Don't grow giddy over rising stocks
After running in terror from stocks since the financial crisis, individuals are suddenly feeling cozy again about a stock market that has gained 120 percent since early 2009.
But should they?
In early January, investors threw a record amount of money — $55 billion — into stock mutual funds during a short period. It shows a change of heart, a more daring spirit, or perhaps a naive one. It's a reversal of the past few years, when frightened investors pulled about $388 billion out of stock funds and poured about $1 trillion into bond funds.
This year's abrupt change toward investing is making some financial advisers nervous. Investors are notorious for picking the worst times to grow affectionate toward stocks. In 2000, they poured a record amount of money into stock funds just before the market plunged 49 percent as the technology sector crashed. In 2007, they threw billions into the stock market just in time for the 57 percent crash on the tails of the housing market collapse and global banking meltdown.
In the months leading up to the 2000 and 2007 crashes, Americans were lulled into a false sense of security. With stocks soaring, more people than ever said they were confident about having enough money to retire when surveyed by the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Seventy-two percent were confident in 2000, and 70 percent in 2007. That year, 27 percent said they were “very confident.” But in last year's survey, only 14 percent were very confident.
Today, nervousness about the stock market seems to be dissipating after headlines have made individuals aware that they missed a 13.4 percent gain in the stock market last year and a 120 percent gain since March 2009. Instead of being comforted by a 120 percent climb, though, investors should realize their “sense of timing has been way off,” said financial planner Michael Kitces, of Columbia, Md.
“They sat out 100 percent of the bull market run,” Kitces said. “If they didn't want to buy stocks when they were half-price, why would they think they have it right to buy now? We are in a risky zone.”
Kitces doesn't see any impending disaster but notes that the brightest economists and financial advisers rarely see red flags until the damage is done.
Individuals don't have to see an economic disaster coming to invest carefully, Kitces said. Instead, they need to know that cycles are always occurring in the stock market. When stocks have been climbing a long time and get pricey, they drop and leave people with losses. The drop isn't usually as sharp as in 2000 and 2007. But corrections — or downturns of 10 percent to 20 percent — are common at some point after investors have been infatuated with stocks for long stretches.
Consequently, Kitces suggests lightening up on stock funds during periods when stocks have been popular, and consequently pricey. He doesn't suggest bailing completely from stocks, but advises caution when the market provides an illusion of ever-climbing levels. Now, he suggests that because of pricey stocks and the 120 percent climb in the market, those who usually would invest 60 percent of their retirement savings in stocks and 40 percent in bonds, do the reverse — investing only 40 percent in stocks.
Gail MarksJarvis is a personal finance columnist for the Chicago Tribune and author of “Saving for Retirement Without Living Like a Pauper or Winning the Lottery.” She can be reached at email@example.com.
Individuals with 401(k)s can make slow moves into and out of stocks with the new money they add each paycheck. That's better than jumping in with both feet when the water looks fine, or running in terror at the worst times.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Shell shovels millions into proposed Beaver County plant site
- Muni bond funds stressed
- Off-duty but on call: Suits seek overtime
- $2-per-gallon gas expected by year’s end, but not in Western Pa.
- Companies hand out perks, benefits instead of pay raises
- Post-Gazette offers voluntary buyouts in bid to avoid layoffs
- Extended oil slump takes toll
- Small business hangs on fate of Export-Import Bank
- When it comes to home ownership, Hispanics finding locked doors
- Of Caitlyn Jenner and workplace restrooms
- Credit score insight from FICO executive