|
|
 |
A
Hedge for the Little Guy
By
Stephen J. Butler |
Archives |
In an attempt
to shed light on a Biblical passage, Woody Allen once said,
"The lamb will lay down with the lion, but the lamb won't
get much sleep."
Today, most of us are perplexed, shell-shocked investors who can
relate
closely to Woody's lambs. News reports suggest that the Federal
Reserve
Board is clueless about the direction of the U.S. economy.
The ever-inventive
securities industry offers a helping hand in the form of a put
on the S&P 500 Index. You can purchase this "insurance
policy" for an amount equal to approximately 3% of your annual
returns. If the market stays exactly even for the next two years,
you will have lost 3% per year. If the market rises by 10%, you
will have a net 7% gain. But, if the market loses 20%, you will
have had a net loss of only 3%, the one-year cost of the "policy."
If you are worried
about the market declining further, the great advantage of
a put is that you do not have to unravel investments that have
performed well over many years. Within a retirement plan, such
as a 401(k), trading out of a stock or mutual fund you have owned
for several of the "good years" and moving to cash does
not trigger any taxable event. However, in a taxable environment,
selling a mutual fund or stock can be extremely expensive. With
100% certainty, you will lose somewhere between 25% to 35% of
your gains to taxes.
This huge potential
tax hit partially explains why many people who would have moved
to more conservative positions during the market bubble of the
late 1990s postponed doing anything - to their regret.
That raises
another question: Why do people hesitate to change their investment
mix or to sell big winners within a retirement plan, where there
is no tax hurdle? Psychological factors are at work here. "Status
quo bias" is a powerful emotion that actually serves people
well during normal times. However, these are not normal times,
and someone approaching retirement may want to keep his or her
stocks and mutual funds while casting an anchor until this uncertainty
blows over.
Stock market
history provides a perspective. After the crash of 1929 and 1930,
the market rose significantly in 1931, only to retreat in a long
downward spiral over the following seven years. More recently,
we had a market that went essentially nowhere for seventeen years
(from 1965 until 1982).
For any number
of reasons, then, some of us may be willing to pay what amounts
to an insurance premium to protect our retirement money. That
brings us back to the concept of a put.
A put is a right
to sell something in the future at a higher price than you can
buy it for at that future time. Therefore, if something goes down
in value, you have the right to buy it at the low price and sell
it for the higher price that someone contracted with you to pay.
(The opposite of a put is known as a call. A call is the right
to buy something in the future at a lower price than its current
market value).
The concept
of a put is not new. Phoenician traders invented it over 2,000
years ago. What is new is that you can buy a put on the value
of the S&P 500 index. The purchase of puts is called "hedging."
Sophisticated trading firms, known as hedge funds, employ this
strategy to protect their wealthy clients from market declines.
By buying a put on the S&P 500, you are harnessing the same
technique for your portfolio that these hedge funds apply to billions
of dollars.
Why is the S&P
500 index such a critical benchmark? For openers, it is the world's
most popular single investment. Almost all major mutual fund and
brokerage houses offer versions of this investment, which mirrors
the performance of the 500 largest public companies in the U.S.
The value of these companies makes up 70% of the entire U.S. stock
market. The other 6,000 public companies are only 30% of the market.
Studies show
that 70% of any single stock's long term performance, on the average,
is a function of what the market as a whole is doing. It's the
"rising tide phenomenon." This explains why most mutual
funds, over time, generate results that are reasonably close to
Freedom Investments, Inc. - Statement of Financial Condition
Freedom
Investments, Inc.
Notes to Statement of Financial Condition
1. Organization
Freedom
Investments, Inc. (the "Company"), a Delaware Corporation, was
organized in November 1994 and is a registered broker-dealer under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company's principal activities include
retail sales of corporate, municipal, United States government and agency,
and mortgage-related securities, options and mutual funds. The Company
is a member of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. The
Company provides discount brokerage services to individual investors throughout
the United States as well as services to independent financial consultants.
The Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Fahnestock & Co. Inc.
("the Parent"), whose ultimate Parent is Fahnestock Viner Holdings
Inc. ("FVH"), a Canadian public corporation.
The
Parent company intends to make additional capital contributions, as necessary,
to fund operating losses and to ensure the Company has sufficient operating
resources to continue its operations.
2. Significant Accounting Policies
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the financial statement. Actual results could differ from
those estimates.
Securities
owned are recorded on a trade date basis and are valued at market.
Depreciation
of furniture and equipment is provided on the straight line basis generally
over 5 years and leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter
of 5 years or the life of the lease.
Purchases
and sales of securities are recorded on a trade date basis. All securities
transactions are cleared through the Parent.
The
Company considers its investment in money market funds to be cash equivalents.
3.
Net Capital Requirement
As
a registered broker-dealer, the Company is subject to the Securities and
Exchange Commission's Uniform Net Capital Rule 15c3-1, which requires
that net capital, as defined, shall be at least the greater of $250,000
or of 6-2/3% of aggregate indebtedness, as defined. At December 31, 2001,
the Company had net capital of $584,982, which exceeded minimum capital
requirements by $334,982.
| |