Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 90

The great myth of the ‘1 in 100 year’ event

How many times have you heard lately that a ‘1 in 100 year’ event has occurred? Weather and financial market events in particular seem to have occurred far more often in recent times, typically with grave consequences for people’s quality of life.

The Global Financial Crisis was described many ways, ‘a five standard deviation event’, ‘a black swan event’, ‘once in a generation’. But putting odds on this type of event is misleading. It suggests that these are predictable events, which they are not, or that they will not occur for another 100 years. That’s why for all the time finance professionals spend talking about risk, 99% of them failed to forecast the GFC. Too much of the industry looks in the rear vision mirror to assess risks, such as ‘based on the last 100 years of data, the chances of that event happening are 1 in 100’. They define this rear vision probability-based approach as ‘risk’.

But what if past performance is not indicative of future performance? What if the world has fundamentally changed, for example due to climate change, or more leverage being applied by parts of the finance sector? What if the world’s population in the future is much older than the population in the past therefore making past data irrelevant?

Looking backwards to define risks is missing a major part of the current and future risk equation. The other part of the risk equation is ‘uncertainty’.

What is the difference between risk and uncertainty?

Risk is typically defined as the chances of something happening in the future given what we know about the past. Uncertainty is the reality that some outcomes aren’t predictable just by looking at the past.

Frank Knight, a relatively unknown economist from the 1920s, described the difference very elegantly. He was the first economist to break ranks and suggest that assuming certainty was foolish, and that there were two distinct concepts of ‘risk’ and ‘uncertainty’. His assertion was illustrated by imagining an urn containing marbles, 40% of which are red and 60% are not red. If you draw one marble from the urn, you don’t know what colour the marble will be, but you know that there is a 40% risk that it will be red.

The non-red marbles are yellow and black. You don’t know how many there are of each. So when you are about to draw a marble from the urn, if you were asked what the risk is that it will be black, you have no way of really assessing the probability. It’s not 40% or 60%, it is unknowable. That unknowable is what Frank Knight characterised as uncertainty. And there is a big difference between risk and uncertainty.

Uncertainty is the most important consideration in investing

Uncertainty must be considered in planning retirement in particular. Once retired, there is typically little chance of being able to earn back any capital lost. Similarly, there is no chance of stopping your spending while you wait for markets to rebound. You either need to have enough certain income, or you will be forced to sell assets during the storm, which is never a good outcome. Uncertainty, more than risk, poses a significant question for investors: “If no-one can predict the future with any certainty, what can I do to ensure I survive the storm?”

Many investors decide the best way to survive is to simply invest in term deposits and other cash investments. In fact, the average SMSF in Australia today has around 27% of its assets in cash. If we look at ‘risks’, i.e. looking backward, this seems like a safe strategy. Inflation has been between 2 and 3% for nearly a generation and doesn’t appear to be going anywhere any time soon. But what if inflation did spike like it did in the 1970s? How would your retirement funds survive then?

“The asset class that most investors consider the ‘safest’ – cash – is actually extremely risky.” – Warren Buffett

Obviously Buffett has used ‘extremely risky’ for effect. Cash isn’t extremely risky. But it’s not risk free either, and the risk is inflation. It is not anticipated inflation (2-3% pa), it is the unanticipated inflation that is damaging. What is hard is thinking about how inflation could possibly jump to say 5% or more when it has been so benign for so long.

Investors in 1970 probably felt exactly the same. At that stage, they had seen 18 years of inflation averaging 2-3%. But retirees in 1970 would see 76% of their savings eroded by inflation over the following 13 years (their life expectancy at that time). Economists in 1970 were saying there was a ‘minor risk of inflation’. But uncertainty was about to impact retirees like never before.

Inflation risk and inflation uncertainty

Most economists aren’t predicting a jump in inflation now either, and nor are we. Our expectation is that inflation can be contained in the 2-3% range, with some risk on the upside if the fall in the AUD pushes up import prices. We can point to that risk because in the past a falling AUD has led to inflation pressures, such as due to rising petrol prices.

But there is a new uncertainty at play at the moment, quantitative easing. Will global inflation spike as a result of the cheap credit that central banks in the US and EU are providing? Five years or more of pumping cheap credit into financial institutions and the economy is unprecedented. Just like predicting the chances of pulling a yellow marble out of the urn, we don’t have any data to use to predict what impact this will have on inflation in the next 10 years. This is ‘unknowable’ because there is not much more than academic theories to guide us.

That unknowable risk is what Frank Knight characterised as uncertainty. Given that it is unknowable, all you can do is to consider whether you want to include investments in your portfolio that rise in value and/or increase income if inflation does suddenly jump. Gold, oil, farmland, infrastructure and inflation-linked bonds are historically amongst the best inflation hedges (i.e. investments that will go up in value if inflation rises). Australian investors have plenty of options for investing in these assets with many on the ASX, but also through the unlisted bond market. We've listed a few examples below:

CS Table1 281114

CS Table1 281114

Craig Swanger is Head of Markets at FIIG Securities. To learn more Corporate Bonds click here. This article is for general education purposes only and is not personal financial advice.


 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Inflation remains transitory due to strong long-term trends

Understanding QE and its impact on inflation

10 rules of thumb for investing during uncertainty

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Comparing generations and the nine dimensions of our well-being

Using the nine dimensions of well-being used by the OECD, and dividing Australians into Baby Boomers, Generation Xers or Millennials, it is surprisingly easy to identify the winners and losers for most dimensions.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Survey: share your retirement experiences

All Baby Boomers are now over 55 and many are either in retirement or thinking about a transition from work. But what is retirement like? Is it the golden years or a drag? Do you have tips for making the most of it?

Interviews

Time for value as ‘promise generators’ fail to deliver

A $28 billion global manager still sees far more potential in value than growth stocks, believes energy stocks are undervalued including an Australian company, and describes the need for resilience in investing.

Superannuation

Paul Keating's long-term plans for super and imputation

Paul Keating not only designed compulsory superannuation but in the 30 years since its introduction, he has maintained the rage. Here are highlights of three articles on SG's origins and two more recent interviews.

Fixed interest

On interest rates and credit, do you feel the need for speed?

Central bank support for credit and equity markets is reversing, which has led to wider spreads and higher rates. But what does that mean and is it time to jump at higher rates or do they have some way to go?

Investment strategies

Death notices for the 60/40 portfolio are premature

Pundits have once again declared the death of the 60% stock/40% bond portfolio amid sharp declines in both stock and bond prices. Based on history, balanced portfolios are apt to prove the naysayers wrong, again.

Exchange traded products

ETFs and the eight biggest worries in index investing

Both passive investing and ETFs have withstood criticism as their popularity has grown. They have been blamed for causing bubbles, distorting the market, and concentrating share ownership. Are any of these criticisms valid?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.