Certain narratives periodically dominate investor minds. And this year, one such narrative is that “inflation is coming”.
Seeing losses as wins transforms investing from a nerve-wracking roller-coaster of anxiety and regret into a confident sailing through the expected ups and downs.
Given the increasing drawdown in the market, it seems prudent to revisit the notion of volatility vs risk
2019 was an especially memorable year, containing a larger than usual number of really big finance-related highlights.
Forecasts, Nowcasts and Pastcasts all have their right place in investing. The risk arises when the latter two start to disguise themselves as the first.
Over the long-run, since 1877, Risk Parity’s performance looks very similar to a 60/40. However, the eye can easily miss the ‘wild swings of dispersion’ along the way.
The rise and fall (?) of Risk Parity is a great case study of the frameworks I have been writing about so far. We start with the concept of “Chasing Diversifiers.”
Nothing sounds simpler than earning the return of a simple 60/40 strategy, right? Just buy two ETFs at Vanguard, Global Stock and Global Bonds, for a combined 14 basis points fee, re-balance quarterly and you are done, right? The reality for most investors could not be further from this.
There are two kinds of randomness, one that is harmless and one that can hurt.
Knowing which one your investments contain is important.
A black-box ‘go-anywhere’ hedge fund = Strategy Risk
Buy and hold S&P500 for the long-run = Asset Risk
One thing has not made sense to me.
Why does the most important step of investing is in the hands of Financial Advisors and not Asset Managers?

A black-box hedge fund might be less volatile than S&P500, but is it less risky?