"What was my portfolio return over the last two years?" Seems like a reasonable question; unfortunately the answer is not necessarily so obvious. Consider the simple answer you would get from all too many investors.
Simple Average
"Well, last year I invested $100,000, and I lost 20%. This year I'm ahead 40%, so that's a return of 20%. So my portfolio ought to be worth $120,000, right?" Wrong. Although it sounds reasonable, consider the actual dollars.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
| Row 0 - Cell 0 | Return in year 1 | -20% |
| Row 1 - Cell 0 | Investment at the end of year 1 | $80,000 |
| Row 2 - Cell 0 | Return in year 2 | 40% |
| Row 3 - Cell 0 | Investment at the end of year 2 | $112,000 |
This type of miscalculation is no reflection on an investor's IQ but rather involves an all-too-human misunderstanding of investment math. For example, after the dot-com market crash in 2000-2002, a client of mine, a retired surgeon with a sophisticated knowledge of investing, came into my office practically in tears. He said, "Harold, last year I had an 80% return on my portfolio. This year I lost 60%. By my reckoning, I should still be 20% ahead. But I just got my statement, and it shows I'm way underwater."
Let's consider the same calculation as above.
| Row 0 - Cell 0 | Return in year 1 | 80% |
| Row 1 - Cell 0 | Investment at the end of year 1 | $1,800,000 |
| Row 2 - Cell 0 | Return in year 2 | -60% |
| Row 3 - Cell 0 | Investment at the end of year 2 | $720,000 |
Yes, a loss of $280,000 against his original $1 million investment! To break even in year 2, my client would have needed a return of almost 140% in the first year.
The math highlights the fact that significant losses require extraordinary subsequent returns in order to simply break even -- a reality to keep in mind when considering an investment in a very volatile risky position.
Internal Rate of Return and Time-Weighted Return
If the simple calculation won't suffice, let's look at using compounded returns. The most common compound return calculation is called the Internal Rate of Return or IRR. This calculation takes into account the timing of investments into and withdrawals out of the portfolio. The result is an annualized return percentage reflecting the investor's actual experience.
For example, in the case of my retired surgeon client, the IRR would be about -15.
The IRR answers the question "how did I do?" But it does not answer another important question: How did the portfolio manager do? The answer lies in the "Time-Weighted Return." As the portfolio manager has no control over when an investor might add funds to or withdraw funds from the portfolio, the time-weighted return is calculated based on the assumption that no funds are added to or taken from the portfolio during the time period being evaluated.
Consider the following example of two investors. They own the same fund -- let's call it Growth Mutual Fund-- over a five-year period. We want to calculate three things – what was Investor A's five-year return, what was Investor B's return, and what return should we credit the manager of the fund?
| Year 1: 10% | $100,000 (initial deposit) | $50,000 (initial deposit) |
| Year 2: -30% | Row 1 - Cell 1 | Row 1 - Cell 2 |
| Year 3: 20% | -$50,000 (withdrawal) | $50,000 (deposit) |
| Year 4: 15% | Row 3 - Cell 1 | Row 3 - Cell 2 |
| Year 5: 20% | $50,000 (deposit) | Row 4 - Cell 2 |
| Portfolio Value(end of 5 Yrs.) $104,712 | $104,712 | $145,556 |
So how did these two investors do, based on internal rate of return?
| Investors' Portfolio IRR Return | 0.80% | 7.90% |
Let's break these numbers down: The Internal Rate of Return calculations show that over the five-year period Investor B did far better than Investor A, as he was lucky in the timing of his investments into Growth Fund. Investor B only had $50,000 invested when the fund lost 30%, while Investor A had $100,000 invested.
Also, Investor A withdrew $50,000 at the beginning of year 3 just before the fund bounced back with a 20% return, while Investor B had just invested an additional $50,000.
However, as the fund manager had no control regarding the timing of these investments, the two IRR calculations provide no information regarding his or her performance. For that we need to look at the second measure, the Time-Weighted Return. As noted earlier, this is a calculation that assumes 100% of the investment was made on day 1 with no additions or withdrawals during the investment period.
Having reviewed the investment policy of Growth Fund, we have determined that the appropriate performance benchmark for the fund is the Standard & Poor's 500 Growth Index. Let's assume the return on the S&P 500 Growth fund was 4.2%.
| Row 0 - Cell 0 | Manager's Time-Weighted Return | 4.9% |
| Row 1 - Cell 0 | S&P Growth Benchmark Return | 4.2% |
Nice job, Mr. Fund Manager.
The Moral: monitoring performance is important, but equally important is to be sure you are using appropriate performance measurements.
Harold Evensky, CFP is Chairman of Evensky & Katz, a fee-only wealth management firm and Professor of Practice at Texas Tech University. He holds degrees from Cornell University. Evensky served on the national IAFP Board, Chair of the TIAA-CREF Institute Advisor Board, Chair of the CFP Board of Governors and the International CFP Council. Evensky is author of The New Wealth Management and co-editor of The Investment Think Tank and Retirement Income Redesigned.
-
America's Surprising Strengths in Manufacturing and ExportsThe Kiplinger Letter Despite common perceptions that the U.S. doesn't build things anymore, American factories are still hard at work. A special report from The Kiplinger Letter.
-
The Trump GOP Tax Bill Could Worsen California Cost of LivingState Tax Energy bills in the Golden State may shock you if Republican lawmakers in Congress remove certain energy tax credits through Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.'
-
Wealth Advisers: In Estate Planning, the End Is Just the BeginningWe need to keep the lines of communication with our clients open so that we can anticipate and help them navigate issues that arise over time.
-
Stood Up by a Radio Show: But Was It a Breach of Contract?A conscientious financial planner reschedules his clients after being invited onto a talk show and ends up losing one of them at a cost of $5,000. What does the radio show owe him, if anything?
-
Eight Estate Planning Steps to Protect Your Loved Ones (and Your Legacy)Two-thirds of Americans don't have an estate plan. If you're one of them, these are the essential steps to take now to prevent problems for your family later.
-
The Six Pros This Adviser Says You Need to Sell Your BusinessSelling your business isn't as simple as getting the best price and walking away. These are the six professionals you'll need to get a deal across the finish line.
-
The Three C's to Financial Success: A Financial Planner's Guide to Build WealthConsistency, commitment and confidence in your chosen strategy are more critical to your financial success than finding the 'perfect' financial plan.
-
A Financial Adviser's Guide to Solving Your Retirement Puzzle: Five Key PiecesIf retirement's a puzzle you're struggling with, try answering these five questions. The answers will guide you toward a solution.
-
You're Close to Retirement and Cashed Out: How Do You Get Back In?If you've been scared into an all-cash position, it's wise to consider reinvesting your money in the markets. Here's how a financial planner recommends you can get back in the saddle.
-
After the Disaster: An Expert's Guide to Deciding Whether to Rebuild or RelocateHomeowners hit by disaster must weigh the emotional desire to rebuild against the financial realities of insurance coverage, unexpected costs and future risk.
