Edit Module
Bookmark and Share Email this page Email Print this page Print Pin It
Feed Feed

Oct 12, 201712:25 PMFinancial Perspectives

with Michael Dubis, CFP

Known vs. unknown and deep vs. shallow risks

(page 1 of 2)

Last month I wrote about pragmatic preparation around events like Harvey and/or Irma. I recommend reading it to get your mind around preparation for the events we have no or little control over.

Markets — risks vs. unknowns

In regard to markets today there are three real-time events that have occurred in the past two months that have risks and unknowns tied to them. There are reasons markets react differently than we expect.

Known risks are already priced into markets. The unknowns cannot be since we have no history by which to assess or “price” it. When the unknown becomes known is when you see major moves in the marketplace in order to adjust to a brand new known.

Volatility is the result of markets learning new information that was once not understood or fully known. Knowing the directions of those changes in advance can be difficult, if not impossible, to exploit.

Author and investment advisor William Bernstein refers to risks as deep and shallow. Shallow risks are risks that time will theoretically cure. For example, a bear market, a stock market pull back, or even events like the 2007–09 credit crisis. Diversified investments over long periods of time have historically recovered. This is primarily why he refers to investing as shallow, and why we say investing is a long-term decision, not a short one. If you have short-term needs, those funds should not be tied to long-term investments and vice versa.

Deep risks are risks that are generally not recoverable. Examples include war, devastation, inflation, deflation, and confiscation.

We have three real-time examples of both deep and shallow risks right in front of us today.

North Korea — war vs. rhetoric

Rhetoric is of little consequence other than for those who are glued to anxiety-inducing media influence. I recommend avoiding it.

War has history to it, and it is the winner that may benefit. I use that term “benefit” in the most skewed sense because war is never good; it is destructive and awful, and the benefits here are relative.

All war is different and this type of possible war — nuclear exchange — is a complete unknown. Markets cannot possibly accurately price this exposure because the markets literally have no idea what to do with an actual nuclear exchange. No matter how smart commentators may sound, they don’t know. That is what it means to be unknown. If a war of this magnitude actually happened, it would be devastating and unrecoverable to the people impacted beyond other long-lasting indirect impacts around the globe.

The markets currently are pricing in rhetoric, though. This is fortunate in that the markets generally are pretty smart to all known information. Let’s hope it stays that way.

(Continued)

Add your comment:
Bookmark and Share Email this page Email Print this page Print Pin It
Feed Feed
Edit Module

About This Blog

It is an understatement to say the world has experienced a radical shift in capital markets. There are more layers of information and opinions on the direction of the world than we've seen in decades. The internet and the media do not always make it easier, but Michael Dubis' contribution through IB blogs will help you sift through the noise and give you some perspective. You can find his company online.

Recent Posts

Archives

Feed

Atom Feed Subscribe to the Financial Perspectives Feed »

Edit Module