With just one day left, I'm sticking my neck out and saying this
financial year was a stinker. The average super fund has gone
backwards by slightly more than 6 per cent in the past 12 months,
SuperRatings says. Even by May some super funds were already down
10 per cent and they can't have improved since then, that's for
sure.
Yet the early signs are that the one coming up might not be too
bad at all.
A survey by the Russell Group found two out of three fund
managers think the market bottomed on March 18, although they're
not exactly gung-ho, either.
So what should you be doing?
Frankly, there's much to be said for doing nothing, considering
you can get about 8 per cent on your money at an online bank.
The trouble is that's not going to look too crash hot a few
years down the track, since you would have missed any chance to let
your principal grow.
At some point you need to invest.
The economy
Meanwhile, the way the sharemarket is carrying on, you'd think
the economy was in a recession. It's slowed down all right, but
it's still pretty frisky.
Even the tax cuts starting on Tuesday - I can hardly wait - pale
into insignificance compared with the resources boom.
For all the talk of US recessions and dangerously high oil
prices, the resources surge only gets stronger.
To get it into perspective, CommSec's chief equities economist
Craig James has calculated that the near tripling of coking-coal
price-contracts and an 80 per cent rise in iron ore prices in the
new financial year are worth $2100 each for every Australian.
But can it come to a shuddering halt this year? No, because it's
like making an ocean liner turn: it takes a long time and, in any
case, nobody has even moved the ship's wheel yet.
You'd think we must be digging up a hell of a lot more to be
getting all this extra national income. Not so. Most of the
commodity boom has been in price rises. We haven't scratched the
surface yet in getting the stuff out.
That's why economists have been talking about a super cycle.
Even though prices will inevitably flatten out - if not drop -
higher volumes will more than make up for the difference.
The sharemarket
Consequently most analysts expect the sharemarket to rise over
the next 12 months, with some even tipping a noticeable improvement
by Christmas.
Mind you, it would be fair to say few of them had predicted the
sharemarket slump would be as severe as this, though a correction
had been seen as long overdue.
"No one wants to buy until the new financial year," James
said.
"It could be a good start. People aren't expecting another year
of decline and certainly not of the same magnitude."
James predicts the market will rise by about 700 points by
December 31 to 6000 - where, incidentally, it was just two months
ago, though it's hard to believe - and to 6300 in a year.
Ignore resource stocks and the market is down about 40 per cent
from its peak last year, putting it in the same league as the 1987
crash.
Is it trying to tell us something?
While there's no doubt it got ahead of itself toward the end of
last year, that still leaves a good dose of scepticism about the
economic outlook which hedge funds and other speculators are making
the most of. Or maybe that should be the least of.
Anyway, at the moment economists are more upbeat than the
market, which must be one for the books.
For their part brokers, naturally more prone to optimism, might
not be adjusting their forecasts enough for a downturn in household
spending.
Or perhaps they're all right and the tax cuts, the fact that the
Reserve Bank is sitting on the fence, the commodity boom and an
acute housing shortage, will all conspire to lift spending and so
profits.
The real blight on the horizon are oil prices, which are a mixed
blessing for Australia anyway.
Still, of all the asset classes the sharemarket will be arguably
one of the less risky ones over the next 12 months.
That's simply because it's beginning from a lower base.
As a long-term performer its credentials are impeccable.
The easiest way to value the market is to look at the
price-earnings ratio, which shows how long it takes to get your
money back.
At the moment the market is at a P/E of 12, including a yield of
more than 4 per cent. The norm is 16.
Ian Huntley, of Huntley's Your Money Weekly, calls this a
"super-duper super cycle" because emerging economies are "intense
investors in infrastructure."
True, he was talking long-term, where the best investments would
be BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Woodside.
"We're the Saudi Arabia of the South Pacific and don't forget
it," he told Morningstar's recent investment conference.
Shane Oliver, chief economist and head of investment strategy at
AMP Capital Investors, predicts the sharemarket will hit 6350 by
December 31 despite "more weakness in the next few months" amid a
succession of earnings downgrades in the next half-year.
In devising a diversified portfolio you need to start with BHP
Billiton, described by Morningstar's senior research analyst Mark
Taylor as "the world's premier diversified mining company."
In fact you'd be getting two bites of the cherry because BHP
Billiton could also be classed as an international asset as
well.
Then look at anything that's been marked down because it's a
cyclical stock.
These include retailers (Harvey Norman, Wesfarmers and
Woolworths seem to be the fund manager favourites), banks
(especially the CBA and Westpac), building (Boral, CSR and James
Hardie) and manufacturing (GWA, especially).
Property trusts
A portfolio staple used to be listed property trusts (LPTs).
But, despite the recent savaging of their prices which should
normally have put them in bargain territory, most analysts are
surprisingly cool about them.
It's not so much that they'll get worse - although when it comes
to property valuations in unlisted trusts the other shoe has yet to
drop - but that they've changed irrevocably from the blue-chip
certainties they once were. The reason can be slated home in one
four-letter word: debt.
Property trusts have become geared to the hilt, a distinct
disadvantage in the middle of a credit crunch and rising interest
rates.
They've been tarred with the same brush as infrastructure
funds.
But surely it would be a different case when interest rates
drop?
No, there's more. Most of the big LPTs have been on an offshore
buying spree, so there's the additional problem of what the
exchange rate does.
Fund managers are also tending to by-pass LPTs for the new,
cheaper real estate investment trusts which are springing up in
Europe and some parts of Asia.
Others are switching to unlisted trusts instead.
Although these don't have to contend with a cranky market, they
face the same property write-downs as LPTs.
Valad Property Group warned of write-downs last week and it's
hard to believe there are many properties out there still worth
last year's inflated values.
But property expert, Ken Atchison of Atchison Consultants, says
LPTs have been over-sold and there's "enormous buying value".
He points to several key indicators: rising office rents, stable
interest rates and still reasonable economic growth.
Housing
Going the opposite way to LPTs are houses and investment
properties, which have arguably been overbought.
Even the developer Mirvac has decreased the values of some of
the properties on its balance sheet by up to 5 per cent.
Worse, on economic fundamentals, Oliver estimates house prices
are overvalued by 30per cent.
Relax. He thinks they'll only fall by "5 per cent or so over the
next year" because of the high rate of immigration and housing
shortage, as well as the commodity boom boosting incomes.
More optimistic is St George, which predicts a 5 to 10 per cent
rise in housing prices.
It does this on the grounds that housing cycles last five years
and the trough was reached in mid-2004, so that puts the next peak
at the end of 2009.
Either way, don't expect a boom year for property.
But when interest rates eventually start falling, it could be on
for one and all because of the acute shortage of accommodation.
International
Investing globally raises the same old problems all over again
about which asset class to invest in when, with the additional
worry of what's going to happen to the dollar.
At least you can narrow down the most desirable locations.
The booming economies are China, India, South-East Asia, Brazil
and Russia.
They're all rapidly industrialising and, at some point, will
have to shrug off their currency peg with the US dollar.
When that happens their currencies are also likely to rise
against our dollar, giving a double dip of benefits. Except there's
a catch - wouldn't you know it?
The only way to invest in them is through a specialist managed
fund. Nothing wrong with that, except it also follows that your
portfolio is becoming less diversified.
But how can that be if you're invested both in and outside
Australia?
Because you need to be diversified internationally as well.
Having all your allocation in an Indian share fund is just as
risky as having everything in, say, the Australian sharemarket. It
becomes concentration, rather than diversification. A broader
spread international fund would be better.
Nor do you want to overlook Europe or the US.
It's true the US is in the throes of a serious downturn, as
you'd expect from falling property prices due to the subprime
crisis.
Even so, it's not all gloom and doom. American exports are
booming, for one thing and, because corporations didn't have an
overhang of inventories, they haven't been forced to slash
production.
And in Europe the introduction of real estate investment trusts
are providing new opportunities.
Find the right mix
It's true that asset allocation is critical, mainly to make sure
your assets are diversified.
Not only is it less risky, it also means that at any given
moment you have investments going in different directions and so
your portfolio is protected.
After all a collection of, say, the 10 biggest stocks isn't
diversification because you're only investing in the
sharemarket.
And the Australian one at that, where there's a good chance all
10 would have something to do with banking, resources and
Telstra.
What about property or bonds, global shares, bonds or property,
gold, other commodities or infrastructure?
The perfect portfolio would throw in a bit of everything, the
exact mix depending on your own tastes.
"You need to know your goals, time horizon and risk," said
financial adviser Anne Graham, managing director of McPhail HLG
Financial Planning.
If you hate taking a risk, a 30 per cent allocation to the
sharemarket, and then strictly in blue chips or an Australian share
fund, should do.
More likely, however, a 60 per cent share allocation is going to
be better for you.
And the younger you are, the more you should have relatively
invested in growth areas such as shares or property than income
assets such as fixed interest.
Retirees who can't afford to lose any capital are naturally more
risk shy.
"My No. 1 rule for anyone investing or trading the sharemarket,
and notably retirees, is to reduce risk," said Dale Gillham, chief
analyst at Wealth Within.
"It is not how much you make on any one investment that makes
you wealthy, it is how much you do not lose over time."
One thing's for sure, flitting from one asset to another each
year isn't the way to go.
Tempting as it is, moving to the hottest performer each year is
self-defeating. You'd be building up losses as you quit
under-performing assets, only to jump on the bandwagon just as it's
about to stop.
The only way you can be sure you'll get full value out of your
ride with a particular asset is if you climb on board before it
starts to move.
Which means being diversified because you won't know in advance
which one it's going to be.
Not even the sharemarket, which had a record bull run until last
year, was always the best performing asset.
It was best in two of the past five years. The other winners
were hedged international shares and property trusts (twice).
Speaking of which, property trusts went from best to worst
performer only a year later.
So the trick is to spread your eggs around so you're not
second-guessing what's going to be hot next. And if the sharemarket
is freaking you out, you need to look at why you're there in the
first place.
Either you misread how you'd cope with volatility - "what's in
the head can be different to what's in the heart", as Graham puts
it - or your financial situation has changed, in which case you
need to revisit your asset allocation.