Posts

Financial writing tip: Don’t ignore the elephant in the room

Don’t write about something controversial as if it is an accepted fact.

“Research has shown that the most active managers can beat their benchmarks handily,” wrote Eleanor Laise in The Return of The Market-Beating Fund Manager” in The Wall Street Journal.

Oh, really? Many financial advisors and investment professionals disagree.

Laise should have acknowledged that her statement was controversial. Her failure to do so undercuts the credibility of her article. Keep this in mind the next time you say something that isn’t widely accepted.

Laise could have rephrased her sentence along the following lines: “New research suggests that most active managers can beat their benchmarks handily.”

Research on active managers’ outperformance

Laise’s article alerted me to an interesting research paper, “Active Share and Mutual Fund Performance,” by Antti Petajisto of NYU University’s business school.

Here’s a provocative quote from Petajisto’s abstract:

I find that over my sample period until the end of 2009, the most active stock pickers have outperformed their benchmark indices even after fees and transaction costs. In contrast, closet indexers or funds focusing on factor bets have lost to their benchmarks after fees. The same long-term performance patterns held up over the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

My LinkedIn contacts responded with scepticism when I quoted Laise’s sentence. What do YOU think about the performance record of actively managed funds?


Defining investment outperformance: You’ve got strong opinions

You don’t agree on how to define outperformance by stock funds, the focus of my latest poll. You expressed your disagreement in votes as well as in your comments on my blog post, some of which I’ve quoted verbatim below.

Outperformance poll results

Almost 30% of you said that an advantage of even one basis point (0.01%) was enough for an investment to claim outperformance. Close to 20% put the break point at 10 basis points (bps). Overall, more than two-thirds of you said there was an absolute level at which asset managers could claim outperformance.

For the rest of you, it seemed that outperformance was relative. Twelve percent defined an investment’s outperformance in terms of “a certain percentage of its benchmark.” The rest of you–21%–said outperformance was defined by “None of the above.”

Here are the poll answers and the percentage replies:

* 1 basis point (0.01%): 29% of all votes
* 10 bps: 18%
* 25 bps: 0%
* 50 bps: 6%
* 100 bps: 15%
* A certain percentage of its benchmark’s return: 12%
* None of the above: 21% (Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding)

The minimalists’ approach

“Technically, a mere 1 bp excess return should arguably count for ‘outperformance,'”wrote David Spaulding of the Spaulding Group in his comment on my blog. His comment was echoed by Jeff McLean, Ph.D., who said, “I believe that a stock, fund, or variable annuity that outperforms a benchmark by any margin, no matter how small, can claim outperformance.”

Consider the benchmark

John Lowell said he’d like a manager’s performance to exceed the benchmark by at least one standard deviation, but preferably 1.5 standard deviations, before he applied the term outperformance. “To really be outperforming, I’d like to see them outperform by at least 1 standard deviation 3 years out of 5 and cumulatively over the 5-year period.”

Some of you who commented on my blog took issue with the idea of comparing performance net of fees with the performance of a benchmark that’s not reduced by fees. Here’s what Frazer said:

For example, if you have a fund with a 50BPs expense ratio being compared with the SP500 (which investors can access via ETF with an 8BPS expense ratio), you should subtract the fees from both numbers to get an accurate view of relative performance by the manager.

In this case, the fund would need to outperform the SP500 by 42BPS to claim “outperformance” over the benchmark.

I imagine that the SEC doesn’t like this approach. What marketer wouldn’t do this if it were legal?

Then, there’s the issue of what benchmark to use. Steve Smith said, “Leaving aside the degree of outperformance, two baseline criteria are also required: 1) choosing the proper benchmark (i.e. “best fit” index) and 2) having a very high (mid-90%) R squared.”

Remember the client

The financial advisors who responded to my poll said that “outperformance” is meaningless if client goals aren’t considered.

David B. Armstrong, CFA, said

I define outperformance as this – when an investor’s portfolio does better then the return required by the financial plan to meet the investors goals – that’s outperformance.

Moderately outperforming the return required in a financial plan is probably ok – most investors can get away with that safely from time to time. It’s when your outperformance is like going 95 mph in a 65 mph zone that investors have a problem. How many investors experienced a ticket or a wreck in their portfolios in late 2008? Or better yet – how many advisors sat in the back seat of the car and let their clients drive 95 mph…drunk!

Stephen Campisi, CFA, agreed, saying “…outperformance is really not about return; it’s about having more money than you need to meet your tangible financial goals.”

Campisi also suggested that fiduciary responsibility comes into play. “As fiduciaries, we need to start thinking in terms of our loyalty standard, and start thinking about meeting the client’s financial goals – and these are money goals. So, we need to “show them the money” and when we talk about return we need to show them an internal rate of return over a long period. We need to show them the return that incorporates their beginning wealth, the money they were able to pull out of the portfolio for their goals, and their ending wealth. Then (and only then) will we be acting in the best interests of the client.”

My take on this issue

I like the idea of defining outperformance relative to client goals. This is an area where financial advisors and asset management firms focused on separate accounts can improve. However, if you’re a fund company producing investment performance reports for a diverse group of investors, you lack information about client goals. So you’ve got to define outperformance relative to a benchmark.

Thank you, commenters!

I’m grateful to everyone who commented–both on my blog and in a lively discussion on the members-only Financial Writing/Marketing Communications LinkedIn Group. You made me see new dimensions to this issue. I love learning from you.

Thank you–and please continue the conversation!

Notable quotes from the CFA Institute’s emerging markets conference

So many great emerging markets presentations, so little time to blog about them.

Below you’ll find quotes or paraphrases of opinions voiced by speakers at the CFA Institute’s  “Investing in Emerging Markets” conference held in Boston on October 19. If these snippets pique your interest, watch the CFA Institute website for podcasts or other records of selected presentations. Also see my recent blog posts, “Bubble?–Emerging markets scrutinized by CFA Institute conference,” “ISI’s Straszheim: China’s interest rate hike is ‘tapping the brakes’,” and “Cautious optimism on emerging market stocks from SSgA’s Hoguet.”

Paulo Vieira da Cunha, Tandem Global partners

  • There is no decoupling. Two-thirds of global consumption and trade is in the advanced economies.
  • There are lots of interesting plays in Brazil today, if you are careful.
  • It’s very clear the Brazilian economy is overheated.
  • China was a big factor in Brazil’s post-2008 recovery.

Kristen Forbes, MIT Sloan School of Management

  • There are few options for emerging market countries to control the impact of capital inflows.
  • Experts disagree about whether emerging market countries should impose temporary taxes on capital inflows.
  • Academic literature says capital controls have little impact, especially long-term. At best, they can shift inflows to safer composition.

Sivaprakasam Sivakumar, Argonaut Global Capital

  • The best opportunities in India are investing in first-generation entrepreneurs. Look for the next Infosys.

Tina Vandersteel, Grantham, May, Van Otterloo & Company

  • When you invest in local emerging market debt, you face the “roach motel risk” of “you can check in, but you can’t check out.” Sometimes currencies can’t be converted.
  • “You are picking up pennies in front of the train” when you invest in certain kinds of emerging market debt.
  • Invest in emerging market debt for value and diversification, not for “safety,” betting against the U.S. dollar, or an inflation hedge.

Cliff Quisenberry, Caravan Capital Management

  • There is a significant different between frontier countries in the index and the other frontier countries.
  • Country selection is more important in frontier markets than in emerging markets.

AlisonAdams, Alison Adams Research

  • Emerging markets’ share of global market capitalization could overtake developed markets’ share by 2030, according to Goldman Sachs.
  • Most emerging market governments are reasonably market-friendly.
  • Extreme events can present buying opportunities, as with the Mumbai attacks in India in 2008.

Bubble? — Emerging markets scrutinized by CFA Institute conference

Is now a good time to invest in emerging markets?

The answer depended on which speakers or attendees I listened to at the CFA Institute’s “Investing in Emerging Markets” conference held in Boston on October 19.

The overall mood was cautiously optimistic for the long-term. “We’re not in a bubble yet,” said George Hoguet of State Street Global Advisors, who also mentioned some concerns about emerging markets.

At least one speaker said some emerging markets are already in a bubble and several attendees told me they’re waiting for a pullback before they put money into emerging markets.

It’s not only emerging market stocks that worry investment professionals. While some investors are eager to pick up an extra six percent (600 basis points) or so by investing in emerging market debt, Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Company’s Tina Vandersteel suggested that emerging market bonds may not be as safe as you think. This is especially true of external debt, which has a 32% probability of default vs. only 2% for local debt, although spreads of about 3% (300 basis points) provide a cushion for defaults, she said.

What about you? Are you ready to invest in emerging markets today?

Cautious optimism on emerging market stocks from SSgA’s Hoguet

Emerging markets have been hot enough that the CFA Institute organized a one-day conference on the topic, held in Boston on October 19.

Here’s how George Hoguet, global investment strategist specializing in emerging markets at State Street Global Advisors, summed up his outlook when he spoke about “Decoupling or Contagion: How Will Fiscal Consolidation in Developed Markets Impact Emerging Markets?”:

The Great Recession has enhanced the secular case for investing in emerging markets, but the reduction in potential GDP growth in many developed markets will negatively impact emerging markets.

One of Hoguet’s comments resonated with me more than the others: “Japan as Number 1 is a reminder of the difficulty of long-term forecasting.” As a former teaching assistant for author Ezra Vogel, I remember the uproar about Japan’s predicted domination of the global economy. The Land of the Rising Sun had seemed unstoppable, which worked to my benefit when I led training seminars on “How to Do Business with the Japanese.” My, how times have changed.

Another warning from Hoguet: Economic growth does not necessarily lead to superior investment returns, as Korea shows. Still, he suggested that investors focus on large economies with sustainable domestic demand. He also recommended that investors overcome their home-market bias to market-weight emerging markets and be open-minded about newer types of investments, such as farm land and long-short funds.

One of the many pluses mentioned by Hoguet was that debt/GDP ratios are lower for emerging markets than for developed countries. In addition, current emerging markets are not “demanding” at about 13-times-earnings for the next 12 months,

We’re not in a bubble yet,” concluded Hoguet.

Guest post: “Investment analysts and social media”

Pat Allen of RockTheBoatMarketing is one of my “go to” people when I’m looking for information on how asset managers use social media. If you’re interested in tracking this topic, follow Pat’s Twitter feed at RockTheBoatMKTG and check out her Twitter list of investment managers. If your interests focus more on financial advisors, then Pat’s AdvisorTweets Twitter account is for you.

In her guest post below, Pat suggests that investment analysts and portfolio managers need to learn how to do research using social media or risk missing–or being late to obtain–information that influences the prices of securities.

Investment analysts and social media

By Pat Allen

Institutional analysts and investors rely most on information that comes directly from companies.

This was a finding in a survey conducted last year by the Brunswick Group that I remember reading and finding unremarkable.  And yet it’s increasingly obvious that corporate information can be relied upon for a company’s plans and intentions—but how an organization moves forward will be influenced by a marketplace reacting in real-time.

To be sure, that complicates things and not just for corporations pursuing business agendas but also for analysts and investors trying to assess companies’ prospects.

Social media is messy. There are zillions of media and networking sites and blogs, lots of noise and plenty of false signals. Still, we think it’s a faulty investment decision that’s made today without consideration for what consumers and influencers are saying.

Gap’s October 4 introduction of a new logo is a recent case in point.

In an October 7 essay on the Huffington Post, Gap North America president Marka Hansen explained that the company’s product selection and retail presence was evolving.

“The natural step for us on this journey is to see how our logo–one that we’ve had for more than 20 years–should evolve. Our brand and our clothes are changing and rethinking our logo is part of aligning with that,” wrote Hansen.

“The natural step for us on this journey is to see how our logo–one that we’ve had for more than 20 years–should evolve. Our brand and our clothes are changing and rethinking our logo is part of aligning with that,” wrote Hansen.

Not so long ago a company executive might have mentioned a new logo on a conference call. If the company’s marketing was believed to be stale and a growth inhibitor, a rebranding plan might have bolstered investor confidence–if only temporarily–prior to the market’s reaction to the change.

In thinking about this post, I flashed back to Peter Lynch’s One Up on Wall Street: How to Use What You Already Know to Make Money in the Market. I was pretty green when I read that book but even then I was skeptical about Lynch’s thesis. Listen to what shoppers said at one store in one mall and invest based on that? I had my doubts and there was something about it that I found condescending. Surely that’s not how professional investors did it?Institutional analysts and investors rely most on information that comes directly from companies.

But Lynch’s recommended approach foreshadowed what is today called online listening. The difference today is that the vast majority of social media sites are architected to serve as databases—easy for interested parties to query, filter and subscribe to for efficient listening and ongoing temperature-checking.
Company information, primary market research, real time subscription information services, analyst research, the business media—all are inputs that ranked higher than “new media” in the 2009 Brunswick research into what influences analysts’ decisions or recommendations. New media, defined as blogs, message boards and social networking sites, were consulted by just 4% of respondents.

The next time such research is conducted we’d expect the monitoring of new media to soar as professional investors learn more about social influence.

Pat Allen is a Chicago-based digital marketing strategy consultant whose Rock The Boat Marketing firm helps investment companies think through what they do on the Web. Pat also operates AdvisorTweets.com, a site that aggregates the tweets of U.S.‐based financial advisors.

Guest post: “Making Research Readable”

Investment research analysts can learn to write better. In his guest post, Joe Polidoro gives directors of research his advice on how to make this happen. I’m delighted to have met another advocate of good investment writing thanks to Twitter, where Joe tweets as @joepolidoro.

Making Research Readable
By Joe Polidoro

Is it worthwhile, or even possible, to improve the quality of your research analysts’ writing? Yes and yes, and I’ll tell you how. First, the business case.

It seems reasonable that good writing—clear, engaging, memorable—should be more effective than sub-par writing at reaching your audience. But let’s see the numbers.

One of the best proofs I’ve come across is courtesy of Dame Marjorie Scardino, CEO of Pearson PLC and former CEO of the Economist Group (hat tip: Vicki Cobb and I.N.K.)

Scardino located a study in which three groups—linguists, writing professors, and journalists –were asked to improve passages taken from a history textbook. Students were then asked to read the original passages and the rewrites and immediately record as much as they could remember.

Recall of the journalists’ rewrites beat recall of the other groups’ rewrites and of the original text by a whopping 40%. Good writing matters.

And I think average writers, including research analysts, can measurably improve their writing—with the right help.

First, look for a writer
In your quest for a writing coach, avoid anyone who doesn’t make a living—and a decent one—by writing. As Stephen King said, anyone who is paid to write knows how to write effectively. Professional writers “get the story told memorably … and quickly,” says Scardino. Those who make their living doing other things, including the teaching of writing, usually can’t.

Hire a writer/coach
A writing pro isn’t necessarily a good writing teacher, however. Aside from references, here’s how to tell. Effective teaching is less about charisma, more about preparation, perseverance, and a passion for the work. So ask questions: What are you going to teach my analysts? What are your goals? What’s your plan? How will you deal with indifference or egomania?

Your writer/coach should be quick with confidence-inspiring answers.  Look for someone who emphasizes telling a story (yes, even in a research report), clarity, and effective editing. Steer clear of those who get deep into grammar and theory. Good writer/coaches use real examples and show how it’s done.

Follow through with your swing
No writer/coach worth hiring will promise to improve your analysts’ writing in one session. A golfer won’t significantly improve her game with a 3-hour lesson. If she’s serious, she’ll take a series of lessons over the season. And writing well is harder than golfing well.

It doesn’t have to be extensive—even three 45-minute sessions over four to eight weeks with your most problematic analysts will work. But set aside budget for this. It’ll show you’re serious. And it will make whoever you hire that much more effective.

Joe Polidoro spent over a year improving the equity research reports at Bear Stearns, where he worked with past and future research stars including Lee Seidler, Lincoln Anderson, Larry Kudlow, Joe Buckley, Jami Rubin, and Steve Binder. Joe now co-heads Triplestop LLC, a marketing agency specializing in asset management and related industries.

____________________
Receive a free 32-page e-book with client communications tips when you sign up for my free monthly newsletter.

Copyright 2010 by Susan B. Weiner All rights reserved

Guest post: "Talking to clients about social investing"

Socially responsible investing can make for a difficult conversation between investment managers and their clients. But it doesn’t have to be that way if you follow the tips provided by my friend Annie Logue, the author of Socially Responsible Investing for Dummies.

Talking to clients about social investing
By Ann C. Logue

Often, an individual client will walk into an office with a list of industries and companies that he or she does not want to own. Some clients have well-thought out objections or religious obligations that set the tone, but others have a vague idea of the goodness or badness of an industry without any real reasoning behind it.

How do you deal with such a customer?

Social criteria can be legitimate investment constraints, so one tactic is to approach it as a constraint. Get the client to identify the real issues, ideally in writing. Are they religious? Well, you can’t argue with religion! If they are more vague, then use some good questioning to get them onto paper, or ask the client to do some research. Some good sources are CSR Wire and Triple Pundit.

The real conversation is about what your client would rather invest in. Social investing doesn’t have to have lesser performance than traditional investing; the KLD Social Select 400 Index has minimal tracking error to the S&P 500 and, right now, outperforms it slightly. The secret is making sure that the companies you do invest in have a similar risk and return profile. If your client wants to sell BP, then you’d better find a company with similar characteristics. Replace BP with a speculative green tech company, and you’re changing the portfolio’s nature. Replace it with a large multinational food company with responsible business practices, paying a high dividend, and subject to commodity price fluctuations, and you’re getting closer to the portfolio contribution of BP without the oil exposure.

Keep holding the conversation, too. BP had a great reputation for its social responsibility right up until April of 2010. Social investing is still investing, and you still take on company risk. Just as there is no perfect job and no perfect boyfriend, there is no perfect investment. Remind your client of the long-term goals. Many clients prefer to separate their investing from their philanthropy, figuring that the more money they make, the more money they can donate and the more time they have to volunteer.

Finally, turn your clients into activists. Talk to them about proxies. They can vote their proxies and have an influence on companies even if they do not change their ownership positions. That gives the client power without disrupting an investment position.

Social investing doesn’t have to underperform, and it doesn’t have to be a wedge between you and your client. You can use a client’s interest as an opportunity to educate them and to show how you can add value to their portfolio.
____________________    
Receive a free 32-page e-book with client communications tips when you sign up for my free monthly newsletter.  

Copyright 2010 by Susan B. Weiner All rights reserved

Small-cap investing opportunities according to Artio’s Dedio

“Opportunities in Smallcap Investing” was the title of the presentation that Samuel Dedio, head of US equities for Artio Global Management, delivered to the 2010 annual conference of the Financial Planning Association of Massachusetts. The growth of options trading was his most interesting theme, in my opinion. By the way, if you don’t recognize the name Artio Global Management, it was formerly Julius Baer. 

Where the opportunities lie 
Dedio identified opportunities in financials sector, including regional banks, online brokerage companies, and insurance. He figures that “industry consolidation and stimulus spending may potentially benefit this area.” 

Industrials and materials stocks will benefit from emerging markets’ demand. For example, Dedio likes silver, where supply is not keeping up with demand. Compared with gold, silver has many more industrial applications, yet it trades at a discount to gold.

In healthcare, Dedio likes companies that can help implement cost savings. This means companies in diagnostics, medical technology, pharmaceuticals, and home healthcare providers.

The survivors of the 2009 shakeout in retailers will benefit in 2010. “We expect margins (and earnings) to recover more rapidly than in prior cycles,” wrote Dedio in the consumer discretionary section of his handout.

Finally, in technology, Dedio focused on the undervalued importance of semiconductors. 

Options: Why online brokerage may thrive 
Dedio particularly likes online brokerage companies with exposure to options trading as a play on demographics and rising interest in making money through options. 

“The younger generation eats it up,” said Dedio, referring to options trading. This is apparently tied to younger investors growing up with computers and to educational efforts by companies such as Think or Swim.

“Don’t 85% of options expire worthless?” asked an audience member. That’s exactly what makes options a great business, according to Dedio. Investors have to buy more options on an ongoing basis. 

Dedio displayed a graph showing that total monthly equity option trading volume has more than doubled since the year 2000. Monthly trading volume, which was under 100 million until January 2004, has been  200 million–and sometimes exceeded 350 million–during the period January 2008 to September 2009.

Dedio’s one concern about options trading is pricing pressure. However, cost cutters are at a disadvantage in the options arena, where education remains critical. Education requires more robust margins than cost cutters manage.
____________________  
Receive a free 32-page e-book with client communications tips when you sign up for my free monthly newsletter.  

Copyright 2010 by Susan B. Weiner All rights reserved

Watch out for inflation, says veteran value manager Jean-Marie Eveillard

Value investing was the focus of the presentation by Jean-Marie Eveillard, senior adviser and board trustee to the First Eagle Funds and senior vice president of First Eagle Investment Management, LLC, to the Boston Security Analysts Society (BSAS) on April 13. Eveillard also opined on the world economic outlook.

Three economic scenarios
Eveillard thinks there are three potential directions for the U.S. from here.
1. A typical post-WWII expansion— In this scenario, the authorities lever up the system again, so we get a three- to five-year expansion, Eveillard said. This would mean that we are still in a post-World War II environment. Eveillard is concerned about the short-term, even speculative orientation of investors in an environment in which equity mutual funds average 100% annual turnover.
2. Japanese-style stagflation–As the private sector continues to deleverage, the U.S. might fall into stagflation similar to that experienced in Japan for the past 20 years. This would happen if lenders don’t want to lend and borrowers don’t want to borrow, despite the government’s efforts to combat their resistance. Eveillard considers this unlikely because, unlike the Japanese, Americans are not resigned to economic stagnation. We’ll act.
3. Negative, unintended consequences including inflation–Eveillard is concerned about the unprecedented scale of the U.S. government’s intervention. This includes a gigantic budget deficit, zero interest rates, and the ballooning of the federal balance sheet.

The third scenario is most likely, said Eveillard, who spoke about the lessons of the Austrian school of economists. The main lesson: If you’re stupid enough to get into a really bad credit boom, you’ll have a bad credit bust. However, the Austrians also say not to do a short-term patch after a bust because you’ll compromise the medium-term and long-term recovery. This seems to be one of the roots of Eveillard’s fear of the third scenario.

But Eveillard’s inflation fears haven’t made him give up on stocks. People make the mistake of thinking that inflation is all bad for stocks, he said. He believes in owning the stocks of companies that are able to raise prices as their costs rise. For example, that’s something that newspapers were able to do back in the 1970s.

Eveillard did not comment on specific stocks that he favors now. “If I knew what my five best ideas were, that’s all I would own,” he quipped.

Benjamin Graham and The Intelligent Investor
Eveillard spent most of his time with the BSAS talking about the history of value investing. For him, the two big names are Benjamin Graham, author of The Intelligent Investor, and well-known investor Warren Buffett.

Graham’s emphasis on the role of humility, caution, and order in investing make sense to Eveillard. He illustrated Graham’s approach to investing as finding a business with an intrinsic value of $50 per share, buying it at $30-$35 per share, and starting to sell it at $40. This is what Warren Buffett called the cigar butt–one puff and it’s over, said Eveillard.

Although Eveillard conceded that Graham’s approach to investing is static and balance sheet-oriented, it still offers opportunities. There are “Ben Graham-type stocks” in Japan, especially among small caps, he said. Because “net cash is greater than market cash…you get the business for less than nothing,” he said.

Warren Buffett added qualitative to quantitative
Benjamin Graham was “all about numbers.” Even today,  value investors all start with companies’ publicly available financial information, and then move on only if they’re satisfied with the public numbers, said Eveillard.

Warren Buffett added qualitative analysis on top of Graham’s quantitative analysis, said Eveillard. For example, Buffett likes companies that have a “moat,” a sustainable competitive advantage.


Comparing Graham and Buffett, Eveillard said that the Graham approach is much less time-consuming, though potentially less rewarding, than the Buffett approach. The First Eagle Funds started out in Graham style, then switched to Buffett’s style after adding the analysts that enabled them to do the necessary research, said Eveillard.


The case for value investing
Eveillard gave two reasons for pursuing value investing. First, it makes sense. Second, it works over time. He doesn’t buy the argument that value investing works only in the U.S. In fact, First Eagle has never opened offices overseas because it doesn’t want to be influenced by how the locals think. Still, he noted, “There are few genuine value investors in the U.S., but even fewer outside the U.S.”


Why so few value investors? For starters, it’s hard work. “Sell-side research is seldom useful” because of its six- to 12-month time horizon, said Eveillard. When your time horizon is five years, it makes a big difference in how you look at a business. That’s why First Eagle’s 11 analysts are “the true heart of our operation,” he said.


The psychological hurdle to value investing is even higher than the research hurdle. It’s not easy sticking with value investing’s long-term time horizon. That’s especially true when it means your investment performance may lag its benchmark in the short-term. First Eagle lost seven out of 10 investors during the period when its performance lagged from Fall 1997 to Spring 2000, said Eveillard.

To be a value investor, “there has to be a willingness on the part of the investor to take the short-term pain.” In addition, you have to be willing to move away from the herd when it’s nearing the cliff, said Eveillard, citing Warren Buffett. Value investing takes a temperament that many lack.

If you’d like to learn more about Eveillard’s views, he’s scheduled to appear on Bloomberg TV on Wed., April 14 April 14 at 5 p.m. EST, according to the First Eagle Funds website.

____________________
The next session of “How to Write Blog Posts People Will Read: A Five-Week Teleclass for Financial Advisors starts April 22. Sign up to receive my free monthly newsletter.Copyright 2010 by Susan B. Weiner All rights reserved