Free 7-day Trial
All Articles and Columns »

Is Buy and Hold Dead?

June 16, 2012 | About:
insider

Gordon Pape

14 followers
I've read some articles lately suggesting that the time-honoured investment strategy of buy and hold is dead. Today's markets are simply too volatile, the argument goes. Only active traders who are able to get in and out quickly can hope to make money.

To a degree, it's true. Certain buy and hold strategies have proven to be non-productive in the current environment and should be avoided. One of them is popularly known as "couch potato investing". This involves creating a passive portfolio using exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The theory is that if you invest in a small but diversified portfolio of index-based ETFs and don't touch it, over time you'll generate a decent return.

The reality is that you may have to wait a long, long time for that decent return to happen - probably too long for most people's liking. Our companion Mutual Funds Update newsletter has been tracking a model couch potato portfolio since January 2008. It has all the classic components - a 40% weighting in a universe bond ETF with the other 60% invested in three ETFs that track the TSX, S&P 500, and EAFE indexes. As of April 30 - more than four years since the launch - the portfolio showed a total gain of just 4.52%. That translates into an average annual compound rate of return of 1.03%. You would have done better in a high-interest savings account.

Purists will suggest that four years isn't long enough to provide a meaningful test for the couch potato approach. That may be true but, as I have noted in the past, the human factor has to be taken into account. It's one thing to play with numbers on paper. It's quite another when those numbers represent your personal wealth. Few people would be willing to stick with an investing plan that has returned only 1% annually over four years and carries a high degree of stock market risk. At some point, you have to move on.

But just because couch potato investing with ETFs hasn't been a very productive strategy does not mean that the whole idea of buy and hold has been discredited. It still makes a lot of sense, provided you are holding the right securities. Just ask Warren Buffett. He believes in buying good companies and holding them forever and he's done all right for himself and his shareholders.

Forever is a long time and I wouldn't go that far. Even iconic companies that once dominated their industry can fall by the wayside. Think Eastman Kodak, Nortel, and the old General Motors. They would have been mainstays of a buy-and-hold portfolio a couple of decades ago and look what happened to them.

So nothing is forever. But there are many securities that can be successfully bought and held for a long time. Here are the key criteria to look for.

Long-term growth profile. Call up a chart of the security that you are considering and look closely at the pattern over the past five and ten years. Compare it to a relevant index to see how it has performed against the broader market. You are looking for companies that are consistently doing better than their peers. You can find stock charts at Globeinvestor.com, Morningstar.ca (interactive), Yahoo Finance (also interactive), and the recently launched Canada Stock Channel (CSC) at www.canadastockchannel.com. The CSC site has a feature that allows you to compare the price performance of a stock with any of several indexes. However, the S&P/TSX Composite is not yet available.

Industry leadership. The top companies in their sectors are there for a reason. Moreover, history tells us they are likely to remain at number one for a long time. You're creating a long-term buy-and-hold portfolio so why settle for second best? Market capitalization is one way of identifying which company is number one. Revenue is another.

Strong balance sheet. A sound financial underpinning has never been more important than right now. This means you're looking for companies with good liquidity, strong assets, and relatively low debt (the latter will depend to some extent on the type of industry it operates in). Look at measures like "current ratio" (current assets divided by current liabilities). If the number is less than one, it's a danger sign. Debt to equity ratio is another popular measure. It is calculated by dividing long-term debt by shareholder equity. Utilities and telecoms, which have to invest heavily in infrastructure, will typically have higher debt/equity ratios but as long as the cash flow and profitability are good, it's not an issue.

Good dividend record. Securities that have a long history of steady dividends and regular increases (preferably at least annually) are prime candidates for a buy-and-hold portfolio. There's a good dividend history chart on the Canada Stock Channel website.

Relative strength in bad markets. No publicly-traded security is immune to market downturns. But some fare much better than others. Look closely at how a stock performed during the crash of 2008-09 compared to the market as a whole. You want securities that have a history of outperforming in such difficult times.

If you choose securities according to these guidelines they should fit well into a buy-and-hold portfolio and you'll be happy to keep them there for several years to come - although maybe not forever.

About the author:

Gordon Pape
GuruFocus - Stock Picks and Market Insight of Gurus

Rating: 2.5/5 (14 votes)

Comments

Cornelius Chan
Cornelius Chan - 1 year ago
Good article. Solid advice. Keep up the steady-as-she-goes articles Gordon!

If one dollar-cost-averages their way using high quality stocks, there can't be much downside if you are looking at a 30 or 40-year time horizon - which I am. All the companies we are looking at on the charts today will be at multiple X higher in a decade and especially multiple decades from now.

tonyg34
Tonyg34 - 1 year ago
Straw man fallacy.

a balanced index fund (60/40) with regular contributions (monthly) has returned more than 4.5% since January 2008.

In real world investing people don't just make one buy and hold purchase decision, they make an asset allocation plan and then make regular contributions over their investment lifetime.

Hell, the yield on a balanced index fund like VGSTX is 2.5% a year, so the dividends a passive index investor earned over your sample holding period would be more than double the returns you gave them credit for.
go_loe
Go_loe - 1 year ago
Lots of it depends on "what you buy & hold"
Bogle_Fan
Bogle_Fan - 1 year ago
Junk article. I'll take a 60-40 total stock market/total bond market etf portfolio over a financial advisor's actively managed portfolio over a 30 year plus time frame any day of the week.
Darrenh11
Darrenh11 - 1 year ago
Unfortunately this gentleman is not telling the whole story. A partial truth does not make him right. The goal of index investing is to track the market using the index as a benchmark. Think about where all of these were at in January of 2008 and where they were at as of April 30. Considering this I think a 4.5% return is tolerable especially considering the low cost of the strategy. The other important factor that is not taken into account is regular rebalancing of the portfolio which would like boost the speculative return he quotes by forcing the passive investor to buy low. This is a terrible article.

Please leave your comment:


Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
Free 7-day Trial
FEEDBACK
Hide