Investment Articles

One of the ideas that has become quite pervasive within the minds of investors is the notion of a “good stock” or a “good property” to own. This notion stems from a general desire on the part of most people to own things of quality. In our personal life, this frequently manifests itself as a desire to own a comfortable home, and a reliable automobile. Quality gives us a feeling of safety and security. Thus, it seems completely natural to want our investments to be the stock of a high quality company, the bonds of a high quality corporation of government, or a property that is desirable in both its quality of construction and location. The problem with this view is that it only provides one half of the information that you need to determine whether an investment is a good deal.

The second half of this investing puzzle is price. Put bluntly, the quality of a stock, bond, or property investment only matters in relation to its price. This means that a ram shackled, blighted property can be a phenomenal deal at a certain price. The stock of media darling companies such as Apple, Google, and Amazon can all be terrible investments at a certain price. It is certainly true that high-quality investments can frequently justify a higher price than lower quality investments. However, it is equally true that any investment can be a spectacular deal if the price is right.

The key for investors is to determine when the price of a high-quality stock, bond, or property is over-valued, or conversely when the price of a lower quality stock, bond, or property is under-valued. Any investment is a good deal at one price, and a poor deal at a different price. Unfortunately, it is frequently very difficult to determine exactly where these two boundaries are drawn for any particular investment.

When estimating the appropriate price for a particular investment, there are two relevant factors that need to be considered. The first is the expected future price, the second is expected future cash flow, and the third is taxes and inflation. When combined, they will create a holistic picture of the value for any particular investment.

Expected Future Price

In the world of stock and real estate investing, this is referred to as appreciation. Fundamentally, it represents the expectation that the future price of an investment will be higher than the price you paid to purchase it. This is frequently referred to as the ‘buy low, sell high’ philosophy. For most investors, this is the primary source of value that they see. Stock market tickers report the price of securities, and the Multiple Listing Service reports the price of properties.
However, the ubiquitous availability of price information frequently causes people to over-emphasize price appreciation as a source of value. It is most certain that price appreciation is an important source of value for investments, but it is certainly not the only value vector. The fact that so many people focus on market prices has made them become very volatile over the past few years. Values for stocks, bonds, and real estate have all fluctuated significantly. This has made future price appreciation very difficult to predict.
In addition to all of this, there is one further characteristic of price that investors must take into consideration. In order to capture the benefit of price appreciation, you must sell the investment. This means that watching the value of your stocks or real estate skyrocket means absolutely nothing unless you sell and lock-in the gain. Thus, in order to realize the full gains from future price appreciation, it means that you must sell at the right time. In practice, this is very difficult to do and frequently results in selling while values are still going up.

Expected Future Cash Flow

Another key characteristic of what makes a good vs. bad deal for investors is the cash flow that is produced. In the case of stocks, this comes from dividends. In the case of bonds, this comes from interest payments and the future return of the bond face amount. In the case of real estate, this comes from rents that are paid by tenants for the use of your property. The importance of cash flow to the value of an investment is that it represents a current, tangible return. Typically, investments that produce the best cash flow don’t always have the best appreciation. However, they also tend to be less volatile since the price tends to be more highly correlated with the rate of cash generation than the market expectations for future price increases.
The way that most investors articulate the future cash flow of an investment is through its yield. In simple terms, the yield of an investment represents its annual cash flow divided by the price paid for the asset. In the case of stocks, the “dividend yield” is the annual dividends divided by the current market price. In the case of rental real estate, the “capitalization rate” is calculated by dividing the annual net operating income of the property by the purchase price. In the case of bonds, the discounted future value of all payments is compressed into an internal rate of return, which is articulated as the bond yield.
In most cases, the rate of cash generation for an investment is much less volatile than the market price of that investment. Stocks that pay dividends tend to adjust their dividend rate at a much slower rate than the market value gyrations of its price. Rents from income properties tend to shift much more slowly than the value of the property. Bonds typically feature a fixed interest and repayment price, with their market value being determined by the movement in yield rates for similar instruments. When market yields increase, the price of bonds currently on the market go down. When market yields decrease, the price of bonds currently on the market go up.

Taxes and Inflation

The final key characteristic that differentiates good vs. bad investments is inflation and taxes. Inflation represents the erosion of you investment’s purchasing power and taxes represent the amount of your gains that need to be paid to the government. One of the oldest and most important concepts in finance is that “It’s not what you make, it’s what you keep”… fundamentally, this means that the “real” rate of return for your investments is much more important than the “nominal” performance.
Starting with inflation, it is important to understand that when the amount of money in circulation expands more quickly than the amount of goods and services being traded, it creates upward pressure on prices. For some asset classes, the effect of inflation is relatively benign, for others it is beneficial, and for some it is devastating. By and large, property values tend to be lifted in proportion with inflation, while cash flows from dividends and rents are also increased by inflation. Some stocks move up with inflation, but certainly not all. On the other hand, bonds with a fixed interest rate are destroyed by inflation since it de-values the interest payments. Conversely, fixed-rate debt that you owe is wiped away by inflation as the dollars you use to re-pay the loan become less valuable.
Another key characteristic to understand is taxes. Different types of income are subject to different rates of taxation. Generally speaking, income that is earned from a job encounters the most taxes. Income that is earned passively encounters less taxes, and income earned from capital investment encounters the least taxes. Astute investors also understand the impact of legitimate business deductions, non-cash expenses such as depreciation, and deferring capital gains through a 1031 exchange to reduce their tax burden down to the legal minimum. In many cases, it is tax advantages that turn a good investment into a great investment.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of each person to determine what constitutes a superior investment deal. Since people have different appetites for risk, there will always be a variety of investors bidding for a variety of assets. What is most important for the individual investor to do is take an honest assessment of their personal investment tolerance and make decisions that incorporate all of the major value factors. By balancing the future price, future cash flow, inflation risk, and tax characteristics, it will allow you to build a strong portfolio of optimized deals.

Sincere Thanks, Douglas J Utberg, MBA

“Business, Life, and Everything In-Between”

If you are like most people, your initial reaction to the question posed by the title to this white paper is “no.” However, for many investors, the answer is “yes.” With all of the investment options available today, many investors are intimidated, confused and frustrated by the investment process. Recent studies also support the suggestion that many investors are perfect targets for investment fraud or already are victims of investment fraud. For instance,

A recent study by Schwab Institutional found that 75% of investor portfolios were unsuitable for investors given their financial situation and goals;

A recent study by CEG Worldwide concluded that over 94% of those holding themselves out as wealth managers were more product salesman than wealth manager;

The 2010 IPT Elder Investor Fraud Survey reported that investment fraud is the number crime against the elderly, affecting an estimated 7.3 million older Americans, or one out of every five senior citizens. Since that number only counts the instances of fraud actually reported, the number of victims is undoubtedly higher.

One of the problems with avoiding investment fraud is the difficulty in detecting some types of fraud due to the subtleness or complexity of the fraud itself. Another problem with detecting fraud is the personal biases and beliefs that each investor has regarding investing. The purpose of this article is to alert investors to some of the more common elements of investment fraud so that investors can prevent unnecessary investment risk and financial loss due to investment fraud.

Fraud and Cognitive Biases

The common response to investment fraud is to call for greater investor education programs. However, a recent law review article in The Elder Law Journal suggests that investor education programs may be largely ineffective due to cognitive issues such as cognitive biases and/or cognitive deficits of investors. Cognitive biases are personal beliefs that impact our decisions. Cognitive deficits are impairments in mental ability, including impairments due to aging.

In the article, “Deception, Decisions and Investor Education,” the author, suggests a model of fraud victimization, which she refers to as the “deception/decision cycle.”1 As investors are provided with investment information, they filter the information through their personal beliefs, beliefs based upon a combination of actual experience, education and first impressions. An Investor’s beliefs, or biases, may or may not be accurate, but they can become so ingrained, or “anchored,” within a person that the person resists any conflicting information.

These biases may be strengthened even further by what are known as “truth” and “authority” biases, a person’s tendency to accept a statement as true, especially when the statement comes from someone with actual or perceived authority or expertise. The individual investor, whether because of issues such as cognitive biases/deficits, the complexity of the investment information of the sheer volume of such information, may fail to recognize the deception involved in the fraud.

Asset Allocation and Cognitive Biases

A perfect example of how cognitive biases can negatively impact investment decisions is a common misperception involving asset allocation. When you mention asset allocation or diversification to most investors, they think in terms of quantity rather than quality. Consequently, a large percentage of investors have portfolios that are diversified in terms of types and numbers of holdings within the portfolio, but the portfolios are not “effectively” diversified due to the high correlation of returns, or overlap, between the investments.

Portfolios that are not “effectively” diversified are sometimes referred to as being “pseudo” diversified since they appear to be diversified, but they do not actually provide an investor with the benefits of a truly diversified portfolio. The high correlation between the investments results in an investor having less downside protection than they would have with a truly diversified portfolio.

As an example, most people would consider a portfolio consisting of a large cap fund (IWB – iShares Russell 100 Index), a small cap fund (IWM – i Shares Russell 2000 Index), an international equity fund (EFA – iShares MSCI EAFE Index) and a bond fund (AGG – iShares Barclay Aggregate Bond Index), to be diversified since it consists of four different types of funds. A review of a correlation of returns matrix for a portfolio of the four exchange traded funds (ETFs) representing the four categories over the time period 8/31/2003 to 8/31/2011 tells a different story.

IWB/IWM – 0.93 IWB/EFA – 0.91 IWB/AGG – 0.05

IWM/EFA – 0.81 IWM/EFA – (0.03) EFA/AGG – 0.11

Analyzing rolling periods of returns often provides a better picture of trends and the persistence of trends. An analysis of rolling five year periods of returns for the referenced ETFs provides the following information:

2010-06

IWB/IWM – 0.966 IWB/EFA – 0.970 IWB/AGG – (0.308)

IWM/EFA – 0.896 IWM/AGG – (0.325) EFA/AGG – (0.432)

2009-05

IWB/IWM – 0.985 IWB/EFA – 0.991 IWB/AGG – (0.282)

IWM/EFA – 0.977 IWM/AGG – (0.338) EFA/AGG – (0.340)

2008-04

IWB/IWM – 0.967 IWB/EFA – 0.999 IWB/AGG – (0.445)

IWM/EFA – 0.973 IWM/AGG – (0.518) EFA/AGG – (0.4650

The higher the matrix number, the higher the correlation of returns and performance. A negative matrix number indicates a negative correlation of returns, which means that the two investments behave differently during various market conditions.

The matrix clearly shows a high correlation of returns between the large cap and the small cap ETF, and a high, albeit varying, correlation of returns between the international ETF and the large and small cap ETFs. The matrix clearly shows a low correlation of returns between the bond ETF and the other three ETFs. An argument can be made that a portfolio consisting only of the large cap ETF (IWB) and the bond ETF (AGG) would produce similar results.

Since fees and expenses are relatively low for most ETFs, cost is not that much an issue with a portfolio of ETFs. Since many financial advisers do not use index funds or ETFs in making recommendations, the negative impact of “pseudo” diversification can be seen in a portfolio of load-based mutual funds, again representing the four asset categories used in the ETF portfolio. The mutual funds represented are American Funds Growth Fund of America (large cap equity), Oppenheimer Discovery (small cap equity), Fidelity Worldwide (international) and PIMCO Total Return (bond).

2010-06

Am/Opp – 0.922 Am/Fid – 0.981 Am/PIMCO – 0.705

Opp/Fid – 0.948 Opp/PIMCO – 0.688 Fid/PIMCO – 0.597

2009-05

Am/Opp – 0.922 Am/Fid – 0.981 Am/PIMCO – 0.519

Opp/Fid – 0.948 Opp/PIMCO – 0.636 Fid/PIMCO – 0.451

2008-04

Am/Opp – 0.893 Am/Fid – 0.989 Am/PIMCO – 0.052

Opp/Fid – 0.935 Opp/PIMCO – 0.482 Fid/PIMCO – 0.148

The data shows the correlation of returns over rolling five-year periods in order to show not only the correlation of returns, but also the trend in correlation of returns. Once again, we see the same high correlation of returns between the equity-based mutual funds, with a lower correlation of returns between the bond fund and the equity-based funds that we saw with the ETF portfolio. The results are consistent with studies that have shown an increase in correlation of returns between equity-based investments over the past decade, especially during periods of increased volatility in the markets.

The correlation of returns matrix exposes the false illusion of diversification created by the bias of assessing diversification on the quantity of funds or types of funds alone. This bias is sometimes difficult to remove, as diversification based on quantity and type seems to make sense. Unfortunately, that is exactly what unscrupulous financial advisers are relying on, as they try to exploit the “truth” and “authority ” biases.

Portfolio Optimization and Cognitive Biases

If you have had an asset allocation plan or portfolio optimization plan prepared by your financial adviser, look at the plan and see if there is anything in the plan that gives you the projected risk, return or correlation of return data on the actual investment portfolio the financial adviser recommended to you. Investors rarely see such an analysis using the investor’s actual investments, primarily because the commercial asset allocation/ portfolio optimization programs used by most financial advisers are not designed to produce such a “real world” analysis. And yet, the calculations can be done using Microsoft Excel.

In many cases this failure to provide a “real world” portfolio analysis results in recommendation-implementation gaps, often leaving investors with portfolios significantly different from the asset allocation/portfolio optimization plan provided to them by their financial adviser, especially with regard to exposure to unnecessary investment risk.

The calculations required to calculate the projected risk, return and correlation of returns statistics for an investor’s actual investment portfolio are complex. Consequently, most investors are unable to calculate the actual portfolio’s statistics themselves or to otherwise detect an investment adviser’s fraudulent behavior.

Too often an investor falls prey to the “trust” bias or the “authority” bias and just accepts the plan given to them without questioning the accuracy of the plan or the failure to provide a “real world” analysis of the actual investment portfolio that their financial adviser recommended. But you should question your financial adviser and ignore any “trust” or “authority” biases, especially since the portfolio optimizers often produce recommendations that are counterintuitive and/or contrary to existing legal standards.

Some examples may help to prove my point. Two of the most important factors in constructing a suitable investment portfolio are the investor’s risk tolerance level and the investor’s investment time horizon. With that in mind, an experiment with two popular online asset allocation calculators provides some interesting results.

The first asset allocation calculator asked about risk tolerance, but did not even ask about investment time horizon. The regulators take the basic position that anyone with an investment time horizon less than five years should generally avoid equity-based investments since they might not have enough time to recover any losses suffered in the market. With the first calculator, we ran the same set of personal investment parameters, with the only exception being that we varied the risk tolerance level in each scenario. The results are shown in Appendix A.

Two clear issues emerge regarding investor protection. First, regardless of the investor’s risk tolerance level, the calculator recommends a portfolio consisting of approximately 60% equities and 40% bonds/cash. Second, the calculator completely ignores the “low” risk tolerance entry, exposing the risk averse investor to an undesired level of investment risk due to recommended equity allocations.

With the second asset allocation calculator, information was requested on both the investor’s risk tolerance level and the investor’s investment time horizon. Once again, the same set of personal investment parameters are used in each analysis, changing only the risk tolerance level and/or the investment time horizon. The results are shown in Appendix B.

If you accept the regulators’ position regarding a minimum five-year investment time horizon for equity investments, then the second calculator’s equity allocation for the 3-5 year time horizon is questionable, as it recommends a 30% allocation to equities for the low risk investor and a 45% allocation to equities for a moderate risk investor.

Expanding the time horizon out to 5-10 years, the low risk investor get the same portfolio recommendations that the 3-5 year time horizon/moderate risk investor got, which obviously raises questions. Strangely, the moderate risk investor with the 5-10 year time horizon receives a recommendation that increases the bond allocation to 65% and lowers the equity allocation to only 45%.

Increasing the investment time horizon to 10-20 years produces basically the same recommendation for both the low risk and moderate risk investor, with the recommended equity allocation only varying by 5 percentage points. The calculator appears to overweight the investment time horizon and basically ignore the low risk investor’s preference to avoid investment risk.

The last example is just further evidence that most asset allocation/portfolio optimization software programs are highly unstable and susceptible to mistakes, so much so that they have been criticized as “estimation-error maximizers” by industry expert Richard Michaud. Investors who wish to protect their financial security would do well to replace any “truth” and/or “authority” biases with a healthy dose of skepticism and a willingness to question their financial advisers.

Investment Fees and Expenses and Cognitive Biases

Investors look to their financial advisers for advice and generally defer to any recommendations provided by their adviser. Again, this is often the results of both the “truth” and the “authority” biases. Many financial advisers limit their investment recommendations to actively managed, commission-based products, which may not be in an investor’s best interests.

The negative impact of biases grows even deeper once the impact of fees and expenses is considered. Fees and expenses on index funds and ETFs are usually low since there is little or no active management of such investments. Fees and expenses on actively managed mutual funds can vary, with some even assessing annual fees and expenses in excess of 1.0% per year. Fees and expenses are important to investors since they reduce an investor’s return.

Assume that we have two funds, Fund A and Fund B, both with relatively similar performance returns. Fund A is an index fund/ETF. Fund B is an actively managed fund that has an R-squared rating of 93, which means that approximately 93% of Fund B’s return can be attributed to the performance of a benchmark index, in this case the index represented by Fund A. However, Fund B’s annual fees and expenses are 1.0% per year, while those of Fund A are 0.25% per year.

Since most of the return of Fund B can be attributed to an index rather than the contributions of active management, why would an investor pay three times more in annual fees and expenses for Fund B? Before investing in Fund B, it is useful to see just how beneficial the active management has been and exactly what the active management is effectively costing the investor.

One commonly used method for making such assessments is known as the active expense ratio. The active expense ratio was introduced by Professor Ross Miller, a finance professor at the State University of New York at Albany. Professor Miller basically compares a fund’s R-squared rating with the excess annual fees charged by the fund to determine a fund’s “effective” annual fees and expenses.

In our example, the active expense ratio calculates to an effective annual active expense ratio fee of 3.02% for the active management of the fund, a little over 200% higher than the stated fees and expenses. For the four mutual funds in our sample portfolio, the active expense ratios were as follows.

American Funds Growth

R-Squared – 98.34

Stated Expense Ratio – 0.69%

Active Expense Ratio – 4.44%

Oppenheimer Discovery

R-Squared – 93.43

Stated Expense Ratio – 1.34%

Active Expense Ratio – 4.63%

Fidelity Worldwide

R-Squared – 97.58

Stated Expense Ratio – 0.71%

Active Expense Ratio – 3.06%

PIMCO Total Return

R-Squared – 68.43

Stated Expense Ratio – 0.56%

Active Expense Ratio – 0.53%

There are those who may argue that the active expense ratio is misleading. However, when an actively managed fund derives most of its performance from an index and an investor can obtain that same index’s performance at a much lower cost, one has to question the wisdom of reducing one’s investment returns by paying “money for nothing” and reducing one’s investment returns. Why pay three times more for essentially the same results?

And yet investors do it every day, impacted by “truth” and “authority” biases they may not even be aware of. Some investors have no choice, as their company’s retirement plan may only offer actively managed, commissioned-based investment options as a result of their plan’s fiduciary being influenced by their own “truth” and “authority” biases. Armed with the knowledge of both these biases and active expense ratios, it would not be surprising to see both plan participants and plan fiduciaries act to provide more meaningful investment options within retirement plans.

Wealth Management and Cognitive Biases

“Anchoring” is one of the strongest cognitive biases and, with regard to investing and wealth management, one of the most potentially destructive influences on wealth preservation. Anchoring can be defined as a reluctance to retreat from existing beliefs and decisions and a resistance to even consider new or opposing information.

The difficulty with addressing anchoring bias can summed up with the observation from noted economist John Maynard Keynes that “the difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from the old ones” and that “worldly wisdom teaches us that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally.” Beliefs often become truths, regardless of whether such beliefs are valid, often resulting in unnecessary risk and financial loss.

A perfect example of the potential negative impact of anchoring can be seen in investors that adopt a buy-and-hold approach to wealth management, or, as buy-and-hold critics often refer to the strategy, the “buy, forget and regret” approach. It is interesting to note that the buy-and hold approach to wealth management is apparently derived from an ongoing misinterpretation of a famous financial study.

A 1986 study, commonly known as the Brinson-Hood-Beebower (BHB) study, concluded that approximately 94% of the variability of a portfolio’s returns was attributable to the portfolio’s asset allocation mix. The study made no representations whatsoever regarding the impact of asset allocation on a portfolio’s actual returns, only on the variability of a portfolio’s returns.

Nevertheless, financial advisers and investment companies misrepresent the study’s findings to support their buy-and-hold argument, claiming that all an investor has to do for investment success is to set up an appropriate initial asset allocation and maintain that allocation since the BHB study proved that asset allocation determines 94% of an investor’s returns. The problem is that many investors have read or heard this mantra so often that they have fallen prey to the “truth” and “authority” biases and the misrepresentations are now firmly anchored into their personal beliefs.

It is interesting to note that the buy-and-hold approach is not derived from the works of the early pioneers of wealth management, Nobel laureates Dr. Harry Markowitz, the father of Modern Portfolio Theory, and Dr. William Sharpe. In fact, Dr, Sharpe has recently stated that investors should change their asset allocation in response to changes in market values. A recent study by asset allocation expert Roger Ibbotson has rebuffed the buy-and-hold strategy, stating that active management and asset allocation have about the same impact on a portfolio’s performance.

There are many investment professionals who would argue that the buy-and-hold approach is fundamentally sound and does not constitute investment fraud. These professionals usually claim that anything other than a buy-and-hold approach, with an occasional rebalancing to restore the original asset allocation parameters, constitutes market timing, which is both costly and ineffective.

From a legal perspective, what buy-and-hold advocates fail to realize is that the buy-and-hold approach completely ignores the proven cyclical nature of the market and t the Prudent Investor Act, whose guidelines which are often used by regulatory bodies and the courts in determining questions of fraud and prudent fiduciary conduct. The Prudent Investor Act clearly states that a fiduciary should make changes in an investment portfolio when changes in the market or economy dictate such changes are necessary in order to protect the portfolio against unnecessary risk and losses.

The classic definition of market timing involves having all of one’s assets either in the market or out of the market. The potential tax implications and the difficulty in perfectly timing the stock make such a strategy practically impossible. Reallocating some of one’s resources to reduce risk exposure is not market timing, but smart, defensive investing.

Smart investors would do well to heed the advice of noted investor Ben Graham, who warned that “the essence of investment management is the management of risks, not the management of returns. Well managed portfolios start with this precept.” Various studies support Graham’s postion, with such studies documenting the fact that avoiding losses has a much greater impact than missing potential returns.

Many investors suffered unnecessary investment losses during the recent 2000-2002 and 2008 bear markets due to their cognitive biases regarding the buy-and-hold approach to investing and their refusal to objectively consider other investment approaches. Unfortunately, these same investors will likely continue to suffer unnecessary investment losses unless and until they recognize their cognitive biases and objectively examine their investment strategy. As George Santayana pointed out, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Conclusion

Investment fraud is a pervasive problem. While various statistics are often cited as evidence of the problem, the truth is that such numbers are only a small percentage of the actual cases of investment fraud, as many cases go unreported and many victims of investment fraud are unaware that they are victims due to the subtlety or complexity of the fraud itself.

An emerging theory of investment fraud is that investors are susceptible to investment fraud due to cognitive biases and/or cognitive deficits that impair their ability to properly analyze investment situations and the recommendations of their financial advisers. It is imperative that investors become aware of and overcome potentially harmful personal biases, such as “truth” bias, “authority” bias and anchoring, in order to properly analyze investment options and better protect their financial security.

© Copyright 2011, InvestSense, LLC. All rights reserved.

This article is for informational purposes only, and is not designed or intended to provide legal, investment, or other professional advice since such advice always requires consideration of individual circumstances. If legal, investment, or other professional assistance is needed, the services of an attorney or other professional adviser should be sought.

Notes

1. Jayne W. Barnard, “Deceptions, Decisions and Investor Education,” Elder Law Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2 (2010), 201.

APPENDIX A

Low Risk Portfolio

Investment Parameters > Age: 50 > Assets: $250,000 > Risk Tolerance: Low > Tax Bracket: 25% > Economic Outlook: Moderate > Income Needs: 4%

Recommended Allocation > Large Cap Equity – 23%, Midcap Equity – 13%, Small Cap Equity – 9%, Foreign Equity – 14%, Bonds – 23%, Municipal Bonds – 18%, Cash – 13%

Moderate Risk Portfolio

Investment Parameters > Age: 50 > Assets: $250,000 > Risk Tolerance: Moderate > Tax Bracket: 25% > Economic Outlook: Moderate > Income Needs: 4%

Recommended Allocation > Large Cap Equity – 21%, Midcap Equity – 14%, Small Cap Equity – 10%, Foreign Equity – 16%, Bonds – 26%, Municipal Bonds – 18%, Cash – 0%

High Risk Portfolio

Investment Parameters > Age: 50 > Assets: $250,000 > Risk Tolerance: High > Tax Bracket: 25% > Economic Outlook: Moderate > Income Needs: 4%

Recommended Allocation>Large Cap Equity – 20%, Midcap Equity – 16%, Small Cap Equity – 13%, Foreign Equity – 17%, Bonds – 24%, Municipal Bonds – 0%, Cash – 10%

APPENDIX B

3-5 Year Investment Time Horizon

Low Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 70%, Large Cap Equity – 15%, Small Cap Equity – 5%, Foreign Equity – 10%

Moderate Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 50%, Large Cap Equity – 25%, Small Cap Equity – 10%, Foreign Equity – 15%

High Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 60%, Large Cap Equity – 20%, Small Cap Equity – 10%, Foreign Equity – 10%

5-10 Year Investment Time Horizon

Low Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 50%, Large Cap Equity – 25%, Small Cap Equity – 10%, Foreign Equity – 15%

Moderate Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 65%, Large Cap Equity – 20%, Small Cap Equity – 5%, Foreign Equity – 10%

High Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 40%, Large Cap Equity – 30%, Small Cap Equity – ]15%, Foreign Equity – 15%

10-20 Year Investment Time Horizon

Low Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 30%, Large Cap Equity – 30%, Small Cap Equity – 20%, Foreign Equity – 20%

Moderate Risk Tolerance:Bonds – 25%, Large Cap Equity – 35%, Small Cap Equity – 20%, Foreign Equity – 20%

High Risk Tolerance: Bonds – 20%, Large Cap Equity – 40%, Small Cap Equity -20%, Foreign Equity – 20%

James W, Watkins, III is an attorney, a CFP® professional and an Accredited Wealth Management Adviser®. His areas of expertise include wealth preservation, asset protection, investment fraud and fiduciary law. He is CEO of InvestSense, LLC, a registered investment adviser firm located in Atlanta, Georgia. For additional articles and information, visit the company’s website, http://www.investsense.com. Mr. Watkins can be contacted at tawj3@yahoo.com, and followed on LinkedIn and on Twitter @InvestSense.

We all use timber on a daily basis, in our houses, our furniture, our floors and our roofing, and institutional investors, hedge funds and pension funds have been investing in timber as a long-term growth asset and inflation hedge for decades. However, as more investors discover the little-known fact that timber investments have generally outperformed stocks, bonds, and commodities over the long run, there are now many opportunities for the smaller investor to participate in this alternative asset class.

The demand for timber is growing in line with an ever-expanding population, as the human race multiplies in number we require more timber for construction, yet at the same time, fundamental limits to the supply of natural forests limit the amount of timber we can grow and harvest for our own use.

Deforestation has destroyed 1/5th of the world’s forests since 1950, and new global legislation is in place to protect the forests that remain as they play a vital role in carbon sequestration and the ecosystem.

This imbalance between supply and demand creates an outstanding opportunity for investors to acquire assets in short supply and profit from undeniable fundamental trends of population growth and resource scarcity.

Investment Performance
The vast majority of return on investment generated by timber is derived from the biological growth in size of the timber source, from seedling to sapling to fully fledged tree. On average, a single tree’s volume of wood will increase by between 2% and 8% every year depending on species, age and climate. On a very basic level, this gives the tree owner more timber to sell as time passes, and hence generates a greater return in the long-term.

Aside from this basic observation there is more to consider, as trees yield a greater sale price when they grow into bigger product classes. As an example, a small tree would only be suitable for paper products or biomass for fuel, where a larger tree can be harvested for sawn-timber which will fetch dramatically higher prices per tonne and can be used for products such as plywood or telephone poles.

A study by Professor John Caulfield of the University of Georgia found that biological growth counts for more than 60% of total financial returns, whilst increases in the price of timber, and capital appreciation of the land account for the remainder of returns generated from a timber plantation.

This goes to show that it is an effective strategy to lease land on which to grow timber, as well as purchase outright as only 6% of profits are derived from capital appreciation in the value of the land. This also shows that fluctuations in the price per cubic metre or tonne of timber have limited influence on the overall performance of timber investments. The majority of return is generated from the growth in the size of the tree itself.

The standard benchmark for timber is The NCREIF Timberland Index, which increased 18.4% in 2007, versus a 5.5% rise for the S&P 500. In the long-term, the Timberland Index has outperformed all major asset classes including, large-cap stocks, International equities and corporate bonds.

Whilst small-cap equities have outperformed timber in the long-term, after factoring in risk (as reflected in the Sharpe Ratio), timber has exhibited the highest risk-adjusted returns of any major asset class. When compared to the S&P 500, timber has displayed a low risk characteristic. Since its 1987 inception, the NCREIF Timberland Index has fallen in only one year: – 5.25% in 2001, at the same time, the S&P 500 has fallen four times, including -22.10% in 2002.

One of the main reasons investors, especially large institutional investors, turn to timber, is the fact that the asset displays low to zero correlation with other assets, especially those linked to financial markets. It has been demonstrated over a long period of time that adding timber to a portfolio of investments has the effect of improving overall risk-adjusted returns. This low correlation reflects
the fact that the primary driver of returns-biological growth-is unaffected by economic cycles.

Institutional Investor in Timber

In 2007, Jeremy Grantham, Chairman of Grantham Mayo and Van Otterloo, a Boston-based firm that oversees $60bn in assets, predicted the impending financial crisis, one of very few Investment Managers to do so.

At a conference in June 2007 Mr. Grantham announced that equities were overpriced to such an extent that the market was as risky as he has ever seen it. “The next few calendar years,” he warned, “look like a black hole as overpriced markets, dangerous leverage and a gigantic hedge-fund business collide with the house-building phase of the US presidential cycle, plus the contraction phase of a long interest cycle.” His prediction? He said he could see the Standard & Poor’s index falling 38% over the next two years.

He went on to say that Investors should allocate capital to timber investments as a stable and predictable asset with a low risk profile where returns are generated outside of any market. It is the only asset class in existence that has gone up in three out of the four major market collapses of the 20th century. It
should be noted that Jeremy Grantham holds 20% of his personal investment portfolio in timber assets.

Institutional investors have recognised the benefits of timber investments for some time, Pension funds such as Calpers, led the way in the 1980s, however it was the big university endowment funds such as Harvard and Yale that saw the true potential and invested heavily in a move to diversify their portfolios globally. In 2009 the Harvard Endowment Fund invested $500m in forestry and carbon credits in New Zealand.

PKA, the DKK 114bn (€15.4 bn) Danish collective pension scheme for employees in the public social and health sectors, raised its forestry investments to about €335m by the end of 2007, raising its commitment to timber from 1.5 to 2% of total assets.

ABP, the €211bn Dutch pension fund made its first timber investment in 2007 with a $60m (€41m) allocation to the Global Solidarity Forest Fund (GSFF), which will develop three sustainable forestry projects in the Republic of Mozambique, in south-eastern Africa, and Angola.

Both the £1.5bn (€2.1bn) UK Environment Agency pension fund, the £31bn Universities superannuation Scheme and the £3.6bn London Pension Fund Authority are reviewing whether to inject money into forestry investments.

European Investment Bank (EIB), the €26.3bn Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company and seven medium-sized Finnish pension funds have all invested in timber via the Dasos Timberland Fund.

Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management Board (Mass PRIM) decided to make a $500 million timber investment just three years after selling a $700 million section of its timber portfolio.

More recently there has been a spate of new timber investment by major asset managers, not least the $1 billion takeover of Canadian timber business TimberWest by two large asset management firms acting on behalf of institutional pension funds.

At the time of writing this report in December 2010, there looms the prospect of a second round of quantitative easing (QE2) by both the US Federal reserve and possibly the Bank of England too.

QE2 should help to shore up the US housing market. Construction accounts for roughly 70% of the total value of timber resources and as the US property market recovers, inflation will rise as houses increase in price once more.

One such asset is timber which has a proven history as an excellent hedge against rising prices.

The US housing market (construction accounts for roughly 70% of the total value of timber resources and QE2 should help to sure up the US housing market. As the US property market recovers, inflation will rise. As house increase in price once more.

Timber as an asset class presents unique characteristics. The performance of forestry assets is driven primarily by the natural growth rate of trees independently from the macro economy. As a tree matures its size and usefulness increases and subsequently so does the price. In a difficult economic climate timber companies have no need to discount their crops because if simply left to grow the value of the asset only increases.

This makes timber much less volatile in the long run and more resilient in difficult times compared to most other commodities as the investment is backed by the underlying real asset value of timber. Timber is recognized as an inflation hedge as trees grow in size, and therefore value each year. If inflation were 3% and your trees grow in size (value) by 5%, you have grown your wealth in real terms ahead of inflation.

As the rate of inflation increases, so to do timber prices, as well as the volume of timber you have to sell. This creates a double-buffer for investors and makes timber investment an ideal balancing tool to diversify portfolios.

There are a number of different opportunities for retails investors to participate in timber investment in various forms. In this section we will focus on direct investment within commercial timber plantations, although the reader should be aware that there are other, market-linked opportunities such as forestry funds and listed timber companies.

The basic premise of all of the investment offerings from various companies that we have researched remains relatively static,in that investors are usually invited to purchase either a lease on a plot of land within a commercial timber plantation, therefore owning cropping rights to any timber produced within their plot or woodlot. An alternative to this is where investors are offered direct ownership of a fixed number of trees.

The cost for plots varies from project to project between £5,000 (GBP) to £22,500 (GBP) depending on the size, location and species of timber being grown.

Sometimes, annual fees are required from the investor to service the costs of on-site management, and of course the occasional thinning that is always required within a commercial plantation.

With other projects, sufficient management fees for the period of time up to the first harvest are paid up-front by the vendor and held in escrow, fees for future harvests are deducted from the revenue of each preceding harvest, therefore creating an investment where no further cash input is required from the investor.

With some projects the land is leased by the forestry company and investors enjoy a sub-lease, with others the land is owned outright by the forestry business and investors have a direct lease and the land held in trust in favour of investors until their lease expires, this mitigates the risk of the forestry business ceasing to trade in the future and the investor left with a sub-lease with a business that no longer exists.

Download your free guide to timber investments and forestry investments at http://www.dgcassetmanagement.com

Ever considered diversifying your assets to other economies? If so, you better check out the Chinese economy.

Over the past few years, China has established an emerging market at par with the western economies. After all it boasts of being the worlds most heavily populated country. International businesses and companies have seen the growing influence of the Chinese economy. Thus, many investors are seeing the possibility of penetrating this market. Before any foreign business can conduct transactions in the country, they need to have proper work permit which includes business-class China visa. A China visa allows businessmen to visit the country and see where their investments go to.

In 2008, China visa applications skyrocketed with the hosting of the Olympic Games. Many business tycoons holding a China visa gained profit out of the lucrative investments they made. As the Chinese economy continues to gain tremendous influence in the global market, most CEOs are now considering China visa as an essential trade document. The growth of the economy will continue to propel people and businesses. With the unlimited opportunities in this vibrant market, there is no reason to hold off on investing in China.

Foreign investors need to understand that for them to be allowed to participate in and enter China; they need to have a China visa. Take note that there are specific types of Chinese visa which they have to avail to be permitted to conduct business in the country. For individual investors, there are three ways of penetrating the Chinese economy: mutual funds, individual stock exchange and foreign companies with base in China. Of these three ways, success is more guaranteed in mutual funds investment.

Mutual funds offer several advantages for foreign investors. First, your assets are diversified in the Chinese economy particularly on the Chinese stocks. You can gain access to different Chinese companies which may not be listed in your original countrys roster of international companies. Second, this is a convenient way of investing money in China. There are several brokerages which have simple account setup interface. Third, mutual funds are managed by financial experts in the Chinese economy. They are far more knowledgeable in terms of investing your money.

However, not all companies are equal. Some offer faster return of investment as compared with other companies. Make sure that you check necessary details like fee structures, expense ratios and recent performance history. Most successful investors prefer visiting the company using their Chinese visa. You should be particular with the history of the investment manager. A reliable fund manager must have over fifteen years of experience in the Chinese and international market. You can get to know them in person if you have a Chinese visa and you actually visit the country. Also pay close attention to the investment strategy of the fund manager. A more conservative investment strategy may be beneficial but it can also prolong the return of investment. Some managers follow a high-risk, high-growth strategy. Either way, you can get to choose which strategy fits your own personal investment pattern.

To ensure that your money will be invested properly, you can choose to stay in China using a China Visa, this way you will learn hands-on the business climate in the country.

When it comes to bond yields, sometimes less is more. While municipal bonds, or “munis,” usually have a stated yield several percentage points below those on comparable corporate or government bonds, the interest paid on municipal issues is generally exempt from federal and, in some cases, state and local taxes. For that reason, a muni may actually provide a similar or higher yield than those other options after taxes are taken into account.

Are Munis Right for You?

You can easily compare the yield on a muni with a taxable investment to help determine whether tax-exempt investing might benefit you. For example, if your income tax rate is 25%, a $1,000 municipal bond yielding 6% may actually be a better investment than a taxable bond yielding 7.9%. Why? While the taxable bond will provide $79 in interest per year, federal taxes will leave you with $59.25. The muni, on the other hand, may pay $60 a year free of taxes.

To determine whether you might come out ahead with a muni, use this formula to calculate its taxable-equivalent yield:

Municipal bond fund yield / (1 – your marginal tax rate) = taxable-equivalent yield

For example: 6.0% / (1 -.25) = 8.0%. In this instance, if you are in the 25% federal tax bracket, a taxable investment needs to yield 8.0% to equal the lower, but tax-exempt, return offered by a municipal bond that currently yields 6%.

How Should You Invest in Munis?

In addition to the thousands of municipal bond issues that are outstanding at any one time, professionally managed funds offer you additional alternatives for investing in munis. Municipal bond funds generally invest in a diversified mix of high-quality bonds whose interest income may be exempt from federal and state taxes. In addition, with initial investment requirements that are generally lower that those for individual municipal bonds, funds that invest in them may make it easier for more investors to participate in the muni market.

Note that investments in Municipal bonds are subject availability and change in price. Market and interest rate risks exist if sold prior to maturity. Bond values will decline as interest rate rise.

If you’d like help determining whether you might benefit from an investment in a municipal bond or bond fund, be sure to consult a qualified financial professional.

Investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses of the investment company carefully before investing. The prospectus contains this and other information about the investment company. You can obtain a prospectus from your financial representative. Read carefully before investing.

Income from some municipal bonds may be taxable under alternative minimum tax rules. Capital gains are taxable.

Lower maximum tax rates on capital gains, dividends and other income would make the return of the taxable investment more favorable, thereby reducing the difference in performance between the accounts shown. Also, changes in lax rates and tax treatment of investment earrings may impact the comparative results and investors should consider their personal investment horizon and income lax bracket, both current and anticipated before making an investment decision.

Arthur Kaplan invites you to visit http://kappatrade.com to learn more about the stock market and what the financial world is currently undergoing. Feel free to write us directly on our website for any help and/or suggestions.

To Sign-Up for our FREE Weekly Analysis & Stock Picks, go to http://kappatrade.com/newsletter_signup.php.

Let me start by asking the following:

Are you finding yourself questioning the value of your financial advisor?
Are you feeling that your financial best interests are NOT being served?
Are you losing trust and confidence in Wall Street and the financial services industry?
Are you fearful that your investments are not protected from the next major market meltdown?
Are you lacking confidence in achieving your retirement goals and needs?

“When it is obvious that the goals cannot be reached, don’t adjust the goals, adjust the action steps.” – Confucius

Perhaps you or someone you know personally experienced the pain from the past ‘decade of lost returns’ due to:

Two bubbles that burst costing trillions of dollars in investor losses
The market’s volatility creating investor uncertainty and fear
The un-denying greed and self-serving nature of Wall Street, the financial services industry and the majority of those that work in it

One did not have to personally experience financial loss to understand this pain and the long-term negative consequences that are, and will continue to be felt by so many investors, especially retirees and the baby-boom generation. Many investors are now having to rethink their retirement plans. Can they retire when planned? If not, how much longer will they have to work or will they have to down-size their retirement dreams and lifestyle? None of these are options anyone wants to face as they near their golden years. This ‘lost decade’ did however, have a silver-lining though…the power of choice…YOUR power of choice.

As an investor, if you answered yes to any of the above five questions, you’re definitely not alone and in fact you are in a select group, the majority, and for good reason. In a recent study conducted by Cogent Research (1), more than 50% of the Gen-X investors surveyed are not satisfied with their financial advisor and are considering a change in course and direction. The study also revealed a staggering fact that is hard to ignore and one that should open the eyes of every current and future investor; “Self-directed (Do-It-Yourself) Gen X investors – those who do not trust any portion of their investable assets to a financial advisor – experienced 28% asset growth in 2010… while their peers who turned to a financial advisor for guidance reported that their investable assets climbed a mere 3% on average during that same time period.” Based on this information, whose game would you rather be playing, ‘theirs’ or ‘yours?’

The reality; The DIY investor is a growing trend and not limited to the Gen X age investors. Truth be known, this trend of dissatisfaction with financial advisors and the financial services industry as a whole, is broad-based and knows no boundaries as it crosses all generations, levels of wealth and genders.

You must understand the following; some DIY investors succeed while others fail. Those that take the leap unprepared, unknowing and unwilling to make the necessary lifelong commitment doom themselves to certain failure as a DIY investor. This group of DIY investors is usually of the mindset, ‘I’ll go it alone’ or I’m looking for that ‘get-rich-quick’ scheme, rather than finding a partner with the knowledge and expertise to educate, mentor and guide them on their new found journey with proven strategies for success.

The group of successful DIY investors, better known as informed self empowered investors, have exercised their power of choice and followed the three basic steps required for any prudent decision-making process.

The power of choice provides every investor this opportunity to freely explore what is meant by being an informed self empowered investor. If someone chooses to pursue the benefits and rewards of becoming such an investor, they only need to do the following three things;

Clearly understand the choices and the differences
Make a decision as to which choice is best suited for them
Take action and make a commitment to follow a proven model for success

Let’s look at each one of those steps in greater detail.

First, you must understand the choices, and there are only two every investor faces. I like sports analogies and will use one here. Investor’s choice revolves around whose game you want to play, ‘their game’ or ‘your game.’ ‘Their game’ is the game your advisor, Wall Street and the industry NEED YOU TO PLAY! They create the rules, they tell you what field you must play on, they control the clock, they hire the officials and all an investor has to do to play is put up 100% of the money, assume 100% of the risk…and pay them to play ‘their game’… and one last minor detail, they define the winners and losers before the game starts. Do you feel like the odds are stacked against an investor playing ‘their game’? It is!!! That’s why so many true titans of the industry refer to it as a loser’s game.

‘Your game’ on the other is a game where you choose what rules you want to play by, you play with a ‘home field’ advantage, you are in complete control of the clock, the officials always work in your best interest, there is one winner…YOU…and your investment dollars now build wealth only for you…NOT your advisor, Wall Street and the financial services industry.

“It is only when you exercise your right to choose that you can also exercise your right to change.”

- Dr. Shad Helmstetter

Second, now that you clearly understand the two choices and the differences, you now have to make a decision as to which game you want to play. But before you decide, ask yourself the following questions. Do you want to play a new game, a winner’s game, ‘your game’? Are you sincerely ready, willing and committed to take the necessary steps to take back control of your financial future and recapture the wealth that has been confiscated, unknowingly from you, by the financial services industry?

“Using the power of decision gives you the capacity to get past any excuse to change any and every part of your life in an instant.” – Anthony Robbins

And third, if you answered yes to playing a new game, a winner’s game… ‘Your game’… and you’re ready, willing and committed, then you have only one more step… TAKE ACTION…and take it NOW! Taking action requires you to enrich your knowledge, become empowered and partner with a company that will easily, confidently and successfully help you escape the tyranny of the financial services industry, without complexity and information overload.

“The most important key to achieving great success is to decide upon your goal and launch, get started, take action, move.” – Brian Tracy

Choosing to start to become an informed self empowered investor is just that easy but remember, it’s a lifelong journey… a journey where you learn how to:

Become your own most trusted financial advisor.
Ensure your investment dollars are building wealth for YOU…NOT an advisor and the industry.
Select an investment strategy that fits your personal investment goals, tolerance for risk and lifestyle.
Enjoy peace-of-mind knowing you’re in complete control of your financial future

If the above looks like a game you prefer to play, why not join the growing trend of informed self empowered investors playing a winner’s game? Commit to take control of your financial future today and escape the tyranny of Wall Street and the financial services industry?

The choice is yours. Whose wealth do you want to build…’theirs’ or ‘yours’?

“Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.” – Mark Twain

(1) Cogent Research Report: http://www.cogentresearch.com

Tim Butt is President and Co-Founder of The Self Empowered Investor and has extensive experience and expertise in financial education, mentoring and coaching.

Tim is now pursuing his passion to help investors who are frustrated and dissatisfied with the financial services industry. His company teaches people of all ages, genders and levels of wealth how to take control of their financial futures by empowering them to become their own most trusted financial advisors to ensure their money is building wealth for themselves…not someone else. If being a self empowered investor is of interest, visit: http://www.theselfempoweredinvestor.com

Where should you put your investment money? What should you trade? These are the big daunting questions. With more than 28,000 symbols in the markets how do you pick?

My first rule is don’t take “tips”.

My second rule is don’t buy just because someone else says to.

Now with those rules out of the way let’s discuss your options. You have three basic choices from which you can choose or you can even mix all three.
The markets contain:

Stocks, which everybody has heard of, whether it be large companies like International Business Machines (known as IBM) and Ford (F), or small companies like Datalink (DTLK).
Mutual Funds which are groups of stocks, like Fidelity select Automotive (FSAVX) or Vanguard Dividend Growth (VDIGX).

ETFs which are similar to mutual funds except that the groups are not ‘managed’ and trade like stocks, for example: iShares Brazil (EWZ).

These are the primary types of stock market investments you may make. There are pluses and minus for each of these three basic investment types.

• Stocks – you can trade at any time, they may or may not pay dividends (which is like earning interest on your investment since the company is giving shareholders a share of its profits); but they can be more susceptible to either upward price jumps or downfalls.

• Mutual Funds – consist of many individual stocks and involve a manager who buys and sell the stocks making up the fund’s portfolio so that the funds value is more of a composite average of all the individual stocks which helps to reduce or average sudden changes in individual stock prices, which also reduces the chance of a major sudden loss and a major profit gain.

• ETFs – the abbreviation for Exchange Traded funds, are kind of a composite of stocks like mutual funds but they trade like stocks. Thus an ETF represents a portfolio of stocks as if it were a mutual fund; but it isn’t a mutual fund because the individual stocks are not ‘managed’ and sold or bought frequently like they are in a mutual fund.

ETFs are a relatively new product and have only become popular in recent years with many mutual fund investors switching to ETFS because of their ease of trading.

Your personal investment portfolio can contain any of these three basic investment types or a mix of all to give you a diversification of your portfolio. Diversification is extremely important and means something different to almost everyone. We will discuss diversification in another article.

Author Raymond Dominick has been investing in the markets since his teenage years. He is the designer of Dynamic Investor Pro investment software. An experienced business manager and journalist, he has been a registered investment advisor representative, also a professional photographer who loves escaping to the wonders of Glacier National Park in Montana. View his software at: http://www.dynamicinvestorpro.com

Whether you have a private business of your own or are thinking more of investing in trading, one way of finding funding is through investing in private placements. This is a type of capital that banks on trading with treasury bills or medium term bank notes, so it is meant to be a more long-term type of investment process with a high rate of return. This can be far safer for the investor than other types of schemes, for a number of reasons. To get started with finding out if this could be a good idea for your small business or personal investment plan, you should first take a look at the benefits.

One reason why those investing in trading might choose to invest in private placements is that it doesn’t require putting up any sort of personal resources or collateral to obtain this type of financing. Another benefit is that these types of trading programs often help benefit humanitarian causes. The profits earned from investments go back to projects that help benefit the economy, or are used for non-profits and social development projects. If that is a draw for you, you should find out what type of works are currently underway, to see if this is something that you might be interested in investing in.

Banks and other financial institutions are not allowed to invest in these programs, which many see as a way of leveling the playing field for smaller personal investors. That makes this a very different type of way of investing in trading, and if the banks do wish to participate they will have to use private investors to purchase shares for them. Because the investment is underwritten by the actual trading group, it is difficult to lose money this way.

However, there are large companies out there that have been known to use private placements as a way of luring investors into unsound schemes, so be sure that you know exactly where your money is going to avoid these types of scams. This is the same with any type of investment, as there is always risk involved whether you are investing in trading, real estate, or start up businesses. For many that is part of the thrill. Investing is a way of playing a game and coming out on top with more money than you started, and if you play the game armed with information, chances are you will succeed.

For more information on investing in investment opportunities usually or normally not found in the marketplace, click here!

Sean Johnson is an Investment Advisor for http://www.inquest.biz an Investment Referral Service for investors requesting information on specific investments.

The very best personal investment may be different for you than it is for someone else, but that does not mean that there are not better places in general to put your money. Still, depending on your financial goals, the amount of risk you are willing to take, and the number of dollars you are willing to invest, you will find different kinds of investments to be more profitable to you. Choose your investments wisely and you will obtain greater wealth to enjoy in the future, despite market ups and downs. You may be interested in investing in hedge funds, investing in stocks, or real estate investing. All of these options will be explored here.

If you think that investing in hedge funds may be for you, you should understand more about them first. Hedge funds are most commonly established as private investment partnerships that are only available to a small number of investors. There is usually a large initial minimum investment required of investors. This money is not liquid as investors are often required to keep their investments in the fund for 12 months or more. Investing in hedge funds may be for you if you have a large amount of money you want to transform into even more money while attempts to reduce risk are highly implemented.

Real estate investing could be for you if you want to make money on the real estate market by purchasing homes with the intent to sell rather than occupy them as your new dwelling. Those within this field of investing often own multiple properties. These may be sold for a quick return or rented out for a long-term investment. There are many different kinds of real estate investing that may interest you, whether you want to be a landlord or get the property off your hands as soon as possible.

Investing in stocks is perhaps the most classic form of investing that exists today. It is known for being quite a risky venture, especially in an unpredictable market. However, if you know how to read historical statistics, you can stay ahead of inflation and increase your finances in time. Even though you must pay taxes when investing in stocks, as well as when investing in these other kinds of investments, you should not let this fact deter you from making more money. Most forms of income are taxed anyway and you have the potential to make a great killing on the stock market, in real estate, or with hedge funds.For more information on investing in investment opportunities usually or normally not found in the marketplace, click here!

Sean Johnson is an Investment Advisor for http://www.inquest.biz an Investment Referral Service for investors requesting information on specific investments.

Most people tend to save part of their monthly income to secure their future. In times of need, savings come handy for cash flow problems without resorting to family help. However, having money in a savings account is not enough and if you are concerned about future of your children or their education, then it is advisable to think about better financial investment options after retirement.

Investing in personal finance would let your money grow over time, therefore providing your family with sufficient funds. If you invest in stocks and shares for example, you can create an income in the form of dividends on a yearly basis, depending on the personal investment plan that you chose.

Obviously there are risks involved in stocks and shares as the companies you invest your money in, can either lose money or make profits. It is best to buy shares from a well known company that has been established for many years in order to feel secure about your investments.

Another option is to purchase bonds. When people buy bonds, they are in actual fact lending money to that company. Bonds normally offer higher interest rates and are not affected by inflation.

Forex trading may be the other great option for you. Forex trading means exchanging foreign currency. The idea is you buy currencies at a lower rate and then sell them at high rates for profit. This type of investment is purely carried out online and you do not need a lot of money to start.

Finally, other financial investment options include buying CD, which stands for Certificate Of Deposit. Banks offer CDs at great rates and they can be anything from 6 months to 5 years. The interest rate is the highest for long term investment. Make sure before you invest in any type of plan, you discuss your options with a reputable financial advisor as they are experts in personal finance.

Do you know that Knowledge is better than getting money? Read the Larry Blair story ASAP! There’s still more time. Click Here