Friday, February 14, 2025

24-Hour Trading is a Bad Idea

I'm on record regarding my misgivings about the Robinhood app, which in addition to 'gamifying' investing, has for some time has offered investors extended-hours trading. Now Charles Schwab has made the same decision, allowing its clients the ability to trade securities pretty much any time. 

Sounds like a great idea, right? Why be limited by the hours the exchanges are open? Buy and sell whenever you want! 

But the problem is two-fold. First, off-hours trades have pricing issues because most trading volume takes place during exchange hours, and highly active real-time supply/demand ensures accurate to-the-second pricing data. At moments when not enough shares are changing hands, an investor cannot have confidence that the price they pay at 9pm or 2am is in fact a fair price. 

Secondly, no one makes their best decisions during the night. You're tired from a full day. Maybe you had a big dinner, or an edible or a couple of drinks. Your circadian rhythm slows your thinking, and slows your metabolism. Executive brain function, critical thinking, logic, mental math, are all operating on a skeleton crew. Which makes it not really a great moment to place a bet with hundreds or thousands of your hard-won dollars. 

If you primarily use one of these securities trading platforms, and you're the sort who scrolls stock news or 'fintech' while half-watching Netflix after work, I would sincerely urge you to set yourself limits. You get an idea? Sleep on it. You see a story or a post which scares you? Sleep on it. Markets move fast but not that fast. The losses you save by not making a compromised decision in the late evening will speak for themselves. Remember what Charlie Munger said"It's not brilliance. It's just avoiding stupidity."  

Morningstar's Samantha Lamas's column, below. Happy Valentine's Day all!

Why Schwab’s 24-Hour Trading Might Be a Bad Idea for Investors


Robin


Friday, February 7, 2025

The Art of Not Panicking - Ben Carlson

The world is full of unknowns and uncertainties. Right now is a delicate time in global finance, as the President of the United States, one of the largest consumer and financial markets on earth, is rolling the dice. The new administration is conducting a massive high-stakes economic experiment in which investors are among the lab rats: What happens when a huge market employs tariffs not only on particular goods or on imports from particular trading partners but on nearly everyone? What happens, further, when those tariffs materialize overnight and evaporate just as fast— when they are in fact merely threats? How can businesses who buy materials overseas or consumers who purchase goods overseas predict costs, or plan spending?

Now add in the effect of those tariff countries placing their own tit-for-tat tariffs on American goods and materials? Will buying continue at higher prices for all? Will it drop off a cliff? How can businesses and consumers manage the uncertainty?

And underlying all of this for investors: What will happen to the revenue of the businesses we own? To profits? How can we plan for that? What do we do with our portfolios in the meantime?  

My investing colleague Ben Carlson just dropped a column every investor should read: 

A Wealth of Common Sense - Don’t Panic

Friday, January 24, 2025

What 'Billionaire's Row' Means for Investors

From the very beginning of this column, I have advocated to be always buying in the markets. At times of distress and losses, at times of celebration and gains. Maybe it’s a few percentage points of your paycheck that automatically goes into an S&P500 index ETF via your retirement account, or maybe you regularly set aside a little each pay period and try to figure out where to invest it. But it’s regular and it is in spite of the news, or the interest rate cycle, or the political moment or wars abroad or your feelings of uncertainty. Always. 


And now, in this moment, I am a bit flummoxed. I don’t really know where to place the funds. 


Since my last post, we’ve got not only a new (old) president. We have a new GOP-led Congress, and those two branches of government join a right-leaning revisionist Supreme Court. Taken together, at a glance this would appear to be the most uniformly conservative American government in many years. But it’s not actually conservative by any traditional measure. It’s certainly nationalist, isolationist, and pedal-to-the-metal kleptocratic (not one but two Trump cryptocurrencies? Naked cash grab!) 


Already cracks are showing: a couple of President Trump’s cabinet picks may in fact not get the nod from the Senate. Elon Musk, co-lead of the new Department of Government Efficiency, appears to have summarily axed his supposed partner, Vivek Ramaswamy. And many of the newly signed Executive Orders look like nothing more than empty promises, just red meat for his base, and are very unlikely to survive scrutiny or lawsuits. Trump sees the presidency not as a job but as a performance for which he expects to be well paid. But when the dust settles, even Trump can’t simply rewrite the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to outlaw birthright citizenship. Even Trump can’t unilaterally rename the Gulf of Mexico, annex Greenland, or through sheer force of personality decide how many genders exist. He bullies and postures, it fires up his base, he sells them his dumb $TRUMPcoin, he gets richer, and all of it inflates his ego and generates fear in those who oppose him. Classic autocrat playbook. 


That said, much of what I discussed in my last post remains true, and is worrisome. Inflation remains a major concern, and many of the president’s promised policy shifts would ultimately drive up prices. The same for mass deportations: if he fulfills his promises, and it looks like he’ll at least try, not only will hundreds of thousands of families be split and people forced from their homes and loved ones— who will do all those jobs? What does that mean for productivity and access to goods? Finally, tariffs are a huge question mark hanging over the economy the next few years. To date, it would seem the president is more interesting in using the threat of tariffs to get what he wants from other nations. But make no mistake, his bluff will be called. Then supply will fall against demand, and prices will rise.


So what does all this mean to the investor? Often a safe play is to just follow the money. 


Billionaires bending the knee

At his inauguration ceremony, Trump’s favorite billionaires were literally trotted out on display for the masses: Tesla’s and SpaceX’s Musk, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Meta’s (Facebook’s) Mark Zuckerberg, Google’s Sundar Pichai, Apple’s Tim Cook (only Microsoft’s Satya Nadella and Nvidia’s Jensen Huang were absent). Plus podcaster Joe Rogan, LVMH founder Bernard Arnault, UFC CEO Dana White. Each gave $1million or more to Trump’s inauguration fund— Musk put over $200 million into the election itself— which is to say they bought their way in. They were on the dais, lined up, Trump's acolytes, behind his family but in front of his cabinet picks. I am assuming that proximity to the president here equates to Oval Office access, and that’s surely intentional. We've long known that Trump is susceptible to both flattery and financial quid pro quo. So as a betting man, I’d say those particular companies have a strong chance of getting exempted from any coming tariffs; their expansion and acquisition plans will probably get a green light from the Justice Department.


What else looks good for your investment dollars right now? Based solely on what we know of Trump and his interests, I’d be looking broadly at the big banks, like JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs. Do I need to mention Trump likes money? That he sees himself as a big shot financier and wants to hang with that crowd? Also ‘Big Oil’ such as Exxon and Chevron. Defense contractors both hardware (warplanes, tanks, missiles, ammunition, spy satellites) and software (intelligence gathering and processing, guidance systems, computer and network security). 


It gets extra sticky when we start to consider how close to all-time highs much of the stock market is right now. The question everyone is asking: If companies are already so richly valued, how much upside remains? For that matter, the market is highly concentrated: currently the 10 largest US companies comprise about 37% of the entirety of the S&P 500 index. So if you’re an index investor because you like getting the automatic diversity, think for a moment— a huge portion of your seemingly low-risk investment hinges in large part on the success of just 10 businesses (5 of which were represented at the inauguration). My default play, just buying shares of the S&P 500 index and then ignoring them for a decade, is looking a little less certain. But again: I am spit-balling here. No one really knows what’s coming next.


The new administration is nothing if not transactional. This crowd loves to make deals, and they expect something in return. They’ve exhibited a strong desire for substantial deregulation, which inherently favors big companies over small as the big ones have deep pockets necessary for buyouts and global expansion. So look for big mergers, which spell increased consolidation and further concentration of markets. Forget the old big-business bent of Doing The Right Thing, or Saving the Planet, or DEI Hiring, or Narrowing the Wealth Gap. For now that’s over. As of this week we’re re-entering the era of Might Makes Right. Adjust your portfolio accordingly.

 ————————————————————

Below are some great pieces I’ve seen recently which address these issues and more. A few are behind paywalls; apologies in advance.