Issue: 178
Sent: 15-09-2009 10:51:01
In this issue:

Investing in Australian DrugsEmail Marketing Business Opportunity - Helen BairstowRetire, then what - 2The Easiest way to do a Client NewsletterWhy Warren Buffett won't buy a NewspaperAverage Returns and Adviser Qualifications
Return to full article list
HomeFree weekly newsletterSelf Managed Super Fund ArticlesContact usLogin

Average Returns and Adviser Qualifications

Click here to buy - A How To Book of SMSF's by Tony Negline
Tony Negline

During the past week I received an email from Professor Sam Savage telling me that he'd finally finished his book "The Flaw of Averages" which is being published by John Wiley & Sons.

I've been following the work of Savage for quite sometime.

In 2000 he published an article in the San Jose Mercury News. His best quote is that, "If you count on the stock market's average return to support you in retirement, you could wind up penniless." You can read that article here:

Averages are used extensively (perhaps even exclusively) in Australian financial planning and elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if the use of average returns helped a few investors see the benefits of gearing and retirement strategies which then failed.

In a 2006 Administrative Appeals Tribunal case one financial planner summed up pretty well how planning recommendations are prepared in Australia. He said in verbal evidence that in order to provide advice "a financial planner would calculate that person's taxation and social security entitlements on various sets of options and to (sic) compare the options."

This is not necessarily dealing with the average return issue but with using an almost hit and miss approach to working out the most suitable recommendation to make to a client.

Savage argues that the cure of averages is monte carlo simulation which he says, "generates thousands of scenarios covering all conceivable real world contingencies in proportion to their likelihood".

Monte carlo simulation does indeed seek to do this. However like all modelling approaches it's only as good as the inputs.

A lot of US based financial advisers have used monte carlo for many years but their assumptions didn't cover the possibility of 50% falls in equity markets because such an event was considered beyond the reasonably possible.

Monte carlo is significantly better than average returns but one could argue that there is a good chance it might not be broad enough unless many assumptions are made sufficiently broad. The generation of good random returns is therefore vital to producing good Monte carlo results.

Finally I am indebted to a colleague who last week pointed out some research contacted in the Quantum Financial Services submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee's on Corporations and Financial Services' inquiry research into financial products and services. Of particular interest is the research about the professional education requirements of various professional activities beginning on page 28 of the submission. Some will see the research and weep. Others will shrug their shoulders and say, "So what?" You can find the document I would be interested in hearing your thoughts.

Share this article
Click to share this article on Facebook Click to share this article on Twitter

Previous article         Next article

If you liked this article and would like more by email, subscribe! It's free.

[Bold fields are required]

Your details

Your alternate email address is used only if messages to your primary email address are returned to us.


Do you work in the financial services industry?

This email is general in nature only and does not constitute or convey specific or professional advice. Legislation changes may occur quickly. Formal advice should be sought before acting in any of the areas discussed. Be aware that the information in these articles may become innaccurate with time. Responsibility is disclaimed for any inaccuracies, errors or omissions. Particular investments are neither invited nor recommended and hence this publication is not "financial product advice" as defined in Section 766B of the above legislation. All expressions of opinion by contributors are published on the basis that they are not to be regarded as expressing the official opinion of any other person or entity unless expressly stated. No responsibility for the accuracy of the opinions or information contained in the contributor's articles is accepted by any other person or entity. Copyright: This publication is copyright. If you wish to reproduce this article you require a license, which can be purchased here, to do so.

Site design by Raycon