Permanent Portfolio
Posts about Harry Browne’s Permanent Portfolio Concept
Diversify Where You Put Your Money
MF Global lays out the perfect case for Rule #10 in the 16 Golden Rules of Financial Safety:
Are customer accounts at brokerage firms safe?
Until the collapse of MF Global, that’s a question I thought I’d never have to ask.
Brokerage firms are required by law to maintain segregated accounts holding all client assets, including stocks, bonds, mutual funds, money market funds and cash. The law was passed after the 1929 crash, in the depths of the Depression, to make sure that customer assets were there at all times, ready to be disbursed even if everyone asked for their money at once.
This obligation to protect customer assets “is considered sacrosanct,” Robert Cook, director of the division of trading and markets at the Securities and Exchange Commission, told me this week. “It’s considered a sacred obligation.”
Lehman Brothers may have engaged in many foolhardy practices, but even in the firm’s last days, when officials were desperate for cash, no one dared touch customer assets, which remained safely segregated despite the firm’s collapse.
And then came the revelation that an estimated $1.2 billion in customer assets had vanished at MF Global, the large brokerage and futures trading firm headed by Jon S. Corzine, the former Goldman Sachs executive and Democratic politician, that collapsed in late October after a catastrophic bet on European sovereign debt.
How could such a thing happen? I had always assumed it was impossible and that strict internal controls existed at all brokerage firms so that firm officials couldn’t tap segregated customer funds even if they were willing to break the law. Thanks to MF Global, it’s now apparent that isn’t necessarily true. “If people are determined to misuse customer funds, they will misuse them,” said Ananda Radhakrishnan, the director of the division of clearing and risk at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission. – A Risk Once Unthinkable by James B. Stewart – New York Times December 9, 2011
(Emphasis added)
Rule #10 States:
Rule #10: Don’t depend on any one investment, institution, or person for your safety.
Every investment has its time in the sun — and its moment of shame. Precious metals ruled the roost in the 1970s while stocks and bonds were in disgrace. But then gold and silver became the losers of the 1980s and 1990s, while stocks and bonds multiplied their value. No one investment is good for all times. Even Treasury bills can lose real value during times of inflation.
And you can’t rely on any single institution to protect your wealth for you. Old-line banks have failed and pension funds have folded. The company you think will keep your wealth safe might not be there when you’re ready to withdraw your life savings.
We live in an uncertain world, and surprises are the norm. You shouldn’t risk the chance that a single surprise will wipe out a large part of your holdings.
(Emphasis added)
I always recommend keeping your savings at more than one institution and not using the same fund company for all your investment money (for instance not using all Vanguard funds or all iShares or all Fidelity, etc.). It’s best to split up the assets in case something very bad were to happen with your brokerage or the company running the funds.
I know it’s more convenient to keep everything at one broker or fund provider because of unified statements, etc, but it’s really not a good idea for diversification. You’ll even notice on this blog when I recommend using ETFs, I tend to not provide tickers from all the same company (like iShares). Rather I think it a better idea to use some Vanguard, iShares, SPDRs and of course physical gold storage somewhere secure. MF Global is the poster-child why this kind of thinking is a good idea.
H/T to Ad Orientem for his link on the forum reminding me to make a comment about this latest financial industry debacle.
Happy Thanksgiving! Now, continue to ignore your portfolio.
A poster on the forum was concerned about his portfolio performance short-term. Watching the markets go up and down can get nerve wracking and I understand the concern.
Let me be blunt: You will go nuts if you look at your portfolio each day. You’ll go nuts faster if you look at the assets in isolation and try to guess what they will do or “protect” yourself by collaring them, etc. with options.
Regular readers probably know that I do very little trading or monitoring of my portfolio. But every year I go to my accountant and he remarks that I outperform all the other clients he sees (he sees a ton of portfolios, investments, taxes on investments, etc.). I do this because I don’t go in and mess with the Permanent Portfolio allocation except to rebalance it if needed or possibly some tax loss harvesting. Other than that, I don’t touch it. Seriously.
Further, calls, puts, options, etc, to protect your assets is a primrose path. All these things are products made to be sold and not bought. They have a reason for certain groups to insure themselves. But other than that, they are just expensive and likely contribute very little except to cause more aggravation and muck up an otherwise simple portfolio for the average investor.
Because of the latest worries, I have now looked at YTD numbers again from Morningstar.
The Permanent Portfolio with 25% in stocks, bonds, gold and ST bonds is up +14.49% this year.
A 60/40 total stock market and total bond market portfolio is -0.67% this year.
David Swensen’s Portfolio advocated in his book Unconventional Success is -0.82% this year.
The Permanent Portfolios is up over +14% by doing nothing all year but sitting on our hands. Beat that CNBC!
The portfolio has been positive year over year for the vast majority of its existence. It could do worse next year, but then again so could another strategy. But I don’t see anything right now that offers a better solution so let’s not go changing things.
I have gone over a month now not reading the news (called a “News Fast” – Try it, you’ll like it). Apparently something is going on in Europe and something with the budget in the US. But because I own low risk US Treasury Bonds and Notes I don’t care if the European banks blow up because it’s not going to hurt my cash and bonds. This is because I have no exposure to risky commercial paper and neither should anyone holding Bonds and Cash in the Permanent Portfolio as advised.
If the US Govt. wants to keep fighting over the budget I don’t really care because I have gold to protect me from that.
If the markets turn around by year end I have the stocks.
I continue to sleep like a baby with this portfolio just as I have been doing for years. But I do this because I ignore the financial news (I don’t really read it even when not doing a total news fast). I also ignore all market predictions. But most of all, I ignore the assets in the portfolio and allow them to do their thing. This is what I always recommend investors do: Set your asset allocation and ignore it.
This Thanksgiving I give thanks to the reader of this blog and forum. Thank you for the contributions. I hope the Permanent Portfolio is keeping your money safe so you can focus on the more important things in your own life you are thankful for having.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Keep the Dogma on a Leash
Sometimes I get a question about implementing the Permanent Portfolio using tools that might not fit the exact strategy laid out by Harry Browne. For instance, someone will want to know if they can use an FDIC insured account vs. a Treasury Money Market account for their cash. Or if a gold ETF is OK if they can’t hold gold physically or store it overseas.
My answer is: Do it. The basic diversification using these products is much better than doing nothing in almost every case.
I’m a huge advocate of following the strategy as closely as possible. But we should also recognize that the dogma behind the Permanent Portfolio shouldn’t interfere with the implementation if you have limited options. Delaying the diversification because we want a perfect option may leave us seriously exposed to market risks in other ways.
For instance, someone looking to do the portfolio but decides they don’t have a good cash option may decide to keep it in some risky money market sweep fund at their brokerage. This is making a mistake. They should probably put the money in a bank CD under FDIC limits if they don’t have a Treasury money market fund to put it into. Why? Because this is a better option than what they are currently doing. It’s all about making better choices on how to invest, and a FDIC account is better than an uninsured money market fund run by your broker.
Likewise for Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) for gold and long term treasuries (GLD and TLT). If your option is to not implement the full portfolio or do it only with ETFs, then buy the ETFs! You are better off with GLD and TLT ETFS for your gold and bonds than no gold and bonds whatsoever.
The take-away is that you do the best you can with the tools you have. When better and safer options make themselves available to you, then use them. But don’t delay implementing the portfolio because you can’t achieve perfection. You can still get a lot of protection from the Permanent Portfolio even if you implement it in the most basic way with imperfect options.
Tutorial on Buying Bonds from Fidelity
Forum member Gumby has put up a great tutorial on how to buy bonds directly if you are with Fidelity:
Buying bonds directly for the Permanent Portfolio is always the best way to own them. You eliminate fund risk and save on management fees as well. Most brokerages have similar interfaces to allow this (or you can call up the bond desk and ask for help). Fidelity’s interface should be a model for others to follow.
Thanks again to Gumby for the tutorial.
Vanguard “Treasury” Bond Funds Filled with Mortgage Garbage
EyeDee over at the Bogleheads forum posts the following:
Those who own Vanguard Treasury funds to avoid mortgage-backed securities should probably be aware that as of 08/31/2011, Government Mortgage-Backed securities in Vanguard’s Treasury funds are up to:
17.7% in Short-Term Treasury Fund
17.4% in Intermediate-Term Treasury Fund
16.9% in Long-Term Treasury Fund
These links go over the current composition of these funds:
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0032&FundIntExt=INT#hist=tab%3A2
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0035&FundIntExt=INT#hist=tab%3A2
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0083&FundIntExt=INT#hist=tab%3A2
I went over why I don’t like Vanguard’s Treasury Bond Funds in a previous post on holding cash. Sometimes you just can’t help but use them depending on your situation, but given the choice I recommend avoiding Vanguard’s Treasury Funds.
Now, allow me to vent for a bit.
Vanguard bond managers are adding absolutely no benefit to investors by shifting around 20% of the assets in these funds to what they think adds more value. And if you look at the Total Bond Fund fiasco in 2002, even Vanguard managers can and do make mistakes. They are chasing yield, and chasing yield can cause problems.
I had posted before that running a Treasury bond fund should be the simplest job in the world for Vanguard and they are trying to make it difficult. If I ran the fund I would require a computer and a PlayStation 3.
The computer is to balance the deposits and redemptions each morning and close of business with buys/sells of Treasury bonds.
The PS3 is for the other seven hours a day where I would have absolutely nothing to do.
I don’t understand why they feel like they need to run their Treasury funds with a speculative bent. I recommend you just buy bonds directly and sit them in your brokerage account or at Treasury Direct. This costs you nothing each year in management fees and they just sit there quietly and pay you interest twice a year.
If you can’t do the above, then use the iShares products (Tickers: TLT, SHY, SHV) that are essentially 100% Treasuries and have a prospectus that limits better what they can do behind the scenes.
Vanguard putting mortgage bonds in a Treasury bond fund is completely inappropriate. Mortgages behave much differently than nominal bonds in changing interest rate environments. Why? Well, people refinance mortgages when interest rates are falling for instance but tend to hold onto low interest loans when rates rise. So it’s heads they win tails you lose. Mortgages have no business being in a Treasury bond fund and I recommend avoiding Vanguard Treasury Bond funds if you are able.





