Tag Archives: interest rates

Personal finance trends – the good and bad

Positive developments in 2013

1)      Lower expense ratios on many Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs). Last year, Schwab started the trend of lowering ongoing management fees on their ETFs and eliminating the transaction costs to buy and sell these products on the Schwab platform. This move attracted the attention of competitors and now many ETFs are cheaper to own than ever before. These products allow the broadest diversification across entire market segments at the lowest possible cost.

2)      The government has increased the contribution limits for retirement accounts for the first time since 2008. Annual IRA contributions were bumped up by $500 to $5,500 for people 49 and under and $6,500 for 50 and over investors. Employer retirement plan contributions also increased. Individuals under 50 can contribute $17,500. The over-50 catch up contribution can add another $5,500 to get to $23,000 total.

3)      Congress adopted higher federal estate tax thresholds ($5.25 million per person and $10.5 million per couple in 2013) than expected by most pundits. This effectively eliminates the prospect of paying federal estate tax for 99.86% of estates according to the Tax Policy Center. It also provided much more clarity for estate planning professionals who work with high net worth individuals on estate planning issues. Many states still have lower estate tax thresholds, however. For example, in Washington state the limit is $2 million. If a person dies with an estate value of $1,999,999 no state estate tax is due. But reach $2,000,001 and an estate tax return and payment are necessary.

4)      Investors have returned to markets. According to Leuthold Group, through April 24, net cash flow into mutual funds was at its strongest pace ever with year-to-date positive cash flow $223 billion.

Trends that concern us:

1)      Regarding that cash flow, the point of concern is that $106 billion of the incoming investments have gone to bond mutual funds. We think bonds will be severely challenged to generate meaningful returns over the next several years. Combine the premium many bonds are trading at with current low yields and the fact that total return could turn negative when interest rates rise and particularly U.S. government bonds will struggle to post returns anything like the past decade. By comparison, $22 billion of new investments have entered U.S. stock funds so far this year.

2)      The low interest rate policy set by the Federal Reserve Board. This policy has lowered the borrowing costs for the U.S. Government, but it has also changed the way that we all invest. Bond investors who are searching for yield are taking considerably more investment risk with their fixed income portfolios than ever before. When the Fed finally increases interest rates, three things may happen: inflation could increase dramatically, bond default rates may rise, and returns for bonds could turn negative as investors seek newer bonds at different increasing interest rates.

3)      Less affordable long-term care insurance. A few trends are becoming clearer for the LTC marketplace. A) most residents of nursing homes are women, b) Most baby boomers don’t have long-term care insurance because they either feel that it is too expensive or they don’t think that they will ever need it, C) Rates paid for LTC policies are becoming gender based, and although they have stabilized somewhat in the past year, the combination of the continuation of the low interest rate policies by the federal government and higher claims rates by women will force LTC prices to continue to grow at higher rates than inflation.

~ Allyn Hughes, CFP® — Brooks, Hughes & Jones – Partners in Wealth Management, Tacoma, WA

www.BHJadvisors.com

If you liked this post, please share it

Federal budget issues on deck

This article from Charles Schwab’s Washington expert Michael Townsend and Director of Income Planning Rob Williams provides a good outline of the debt ceiling and other upcoming federal negotiations and how they may impact markets and retirement income.

There are three deadlines looming. How well, or not, Congress and President Obama work together, will likely dictate movement in stock and bond markets over the next several weeks.

Topics covered include:

  • Impact of default or debt downgrade
  • Debt ceiling debate is about more than just default
  • Debt downgrade more about politics
  • Downgrade could have spillover effects
  • Tax-exempt status of muni bonds
  • Interest-rate impacts on bonds
  • Low interest rates hurt retirees
  • Bonds or bond funds?

~ Gary Brooks, CFP(r) — Brooks, Hughes & Jones, Partners in Wealth Management — Tacoma, WA

www.BHJadvisors.com

 

If you liked this post, please share it

Bond risk escalates rapidly below investment grade

Through September 12, 2012, year-to-date investments into U.S. taxable bond funds totaled over $324 billion according to the Investment Company Institute. At the same time, over $237 billion flowed out of U.S. stock mutual funds.

Essentially, many investors decided that the prospect of continuing to invest in bonds at historically low interest rates is more appealing than the risk of owning more U.S. stocks should another recession or bear market occur.

Many investors, aware of the negative real return presented by owning U.S. Treasury bonds with payments lower than inflation, have chosen to invest in corporate bonds instead, expecting higher income payments. According to a note in the Sept. 25 Wall Street Journal, even corporate bond payments are near record lows. The rate of high-yield, or “junk” bonds, above comparable maturity Treasuries was 5.42 percentage points, down from 9.1 percentage points just a year ago.

The search for higher yields makes it very important to understand the risk inherent in corporate bonds.

According to research from Asset Dedication, LLC, from 1970-2009 the default rate on U.S. corporate bonds by rating class over the first 10 years after issuance was:

Bond Rating Default Rate Moody’s Comment
Aaa .5% Highest quality, minimal credit risk
Aa .54% High quality, very low credit risk
A 2.05% Upper-medium grade, low credit risk
Baa 4.85% Medium grade, moderate credit risk
Ba 19.96% Have speculative elements and substantial credit risk
B 44.38% Speculative and high credit risk
Caa – C 71.38% Poor standing or in default and very high credit risk

This table shows the non-linear nature of the risks of owning corporate bonds of different qualities.  High-quality bonds (Aaa and Aa) have similar default rates that have been historically very low. As you get lower on the quality ladder, however, the risks of owning these bonds tends to go up very quickly, so when you get to high-yield bonds (generally B and below) the default rates are above 50% on average.

These default rates go up and down based on the performance of the overall U.S. economy.  If earnings are pretty good, and the U.S. economy is doing OK, the default rates of lower-quality bonds are usually lower than the table above.  When the economy hits a rough patch the performance of these companies suffers, and more of them are unable to cover the interest payments that they owe.  They default and provide no or reduced payments to shareholders.

We suggest that before you buy a bond mutual fund you learn more about the rating of the bonds held within the fund. With this information you can get an idea of how much risk you are taking with this portion of your investment portfolio.

BEWARE OF AVERAGE CREDIT QUALITY

Be careful not to place too much weight in your evaluation on the average credit rating of a bond mutual fund or exchange-traded fund. As referenced above, the advancement of default risk is not linear. However, when determining average credit quality, most fund firms and research organizations treat the calculation as if there were a linear progression of risk.

According to a note in the September 12 edition of ETF Report, “most data services assign each rating a grade: AAA=1, AA+=2, AA=3, and so on. The numeric values are summed up and averaged. With one bond in each tier, the average credit rating is BB+, one notch below investment grade.” This presents a problem because while the difference between AAA and AA may not be significant, the difference between CCC and C+ is massive. If you use actual default rates rather than just assigning a value to each tier, the expected default rate of the overall portfolio would climb from 0.63% for the simple math approach to 2.73% for the actual experience approach. That’s 333% increase in default rate.

How do you feel about investing in bonds in today’s market environment?

Have low interest rates forced you to change your investment approach?

~ Allyn Hughes, CFP®, CLU®, ChFC®, Brooks, Hughes & Jones – Partners in Wealth Management, Tacoma, WA — www.BHJadvisors.com

If you liked this post, please share it

Bonds less incredible than you think

Here is Gary Brooks’s column from the October 5 Tacoma News Tribune.

If you liked this post, please share it

Challenges facing bond investors, reasons to hold them

The following chart from Natixis Investments demonstrates how interest rates impact bond markets, particularly long-term government bonds. Over the past 30 years, generally declining interest rates have fueled bond returns that have easily outpaced inflation (6% real return). But go back to the previous 30 years when rates had a long upward trend and you can see that U.S. long government bonds lost ground to inflation (-1% real return).

Many economy and market watchers forecast that we are entering a period in this cycle similar to the green portion of the graph above with interest rates generally climbing for an extended period. This will make it harder to build financial security with a bond-heavy investment mix.

Couple this with recent comments from Ben Inker, head of asset allocation at money manager Grantham, Mayo, van Otterloo (GMO). Government bond yields are now at 60-year lows, Inker said at a presentation March 25. The last time bond yields were this low was the 1940s and they generated returns worse than cash for 40 years.

This doesn’t mean investors should avoid bonds entirely. U.S. Treasury bonds may not be attractive but a well diversified bond portfolio can still add value to an investment mix by holding corporate bonds, foreign bonds (where government finances are in better shape than the U.S.), and specialty bonds like floating rate bank loans.

This type of mix may not outpace inflation significantly, the way bonds have for the past several years, but it can be expected to provide a welcome buffer for periods when the stock market is not in favor. The magnitude of losses for bonds compared to stocks is minimal even when it is not an opportune time to build wealth through bond investments.

According to Fidelity Investments, in the period from 1941-81 when bonds struggled, the probablity of suffering a negative return in Treasury bonds in any one-year period was just 10.3%. The probability of negative Treasury bond returns over a three-year period was just 0.8%.

~ Brooks, Hughes & Jones, Partners in Wealth Management, Tacoma, WA

If you liked this post, please share it

Investors overreact to municipal bond fears

This video from Vanguard Investments is a helpful reviewof the current state of the municipal bond market. Three turbulent months based on speculation about future defaults have shaken munis. The risks appear to be overblown.

If you liked this post, please share it

The total return picture for bonds when interest rates rise

Extending our thoughts from the 2-part Bond Market Conundrum post of December 22, here is a good visual representation of the fact that total return (income + price appreciation) is important to evaluate bonds and bond mutual funds.

When interest rates climb and negatively impact bond prices, the income paid by the bonds largely offsets the problem, usually keeping bonds in positive territory.

This chart, produced by our friends in the advisor consulting group at Russell Investments, tracks the total return components of the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index since 1994.

Bond market total returnAs long as interest rates don’t rise much faster than expected, bond mutual fund managers should maintain a good ability to manage the changes.

There is a rule of thumb approach to measuring the negative impact of interest rate changes on bond funds. Bonds can be expected to decline by a multiple of the percentage change in interest rates times the duration* of the bond(s).

Here is an example using data from the Barclays Aggregate Bond Index at the end of 2010.

Let’s assume interest rates over the next year rise by 0.5%. The duration of the Barclays Aggregate Index on 12/31/2010 was 4.98 years.

0.5% x 4.98 = 2.49

You could expect a bond’s price to decline by 2.49% over this time. The average income yield of the Barclays Aggregate Index at the end of 2010 was 4.24%. Add that to the negative 2.49% price decline and the total return of the index would be 1.75%.

If rates happen to climb by a full 1.0% in a year, then total return would be lightly negative.

Unless unemployment declines, home prices regain value and inflation grows significantly, there doesn’t seem to be much pressure to raise interest rates very swiftly.

*The longer the duration, the higher sensitivity to interest rate changes. This explains why long-term bonds are impacted more by interest rate moves than short-term bonds.

~ Brooks, Hughes & Jones — Partners in Wealth Management — Tacoma, WA

If you liked this post, please share it

The Bond Market Conundrum of 2011 — Part II

Portfolio Management Preferences to Reduce Risk

LOOK BEYOND TREASURIES

U.S. investors have easy and relatively inexpensive access to a broader selection of bonds than they had in 1994.

  • Non-U.S. bonds provide U.S. investors access to different economic cycles, interest rates and currency values which can help reduce overall portfolio risk.
  • Floating rate bank loans are another portion of the bond market that actually do better in rising interest rate environments. These loans are very short term, resetting every 30-90 days.

High-yield corporate bonds (those below investment grade ratings) have historically performed much better than other bonds during periods of increasing interest rates.

Consider this research reported by Investment News writer Jeff Benjamin:

According to an analysis of the biggest interest rate moves over the 20-year period through June 2006, high-yield bonds are remarkably resilient against interest rate volatility. Between September 1987 and June 2006, there were six separate 12-month periods that saw the yield on the 10-year Treasury climb by between 117 and 222 basis points. The average total return of high-yield bonds for those same 12-month periods was 5.5%, with just one negative-return period.

THE TOUGHEST DECISION

If your investment mix currently includes a significant overweight to stocks, should you leave it that way or diversify to include bonds at a point when bond returns are not expected to be nearly as good as they have been over the past few decades?

While the potential to see the value of your bond holdings drop is discouraging, watching them decline perhaps a few percent should be much more palatable than watching a stock investment decline significantly more.

If global economic conditions receive any more shocks, it’s conceivable that U.S. and international stocks could return to a bear market, declining 20% or more. In this case, having some bond exposure creates downside protection in a broadly diversified investment mix. It may be a hollow victory for bonds if all they do is lose less, but their ability to steady a portfolio amid periods of stock volatility can be valuable.

Let’s not forget that since March 9, 2009, the U.S. stock market has been on an exceptional run. The S&P 500 Index gained 85.5% as of December 22. Small companies, as measured by the Russell 2000 Index gained 130.3%. A correction would not be surprising.

WHAT ABOUT MUNICIPAL BONDS?

The biggest fear in the municipal bond market isn’t so much interest rates as it is pure default by the municipality. Clearly, government entities at all levels are faced with significant deficits. Historically, municipal bond default rates have been very low, essentially not a concern expect in a few high profile cases (Orange County, CA, the WPPSS nuclear project here in Washington). Holding a diversified mix of many different types of municipal bonds can minimize default risk.

Many people assume that if cities or other municipal entities fail, the Federal Reserve will bail them out, saving value for bond holders. This could be the case but may serve to further bog down the economy.

Even if we see 50-100 imminent municipal defaults as Meredith Whitney forecast on 60 Minutes December 19, that is a small percentage of the overall municipal bond market. If your municipal bond exposure is in an actively managed mutual fund with an experienced analyst monitoring credit ratings, the default impact may not be all that significant.

IS CASH A BETTER BET?

Shifting the fixed income portion of your investment mix to cash comes with an opportunity cost. What if interest rates don’t move quickly and bonds continue to produce attractive total returns? What if U.S. interest rates increase slowly and bond returns decline moderately?

If your current bond holdings are in a portion of your portfolio that can’t take even a minor loss in the next two years, we think that this investment should be in cash. If you can afford to take a limited amount of risk, we think that concerns about bond declines may be overstated from a longer-term perspective. More importantly, cash holdings do not rally.

EXPECTATIONS ARE BUILT INTO MARKET PRICES

All investment markets are driven by future expectations. These expectations are already priced into stocks and bonds. Bond investors don’t generally expect the same tailwind that has filled their sails for most of the past generation. A less friendly headwind may already be evident in the price of bond funds.

WHY WE PREFER BOND MUTUAL FUNDS OVER INDIVIDUAL ISSUES

We feel more comfortable letting professional bond managers navigate the opportunity and pitfalls the market presents.  Bond fund managers spend their days building portfolios that are liquid, sensitive to the outlook for interest rates, and focused on managing the risks and returns for their investors.  Unless you are certain as an individual investor that you will hold individual bonds until they mature, receiving a payout of the bond’s face value, and that you have enough individual bonds to diversify away as many of the risks as possible, it is unlikely you will be able to outperform these professional  managers on an ongoing basis.

Considering the open issues and historical precedent, investors definitely need to ratchet down expectations for U.S. bond returns. But we don’t think you need to run away from U.S. bonds altogether. And your portfolio may be optimized by expanding to include international bonds.

Part I What Happens When Interest Rates Rise

~ Gary Brooks, CFP®, Allyn Hughes, CFP®, and Nancy Jones, CFP®, — Brooks, Hughes & Jones, Partners in Wealth Management, Tacoma, WA

If you liked this post, please share it