Commodities

absolutely in this day and age. 20 years ago nope, maybe even a decade ago nope but today as basic as bonds ,reits and stocks
 
http://www.indexuniverse.com/providers/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=322 is a spirited discussion of commodities and whether you need to own them or not. It may be helpful reading to the OP.

Specific advice to the parents: Sell the fund and go back to total market index investing. The total market would hold the stocks that were in their natural resources fund anyways. Also by investing the stocks of companies, they are not investing in commodities per se and probably do not acrue any benefit. That is, they are simply performance chasing: buying high and selling low. They need to read "Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes".
 
never confuse owning the commodities with owning the stocks. oil stocks were sucking wind as oil broke new highs... stocks are still companies first and plays on what ever they hold 2nd , maybe. they are subject to political issues, strikes, bad managment,missed earnings etc....

my feeling is if you want commodities coverage in your portfolio buy commodities and leave the stocks to the stock portion
 
because they aint stocks and may react differently under certain conditions at times. in a market where good news can equal bad news except when good news can equal good news and bad news can equal bad news its very difficult to call what reaction to the various asset classes any asset will have. in a world where commodities, oil and long term treasuries turned out to be bed fellows strange things can happen at anytime.

i like the extra layer of diversification , you may not care to have it. its just another strategy
 
Nope, I love diversification. I just want to understand if and how it diversifies.

Commodities over the last 5 years went pretty much north no matter what anything else did. Now they're going down with everything else.

Thats not a diversifier.

I once again caution people to understand their investments before landing a lot of money in them. And be quite wary of people who promote investments who cant explain why they're beneficial.
 
ooooh yes it is.. you said it yourself. they went up when everything else went down..... the markets been coming back slightly , the dollars been up, they are now moving the other way. if thats not diversification then i dont know what is. commodities are just another asset class that moves to its own beat sometimes moving in the same direction as equities and bonds and sometimes the opposite. no different then sometimes equities and bonds move the same way at times. . the real deal is if the perception of inflation should reach the hyper stage. then all traditional thinking about commodities should hold true. . listen the point is you are always down on commodities and are always looking for someone to tell you why and when its explained to you you still come back and go but why?

if you dont get the point by now there is no point in still trying to explain it. you can say why? about any asset class including equities which did almost nothing for more then a decade. every asset class is supposed to respond to one of the 4 possible economic scenerios that are possible,

inflation,deflation,prosperity,recession are the 4 outcomes. equities only cover part of that. exactly when and how each class reacts can be skewed at times and can have strange results to what they shouldnt . true diversification covers those 4 possibilities. you can choose to cover all,some or none of the scenerios but thats an individual choice
 
I'm with the rabbit on this one. Having taken the trouble to understand commodities I do not intend to touch them.

(See my original post in this thread for full details.)

Having followed commodity threads in more than one forum, I know that some investors think that just because the asset class is a diversifier, it's OK to invest in it, without knowing that it has a significantly positive expected return.

Does such an investor bet a proportion of his assets on the spin of a wheel at the casino on a regular basis? That's an "investment" with returns uncorrelated to the rest of his portfolio, a volatility that can be made similar to that of commodities, and (as far as he knows) the expected return is no different from commodities.

Perhaps he should forget about traditional positive-return asset classes altogether, and "invest" in a diversified portfolio of gambling opportunities. There's no limit on the different "asset classes" you can find, once you abandon the need for a positive expected return. You could put equal amounts of money into 20 different "investments" all with zero correlation to each other.

I'd prefer to own shares in the casinos and the bookies. My portfolio would be far less diversified, but I reckon I'd end up with more money.
 
we like to think our investments have postive returns on the horizons but we dont know that. gambling dosnt respond to any of the 4 economic scenerios as far as its outcome. perhaps if it did it could be an asset class ha ha ... if we turned to the perception of hyper inflation from all this spending watch what happens to commodity prices and watch what happens to the more traditional stocks and bonds mix as they really may get hit hard......

the idea of diversification is not to predict what goes up next or falls next but to profit from any economic scenerio to offet losses somewhere else.

since anything really really bad happening in one situation may drop its corresponding asset class around 50% historically the other opposite should double triple etc...... we hope
 
The point is, when we lend money we expect to get profit from interest, if the borrower doesn't go broke, when we own property, we expect to get rent, if the building doesn't burn down, when we own shares, we expect to get profits, if the business is successful, but when we buy a commodity index tracker, there is no known expected economic return, just luck, good or bad.

More concisely, there is no fundamental economic reason to expect, with average luck, positive returns from commodities. There is for everything else.

(I'm oversimplifying hugely here. Some people will argue, with some justification, that there is an expected positive return from rebalancing, however the unknown and possibly hugely negative roll returns have to be set against that.)
 
well you got a choice, you can do nothing and just keep absorbing the hit from rising oil and food prices and take it out of your pocket or you can profit too each time they rise again. just wait until the first hint of recovery appears world wide and oils 175-200. i think we stand a pretty good chance of having higher highs and higher lows in commodities again very soon, in fact probley sooner than the equity markets recover. . the past few years my gsg commodities fund has given me enough of a profit to cover my extra energy,food and fuel costs for the next few years. if thats not reason enough to add them to your mix then theres no point discussing this...... we dont need the recovery to actually start to send them soaring again just the perception.. 5% moves in one day are normal.... if you think your only going to get in before the big turn around good luck to ya.
 
If you're going to establish an argument that owing oil is a good idea, I cant disagree with that. However oil doesnt fit with your 'diversification against economic conditions' argument. Oil keeps going up steadily due to increased demand and supply not keeping up, with some hiccups along the way for sudden demand increases, sudden supply decreases, and geopolitical events. Although it may be worth pointing out that for most of its history, oil prices adjusted for inflation werent a positive return.

The rest of the commodity bucket doesnt seem to pass the tests for decoupling from economic events or even moderate predictability of decoupling from other asset classes. Adjusted for inflation most of them arent producing a positive return either.

And no dividends or interest to make up for it.

If the argument for those is "Well, sometimes they did, there arent any good answers, so throw some money into them and hope for the best!"...well...I think I'll pass.

If you want a neutral return, you can buy cd's and get that with no risk. If you'd like a foolproof slightly positive return against inflation, buy TIPS.
 
most of the commodities funds like gsg and dbc are very heavily weighted in oil and gas.... where goes oil goes the funds. where goes oil goes food prices as delivery and farmland is grabbed for ethanol. where goes the recovery goes oil, steel and industrial metals..... it all boils down to one thing, we are going to see another big rise across the board as soon as things look up again.


just watch where prices head if we have the perception of hyper inflation or severe inflation. non the less it all boils down to whether you want the protection or not in your portfolio. i do and havent regreted it for a second. even now ...
 
cd's are a guaranteed loss after taxes and inflation, tips are no better as they barely kept pace with the rise in commodity prices..... the index tips used is manipulated and tips themselves can loose value in inflation as new tips offer higher rates then older tips if you want to sell or own a tips fund

sorry but cd's and tips are no match for commodities when prices are rising sharply

gsg 1yr return 47.88%
tip return 6.00%


as far as the 4 economic conditions we are mid-stream inbetween heading for recession or severe inflation depending which way the wind blows.. once we have a clear trend commodities will either be higher or much lower and bomnds will take over but yes commodities are directly linked to the 4 economic conditions
 
Yahbut, except for a couple of spikes (followed by drops) commodities ex-oil havent even kept up with inflation.

If the argument is that they'll spike unexpectedly and during those times you grab some money out of them and put it into other assets, then we're sliding rapidly back to the casino analogy. We're a bit away from the 'diversifier' and 'reflexive to certain economic conditions' arguments.
 
we can banter this back and forth forever... all i can say is if anyone feels we are not destined for higher and higher prices over time or you feel you can do better elsewhere do it..... i tend to like the price protection insurance having a commodities fund adds to my mix.....
 
mathjak107 said:
we can banter this back and forth forever... all i can say is if anyone feels we are not destined for higher and higher prices over time or you feel you can do better elsewhere do it..... i tend to like the price protection insurance having a commodities fund adds to my mix.....
Click to expand...


I second that position.
 
only thing ill add is that years ago there was no easy way for the common guy to buy commodities or even gold. it made it very difficult for it to be something that was added to a portfolio and at least on everyones radar.... i remember buying gold eagles from fidelity in the 80's and having to pay a certain amount of money a month for insurance and storage for them to be stored by fidelity in the bank of delaware,

i remember actually taking delivery on some and getting nailed with new york city sales tax... then trying to sell them was tooooo much work. today with etf's its a piece of cake and so as i say all the time these things went from being fringe investments and estoric specialty investments to where they are now where they are sooooooo on the radar that they can move 5-6% in a session.... i think the fact that they are utilized now soooo much will make a big difference in their behavior both up and down.....
 
mathjak107 said:
we can banter this back and forth forever... all i can say is if anyone feels we are not destined for higher and higher prices over time or you feel you can do better elsewhere do it..... i tend to like the price protection insurance having a commodities fund adds to my mix.....
Click to expand...


historically commodities will go through a decade of nice price gains and then 20-30 years of deflation or single digit gains for the entire decade. the current commodity bull market started in 1997
 
Years ago, I read a study on inflation that Scott Burns mentioned. Different types of inflation have different causes and different buffers. Unexpected inflation is often caused by spikes in commodity prices that CCFs can buffer. I've seen that twice now. A different inflation was buffered by a higher allocation to equities. Inflation protected bonds fit in there somewhere, too. With a no-COLA pension, inflation buffers are important to me.

I like broad diversification, even with the potential of lost opportunity costs, so I own CCFs. I will live with the consequences of that decision.
 
Another way to look at energy commodities is as a hedge against commodity led inflation for heating, vehicle fuel, and oil inflated products like food.

Personally, I only include energy commodities as part of my portfolio.
 
plex said:
Why are commodities good or not good to have as a part of someones long term asset allocation plan?

Some background: My problem is, my parents are constantly asking me financial questions these days. I do not work in the financial industry, it is just a hobby I have recently picked up because I believe it is important to know in order to FIRE as quickly as possible.

My parents are fairly near to retirement, so they struggle constantly with balancing risk vs. reward. Beyond just attempting to stay within a certain stock/bond allocation, they seem to be pretty unsure on what sort of allocation to use beyond that, and more importantly, have problems sticking with it. They get very scared when the market does badly and very confident when the market is doing well.

So at the beggining of the year they bought a natural resources mutual fund (oil/natural gas), in order to have commodities. Now they are asking me if they should sell it after it when from a fairly positive return to a small negative return in a short period. I ask them if commodities are part of their long term portfolio (as opposed to being just their high risk play money) and why they want commodities, and they just stare at me blankly...


I could really use some insight. Thanks all.
Click to expand...

I tend to phrase things as 5 phases of investing:

1) starting out- the deposits are more than the account balance
2) accumulation- the deposits are a considerable percentage of the account balance- generally greater than 5% and possibly closer to 10%. Drops in the portfolio amplify this.
3) growth- the deposits are a smaller percentage of the balance and even a 2-5% increase in portfolio value is more than a normal yearly deposit.
4) stability- the goal is to see the portfolio maintain its value and generate a passive income which is less than the portfolio's annual gain
5) selling of assets to generate income

IMO commodities fit #4 but do not fit into 1-2-3 or 5. Meaning if the goal is to have a portfolio maintain it's value, commodities do that well.

In general when growing the portfolio (1-2-3) it makes sense to stick with asset classes which have high return percentages and consistent returns tested over signifcant time (stocks and bonds).

In general when maintaining a portfolio's value, adding many asset classes will help- meaning add commodities, add a cash position (or make it larger), add a bond position (or make it larger), add a real estate position (or make it larger) so that the losses in any one portion are offset by the gains in the others. Sell the winners to generate income.
 
Considering that general commodities funds such as PCRIX are down almost 25% over the last couple of months, I'm not sure I'd want to qualify commodities as a way to 'maintain a portfolios value'.

I might say that they're more appropriate as a highly volatile, high risk/reward, plausible tracker for unexpected inflation.

I'd also say that just owning the oil component probably nets you 90% of the benefit at about 25% of the risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
What Debit/Credit Card Do You Use When Travelling To The UK?
2
Replies
32
Views
798
audreyh1
audreyh1
M
Another asset allocation question
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
socca
S
Car-Guy
Slow Fixed Income Payments (Rant?)
Replies
8
Views
520
Midpack
Midpack
Y
Parent brokerage holdings doesn't make sense
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
imnontrad
I
E
Greedy Investor
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
WannabeRetired
W

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom