Taking Stock of Bonds:
A Meditation
Everybody knows the stock market's been red-hot.
But 1999 was bummer for bonds. "The bond market is suffering its second-worst
year on record," wrote Greg Zuckerman in the September 13 Wall Street
Journal, "and small investors are getting bruised as much as pros."
We know we're supposed to buy stocks and mutual
funds when there have been cataclysmic price drops. But when are we
supposed to buy bonds and bond funds? A
professor of finance, Paul Koch, talks about how to think about this
issue.
Let me speak directly to your question, then to some
larger issues. The flavor of your question suggests a desire to "time"
purchases and sales of investments in stocks or bonds in order to benefit
from short term expected movements in stock markets or interest rates.
I am not enamored with anyone's ability to consistently
and successfully predict short-term stock market or interest rate movements.
Therefore, I would not advocate actively buying or selling stocks and
bonds in an effort to time short term market moves. I believe that,
over time, this strategy is likely to perform poorly. Of course, this
belief does not always keep me from trying to do just that myself. In
such an effort, I would only counsel individuals to do their homework
and strongly consider the fundamental underlying economic value of what
they are buying in relation to how much they are paying.
In a more general sense, stock markets, like bond markets,
generally benefit from economic developments that reduce interest rates;
the opposite generally holds when interest rates rise. In this way stocks
and bonds behave similarly over the long run.
Equities - stocks - are fundamentally different from
debt instruments - bonds - in that holders of equities participate in
the profits (or losses) of the underlying businesses after debt-holders
have been paid off. Debt-holders, on the other hand, have a prior fixed
claim on the earnings and assets of the firm. They do not participate
fully in the potential profits of the firm, but only hope to receive
their investment back with interest if the firm does well.
Both equity and bond holders expect to gain over the
long term when economic conditions favor the performance of companies
underlying the claims. However, equity holders accept more risk over
the short term, since their claims are hurt more when the firm performs
poorly. As a result, equity returns are generally more volatile - are
subject to higher highs and lower lows - than returns on bonds over
the short term. This means that, in the short run, equity holders should
expect to experience periods when their holdings perform much worse
than bonds.
However, over longer periods of time, equities have
historically overwhelmingly outperformed bonds. This enhanced performance
of equities comes from the nature of the equity claim, which entitles
the holder to participate in the good fortunes of the company. In return
for the extra risk over short periods of time, equities are expected
to pay a higher return over time.
In this sense, one might argue that it is actually more
risky to buy bonds than stocks, if your investment horizon is a longer
time frame, say 20 or 30 years (or even 10 years). Over such long time
horizons, equities have, in the past, almost always outperformed debt.
Of course, it is not necessary that this historical behavior will repeat
itself in the future. However, the nature of the two claims strongly
favors equity over debt over long periods, if we expect a growing worldwide
economy, because equity holders will participate in this future growth
while debtholders only hope to receive their investment back with interest.
Paul Koch, professor of finance
School of Business
Koch team-teaches "Applied Portfolio Management"
with adjunct professor Kent McCarthy
