submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

burritoLover wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 12:28 pm Looking forward to this episode!
Same! Honored to be able to do this interview.

:happy
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
tomsense76
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:52 am

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by tomsense76 »

Considering the market portfolio can't consider any individual investor's situation (except as part of the aggregate), can there be cases where holding the market portfolio is riskier for some investors? If so, would some modest alteration (like tilting) be preferable? How should investors approach this?
"Anyone who claims to understand quantum theory is either lying or crazy" -- Richard Feynman
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

kd2008 wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 3:50 am Any estimate when we may get to listen to this episode?
May

:happy
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

Charles Joseph wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:41 am
2. I guess what I was getting is that a high Sharpe Ratio may be meaningless if returns are too low for an investor to meet their goals. Would it be better for the overwhelming majority of investors to simply focus on risk tolerance (using, for example, Rick Ferri's “asset allocation stress test”, or any other useful risk tolerance tool) and then build a simple two- or three-fund portfolio that meets a person's risk tolerance, while ignoring Sharpe Ratio all together?
Fantastic!

Thank you. :happy
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
djm2001
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 6:23 am

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by djm2001 »

Jon Luskin wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 6:36 pm
djm2001 wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:25 am How does Professor Sharpe think of the World Bond/Stock portfolio in relation to average consumption? Does the payout stream (dividends and buybacks) from this portfolio fund the average consumption stream? What withdrawal strategy does he believe works best with the World Bond/Stock portfolio (fixed percentage vs. 1/N vs. live off the dividends (and buybacks) etc.) for the average investor?
Tell me more about this question.

:happy
Here goes...

Professor Sharpe is known for taking a "macro" perspective on asset allocation. He often draws useful conclusions about asset allocation from macro-level properties and equations.  For example,
  1. In The Arithmetic of Active Management, he uses a simple identity (total market = active portion + passive portion) to prove that the return on each passively managed dollar is greater than the return on the average actively managed dollar after costs.
  2. In his seminal 1964 paper, Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk, he showed that every investor must hold the market portfolio at equilibrium (under certain assumptions, e.g., ability to borrow at the risk-free rate).
  3. In Adaptive Asset Allocation Policies, he identifies a class of dynamically adjusting allocation strategies tailored to an invsetor's risk preferences that are macro-consistent, i.e., all investors can follow these strategies and the market will still clear.
However, deciding asset allocation is only half of the problem of investing.  The other half is deciding portfolio inflow (i.e., when and how much to invest) and outflow (i.e., consumption/withdrawal).  For example, Robert Merton solves asset allocation and consumption/withdrawal as a joint problem (see Merton's portfolio problem).  In essence, the investor is dealing with a stock and flow system, and so must reason about both "stocks"  (e.g., asset allocation) and "flows" (e.g., consumption/withdrawal). (The linked Stock-Flow Consistent Macroeconomics article has a great quote from Michal Kalecki: "I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows".)

Given that Professor Sharpe has focused a lot on applying a macro approach to the "stocks" (i.e., asset allocation) side of things, I was wondering if he has any thoughts on applying a similar approach to the "flows" side of things, and in particular to consumption/withdrawal flows.  For example, are there useful conclusions that can be drawn about the individual investor's (or even the average investor's) withdrawal strategy based on macroeconomic equations such as:

Code: Select all

Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports = Wages + Profit + Taxes
John Cochrane's Portfolios for Long-Term Investors suggests something along these lines with the following rather cryptic quote:
If the indexed perpetuity is the riskless asset, then the consumption claim, that pays one unit of aggregate consumption, must be the risky claim and held by the average investor. People must mix their portfolios between these two claims, with more risk averse people taking more of the indexed perpetuity, and vice versa. And all of this holds with an arbitrarily dynamic and multifactor view of the world.
My interpretation is that Cochrane is suggesting that every investor's consumption stream could be funded by a combination of an indexed perpetuity (think Social Security) payout stream and the market dividend stream (i.e., dividend payouts of the cap-weighted market portfolio). And netting everything out, the average consumption stream could be funded by just the market dividend stream. I was wondering if Professor Sharpe agrees with that, and whether he would be willing to elaborate his views on the topic of withdrawal strategies in general.
AA = global stocks & bonds @ market weight (~60/40); EF = i-bonds; WR = -PMT(1%, 100-age, 1, 0, 1)
McQ
Posts: 1425
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 12:21 am
Location: California

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by McQ »

djm2001 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:48 pm ...

Here goes...

Professor Sharpe is known for taking a "macro" perspective on asset allocation. He often draws useful conclusions about asset allocation from macro-level properties and equations.  For example,
  1. In The Arithmetic of Active Management, he uses a simple identity (total market = active portion + passive portion) to prove that the return on each passively managed dollar is greater than the return on the average actively managed dollar after costs.
  2. In his seminal 1964 paper, Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk, he showed that every investor must hold the market portfolio at equilibrium (under certain assumptions, e.g., ability to borrow at the risk-free rate).
  3. In Adaptive Asset Allocation Policies, he identifies a class of dynamically adjusting allocation strategies tailored to an invsetor's risk preferences that are macro-consistent, i.e., all investors can follow these strategies and the market will still clear.
However, deciding asset allocation is only half of the problem of investing.  The other half is deciding portfolio inflow (i.e., when and how much to invest) and outflow (i.e., consumption/withdrawal).  For example, Robert Merton solves asset allocation and consumption/withdrawal as a joint problem (see Merton's portfolio problem).  In essence, the investor is dealing with a stock and flow system, and so must reason about both "stocks"  (e.g., asset allocation) and "flows" (e.g., consumption/withdrawal). (The linked Stock-Flow Consistent Macroeconomics article has a great quote from Michal Kalecki: "I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows".)

Given that Professor Sharpe has focused a lot on applying a macro approach to the "stocks" (i.e., asset allocation) side of things, I was wondering if he has any thoughts on applying a similar approach to the "flows" side of things, and in particular to consumption/withdrawal flows.  For example, are there useful conclusions that can be drawn about the individual investor's (or even the average investor's) withdrawal strategy based on macroeconomic equations such as:

Code: Select all

Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports = Wages + Profit + Taxes
John Cochrane's Portfolios for Long-Term Investors suggests something along these lines with the following rather cryptic quote:
If the indexed perpetuity is the riskless asset, then the consumption claim, that pays one unit of aggregate consumption, must be the risky claim and held by the average investor. People must mix their portfolios between these two claims, with more risk averse people taking more of the indexed perpetuity, and vice versa. And all of this holds with an arbitrarily dynamic and multifactor view of the world.
My interpretation is that Cochrane is suggesting that every investor's consumption stream could be funded by a combination of an indexed perpetuity (think Social Security) payout stream and the market dividend stream (i.e., dividend payouts of the cap-weighted market portfolio). And netting everything out, the average consumption stream could be funded by just the market dividend stream. I was wondering if Professor Sharpe agrees with that, and whether he would be willing to elaborate his views on the topic of withdrawal strategies in general.
Great post, regardless of whether Jon is able to ask the question or Professor Sharpe answers. I learned from it.

Thanks!
You can take the academic out of the classroom by retirement, but you can't ever take the classroom out of his tone, style, and manner of approach.
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

tomsense76 wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:02 am Considering the market portfolio can't consider any individual investor's situation (except as part of the aggregate), can there be cases where holding the market portfolio is riskier for some investors? If so, would some modest alteration (like tilting) be preferable? How should investors approach this?
That's a pretty neat question. It's going on the list!

Best,
Jon
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

djm2001 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:48 pm
Jon Luskin wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 6:36 pm
djm2001 wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:25 am How does Professor Sharpe think of the World Bond/Stock portfolio in relation to average consumption? Does the payout stream (dividends and buybacks) from this portfolio fund the average consumption stream? What withdrawal strategy does he believe works best with the World Bond/Stock portfolio (fixed percentage vs. 1/N vs. live off the dividends (and buybacks) etc.) for the average investor?
Tell me more about this question.

:happy
Here goes...

Professor Sharpe is known for taking a "macro" perspective on asset allocation. He often draws useful conclusions about asset allocation from macro-level properties and equations.  For example,
  1. In The Arithmetic of Active Management, he uses a simple identity (total market = active portion + passive portion) to prove that the return on each passively managed dollar is greater than the return on the average actively managed dollar after costs.
  2. In his seminal 1964 paper, Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk, he showed that every investor must hold the market portfolio at equilibrium (under certain assumptions, e.g., ability to borrow at the risk-free rate).
  3. In Adaptive Asset Allocation Policies, he identifies a class of dynamically adjusting allocation strategies tailored to an invsetor's risk preferences that are macro-consistent, i.e., all investors can follow these strategies and the market will still clear.
However, deciding asset allocation is only half of the problem of investing.  The other half is deciding portfolio inflow (i.e., when and how much to invest) and outflow (i.e., consumption/withdrawal).  For example, Robert Merton solves asset allocation and consumption/withdrawal as a joint problem (see Merton's portfolio problem).  In essence, the investor is dealing with a stock and flow system, and so must reason about both "stocks"  (e.g., asset allocation) and "flows" (e.g., consumption/withdrawal). (The linked Stock-Flow Consistent Macroeconomics article has a great quote from Michal Kalecki: "I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows".)

Given that Professor Sharpe has focused a lot on applying a macro approach to the "stocks" (i.e., asset allocation) side of things, I was wondering if he has any thoughts on applying a similar approach to the "flows" side of things, and in particular to consumption/withdrawal flows.  For example, are there useful conclusions that can be drawn about the individual investor's (or even the average investor's) withdrawal strategy based on macroeconomic equations such as:

Code: Select all

Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports = Wages + Profit + Taxes
John Cochrane's Portfolios for Long-Term Investors suggests something along these lines with the following rather cryptic quote:
If the indexed perpetuity is the riskless asset, then the consumption claim, that pays one unit of aggregate consumption, must be the risky claim and held by the average investor. People must mix their portfolios between these two claims, with more risk averse people taking more of the indexed perpetuity, and vice versa. And all of this holds with an arbitrarily dynamic and multifactor view of the world.
My interpretation is that Cochrane is suggesting that every investor's consumption stream could be funded by a combination of an indexed perpetuity (think Social Security) payout stream and the market dividend stream (i.e., dividend payouts of the cap-weighted market portfolio). And netting everything out, the average consumption stream could be funded by just the market dividend stream. I was wondering if Professor Sharpe agrees with that, and whether he would be willing to elaborate his views on the topic of withdrawal strategies in general.
Fascinating, thank you. I'll have to think about how to boil this down to a sound byte for the interview.

Best,
Jon
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 13614
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:18 am
Location: Gig Harbor, WA, USA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by watchnerd »

McQ wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:35 pm As Nisiprius mentioned, a Sharpe portfolio could be implemented with just four funds, or really just two, World stock and World bond, per a long-running thread here. Under MPT, that is THE market portfolio, and there can be no more efficient, no more diversified portfolio (if those are all the assets that be).

But Taylor chose to go with a 3-fund portfolio, excluding world bonds; and Bill Bernstein has likewise expressed reservations about international bonds. Vanguard, by contrast, goes with Sharpe.

One argument against foreign bonds is tail risk—1919-1923 and all that. More generally, that foreign government bonds are not risk free in the way that domestic government bonds are. The local sovereign can always issue currency to redeem its bonds at par at maturity; a foreign government can’t necessarily do that for the US dollar investor.

And then there is foreign exchange risk, which, if there is a cost to hedge, may wipe out any diversification benefit.

So the question for Professor Sharpe is, How much more should an ordinary US investor expect from a World Stock – World bond portfolio, relative to holding Taylor’s 3-fund portfolio, in which all the bond weight is placed on domestic total bond?

No one knows exactly, of course; but I would be interested to hear his expectation for the scale of the benefit.

-an extra 10 basis points in return enhancement / risk reduction from including World bonds?
-25 bp? 50 bp? More?

Or—no expectation, just an allegiance to theory: that in the very long run, the whole must be better than any part, even if only by a basis point or two.
If you want to 'enhance' the global market portfolio, you can just add leverage to taste.

You don't need to deviate from the global market weights.
Global stocks, IG/HY bonds, gold & digital assets at market weights 75% / 19% / 6% || LMP: TIPS ladder
BigDGB
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:18 pm

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by BigDGB »

Jon Luskin wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:54 pm Yours truly will be honored to interview for a future podcast episode Bill Sharpe.

Sharpe's work contributed to the capital asset pricing model (CAPM), earning him the 1990 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. The Sharpe ratio - a favorite of finance nerds - measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment.

You can submit your questions below. (I may include your question in the episode. No guarantees.)

This will *not* be a live episode (Twitter Space). So, the only way to get questions is by submitting them below.

On a personal note, I used the Sharpe ratio to show how index funds outperformed high-fee portfolios for my thesis on endowment investing. So, I am very excited about this interview!

Thank you,

Jon Luskin
Host
Bogleheads® Live

P.S. Listen to past episodes of Bogleheads® Live via the podcast: https://boglecenter.net/category/bogleheads-live/

The Bogleheads® Live series is hosted by me, Jon Luskin, CFP®, a long-time Boglehead®. This podcast is supported by the John C. Bogle Center for Financial Literacy, a non-profit organization approved by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) public charity on February 6, 2012.
At what % of your portfolio that is dedicated to equities and/or at what withdrawal rate % rate that is withdrawn from a portfolio do TIPS become unnecessary in retirement ?

For example, if one has 70% + in equities and a withdrawal rate of < 3% , how would TIPS fit in a portfolio?

I am personally at an 80/20 equity to bond mix and am not utilizing TIPS .
Thank You Jon
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

watchnerd wrote: Sun Apr 02, 2023 4:52 pm
McQ wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 2:35 pm As Nisiprius mentioned, a Sharpe portfolio could be implemented with just four funds, or really just two, World stock and World bond, per a long-running thread here. Under MPT, that is THE market portfolio, and there can be no more efficient, no more diversified portfolio (if those are all the assets that be).

But Taylor chose to go with a 3-fund portfolio, excluding world bonds; and Bill Bernstein has likewise expressed reservations about international bonds. Vanguard, by contrast, goes with Sharpe.

One argument against foreign bonds is tail risk—1919-1923 and all that. More generally, that foreign government bonds are not risk free in the way that domestic government bonds are. The local sovereign can always issue currency to redeem its bonds at par at maturity; a foreign government can’t necessarily do that for the US dollar investor.

And then there is foreign exchange risk, which, if there is a cost to hedge, may wipe out any diversification benefit.

So the question for Professor Sharpe is, How much more should an ordinary US investor expect from a World Stock – World bond portfolio, relative to holding Taylor’s 3-fund portfolio, in which all the bond weight is placed on domestic total bond?

No one knows exactly, of course; but I would be interested to hear his expectation for the scale of the benefit.

-an extra 10 basis points in return enhancement / risk reduction from including World bonds?
-25 bp? 50 bp? More?

Or—no expectation, just an allegiance to theory: that in the very long run, the whole must be better than any part, even if only by a basis point or two.
If you want to 'enhance' the global market portfolio, you can just add leverage to taste.

You don't need to deviate from the global market weights.
Thanks for sharing!

:happy
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 13614
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:18 am
Location: Gig Harbor, WA, USA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by watchnerd »

tomsense76 wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:02 am Considering the market portfolio can't consider any individual investor's situation (except as part of the aggregate), can there be cases where holding the market portfolio is riskier for some investors? If so, would some modest alteration (like tilting) be preferable? How should investors approach this?
If you want to de-risk, you don't need to tinker with the market portfolio.

Tinkering defeats the purpose of owning the global market portfolio as your risk port.

To de-risk, just hold more in the risk free / LMP / lock-box portfolio.
Global stocks, IG/HY bonds, gold & digital assets at market weights 75% / 19% / 6% || LMP: TIPS ladder
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

BigDGB wrote: Sun Apr 02, 2023 6:55 pm
At what % of your portfolio that is dedicated to equities and/or at what withdrawal rate % rate that is withdrawn from a portfolio do TIPS become unnecessary in retirement ?

For example, if one has 70% + in equities and a withdrawal rate of < 3% , how would TIPS fit in a portfolio?

I am personally at an 80/20 equity to bond mix and am not utilizing TIPS .
Thank You Jon
It's going on the list!
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
jocdoc
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:29 am

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by jocdoc »

In addition to the previously asked questions regarding Gold, commodities should you add TIPS hi yield bonds, long term bonds, Reits. how much in %.

I want to know if the Vanguard lifeStrategy fund or ishares AOR is a good enough approximation of the investable global market portfolio as suggested by Longinvest.
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

jocdoc wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 6:14 am In addition to the previously asked questions regarding Gold, commodities should you add TIPS hi yield bonds, long term bonds, Reits. how much in %.

I want to know if the Vanguard lifeStrategy fund or ishares AOR is a good enough approximation of the investable global market portfolio as suggested by Longinvest.
Love it!
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

jocdoc wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 6:14 am In addition to the previously asked questions regarding Gold, commodities should you add TIPS hi yield bonds, long term bonds, Reits. how much in %.

I want to know if the Vanguard lifeStrategy fund or ishares AOR is a good enough approximation of the investable global market portfolio as suggested by Longinvest.
Love it!

It's going on the list!
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
unwitting_gulag
Posts: 665
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:37 pm

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by unwitting_gulag »

My question isn't particularly erudite, and has probably been rehashed multiple times; but here goes: what's the current thinking on small-cap stocks?

They've been the darlings of high-reward-for-high-risk thinking, but over the past 20 years, they've been a sore disappointment... plenty of risk, but not high reward. Is this just recency-bias? Or is overweighting in small-caps still useful, for investors with long time-horizons, who wish to improve their returns?
BigDGB
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:18 pm

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by BigDGB »

Jon Luskin wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 12:06 pm
jocdoc wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 6:14 am In addition to the previously asked questions regarding Gold, commodities should you add TIPS hi yield bonds, long term bonds, Reits. how much in %.

I want to know if the Vanguard lifeStrategy fund or ishares AOR is a good enough approximation of the investable global market portfolio as suggested by Longinvest.
Love it!
Again, relating to this, a little more granular question on the TIPS, would be at what level of equity allocation and or withdrawal rate do they or don’t they make sense for an investor?

Thanks again
User avatar
Ben Mathew
Posts: 2720
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:41 am
Location: Seattle

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Ben Mathew »

djm2001 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:48 pm
Jon Luskin wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 6:36 pm
djm2001 wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:25 am How does Professor Sharpe think of the World Bond/Stock portfolio in relation to average consumption? Does the payout stream (dividends and buybacks) from this portfolio fund the average consumption stream? What withdrawal strategy does he believe works best with the World Bond/Stock portfolio (fixed percentage vs. 1/N vs. live off the dividends (and buybacks) etc.) for the average investor?
Tell me more about this question.

:happy
Here goes...

Professor Sharpe is known for taking a "macro" perspective on asset allocation. He often draws useful conclusions about asset allocation from macro-level properties and equations.  For example,
  1. In The Arithmetic of Active Management, he uses a simple identity (total market = active portion + passive portion) to prove that the return on each passively managed dollar is greater than the return on the average actively managed dollar after costs.
  2. In his seminal 1964 paper, Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk, he showed that every investor must hold the market portfolio at equilibrium (under certain assumptions, e.g., ability to borrow at the risk-free rate).
  3. In Adaptive Asset Allocation Policies, he identifies a class of dynamically adjusting allocation strategies tailored to an invsetor's risk preferences that are macro-consistent, i.e., all investors can follow these strategies and the market will still clear.
However, deciding asset allocation is only half of the problem of investing.  The other half is deciding portfolio inflow (i.e., when and how much to invest) and outflow (i.e., consumption/withdrawal).  For example, Robert Merton solves asset allocation and consumption/withdrawal as a joint problem (see Merton's portfolio problem).  In essence, the investor is dealing with a stock and flow system, and so must reason about both "stocks"  (e.g., asset allocation) and "flows" (e.g., consumption/withdrawal). (The linked Stock-Flow Consistent Macroeconomics article has a great quote from Michal Kalecki: "I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows".)

Given that Professor Sharpe has focused a lot on applying a macro approach to the "stocks" (i.e., asset allocation) side of things, I was wondering if he has any thoughts on applying a similar approach to the "flows" side of things, and in particular to consumption/withdrawal flows.  For example, are there useful conclusions that can be drawn about the individual investor's (or even the average investor's) withdrawal strategy based on macroeconomic equations such as:

Code: Select all

Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports = Wages + Profit + Taxes
John Cochrane's Portfolios for Long-Term Investors suggests something along these lines with the following rather cryptic quote:
If the indexed perpetuity is the riskless asset, then the consumption claim, that pays one unit of aggregate consumption, must be the risky claim and held by the average investor. People must mix their portfolios between these two claims, with more risk averse people taking more of the indexed perpetuity, and vice versa. And all of this holds with an arbitrarily dynamic and multifactor view of the world.
My interpretation is that Cochrane is suggesting that every investor's consumption stream could be funded by a combination of an indexed perpetuity (think Social Security) payout stream and the market dividend stream (i.e., dividend payouts of the cap-weighted market portfolio). And netting everything out, the average consumption stream could be funded by just the market dividend stream. I was wondering if Professor Sharpe agrees with that, and whether he would be willing to elaborate his views on the topic of withdrawal strategies in general.
Great post. I've also appreciated Bill Sharpe's macro market clearing perspective in CAPM, adaptive asset allocation, and the arithmetic of asset management. Simple ideas with tremendous insight.
Total Portfolio Allocation and Withdrawal (TPAW)
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

unwitting_gulag wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 3:14 pm My question isn't particularly erudite, and has probably been rehashed multiple times; but here goes: what's the current thinking on small-cap stocks?

They've been the darlings of high-reward-for-high-risk thinking, but over the past 20 years, they've been a sore disappointment... plenty of risk, but not high reward. Is this just recency-bias? Or is overweighting in small-caps still useful, for investors with long time-horizons, who wish to improve their returns?
It's going on the list!
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

BigDGB wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 9:33 am
Jon Luskin wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 12:06 pm
jocdoc wrote: Tue Apr 04, 2023 6:14 am In addition to the previously asked questions regarding Gold, commodities should you add TIPS hi yield bonds, long term bonds, Reits. how much in %.

I want to know if the Vanguard lifeStrategy fund or ishares AOR is a good enough approximation of the investable global market portfolio as suggested by Longinvest.
Love it!
Again, relating to this, a little more granular question on the TIPS, would be at what level of equity allocation and or withdrawal rate do they or don’t they make sense for an investor?

Thanks again
Got it!

Thanks,
Jon
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

Ben Mathew wrote: Wed Apr 05, 2023 11:20 am I've also appreciated Bill Sharpe's macro market clearing perspective in CAPM, adaptive asset allocation, and the arithmetic of asset management. Simple ideas with tremendous insight.
Good topics for discussion!

Thanks,
Jon
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
Topic Author
Jon Luskin
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 1:56 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by Jon Luskin »

kd2008 wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 3:50 am Any estimate when we may get to listen to this episode?
Updated: late June.

:happy
When there are multiple solutions to a problem, choose the simplest one. ~Jack Bogle
AlwaysLearningMore
Posts: 1934
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 2:29 pm

Re: submit ?s for Bill Sharpe

Post by AlwaysLearningMore »

Potential question for Dr. Sharpe: Over the course of his career, has he changed his mind about any important financial topics to the extent that he is surprised he previously held a different opinion?
Retirement is best when you have a lot to live on, and a lot to live for. * None of what I post is investment advice.* | FIRE'd July 2023
Post Reply