Hey there, My Money Box Community! đź‘‹
Have you ever been at a gathering where someone casually drops a bombshell about an investment that skyrocketed, boasting returns that would make your investments blush? Picture this: Over the last year, their new asset class delivered a whopping 150% return. Over five years, they’ve seen a steady 50% annualized return, and over a decade, a solid 60% annualized. Sounds tempting, doesn’t it? But hold your horses—let’s dive a little deeper before we jump on board.
Now, if I’ve piqued your interest, you’re probably wondering if those consistent returns tell the whole story. Spoiler alert: they don’t. The first question you should be asking isn’t about the returns themselves but about the risks involved. What’s at stake? Could you lose your initial investment, or might the returns not pan out as expected? Essentially, we’re talking about the uncertainty that comes with the territory.
Even if I reassure you that this investment is as “safe” as a kitten playing with yarn, how do you actually measure that safety? That’s where you need to pull out the magnifying glass and scrutinize risk and returns side by side. Only then can you make a fair comparison to other asset classes like cash, bank deposits, stocks, bonds, gold—you name it.
Enter the realm of Risk Adjusted Returns. As a rational investor, your mission is to get the best bang for your buck while managing the risks you take. There are a plethora of methods to measure risk, but almost all of them hinge on a set timeframe and a benchmark for comparison. And let’s be smart about our benchmark selection, so we’re not comparing apples to oranges.
Let’s break down some foundational risk measures:
Beta: Think of Beta as the market’s mood swings. It’s a gauge for volatility. A Beta of 1 is your baseline, meaning the market itself. If an asset’s Beta is over 1, it’s a wilder ride than the market. Below 1? It’s more like a gentle carousel.
R-squared: This is like a relationship status for an asset and its benchmark. Expressed as a percentage, it tells you how much of an asset’s price movements can be explained by its benchmark’s movements. An R-squared of 85% means 85% of the asset’s price dance is in sync with its benchmark.
When you’re looking to diversify your portfolio, in an ideal world, you’d want zero overlap in the returns of different assets. But reality check: all assets play in the same sandbox to some extent. Our goal is to understand this correlation and use strategies to play it to our advantage.
Standard deviation: This is the drama meter for an asset’s price compared to its historical average. More drama (higher standard deviation) means more volatility.
But here’s the kicker: if Asset A is a steady Eddie with an 8% expected return and a low standard deviation, and Asset B is a rollercoaster with a 15% expected return and a high standard deviation, which one truly gives you more value for the risk you’re taking?
That’s where the Sharpe ratio and Sortino ratio come into play:
Sharpe ratio: This is all about how much extra return you’re getting for each unit of risk, compared to the risk-free rate.
Sortino ratio: Similar to Sharpe, but with a twist—it only cares about downside risk. Some investors love this because they don’t see rising prices as a risk.
To wrap it up, a higher return doesn’t always mean you’re winning the investment game. Risk-adjusted returns give you the real scoop, considering the risk level you’ve braved to snag those returns.
You’ll find many of these risk measures published for different asset classes and investments. And if you’re feeling adventurous, grab some historical data and flex your Excel skills to crunch the numbers yourself.
Once you’ve got a handle on these risk measures, you’re better equipped to either sidestep risks or manage them like a pro. Remember, there’s more to investment performance than just looking at the returns.
Alright, I want to hear from you now! Are there any risk measures you swear by? Any wild investment stories you want to share? Drop your thoughts and experiences in the comments, and let’s keep the conversation going!
PS: Do note that while risk-adjusted returns provide valuable insights, they are not without limitations. One limitation is that they rely on historical data, which may not accurately predict future performance. Also, risk-adjusted returns can be influenced by factors such as the choice of benchmark, the time period analysed, and the assumptions underlying the calculation method. These factors can lead to inconsistencies and biases in assessing performance.
My Money Box 