SteadyOptions is an options trading forum where you can find solutions from top options traders. TRY IT FREE!

We’ve all been there… researching options strategies and unable to find the answers we’re looking for. SteadyOptions has your solution.

Do all stocks have the same expected returns?


When deciding to build a diversified investment portfolio, there are many different considerations. Which asset classes do you buy? Large cap or small cap? US only, or international too? Mutual funds or ETFs? How much in bonds? Passive or active? Growth or value?

Without a specific goal in mind and an investment philosophy to guide your decisions, it can quickly become overwhelming. There are two primary asset classes that form the core of an investment portfolio: Stocks and bonds. I find that many investors and advisers intuitively understand and accept the economic logic that longer term bonds have higher expected returns than shorter term bonds, corporate bonds have higher expected returns than government bonds, and stocks have higher expected returns than bonds. This is rational compensation for risk.

If I've already given you brain damage, think about it like this: If a 1 month treasury bill issued and guaranteed by the federal government was yielding the same return if held to maturity as a 30 year bond issued by a corporation in significant financial distress, which one would you buy? Of course you'd buy the 1 month T-bill, as the 30 year corporate bond offers no compensation for risk, and a bond is nothing more than a promise to pay you back. 

When the conversation shifts to expected returns on stocks, there is often more debate. Originally, the thought was that differences in returns among stocks could be explained by market beta. In other words, how much equity like risk a stock or fund has. A stock or fund with a market beta of greater than 1 has more equity type risk than the overall market, and vice versa. Therefore stocks with higher betas were thought to have higher expected returns than the total market, but applying this model to empirical data showed that market beta only explained about two-thirds of the differences in stock returns.

Eugene Fama and Ken French added to the research in the early 1990's, finding that by adding a stock's size (market cap: small vs. large) and relative price (book value vs. price: value vs. growth) to the equation, more than 90% of the differences in performance among stocks could be explained. The Fama and French model is referred to as the 3 factor model, concluding that there is a difference in expected returns among stocks that can be explained by their size, relative price, and market beta. Smaller stocks with lower relative prices (referred to as value stocks) have unique risks associated with them unrelated to market beta, and this additional risk explains their higher historical returns and implies higher expected returns in the future. 

Image result for small cap value style box

For perspective, since the 1920's, small value stocks (measured by the Dimensional small cap value index) have had returns approximately 4% per year higher than the total market (measured as the S&P 500). With the higher risks in mind associated with small value stocks, it's rational to believe these higher returns exist as compensation for risk in a similar way that differences in term (time until maturity) and credit (ability to pay) characteristics explain the difference in returns among bonds. The small and value premiums have also been persistent and pervasive across both international and emerging markets, further supporting the Fama/French findings.

Armed with this information, an investor can potentially construct a more efficient portfolio. One that has comparable expected returns as the total market, but with less risk. The 4% higher historical return for small value stocks would have allowed an investor to achieve the same return as the total market with just 40% in small value stocks, and the remaining 60% in the safety and stability of 5 year US treasuries. The net result would have been an almost 40% reduction in portfolio volatility. 

My experience as a financial adviser for more than a decade has taught me that limiting the risk of large losses increases the odds that investors will be able to maintain discipline during bear markets. 

Investors interested in more on this topic can contact me at jblom@lorintine.com. I also recommend the writings and books of Larry Swedroe, especially his most recent book, "reducing the risk of black swans", which is an easy read and can be purchased for under $10 on Amazon.

 

Jesse Blom is a licensed investment advisor and Vice President of Lorintine Capital, LP. He provides investment advice to clients all over the United States and around the world. Jesse has been in financial services since 2008 and is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™. Working with a CFP® professional represents the highest standard of financial planning advice. Jesse has a Bachelor of Science in Finance from Oral Roberts University. Jesse is managing the LC Diversified portfolio and forum, the LC Diversified Fund, as well as contributes to the Steady Condors newsletter.

Edited by Jesse

What Is SteadyOptions?

Full Trading Plan

Complete Portfolio Approach

Diversified Options Strategies

Exclusive Community Forum

Steady And Consistent Gains

High Quality Education

Risk Management, Portfolio Size

Performance based on real fills

Try It Free

Non-directional Options Strategies

10-15 trade Ideas Per Month

Targets 5-7% Monthly Net Return

Visit our Education Center

Recent Articles

Articles

  • The Minimum Effective Dose (MED) For Cash Flow Planning

    Financial planners can usually give generic advice that will be appropriate for the majority of Americans, and that’s the goal of this article. If we can get the fundamentals of cash-flow planning right (where to put your money after you earn it and pay your taxes and bills), we’re 80% of the way towards maximizing our financial situation.

    By Jesse,

    • 0 comments
    • 252 views
  • Are You Breaking Even? Or Losing?

    Among the good reasons to trade options is the need to meet or surpass your breakeven yield. This is the yield you need just to preserve your purchasing power; and it higher than most people think. In fact, most people relying on moderate to conservative yields from stocks, mutual funds, real estate and savings accounts might be earning well below this breakeven level.

    By Michael C. Thomsett,

    • 0 comments
    • 280 views
  • Buy When You Have the Money, Sell When You Need the Money

    Money can be quite an emotional topic for many of us. Emotions can enhance our experiences and relationships in many ways, but they can act as mental roadblocks especially when trying to make wise financial decisions. One of the most common emotional roadblocks I come across when working with individuals is an unwillingness to invest idle cash to meet long-term goals.

    By Jesse,

    • 0 comments
    • 629 views
  • Strategy Selection vs. Risk Management

    "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money." Everett McKinley Dirksen. Let’s begin with the bottom line: When I talk to anyone about the concept of choosing an option strategy (or two) to adopt for trading, I stress that the strategy should have certain characteristics.

    By Mark Wolfinger,

    • 0 comments
    • 317 views
  • Blending Anchor Strategy

    Anchor and Leveraged Anchor investors frequently ask why the strategy only trades SPY and SPY options rather than individual stocks, other indexes or commodities. We avoid individual stocks because of tracking and divergence issues.

    By cwelsh,

    • 0 comments
    • 411 views
  • Fundamental Volatility and Stock Prices

    Every options trader must wonder whether any connection will be found between the company's fundamentals and stock prices (and in turn, option valuation as well). Because options are derived from stock price behavior, the analysis of stock movement is crucial to selecting options wisely; and that relies on volatility in the reported profit and loss over several years.

    By Michael C. Thomsett,

    • 0 comments
    • 437 views
  • Bullish Short Strangles

    A bullish short strangle sounds like a complicated strategy, but it’s really quite simple for those familiar with option terminology. A short put is combined with a short call to where the position starts with some amount of positive delta overall. This distinguishes itself from a delta neutral strangle, where both the short put and short call are sold at the same delta.

    By Jesse,

    • 5 comments
    • 693 views
  • Eight Mistakes Every Forex Trader Should Avoid

    The forex market is currently the largest financial market in the world and, due to its highly liquid nature and low barriers to entry, is only expected to grow. Becoming a forex trader requires minimal effort and with a decent internet connection, a laptop or computer, and some spare money to invest, you can start in no time.

    By Kim,

    • 0 comments
    • 510 views
  • Put/Call Parity - Two Definitions

    Put/call parity is a term options traders use to mean one of two things. The simplest definition and the one most applicable to most options traders compares the similarity in the bid/ask spread and the net debit or credit resulting from this.

    By Michael C. Thomsett,

    • 0 comments
    • 560 views
  • Put Selling: Strike Selection Considerations

    When selling puts, such as we do in our Steady Momentum PutWrite strategy, there are many questions a trader must answer: What expiration should I use? What strike should I sell? Should I choose that strike based on delta or percentage out of the money?

    By Jesse,

    • 0 comments
    • 592 views

  Report Article

We want to hear from you!


There are no comments to display.



Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy and free!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

Options Trading Blogs