What would happen if an investor only captured 50% of the market decline and then captured 50% of the latest rally? Once again the numbers might be counterintuitive to some. An investor with a portfolio valued at $1,565 would have seen their portfolio value decline by 27.5% (one half of the 55% decline) to a value of $1,134. Then the portfolio would have rallied by 25% (one half of the S&P rally of 50%) to a value of $1,417. The portfolio would only be 10% below its starting value, as opposed to the current S&P dilemma of needing a 56% rally to get back to even. As it turns out, Pinnacle’s Moderate Growth portfolios have a similar ratio of downside and upside capture. Our Appreciation portfolios have done even better with the downside capture being contained but the upside capture being much higher as a percentage of the market. As we work through the entire cycle, defending against large losses has served our clients well.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
The Surprising Mathematics of Defending Market Declines
The mathematics of portfolio declines and recoveries are somewhat counterintuitive. You would think that if your portfolio declines by 50% that you would need the portfolio to rally by 50% to get back to even. But that’s not true at all. The following simple chart shows the relationship between portfolio declines and portfolio recoveries:
When you consider how a 50% decline requires a 100% rally to break even, and a 70% decline requires a 233% rally to break even, you can see why defending against dramatic portfolio declines is important. As it turns out, the actual S&P 500 decline is 57% from the October 9, 2007 high of 1,565 to the March 9, 2009 low of 676 (including dividends the decline is 55%). The recovery as of last Friday’s closing price of 1,004 is 48.5%, or 50% including dividends. Even though the decline was 55% and the recovery has been 50%, the index still needs to rally an additional 56% just to get back to the October 2007 highs!