future.

Third, given this highly speculative, future-oriented, and risk-adjusted valuation process, there are bound to be very significant price fluctuations as time goes on. This variability is the natural side effect of the market’s communal, self-interested valuation process and is neither good nor bad. It seemly means that speculation about future investment value has been, is, and will always be subject to risk and uncertainty.

The problem with trying to predict future securities market values is that the future is fundamentally unknowable, until it arrives.

While history can be instructive about what might be more or less likely in the future, history tends not to be predictive. Securities prices exhibit only a very tiny level of predictability within a very large range of random fluctuations. The blending of expectations about future returns and risks into current securities prices means that the situation is subject to a wide range of either insightful to specious predictions. Unfortunately, you can only guess which predictions are insightful or specious, until after the fact.

The volatility of prices across time provides an opportunity for just about anyone to develop a supposedly predictive theory on how the markets actually work and to offer selected data to support their arguments. The only reliable way to sort through what is true or false is to rely upon the investment research studies of highly disciplined academics who carefully test these theories against market price data that is unbiased.

Individual investors are usually better off, when they ignore concerns about whether the securities markets fairly value investment securities.

If there is a reasonably large and liquid market where investors interact through “arms length” transactions, then individual investors should simply accept current market prices and avoid the usually futile temptation to second-guess current values and try to beat the market. While some securities prices will eventually be shown to have been either too high or too low relative to their subsequent prices, the reasons almost always have nothing to do with current market pricing mistakes by the securities markets.

Current securities market prices do a pretty good job of reflecting information that is already know. Statistical studies demonstrate that errors tend to cancel each other leaving little opportunity of investors – especially amateur individual investors – to identify, trade, and profit on these current pricing errors. In effect, especially among individual investors, those who appear to have done better than the market were largely lucky and those who did more poorly were simply unlucky.

Instead, prices tend to change over time due to unpredictable future events which occur and cause the securities markets to revalue securities. New information continually changes forward-looking expectations about expected future investment values. Since this new information becomes known only if and when it happens, there is no way to have reliably predicted it. Speculation about a range of possible future events will influence current prices, but only time will tell what actually will happen.

Some full-time professional investment managers and professional securities analysts might be able to discern when a security is more likely to be under-valued or over-valued. On average, before their added costs and taxes are considered, active professional mutual fund managers have been shown to deliver performance that is modestly better than passive index benchmarks. However, across all professional investors there is no evidence that they can consistently beat the markets, after their added costs and higher taxes are taken into consideration.

Unfortunately, the average professional investment fund manager charges several times his added-value through increased investment fees, costs, and taxes.

For the individual investor trying to identify and hire only “superior investment managers,” this effort is highly uncertain, usually futile, and subject to a great deal of error and dumb luck. Except for cost reduction, there are no reliable metrics to predict superior investment fund performance and to identify superior money managers before the fact.

So, where are all the perennially superior traditional money managers who can be hired economically to manage your money and that of thousands of others for a superior return? They are not to be found. Individual investors spend an excessive amount of time and money looking for investment mutual fund managers who will almost all turn out not to be the next Warren Buffett in the long run.

The lowest cost investments will always mean adopting a passive index benchmark investment strategy. The logical decision of individual investors is to avoid all costly activism and not to pay a substantially more for a very poor chance of winning versus a much larger chance of losing. Instead of trying to beat the market or trying to find a mutual fund manager who will beat the market net of his substantial added costs, individual investors should focus their efforts on:

• becoming better educated about investing rather than just relying naively upon advisors to do the right thing for them
• earning income and saving adequately to fund their investment program
• understanding their relative investment risk tolerance and choosing an investment asset allocation that is appropriate for their personal risk profile
• using rational selection methods to acquire a low cost, low tax, broadly diversified, passive market-based portfolio
• applying time and energy to investment activities that tend to increase personal financial welfare, while eliminating time spent on activities that undermine it.

Invest passively in very low cost, very broadly diversified index funds across the world. Save more to build your assets. Do something else that you actually enjoy, instead of wasting your time and money playing amateur individual investor.

.

See: Registered Investment Advisor Pasadena >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding how I am compensated, I provide financial planning services only on a hourly fee or fixed fee for service basis, and only under a contract that we agree upon. You will not have to pay any asset fees. Furthermore, to avoid all conflicts-of-interest, I do not accept compensation or commissions of any kind from the industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Registered Investment Advisor Pasadena

Use the services of the top independent investment advisor in SoCal — I will help client locally and remotely including those in and around Glendale, La Tuna Canyon, Los Feliz, North Hollywood, San Gabriel, South Pasadena, La Canada Flintridge, La Crescenta, Monrovia, Rosemead, and San Dimas.

This is one of the “10 Steps in the Right Direction” that make up The Pasadena Financial Planner‘s personal financial planning and personal investment management process. For a summary of these ten steps, see Your Family Financial Planning. To find an in depth article for each step, just click the Sitemap link at the top of this page. Also, you can reach us by using the contact form below. Please enjoy reading this article. Thank you!

Setting your personal investment asset allocation is a critical decision for every individual investor.

Asset allocation can be viewed as an extension of the Global Investment Diversification strategy principle to multiple types of assets, such as equities versus fixed income securities. Asset allocation is also how you blend your personal investment risk preference into your investment asset portfolio.

Appropriately setting your personal asset allocation in line with your personal risk tolerance is a critical decision for every investor. The percentages that are allocated to various asset classes tend to change slowly over time, so it is important to get it right at the outset.

Investing and asset allocation is all about risk-adjusted investment returns related to your overall investment asset portfolio. Because the risk and return characteristics of various asset classes are not completely correlated, changes in their market prices sometimes off-set each other. Therefore, you normally can assemble an investment portfolio with lower overall investment risk, when compared to the risk of each of the individual asset classes that make up your portfolio. In effect, the various asset classes provide additional diversification benefits that go beyond the investment risk reduction benefits that can be achieved through full diversification within each individual asset class.

What is an investment asset class?

At the outset, a word of caution about the proliferation of “asset classes” promoted to individual investors is useful. Whether you invest through broadly diversified index mutual funds or diversified exchange-traded funds (ETFs), the largest and most established investment asset classes are stocks/equities, bonds/fixed income, and cash/cash equivalents. Stocks, bonds, and cash are sometimes referred to as financial assets, and most often these financial assets are priced and traded on real-time securities markets.

Real estate property is an additional asset class, which creates some complications related to portfolio diversification. The great majority of individual investors with some financial assets also tend to be real estate property owners. For many, their real estate assets – usually their personal residence – can grow in value over their lives to become a very substantial and even majority part of their personal investment asset portfolios. Since this real estate equity is in a homes, which also provides shelter, then these real estate assets really function as a financial asset reserve of last resort after equity, bond, and cash financial assets are exhausted, usually during retirement.

Common stocks, which are one of the largest and most well established investment asset classes in the world, have been sliced and diced into a myriad of confusing segments.

The financial services industry is ingenious in its invention of new asset classes and its balkanization within even traditional investment asset classes. You may already be aware, for example, that the stocks or equities asset class already offers a large boatload of investor confusion. Even if you decide to invest only in mutual funds and/or ETFs for diversification and you intentionally avoid the daunting task of picking individual stocks, you still are confronted with extraordinary complexity. Stock investment fund choices include: small-cap, mid-cap, large capitalization, domestic, international, global, value, growth, core, sector, industry, hybrid, long-short, socially conscious, green, active, passive, index, Class A shares, Class B shares, Class C shares, and on and on and on.

Armies of securities industry sales and advisory personal compete for your attention and advocate that you assemble your personal portfolio according to differing and supposedly superior portfolio optimization techniques. Often, it is unclear whether these asset class segment inventions truly are beneficial to investors. Of course, the associated fees seem to guarantee that this segment proliferation will always be beneficial to the securities and financial services industry. The more complex things get, the more you seem to need someone to help you to fiddle with and to rebalance your portfolio. That, of course, costs more, too. Plus, you get to pay more repeatedly, because the fiddling never stops in this noble pursuit of more optimal risk-adjusted portfolio returns. Unfortunately, the additional costs most often outweigh the additional benefits.

Non-traditional investment asset class concerns

Beyond stocks, bonds, cash, and personal real estate holdings, there are numerous other perhaps real, but very often fanciful or false asset classes that are promoted to individual investors. A few of the alternative asset classes and associated investment products that are pitched to individual investors include: commodities generally, gold, foreign exchange, hedge funds in 57 varieties, infrastructure, managed futures, private equity, limited partnerships, variable annuities, etc. Once you stray beyond stocks, bonds, cash, and real estate, the proliferation of additional asset classes and investment vehicles seems virtually unlimited.

Unfortunately, many of these alternative asset classes and investment products are fraught with problems for less sophisticated (and even for more sophisticated) individual investors. Here is the rub. How can you tell whether an alternative asset class might genuinely be beneficial to add to your portfolio? Which of them should you hold?

Generally, the alternative investment asset class sales argument goes as follows:

“A) This special ‘new asset class’ has had very high returns. While this asset class also has had very high risk, if you had put this new investment asset class into your portfolio in the past, the risk would have been moderated. That is because values in this new asset class historically has zigged, when values of the other investment asset classes have zagged.

“B) Therefore, this new investment asset class might increase your future returns and could even reduce your portfolio’s overall risk. This is a great opportunity for you. You should put 5%, 10%, or x% of your total assets into this asset class. We have introduced some swell new investment products that address this asset class. It is too bad that you did not buy these investments years ago, before the run up in values. Unfortunately, we did not offer these investment products back then, because we have only introduced them recently in response to the loud clamor of investor demand. Of course, none of this loud investor demand has anything to do with us in the financial services industry loudly promoting these great future investment opportunities based on our back-fitted, data mining discoveries of selective “coulda-shoulda-woulda” superior historical investments.

“C) Pay no attention to the high fees and high costs of buying into this asset class with these new investment products. These extra costs are small in comparison to the potential payoff to you. Pay no attention to those naysayers behind the curtain, who may argue that historical performance is not predictive. Ignore their suggestions that this asset class was just cherry picked from the historical investment returns records, because of its past performance. Pay no attention to the ‘Nerds on Wall Street‘ behind the curtains.

“D) Do not listen to anyone who says that you could be paying a very high price to put a lot more risk into your portfolio with no assurance of a superior payoff in the future or reduced risks. What is that you say? You want a guarantee. Oh my, I am sorry, but there simply are not guarantees in investing. However, do not worry now. You can just trust me. We have done our research. See this 4-color brochure on the product? This is a nice silk tie I have isn’t it? Let me tell you about the swell tropical place I stayed, when I was on vacation. Oh, just sign here, while we chat.”

Heard this one before? Did you put in your money? How did it work out? How did you sleep?

An individual’s risk preference relative to that of the average investor influences the asset allocation that would tend to be most beneficial from a risk-adjusted portfolio performance point-of-view.

Your personal investment risk tolerance should determine your investment asset allocation. Investment always involves risk. If your personal capital is not at risk, you simply are not holding an investment. All investors — small or large – skilled or unskilled — irrational or rational — sophisticated or unsophisticated – must navigate the same uncertain securities market and economic waters to get to their financial goals. While investing involves significant complexity, much of which is unnecessary, an investor’s ability to tolerate risk or the occasional, inevitable, and unpredictable stormy waters will dictate whether they can stay in the markets in the bad times, as well as the good times.

By analogy, those who cannot tolerate rough waters, should sail in a bigger, safer, and slower boat (more cash and bonds and less stocks). Those who can better stomach the storm can sail in smaller, faster boats (more stocks and less cash and bonds) and perhaps go faster while exposing themselves to greater risk. On average historically, greater risk has yielded greater rewards, but investors need to be aware of their limitations and choose the appropriate investment boat, given their risk tolerance and fortitude. If the average investor sails in the average investment boat, then the more risk averse investor should choose a larger, slower boat, while the more risk tolerant investor should choose the smaller faster boat. Risk tolerant investors tend to be frustrated by the lower performance of slow boats, while risk averse investors in small fast boats may experience fears and losses (however temporary) that they simply cannot tolerate.

Virtually all investors are risk averse to some degree. Therefore, securities markets are expected to pay a positive, albeit uncertain, future return or risk premium. Otherwise, no investor with greater or lesser risk aversion would be willing to put their capital at risk versus storing their money in a more certain asset with lower risk. Those few who crave risk have casinos or day trading or Forex or commodities or some other  ”zero-sum-plus-costs” game, where they can give their money away to the “house” slowly or quickly — and hopefully they enjoy themselves during that foolish process.

Because the average risk-averse investor holds the average portfolio asset allocation, this becomes a reference point in determining how a specific individual’s investment portfolio asset allocation might diverge from that of the average investor’s asset allocation. The question becomes: “What is the average asset allocation of the average investor?” The aggregate values and relative proportions of the financial markets will define this average asset allocation.

Defining the average asset allocation of the average individual investor

For the rest of this discussion, we will focus on getting rough estimates of the primary financial asset classes — cash, bonds, and stocks — to develop a point of reference for the “average investor.” Of course, there are other asset classes that some individual investors hold, such as real estate and private business interests. These other classes need to be taken into account when developing a comprehensive family financial plan. Nevertheless, cash, bond, and stock financial asset interests tend to be the most easily changeable in their composition. Each of these financial asset classes can be readily converted into the other through modern real-time securities markets, and thus an asset allocation plan with infrequent rebalancing is prudent.

Measuring the average asset allocation of the average investor is therefore the goal. This should be pretty simple, correct? Just measure all financial assets held directly or indirectly for the benefit of individuals (in our case US residents) and figure out the proportions of cash, bonds, and stocks. These asset class proportions then become the average asset allocation reference point for the average investor. A more risk averse investor would then hold a portfolio the skews toward less investment risk, and the converse would be the case for a more risk tolerant investor.

However, this is only half of the puzzle, because the average asset allocation is not always stable over time. Economic cycles and securities market cycles exist, and their movements are correlated. The economy grows more quickly at some times and goes into a reversal during recessions and depressions. Securities market cycles tend to anticipate business cycles, but without any reliable assurance that the direction and strenght of current securities market anticipation is accurate. The prescience of securities markets can only be measured in hindsight, after changes in the economy have become clear and the future that was anticipated by securities markets becomes the past or history.

Since the turn of the century and the millennium, the US and the world has experienced extraordinary financial times. Two decades of expansion in the 1980s and 1990s peaked in a technology/communications/financial bubble that collapsed in 2001 and was followed by an anemic recovery and growth cycle from about 2003 to 2007. Without strong US job growth in this growth cycle and driven by rising US consumer debt obligations and a US housing value bubble, the US then lead the world into another financial or “credit crunch” crisis that was far worse than the dot com crash.

In the fall of 2008, the world stared into the abyss of global financial crisis, akin to Calypso’s maelstrom in “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End.” It did not matter whether you were in a big slow investment boat or a small, speedy investment boat. Without the real world “special effects” of massive global government intervention in the securities markets, we would have found the end of this unfolding securities horror movie would have been to find most large boats and all small boats in Davy Jones locker at the bottom of the economic ocean.

In panic, those who could not stomach this maelstrom fled to the “dry land” of government guaranteed cash investments, and away from stocks and even bonds. The remainder of this article provides a few numbers that tell this disturbing financial tale. For purposes of setting an asset allocation strategy, one needs to decide whether to pay attention to the average asset allocation “normal” of the last several decades or to decide that what we just have collectively endured is the “new normal,” which it likely is not.

Before the Credit Crisis: Average Asset Allocation Percentage Data for 2004

To understand the overall asset allocation percentages of the major financial asset classes, in mid-2004 I performed a detailed analysis of all US personal financial asset ownership held directly by individuals and indirectly by institutions for the benefit of individuals. Concerning the average portfolio of the average investor, I reviewed detailed data from the US Federal Reserve Bank which tracks total personal assets across all kinds of personal accounts including brokerage, tax deferred, pension, insurance, trust, and other accounts. The Fed’s June 2004 Z.1 report indicates that total U.S. personal financial assets were approximately $26.9 trillion dollars. In total in mid-2004, the percentage allocation across the major financial asset classes was 26.9% in cash and equivalents, 18.9% in fixed income, and 54.2% in equities.¹

For purposes of comparison, the Investment Company of America’s (ICI) end of 2004 estimate of total US domiciled mutual fund assets, which is a subset of the personal assets that the Fed tracks, totaled $7.5 trillion dollars.² The percentage allocation was 27.7% in cash and equivalents, 19.7% in fixed income, and 52.6% in equities. The mid-2004 Federal Reserve and the end of 2004 ICI numbers are remarkably similar. This gives confidence that these figures represent approximately the average asset allocation of the average personal portfolio. Analyzing the Federal Reserve data takes quite a bit of time, whereas the ICI data can be analyzed and understood much more quickly.

The average asset allocation at the mid-point of economic and securities market cycle can serve as a baseline for the asset allocation of the average risk-averse investor.

Therefore, if we summarize the Federal Reserve Z.1 assets data and the ICI mutual fund assets data for 2004, about 27% of assets were in cash and equivalents, 19% were in bonds and fixed income assets, and 54% were in stock and equity assets. With the benefit of several years of subsequent hindsight, the end of 2004 was roughly the middle of the last combined business and securities market cycle.

For an asset allocation comparison taken near the tail end of the market cycle prior to the credit crunch debacle of 2008/2009, I also looked updated ICI data for total U.S. domiciled mutual fund assets in November 2007. (U.S. domiciled mutual funds would include both domestic and international stock, bond, and cash investment assets.) The ICI reported that, at the end of November 2007, U.S. domiciled mutual fund assets totaled $12.1 trillion, which is about a 60% increase over total assets in mid-2004.³

Even with this huge, $4.6 trillion increase in total mutual fund value, the late 2007 percentage allocation was 25.7% in cash and equivalents, 17.0% in fixed income, and 57.7% in equities – again reasonably similar to mid-2004 with a moderate shift of value toward equities. The proportion of asset value in the equities asset class rose about 5 percentage points, as the business/economic cycle and securities market cycle advanced and matured.

Meanwhile the proportion of asset value in both cash and debt securities declined modestly. Cash has been redeployed somewhat, and bond asset values have declined as debt instruments have came under pressure in the credit crisis of the second half of 2007. Nevertheless, the change in percentages has not been dramatic. These figures demonstrate that, overall, about 55% of total asset value is held in equities, about 25% in cash, and somewhat shy of 20% in bonds.

These 2004 to 2007 proportions represent the average holdings of the “average” investor across all personal financial assets held in U.S. personal accounts, either directly or indirectly through institutional holdings on their behalf. Depending upon your relative tolerance for investment risk compared to the “average investor,” these average percentages are instructive concerning what an average individual investor’s asset allocation would be.

What happened to the average asset allocation during the recent credit crisis of 2008 and 2009?

While we can only hope the the credit crunch, financial markets crash, recession, and near depression of 2008 and 2009, is an aberation and not the new normal, it is instructive to look at a few data points to see what happened to the apparent asset allocation percentages at certain points during this crisis. Here I will use ICI mutual fund data.

Following a grinding decline in stock market values beginning in late 2007 and culminating in the free fall collapse of equity values near the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009, the stock markets bottomed out in March of 2009. The the equity markets began a recovery that was surprising to many if not most investors. (Note that this is being written in October of 2009 and thus I cannot predict (nor can anyone else) what will happen going forward.)

Measured at the end of the first quarter 2009, the ICI reported total US domiciled mutual fund assets of $9.2 trillion dollars or very close to 50% of the $18.2 trillion dollars in mutual fund assets held by investors across the globe. ⁴ For US mutual funds, 41% of total assets were held in cash equivalent money market mutual funds, 20% of assets were held in bond funds, and 39% of assets were held in stock or equity mutual funds.

In effect, when compared to the 2004 and 2007 figures above, there was roughly a 15 percentage point shift from stock funds to money market funds.(In aggregate the total value of US mutual fund asset almost $3 trillion lower than the total value near the end of 2007.) While only a small part of this shift in percentages can be was due to actual net redemption cash flows out of stock funds, the real explanation was that the collapse of stock market values accounted for the vast majority of the shift in overall percentages. Assets did not have to move. Equity values had just collapsed, as expectations about the future economy contemplated a severe depression.

And then the recovery of 2009 reversed trends in aggregate asset allocation percentages

Now, let’s take a look at the latest available figures at the time of this writing, which were for the end of  September, 2009. ⁵ The ICI reported total US domiciled mutual fund assets of $10.6 trillion dollars representing an increase in total mutual fund asset values for about $1.4 trillion in that six month period. For these US domiciled mutual funds, 34% of total assets were held in cash equivalent money market mutual funds, 21% of assets were held in bond funds, and 45% of assets were held in stock or equity mutual funds. In effect, when compared to the end of March 2009 figures above, there was roughly a 6 percentage point total value shift in favor of stock funds and a 1 percentage point shift in favor of bond funds — all away from money market funds. Again only a  small part of this shift in percentages can be accounted for from actual net cash in-flows into stock funds.

The vast majority of the last six months of equity market appreciation was due simply to a recovery of equity market values and not due to cash in-flows. Those who were in the market benefited with paper gains, just as the vast majority of them had paper losses as the markets collapsed in 2008 and early 2009. The real question is whether current aggregate asset allocation percentages are the new normal, or just a transition from a severe securities market crisis back toward the historical norm. This is a critical asset allocation decision for investors.

If you were an average investor and held the average asset allocation of 2004 to 2007 and had an investment policy to retain that asset allocation through periodic re-balancing, then you would have been a net buyer of equity assets as securities market values collapsed in 2008 and early 2009. While perhaps emotionally challenging to anyone, this “buy equities into a crisis” (and “sell them into a growth cycle”) strategy would have positioned you for the recovery that occurred in 2009. Most who flew to cash did so after most of the collapse in equity values had already occurred (buy high and sell low), and they were sitting in cash on the sidelines in surprise as equity market values recovered. The investment research literature has repeatedly shown that market timing is an inferior strategy. In the next few years, we will undoubtedly seem more studies that repeat this finding. Even if another maelstrom reoccurs, this will be yet another opportunity for investors to achieve dramatically inferior portfolio performance, when they do not have a well-defined long-term asset allocation and re-balancing strategy in place and when they do not have the will to implement it consistently over time.

Professional advice about your personal investment portfolio asset allocation

If you are confused by asset allocation and all these investment product choices, hire a genuinely competent, knowledgeable, and objective financial advisor to help you. However, if your financial advisor or investment counselor is the one promoting alternative investment classes, perhaps you might want to run the other way.

In particular, you might want to run away, if your stock broker, investment counselor or other financial adviser will get paid commissions to sell these alternative asset class investments to you. Furthermore, if you answer just a short investment risk questionnaire and your investment advisor quickly classifies you as a conservative, average, or aggressive investor, be wary. If your advisor quickly starts selling, this also might be a very good time to head for the door. An advisor who uses a commission motivated investment product sales strategy can be a large problem for you rather than the solution you are looking for. Remember that it is your money in play — not his. Pay very close attention to your advisor’s sales incentives. High cost and high fee investment products will be the highlight of the conversation. When the sales incentives disappear, so does this kind of “financial advisor.”

For more information about personal investment portfolio asset allocation, see these articles on “Asset Allocation and Personal Investment Risk Tolerance.” These articles are published on our sister website, The Skilled Investor. Again, you can subscribe to our Objective Family Financial Planning Blogs by clicking the orange RSS icon to the upper left.

.

See: Pasadena Financial Advisors >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding how I am compensated, I perform services only on a hourly fee or fixed fee for service basis, and only under a contract that would be agreed upon with you. You will not have to pay any form of asset fee. In addition, to avoid any conflict-of-interest, I do not accept commissions or compensation of any type from the financial industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Pasadena Investment Adviser

The best fee only financial and investment advisor in Pasadena California – serving individual investors in cities such as Azusa, Eagle Rock, Rancho La Tuna Canyon, San Gabriel, South Pasadena, Sunland, Tujunga, and Pasadena.

Footnotes:

1) Federal Reserve Bank, Federal Reserve Z.1 Report. June 10, 2004. http://www.federalreserve.gov
2) Investment Company Institute. “2004 Mutual Fund Fact Book.” Note that while the balanced or mixed mutual fund category is relatively small and usually constitutes about 5% of total mutual fund assets, this category consists mainly of bonds and stocks. For purposes of analysis, I assumed that the proportion of assets in the balanced or mixed category was 50% bonds and 50% stocks and I allocated these dollar amounts to the primary bond and stock asset categories to eliminated the mixed category.
3) Investment Company Institute. “Trends in Mutual Fund Investing, November 2007″ (The same procedure for balanced or mixed mutual fund assets as decribed in the note above was applied.)
4) Investment Company Institute. “Worldwide Mutual Fund Assets and Flows, First Quarter 2009″ Supplementary Table S4 (The same procedure for balanced or mixed mutual fund assets as decribed in the note above was applied.)
5) Investment Company Institute. “Trends in Mutual Fund Investing, August 2009″ (The same procedure for balanced or mixed mutual fund assets as decribed in the note above was applied.)

This is one of the “10 Steps in the Right Direction” that make up The Pasadena Financial Planner‘s personal financial planning and personal investment management process. For a summary of these ten steps, see Your Family Financial Planning. To find an in depth article for each step, just click on the Sitemap link at the top of this page. You can reach us by using the contact form below. Please enjoy reading this article. Thank you!

You need to develop your own personal financial management skills, because you must live with the results of your financial planning and investment management decisions.

People face formidable challenges to lifetime financial success and their ability to retire with financial security. Throughout your life, you must decide for yourself whether any particular personal financial planning or investment management concept is fact or fiction. One thing can be guaranteed: there will be no shortage of ideas proposed to you by others about what you should do with your money.

Post-Financial Crisis Update About:

Personal Financial Planning

NOTE: The best individual investment and financial planning rules persist and wouldn’t vary due to market cycles or financial crisis. The article that follows was written years ago and requires no changes. Given the subsequent financial market crisis, the update comments in this box were written more recently to emphasize the enduring wisdom contained in the detailed original article below.

The financial crisis has demonstrated clearly that there really are no “smart money” managers — at least none that you can hire to work in your interests after all of their costs are considered. Furthermore, when the financial tide went out, so much fraud and malfeasance was uncovered that only the most gullible of people still believe that wide swaths of the financial services industry actual operate in their best interests. Individuals or “retail clients” are a huge industry profit center. The profits are immense, the fees are ever-present, and the bite out of your wallet is huge over the course of your lifetime.

The original point of this article was that people need to do their homework and to develop some sophistication in dealing with their own finances and with the industry. Only you and your family will have to live with the results of your financial decision-making throughout your life. The industry will extract its exorbitant costs up front and along the way. Pay less to the industry and you will have more assets for longer. If you don’t have any assets, you won’t get the time of day from the financial industry.

You need to get educated, and you need to be skeptical. While the industry has very polished song and dance routines in a vast rainbow of flavors, most of what you are told to do is not good for you. The vast majority of the supposed “financial innovation” that you encounter is designed to lighten your wallet. Only a minority of the investment, mutual fund, ETF, insurance, annuity, education, retirement, and other specialized financial products that you encounter have any long-term validity demonstrated in the objective financial research literature. Your best interests come after the best interests of the financial services industry. It is a simple as that.

And, by the way, all that wool, silk, brass, and mahogany looks impressive, but who is paying for it? (Hint: find a mirror.) The pay scales and bonuses of the financial services industry are astonishing compared to any other industry. This is even more bizarre, because from what I can tell, the average value-added of this service industry to the average person is negative! Start being skeptical and stop deferring to the supposed wisdom of the latest slick financial industry sales pitch.

Article continues:

Even when you delegate decisions to an investment counselor or financial advisor, you and your family still must live with the consequences. You must learn about investing.

You must make intelligent and informed decisions about whether the financial planning strategies and tactics recommended to you in the financial media and by financial advisers are personally valid for you and your family. The vast majority of financial ideas proposed to you during your lifetime will be suboptimal, self-interested (not yours), simply wrong, and/or just plain rubbish.

Many people have inadequate knowledge and skills about personal financial planning and personal investing.

Some of the saddest financial stories concern naive older people who get robbed of their lifetime savings by some smooth-talking slime bag financial scam artist. These fraud victims have no way to recover the lost lifetime assets. Before the fact, they needed to know better to avoid being duped. However, they lacked the knowledge, skills, and judgment to know better.

Only through a lifetime of taking personal responsibility and intentionally educating yourself will you learn how to manage your money. Only by taking personal responsibility will you learn to navigate around the amazing number of potential pitfalls associated with personal financial planning and personal investment management.

Is it reasonable to expect that you would have such expertise? You may be an expert in your profession or trade, and you may earn substantially more than you need to meet your current expenses. However the dilemma is whether and how you will also learn to manage, grow, and protect your financial assets. As you develop your financial expertise, you will increase the chances that your assets will grow sufficiently to fund your family’s future financial needs, while you become less dependent on your earned income.

Personal financial planning and investment management requires knowledge that is different from professional and career skills.

This situation makes self-direction of your finances problematic. Furthermore, this situation creates a great temptation simply to trust someone else to manage your financial affairs and investment strategy — hopefully in your best interests. (Remember to cross your fingers and keep them crossed!)

The Pasadena Financial Planner believes that people who are successful in their careers and have the ability to generate substantial investable income must also become more successful concerning the management of their money during their lifetimes. You must develop both career professional skills and personal financial planning skills to increase the probability of achieving lifelong financial success. In financial affairs, trust is often given, but not always reciprocated. Many people are just too naive and trusting, when others have an eye on their pocketbook.

Many people need help from financial planners and investment counselors. However, they base their advisor selection decisions on “trust” and the recommendations of friends and colleagues. Frustrated with complexity of personal finance and investing, they want to find someone they can “trust.” Then, they want to hand over the keys and let someone else drive.

Unfortunately, the entire financial services industry uses a “we are worthy of your trust” marketing message. Yet, it is difficult to find another service industry where so much is paid for so little genuine value in return. Much of the trust that individuals have if mis-placed and ill-founded.

Personal financial planning and asset class investment management advice from the financial services industry is often shallow and inappropriate.

While advice might seem plausible, many financial industry proposals are simply not good for you. The financial services industry writes its marketing material to sound reasonable to individuals. Some financial ideas reasonable, but many are not. Most recommendations involve the purchase of financial and investment products that are simply far too costly and far too risky.

The vast majority of personnel in the financial services industry are taught how to sell the most profitable financial products. Relatively few genuinely understand finance and investments from the perspective of what is really best for their clients. Even fewer have an incentive to act in the best interests of their clients.

Most often, the interests of the industry and the client are in conflict. Most often, the financial services industry will win, as it delivers excessively expensive and overly risky financial and investment products to its overly trusting clientele.

Without adequate personal financial knowledge and oversight, delegating personal finance and investment decisions to industry financial advisers can be very risky to your personal and family financial welfare. You will have to live with the consequences of poor or bad decisions long after your advisors have perhaps passed from the scene and even retired on their fees.

Naive trust, faith and hope are not a reliable path to financial success, when you are dealing with the financial services industry. There are simply too many potholes, conflicts of interest, and hands in your wallet. The only practical solution is for you to increase your personal investment knowledge and skills.

Information from the financial services industry furthers its interests, as brokers and financial counselors sell risky and expensive investment products and financial services to you.

For example, when hundreds of broadly diversified mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are available at extremely low costs, there is ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD REASON for individuals to do so much buying and selling of individual securities. Yet, millions frantically buy and sell equity securities in efforts to beat the market.

Egged on by the financial media and the brokerage industry, millions of people waste huge amounts of their valuable personal time in these pursuits. Most will fail miserably in their efforts and will suffer substantially increased risks, costs, and taxes in the process. Most will obtain substantially inferior performance results relative to the performance of broad securities market indexes.

Yet, the vast majority will never bother to check their net performance against passive benchmarks. They will just keep trusting and never really know how very badly they have done compared to a passive investment program that would have required far less time, less risk, lower taxes, and much lower industry fees.

Individual investors need to do a much better job of distinguishing personal finance and investment planning fact from fiction.

They need to base their decisions on financial strategies and tactics that have been validated scientifically. Individuals must become better informed. Otherwise, they must rely naively upon the supposed goodwill of investment counselors and financial advisors who have very strong incentives to sell expensive financial products to them.

When you deal with a broker, investment counselor, or financial advisor, the financial products they recommend will almost always far more expensive than necessary. You will be sold the dream of better results, while most often the reality in the future will be the opposite. In this very costly environment of “advised” personal finance and investing, depending upon the goodwill of industry representatives can be a very risky strategy.

Significant danger exists in not understanding certain fundamental truths about the financial services industry itself. The structure of the financial services industry creates costly conflicts between the financial interests of individuals and the profit motives of companies in the industry and the self-interest of its sales agents. These financial conflicts of interest are a much greater threat to the welfare of individuals and their families, than is the potential for outright financial fraud that rightly concerns so many people.

The securities industry sells investment products that add substantial and unnecessary costs that are not in the interests of their clients.

Individual investors, sometime referred to as “retail investors,” will never find “free” risk-adjusted investment money lying around. Interactions with the financial markets are a “zero-sum game” before costs and taxes. With all costs and taxes, dealing with that financial industry is a “negative sum game.”

In the short-term, the size of the securities market pie is fixed. When one party gets more, another gets less. In and of themselves the securities markets do not create value, but the industry can siphon away a significant portion of an individual investors’ potential returns through visible fees and hidden costs.

Of course, the capital markets provide an extremely valuable economic contribution to our world through the generally efficient allocation of capital. However, this role does not necessarily mean that investment profits will be shared equitably between individual investors and the financial services industry. Retail investors and the financial industry are in competition with each other over how to split this fixed short-term pie. Investors who understand this conflict can better ensure that they get a more reasonable deal.

The good news is that modern financial markets are competitive and relatively efficient asset price setting mechanisms. This means individual investors cannot consistently “beat the market” on a risk-adjusted basis. While this might disappoint some investors who believe they are smarter than others, in reality this is very good news. On the opposite side, the good news is that competitive and efficient markets mean that individuals need not be beaten badly by the market either. Investor returns can track a market return quite closely at very low cost.

While beating the market is not a reliable strategy, individual investors can still make better decisions by choosing lower cost investment strategies.

Passive strategies targeting the market return do not provide an entirely free ride, because there is always a minimum cost. However, optimal investment practices do amount to a highly discounted ticket, which can get individuals to their financial goals quicker and/or richer.

Without optimal strategies, the risk-adjusted asset class returns of the average investor will lag the market return by a much wider margin. This lag will be due to the inferior gross returns of their sub-optimal investment strategies, which are primarily attributable to their unnecessarily high investment costs and taxes.

Therefore, at the outset, the crux of the matter is to learn what does and does not work in personal financial planning and investing. Accepting what you hear or read about personal financial strategies without demanding proof, is almost certainly the road to a much lighter wallet in the future.

Please click the Sitemap link at the top of this page to find and read about the other steps in this 10 step Family Financial Planning Process.

.

See: Financial Advisors in Pasadena CA >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Concerning how I am compensated, I charge solely on a fixed fee or hourly fee for service basis, under a contract agreed upon with you. You do not have to pay any form of asset fee. Furthermore, in the interest of avoiding all conflicts-of-interest, I do not accept compensation or commissions of any kind from the financial services industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Pasadena Financial Planner

An objective and independent financial advisor for clients in the West Los Angeles area including, for example, financial planning clients in Altadena, Monrovia, Montrose, Pasadena, San Gabriel, South Pasadena, Sunland, Temple City, and Toluca Lake.

(Note that you can reach us by using the contact form below.)

Using hundreds of thousands of what the securities industry calls “producer” employees, the brokerage industry sells investment products and services to clients for transactional fees, asset holding charges, and many other more or less visible investment costs. Governed by the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the legal standard of client care by these brokers is the “suitability” of an investment to a client. However, there is huge latitude in what a suitable investment is and how much it can cost a client.

From the brokerage industry’s perspective, the wealthier the client is the better. Greater assets yield more revenue and higher profit per hour spent with clients. For example, Morgan Stanley’s 2007 compensation plan for their personnel serving retail clients eliminated all compensation for household accounts below $50,000, and it reduced compensation on household accounts under $75,000, unless these client accounts were being charged a percent of assets fee. Clearly, the message to Morgan Stanley sales personnel was and is to chase wealthier fish. Similar messages are given to broker producer employees in all brokerage firms across the industry.

Post-Credit Crisis Notes Concerning:

Financial Planning Fees

NOTE: Best individual financial planning and investment practices persist and shouldn’t vary because of financial crisis. The detailed article below was published before the financial and requires little updating. Given the more recent financial crisis, the update comments in this box were authored more recently to emphasize the enduring wisdom contained in the detailed original article below.

As the financial crisis arose and subsided, those who occupied many of the musical chairs of the financial industry changed. However, the financial incentives and compensation practices of the industry changed hardly at all. Since increasing industry concentration had never been challenged before the financial crisis, we were all faced with the “too-big-to-fail” conundrum. The professional — supposedly “smart money” — financial industry created a toxic financial environment for everyone, but they just “had” to be bailed out by taxpayers, so that all of our houses would not burn to the ground collectively.

Subsequently, little if anything has changed — even with passage of Wall Street reform act in 2010. Before most of the country had realized just how persistently bad things would become in the general economy, the securities markets turned around in anticipation of future improvements. And, huge Wall Street bonuses started all over again. Yet, it was the taxpayer bailout money that keep the financial industry and the general economy away from the precipice of another great depression. Thus, financial market expectations rose off of extremely pessimistic depression expectations, allowing the industry to restore its profitablity and fat paychecks.

Concerning how the financial advisory industry deals with the “retail public,” which is discussed in this article, little has changed. If anything the industry’s pursuit of the rich has intensified, while services to the middle class have declined. In summary, if you don’t have substantial investable assets, then expect little attention and overly expensive commissioned products. If you do have substantial investable assets, then hold on to your wallet with both hands! You will be asked to pay a substantial percentage of your assets year after year with no reliable assurance that these fees will improve your welfare in the long-term.

Most registered investment advisor compensation is proportional to client assets — the more assets you have the better for your financial adviser

Another large segment of the financial services industry that serves the public consists of about 100,000 independent investment advisor consultants, who are regulated at the federal and/or state levels. Governed by the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, and by state laws, these advisors have a seemingly more stringent standard of client care. However, again there is huge latitude in what constitutes minimally acceptable advisor service quality and how much advisory services will cost a client.

Most registered investment advisors deliver services that are charged as a percent of client assets under management. However, often many of these same advisors obtain additional revenues from the securities and insurance industry, when they sell commissioned financial products to their clients.

The wealthier the registered investment advisor’s client is, the better it is for the advisory practice. The greater the client assets under management, the more total revenue for the advisory firm and the higher the client service profit per hour will be.

The economics of the financial consulting industry create a mad dash to catch the wealthy

Whether served by a broker or by an independent financial advisor, if an individual wants personal professional attention, that individual must already have substantial assets that can generate revenue to compensate the advisor. If clients are to be given personalized attention and the valuable time of the advisor, each client must generate several thousand dollars in fees annually one way or another.

The math is simple. For example, if average client servicing requires 20 hours of attention yearly and a profitable hourly rate is $150 per hour, then the required average revenue per client is $3,000 per year. If $3,000/per year is the client revenue minimum for a practice, then the client needs to have $300,000, if the fee is 1% of assets per year. The lower the assets, then the higher the percentage necessarily must be.

Since clients usually balk at much higher percentage fees, the revenue requirements of advisory practices mean that people with less assets will not get personalized services. Clearly, the vast majority of Americans do not fit the industry’s economic profile of a profitable advisory client.

This is why there is so much effort to obscure and hide the true financial and investment costs that clients actually pay. The more the true cost can be hidden and the services promoted as supposedly “free,” then the easier it is to profit from the client, while probably not serving his best interests.

The Pasadena Financial Planner breaks out of this chase-the-rich compensation model

My financial and retirement planning services will be valuable and cost-effective to you. My financial consultant fees will be reasonable, clearly understood, and determined in advance. I can provide you with comprehensive, reasonably priced financial, investment, and retirement planning services on an hourly, fixed fee, or retainer basis. I never charge any fees in relationship to your assets.

For a better understanding of how I operate see: Financial Planning in Pasadena

.

See: Independent Pasadena Financial Advisor >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding how I am compensated, I perform services only on a hourly fee or fixed fee for services basis, and only under a contract that we agree upon. You do not have to pay any asset fees. In addition, to avoid any conflict-of-interest, I never accept compensation or commissions of any type from the industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Pasadena Financial Advisors

Find the best independent financial planner for those living in the San Gabriel Valley, including Arcadia, Baldwin Park, Burbank, Covina, Diamond Bar, Glendale, Duarte, La Canada Flintridge, West Los Angeles, and Pasadena.

(Note that you can reach me by using the contact form below.)

During my 20+ year Silicon Valley business management career, I had saved and invested according to the financial principles that I had learned at the Stanford Business School in the early 1980s. (See: Pasadena Financial Planner) Retiring in 2001, I began a systematic reading of the academic literature about personal financial planning and personal family investing.

As I searched the web, university libraries, and on-line scholarly paper repositories, I was impressed by how much very useful personal financial planning information was scattered around the academic world. It seemed to me that many individuals and families were starved for just this kind of objective financial and investment information. At the same time, people were drowning in a sea of self-interested securities and financial services industry sales pitches that pushed overly expensive and unnecessarily risky investment products, with expected returns that were much more likely to be inferior due to these high investment costs.

Information from the financial media and financial services industry is superficial and biased.

The financial media and the securities industry generate a deluge of information, but leave individuals with very little systematic or durable understanding of which are the best financial planner practices, and which practices are likely to be inferior. Faced with all this finance and investment “noise,” individuals are hard pressed to understand what is true and what financial and investment claims have or have not been verified. Without valid guideposts to screen out all the noise and self-interested hype, individuals cannot reasonably be expected to plan a proper course for their lifetime financial affairs.

Scientific financial planning information is very useful to individuals for personal financial planning and investing.

As I returned to my academic and research roots, I began to read finance and investment journals, to visit finance professors’ websites, and to search the Internet for publications and working papers. After my first year of almost full-time reading, clarity began to emerge. By the middle of 2003, I was convinced that I understood more efficient and scientifically verifiable pathways for individuals to optimize their financial planning and investment strategies.

Since then, I have collected and organized over 25,000 electronic documents related to personal finance and investing. I have read thousands of research paper abstracts and over 1,000 seminal financial and investment papers in their excruciating economic and statistical details.

Nevertheless, academic research papers are not written for individuals, but rather for other academics and for highly trained financial industry research professionals. Furthermore, useful information is dispersed in a sea of less useful research information not focused on personal financial planning. Moreover, these research papers contain the obscure vocabulary of economic and statistical research — not breezy reading at all! To make some of this information more accessible, I have written hundreds of articles and published them for free on various financial websites.

.

See: Financial Planner Pasadena CA >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding compensation, I provide financial planning services solely on a fixed fee or hourly fee for services basis, and only under a contract that we agree upon. You do not have to pay any asset fees. In addition, in the interest of avoiding any conflict-of-interest, I do not accept compensation or commissions of any type from the financial industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Pasadena Financial Advisors

Find the best independent investment advisor for money conscious people in Pasadena, Altadena, Arcadia, Baldwin Park, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Glendale, La Canada Flintridge, La Crescenta, and other surrounding cities.

<<< Pasadena Financial Planner Background Part 1: Pasadena Financial Planning

(Note that you can reach me by using the contact form below.)

Receiving my Stanford MBA in 1982, I moved a few miles south to begin my corporate career in Silicon Valley. For most of my twenty-five plus years after Stanford, I have managed strategic business and corporate initiatives for technology companies. Analytically oriented management positions in these corporations sharpened my financial and business judgment. I first joined Hewlett-Packard’s computer systems division, where I led business development and marketing initiatives. After seven years at HP, I was Director of Product Marketing at IntelliCorp, an AI software company, and then I moved on to Sun Microsystems.

At Sun Microsystems from 1991 to 1999, I acquired rights for Sun to numerous product lines from independent technology companies via negotiated licensing arrangements. As Director of Corporate Development during my last four years at Sun, I oversaw merger and acquisition projects and evaluated innumerable external investment proposals that were made to Sun’s executive committee members.

Bitten by the startup bug in 1999, I co-founded Codexa Corporation in Altadena, California. Codexa provided advanced information services to Wall Street securities industry professionals. My co-founder and MIT roommate, Dave Leinweber, had been managing about $6 billion of institutional equity with highly quantitative methods at First Quadrant in Pasadena. Look here for chapter summaries of his recent book, Nerds on Wall Street, published by Wiley. Most individual investors do not have a clue about the techology behind Wall Street professional trading — if they did, then some of them might not do all the silly stock trading, options trading, currency trading, day trading, etc. that they do to fritter away foolishly some of their hard-earned assets, while wasting their valuable time.

Solving the Internet on-line trading and investment management information challenge

Dave believed that the flood of financial information across the web had greatly changed the nature of the securities markets. Together, we founded Codexa Corporation and set out to develop a technological solution to gain some control of this information explosion. Our primary objective was to harvest, filter, and display semantic trading and investment management information on traders’ workstations in real-time.

We developed Codexa’s information service provider business plan, hired the management team, and raised an $8M Series A venture round. The company secured $2M in initial revenues from major Wall Street investment and trading clients. As Codexa’s EVP and CFO, I managed the finance, business development, accounting, human resources, legal, and real estate functions. Then, the stock market collapsed and our paying Wall Street clients simply evaporated. It did not matter that we succeeded in developing a robust and extensible technology. The clients who had been supporting our early technology development efforts disappeared as Wall Street’s revenues collapsed and tens of thousands of people in the securities industry lost their jobs.

Our business stradded both the faltering financial securities industry and the plummeting high technology industry. When these industries collapsed, so did Codexa. We had to let fifty very skilled software technology people go. Subsequently, I had the privilege to learn about the corporate bankruptcy process, which had never been high on my list of career interests. Except for a subsequent six-month consulting arrangement as the interim president of a Caltech startup during its formation, very little new was happening in the technology economy after the crash in Southern California. Therefore, I retired at the ripe middle age of 50, just as I was receiving my first solicitations in the mail from AARP.

With the dot com stock market collapse, the high tech industry in the U.S. lost roughly 225,000 positions and the securities industry lost approximately 75,000 positions. It was financially devastating for many affected families, and even those who remained employed found a very significant deterioration in the quality of work life and a great increase in stress.

While the economic fallout from the market crash could have been a lot worse to the broader economy, it was and still is devastating to many in the high tech industry. (And, you could easily perceive that historically low, post-dot-com-crash interest rates coupled with good old greed and lax regulation of mortgage brokers, resellers, and derivatives hucksters have lead us to the broader real estate and credit crisis of 2007/8/9 and counting — just a delayed reaction to the false “cure” for the dot com crash.)

I quickly concluded that the dot com economic downturn was so severe from a new employment opportunities standpoint, that it is not even worth looking. I decided to wait it out. This was a great blessing in disguise, that I did not recognize at the time.

Comprehensive financial planning advice based upon objective financial research

As an involuntarily retired 50-year-old, I still had the start-up bug. Instead of heading for the golf course, I decided to do some in depth investment research and to catch up on new developments since I studied finance at Stanford.

I started Lawrence Russell and Company, and I began to publish The Skilled Investor. I wrote and published hundreds of objective personal financial planning and investment articles on the Internet. I now have a family of free and objective financial information websites written entirely by myself that help to meet the informational needs of individuals around the world who are managing their own financial and investment affairs.

My firm also became a Registered Investment Adviser in the state of California (Certificate #133101). I passed the Series 65 “Uniform Investment Adviser Law Examination” administered for the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). I hung out my virtual shingle.

I designed and developed VeriPlan, which I dubbed “Your Personal Financial Lifecycle Planner.” I did an indepth, multi-year study of the scientific finance and investment literature to find out what personal financial planning and investing strategies and tactics really do and do not work.

In short, I am having tremendous fun developing financial planning software, writing financial planning articles, and offering comprehensive financial planning services to families in the Greater Pasadena California, West Los Angeles, Gendale, and San Gabriel Valley areas of Southern California.

.

See: Financial Planning in Pasadena CA >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Concerning my compensation, I perform services only on a fixed fee or hourly fee for services basis, and only under a contract that we agree upon. I do not charge any form of asset fee. Furthermore, to avoid any conflict-of-interest, I do not accept commissions or compensation of any type from the financial services industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Financial Planner Pasadena CA

Get comprehensive financial planning services from the best personal financial advisor serving clients in the Pasadena area, including these cities: Altadena, Arcadia, Burbank, Eagle Rock, Glendale, La Canada Flintridge, La Crescenta, and Monrovia.

.

I am committed to the financial education of my clients. I strongly believe that financial education will help you to make much better personal financial planning decisions across your lifetime. Together, we can significantly improve the quality of your practices in family financial planning and your personal investment management.

We will work together cooperatively to analyze your financial affairs. We will develop a detailed lifecycle projection model of your family’s finances that will allow us to automate the testing of how different personal financial decisions might impact your family’s financial future.

I will help you to understand and adopt more durable, time-efficient, and cost-effective lifetime financial and investment strategies. I will advise you on improved methods for the long-term self-management of your family’s financial affairs. Your personal financial and investment plan will be designed for cost-efficiency, tax-efficiency, and time-efficiency. Once established, your financial plan should require minimal tuning over time.

As your personal financial advisor and independent investment advisor, I will also act as your financial consumer advocate.

I will help you learn how to be a highly cost conscious consumer of financial and investment products that are consistent with your personal financial goals and plan.

My financial and retirement planning services will be valuable and cost-effective to you. My financial consultant fees will be reasonable, clearly understood, and determined in advance. I can provide you with comprehensive, reasonably priced financial, investment, and retirement planning services on an hourly, fixed fee, or retainer basis.

I will never charge any fees in relationship to your assets. Simply put, your financial assets are yours and not mine. I believe that financial advisor fees should not be proportional to your assets.

Your family’s interests will always come first. I will work exclusively for you and your family. I will never accept any form of compensation from any third party.

When delivering my financial planning and investment advisory services, I will never tolerate any conflict of interest. No financial industry incentives will ever interfere with my development of an optimal long-term financial plan for you. My recommendations will focus exclusively on your family’s financial interests.

Get help from a fee only financial planner and independent investment advisor who will:

• Take the time necessary to understand your family’s personal financial and retirement planning situation in comprehensive detail
• Provide thorough, personalized, and specific financial action plans
• Put you at the center of decisions using a sophisticated and fully automated personal financial planning tool that projects across your lifetime the potential impacts of financial decisions you might wish to make.

.

See: Pasadena Financial Planners >>>

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding how I am compensated, I work solely on a hourly fee or fixed fee for services basis, and only under a contract that we would agree upon. I do not charge any asset fees. In addition, in the interest of avoiding any conflict-of-interest, I never accept commissions or compensation of any kind from the industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Financial Planner in Pasadena California

Serving clients throughout the greater Pasadena, California area including these cities: Glendale, La Canada, La Crescenta, La Tuna Canyon, La Verne, Los Feliz, Monrovia, Montrose, North Hollywood, Pasadena, San Marino, and South Pasadena.

• Take the time necessary to understand your family’s personal financial and retirement planning situation in comprehensive detail
• Provide thorough, personalized, and specific financial action plans
• Put you at the center of decisions using a sophisticated and fully automated personal financial planning tool that projects across your lifetime the potential impacts of financial decisions you might wish to make.

.

My knowledge of personal financial planning and investing has been developed through:

• education at Stanford University (MBA), Brandeis University (MA), and M.I.T. (BS)
• twenty-five years of corporate and start-up management experience in the business development, financial planning, corporate development, and investment functions
• studying the scientific finance research literature in depth to find evidence about which investment and financial planning strategies work and which do not
• design and engineering of sophisticated lifecycle personal financial planning software to support the development of highly personalized lifetime family financial plans

.

Do you want reasonably priced, comprehensive financial planning services from a responsive fee only investment advisor and personal financial planner?

My financial and retirement planning services will be valuable and cost-effective to you. My financial consultant fees will be reasonable, clearly understood, and determined in advance. I can provide you with comprehensive, reasonably priced financial, investment, and retirement planning services on an hourly, fixed fee, or retainer basis.

When delivering my financial planning and investment advisory services, I will never tolerate any conflict of interest. No financial industry incentives will ever interfere with my development of an optimal long-term financial plan for you. My recommendations will focus exclusively on your family’s financial interests.

.

See: Pasadena California Financial Planner >>>

.

.

.

Larry Russell, Managing Director

MBA – Stanford University, MA – Brandeis University, and BS – M.I.T.

Lawrence Russell and Company Pasadena, California 91103

(626) 399-9579

A California Registered Investment Adviser — Certificate 133101

KNOWLEDGE — OBJECTIVITY — HONESTY — DILIGENCE — SATISFACTION

.

A truly independent financial planner and fee only investment advisor

(Regarding compensation, I perform services solely on a fixed fee or hourly fee for service basis, and only under a contract that we agree upon. You will not have to pay any asset fees. Furthermore, in the interest of avoiding any conflict-of-interest, I never accept compensation or commissions of any type from the industry.)

Start a conversation today — Send a message using this contact form

Financial Planner in Pasadena CA

.

Serving clients throughout the greater Pasadena, California area including these cities: Altadena, Glendale, La Canada Flintridge, Montrose, Pasadena, Rosemead, San Dimas, San Gabriel, San Marino, Silver Lake, South El Monte, and South Pasadena.

.