FUNDAMENTALS
™
October 2015
Investing versus Flipping
“
Chris Brightman, CFA
As a long-term
investor, we experience
“
short-term price
volatility as opportunity,
and high prices as risk.
KEY POINTS
1.
High stock prices, just like high
house prices, are harbingers of
low returns.
2.
Investing in price-depressed residential rental property in Atlanta
is like investing in EM equities
today—the future expected
long-term yield is much superior
to their respective high-priced
alternatives.
3.
Many parallels exist between
the political/economic environment and the relative valuation
of U.S. and EM equities in the
periods from 1994 to 2002 and
2008 to 2015.
4.
Our forecast of the 10-year real
return for U.S. equities is 1%
compared to that of EM equities
at 8%, now valued at less than
half the U.S. CAPE.
I have the good fortune to live and work
in Newport Beach, California.
Among the
global investment community, Newport
Beach may be known as home to PIMCO
(and, of course, Research Affiliates). Locally,
however, the business of Newport Beach is
real estate finance. Many of my local friends
have made a bundle in recent years flipping
houses in Orange County (the OC).
I have
also purchased some houses over recent
years, but as an investment rather than as
a flip. In this article, I explain the difference
between investing and speculating by sharing my personal experience investing in
residential real estate.
A Fireside Chat
This story begins four years ago when Dave,
a longtime friend and real estate investor
from Atlanta, was visiting my wife, Donna,
and me in Newport Beach. Sitting by the
fire pit in our backyard after dinner one
evening, sipping a nightcap, we chatted
about business.
Dave explained that the residential real
estate crisis had hit Atlanta hard.
Countless
thousands of homes had been foreclosed
and were owned by banks across the
sprawling metropolis. The best bargains,
he explained, were houses in the older
and less wealthy areas of the city. The big
private equity firms (BlackRock, Starwood
Waypoint, and Colony Capital) were
starting to gobble up foreclosures and bid
up prices in the easy-to-value suburbs, but
they were ignoring the less homogeneous
urban areas, some of which then, as now,
may seem unsafe, but many more are solid
working-class neighborhoods.
Dave was buying vacant single-family homes
out of foreclosure in decent neighborhoods
for $10,000 to $20,000, investing another
$10,000 to $20,000 in renovations, and
then renting the renovated properties for
$800 a month.
His problem was that he
couldn’t sell the houses—not for any price.
Credit was then, and still is, unavailable to
most of the folks who live in Atlanta’s lower
income neighborhoods.
Before the housing crisis, banks were fighting
each other to lend money, to buy houses at
ridiculous prices and on ridiculous terms. As
a result, after the crisis, Dave owned many
properties across Atlanta, all leveraged to
the hilt. Even though he was comfortably
solvent and current on all his properties, he
couldn’t get another dime out of any lender
to buy rental properties.
How do you know, I asked, that these houses
are sensible investments? Houses in Detroit
are cheap too, I observed.
Unlike Detroit,
with an aging and shrinking population, Dave
explained, Atlanta is a vibrant growing city.
How do you know the price is right? Are you
kidding, he asked? I am buying houses at a
small fraction of replacement and renting
them at 25% of my cost. I get my money
back in rent in four years!
Media Contacts
United States and Canada
Hewes Communications
+ 1 (212) 207-9450
hewesteam@hewescomm.com
Europe
JPES Partners (London)
+44 (0) 20 7520 7620
ra@jpespartners.com
. FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Over the coming days, Donna and I
talked about getting into the residential
real estate business. Our alternative
investment opportunities in the U.S.
capital markets at the time, much like
today, were 2% bond yields and 2%
dividend yields. Investing in houses
seemed an attractive alternative. Thus
began our business of investing in
houses in Atlanta.
We are still buying
there today.
and capital gains taxes. I don’t like this
investment. House prices can go down
as well as up.
The high prices in the OC
seem risky to me.
prices, the cheapest houses in OC fetch
half a million dollars. We could rent one
of these houses for $2,000 a month.
As shown in Table 1, the prices in the
OC are—to anyone who doesn’t live
here—insane. If we were to invest in
a house today as a rental property in
the OC, our net annual rental yield
(annual rent minus taxes, insurance,
and property management) would be
about 3% before tax.
Of course, we can
reasonably assume that home prices
rise with inflation, so this is a real yield.
Not bad. But California and the IRS tax
even the inflation portion of the return.
This yield is then mostly taxed away, at
higher rates than in Atlanta, to deliver
less than 1% real return, after income
Relative Value of Houses
Let’s compare the housing market here,
where we live in the OC, to Atlanta. The
best bargain we can find in the OC is a
three-bedroom, two-bath house that
sells for $500,000.
Yep, for those of you
unaccustomed to California real estate
Instead, we buy houses in Atlanta. Today,
we buy renovated “three/two” houses
(three bedrooms and two bathrooms, in
the parlance of the trade) for $80,000,
and then rent them out for $850 a
month. As shown in Table 1, our net pretax rental yield is 9%, and approximately
5% after tax.
I have strong conviction
that buying rental properties in Atlanta
at a 5% real after-tax yield is a far more
sensible and safer way to accumulate
wealth for our retirement than buying
rental properties in the OC with an aftertax yield of 1%.
Table 1. Investing in Houses
Location
Orange County, CA
Atlanta, GA
Recently
Sold
Atlanta
3 Bedrooms
2 Baths
1500 Sq. Ft.
Prices & Rents
Price
Gross Rent
Expenses
Property Tax
Insurance
Management
Total Expenses
Net Rent
Taxes
Depreciation
Income Tax Rate
Income Tax
Inflation Rate
LTCG Tax Rate
Capital Gains Tax
After Tax Return
Orange County
% Price
$500,000.00
$24,000.00
4.8%
$5,000.00
$1,500.00
$2,400.00
$8,900.00
$15,100.00
1.0%
0.3%
0.5%
1.8%
3.0%
% Rent
$8,182.00
52%
$3,597.00
2.5%
35%
$7,239.00
$4,264.00
% Price
% Rent
$80,000.00
$10,200.00
21%
6%
10%
37%
63%
0.7%
15%
1.4%
0.9%
30%
18%
12.8%
$1,200.00
$800.00
$1,020.00
$3,020.00
$7,180.00
1.5%
1.0%
1.3%
3.8%
9.0%
12%
8%
10%
30%
70%
2.5%
20%
1.8%
4.7%
14%
37%
$2,909.00
47%
$2,007.00
2.5%
29%
$1,424.00
$3,749.00
Source: Research Affiliates, LLC, based on data from Zillow.
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 2
.
FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Flip That House?
the coming year, I respond that I have no
clue about the prospects for short-term
price changes. If I had to guess, I would
pick the OC as the hotter market. But
I am not flipping houses, I explain. I am
investing to build long-term wealth.
Now, to some of my house-flipper
friends in Newport Beach, the OC
seems the better bet.
The OC is local,
prosperous, and safe. House prices
have been rising rapidly for many years;
they’ve even recovered the full damage
wrought from the 2008 global financial
crisis. Atlanta, in contrast, seems far
away and scary.
They have a point; the
urban neighborhoods of Atlanta have
a very different socioeconomic profile
than Newport Beach and must deal
with the corresponding issues of a less
educated renter base, a less prosperous
population, and a higher crime rate.
I can confirm that Donna and I don’t
feel quite as safe when wandering the
streets of the neighborhoods in Atlanta
where we search for houses as we do
during evening strolls through our quiet
neighborhood in Newport Beach. That’s,
in part, why a comparable house costs
$500,000 in the OC, but only $80,000
in parts of Atlanta.
“
High prices create a
risk of failing to meet
return goals.
prices/low yields of houses in the OC
seem risky to me. Because I am a longterm investor, Atlanta seems the better
choice.
Relative Value of Equity
Markets
“
Perceptive
readers
may
by
now
recognize that I am not just talking about
rental houses.
I am also talking about the
valuation differential between U.S. and
When my local house-flipper friends ask
how I can be sure that, when the next
housing crisis comes, house prices in
Atlanta will decline less than houses prices
in the OC, I say that I expect and hope
that they will decline more. For savers like
me, price volatility is opportunity not risk.
Three years ago, we were buying houses
in Atlanta for less than $50,000.
I wish
we had that opportunity again!
When investing, I ignore the popular
game of trying to predict short-term
price changes. Instead, I pay attention to
valuation, which can be simply observed
as the long-term after-tax real yield—less
than 1% for houses in the OC and nearly
When my local house-flipper friends
ask how I can be sure that house price
appreciation in Atlanta will outpace
house price appreciation in the OC over
5% for houses in Atlanta. The high
emerging market (EM) equities.
Like
the OC, the United States is prosperous
and feels like the better investment
choice. Like home prices in the OC, the
prices of equities in the United States
have risen strongly since the global
financial crisis. As Table 2 shows, the
U.S.
equity market is priced at a Shiller
P/E of 25, far above its historical median
of 16.1
Like house prices in the OC,
high prices for U.S. equities cause us to
forecast low future returns. We forecast
a 10-year annualized return of 1.1%, net
of inflation, for the U.S.
equity market.
For the taxable investor, the real return is
likely to be negative. High prices create a
risk of failing to meet return goals.
Table 2. Investing in Equity Markets
U.S.
(Large)
EAFE Equity
EM Equity
Shiller P/E
25
Shiller P/E
14
Shiller P/E
11
Maximum
44
Maximum
40
Maximum
35
Median
16
Median
22
Median
19
Minimum
11
Minimum
11
Minimum
5
EPS Inception
1871
EPS Inception
1972
EPS Inception
1995
Expected Return
1.1%
Expected Return
5.3%
Expected Return
7.9%
Volatility
15%
Volatility
17%
Volatility
24%
Source: Research Affiliates, LLC, based on data from MSCI, Bloomberg, and Robert Shiller.
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 3
. FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Like the neighborhoods in which we buy
houses in Atlanta, EM equity markets
seem far away and scary. Many of the
inhabitants in these geographies are less
educated and less prosperous than my
neighbors in Newport Beach. Like the
houses in Atlanta that Donna and I are
buying, prices of EM equities rose to lofty
levels in 2008 before the global financial
crisis, fueled by overly optimistic buyers
extrapolating past price gains. And
like home prices in Atlanta during the
financial crisis, prices of EM equities
have plunged as credit conditions have
tightened.
Also like house prices in
Atlanta compared to those in the OC,
prices for EM equities are now far below
prices for U.S. equities. As displayed
in Table 2, we forecast an annualized
10-year real return for the EM equity
index just under 8% a year compared to
just over 1% for the United States.
This
is for a passive index and doesn’t even
count the incremental returns that we
think “smart beta” strategies are likely to
deliver in these markets.
buy assets more cheaply next year than
those I am buying this year. For me, price
volatility is opportunity not risk.
Speculating in Equities
The next issue that speculators raise
when I explain this opportunity is the
return of capital rather the return on
capital. How can I be sure that, in these
risky countries, I will not lose all of my
investment? Well, I have no certainty
when making return forecasts.
I could
be wrong. Yet, I vividly remember these
same questions being asked back in the
late 1990s. Whatever problems with
corruption and geopolitical uncertainty
in EM markets we face today, the
environment in the late 1990s seemed
much worse.
Like my house-flipper friends, speculators
in equities ask how I can be sure that
when the next financial crisis comes,
equity prices in emerging markets will
decline less than equity prices in the
United States.
I respond that I expect, and
welcome, that they will decline more. I have
a long investment time horizon and add
to my savings each year. I hope that I can
“
Like my house-flipper friends, speculators
in equities ask how I can be sure that
equity prices in emerging markets will
rise more than equity prices in the United
States over the coming year.
I respond
that I have no clue about the prospects
for short-term price changes. I am not
speculating on price changes, I explain. I
am investing to build long-term wealth.
“
Like house prices in
the OC, high prices for
U.S.
equities cause us
to forecast low future
returns.
When investing, I ignore the popular
game of trying to predict short-term
price changes. Instead, I pay attention
to valuation. On the asset allocation
section of our website, we explain our
methodology for estimating the 10-year
real returns of equity markets, as well as
other global asset markets.
Today’s high
price of the U.S. equity market seems
risky to me. Because I am a long-term
investor, emerging markets seems a
safer investment.
The Return of Capital
In July 1997, the Thai baht collapsed,
seeming to bring to an end the Asian
economic miracle.
The currencies and
stock markets of emerging Southeast
Asia (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and
the Philippines) collapsed along with
the relatively more developed markets of
Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South
Korea. Meanwhile, Russia was waging
war in its neighborhood (Chechnya then,
rather than Ukraine now). The ruble
crisis followed a year later with Russia
dramatically devaluing its currency and
defaulting on its internal debt.
Oil prices
collapsed to below $10 a barrel. By 1998,
everyone just knew that EM equity was too
risky to be a prudent investment and that
U.S. tech stocks were on a tear.
“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it
often rhymes.” —Mark Twain
The political/economic environment and
resulting relative valuation of U.S.
and EM
equities from the 2008 EM market peak
through 2015 rhymes with the span from
the 1994 EM market peak through 2002.
From 1990 to 1992, both the U.S. and
EM equity indices were valued, as shown
in Figure 1, at about the same cyclically
adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio.
Like in the early 1990s, in late 2006 and
early 2007, the U.S. and EM equity indices
were again valued at about the same
CAPE.
By year-end 1993 and again in 1994,
enthusiasm for the Asia-centered growth
of EM markets propelled the EM CAPE
to above 30, a 30% premium to the U.S.
CAPE.
Like in late 1993, in 2008, enthusiasm for
the China-centered growth of emerging
markets propelled the EM CAPE to above
35, a 25% premium to the U.S.
CAPE.
In 1994, problems in emerging markets
resulting from Fed tightening (the Tequila
crisis) caused EM stock prices to decline
back to a CAPE of 20.
In 2013, fear of Fed tightening (the Taper
Tantrum) caused EM stock prices to
decline to a CAPE of 15.
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 4
. FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Figure 1. U.S. and EM CAPE, 1990–2015
50
45
40
CAPE
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
U.S. CAPE
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
EM CAPE
Source: Research Affiliates, LLC, based on data from MSCI, Bloomberg, Robert Shiller, and Global Financial Data.2
From 1995 to 1999, U.S.
equity market
10-year real return from investing in
nity, and high prices as risk. The volatility
prices, led by tech stocks, soared while
the EM equity market over this period,
of house prices leads to opportunity for
the EM market tanked.
priced at less than half of the U.S.
investing in residential real estate. I am
Like in the late 1990s, from 2012
CAPE, ranged from 5% to 15% and
buying cheap houses in Atlanta with long-
through 2014, U.S.
equity market
averaged 11%, as shown in the shaded
term expected after-tax returns of 5%.
prices soared, again led by tech
area of Panel B.
These investments in houses seem safe
to me. Comparable houses in the OC are
stocks, while the EM markets tanked.
The future 10-year real return lines
far more expensive. I estimate long-term
From the end of 1997 to early 2003,
in Figure 2 end at 2005 because we
after-tax returns of only 1% for investing in
the U.S.
market was priced at a CAPE
will not know the 10-year return from
houses in the OC. I judge these high house
more than double that of the EM
investing beginning in 2006 until we
prices as creating risk to achieving my
market, depicted by shading in Figure 1.
reach 2016. And although the future is
return goal for retirement.
Today, in 2015, the U.S.
market is
uncertain, the CAPE does provide some
again priced at a CAPE more than
information. What do we expect from
The volatility of equity prices leads to
double that of the EM market.
investing in equity markets in 2015?
opportunity for investing in equity markets.
Our forecast of the 10-year real return
I am invested in cheaply priced EM equity.
I feel like I have seen this movie before.
for investing in the U.S. equity market
We estimate an 8% long-term real return
I remember how it ends.
at today’s high prices is 1%.
In contrast,
from investing in EM equity at today’s low
our forecast of the 10-year real return
prices. These EM equity market investments
Future 10-year real returns are plotted
for investing in the EM market, at less
seem safe to me. In contrast, equities in the
in Figure 2.
The 10-year real return
than half the U.S. CAPE, is 8%.
United States are far more expensive. We
from investing in the U.S.
market at
estimate long-term real returns of only 1%
through April 2003 ranged from 5%
Volatility Is Opportunity
and High Price Is Risk
to −5% and averaged 0%, as shown
As a long-term investor, we experience
prices as creating risk to achieving my
in the shaded area of Panel A. The
short-term price volatility as opportu-
return goal for retirement saving.
the peak prices from October 1997
for investing in the U.S. market at today’s
high prices.
I judge today’s high U.S. equity
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 5
. FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Figure 2. Future 10-Year Real Return
20%
0
15%
10
10%
20
5%
30
0%
CAPE
Future 10-Year Real Return (in USD)
Panel A: U.S. CAPE vs. Future 10-Year Real Return
40
-5%
-10%
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
Future 10-Year Return
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
50
U.S.
CAPE
0
20%
15%
10
10%
20
5%
30
0%
CAPE
Future 10-Year Real Return (in USD)
Panel B: EM CAPE vs. Future 10-Year Real Return
40
-5%
-10%
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
Future 10-Year Return
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
50
EM CAPE
Source: Research Affiliates, LLC, based on data from MSCI, Bloomberg, Robert Shiller, and Global Financial Data. Note that the right-side axis is
inverted.
Endnotes
The Shiller P/E is also called the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings
(CAPE) ratio.
The CAPE is defined as current market price divided by
10-year average historical real earnings per share. As Robert Shiller
(among many others) has demonstrated, CAPE predicts future longterm returns. Because earnings measured over shorter horizons such
as one year are extremely volatile and mean reverting, the ratio of
prices to current earnings does not predict future long-term returns.
2. The U.S.
CAPE ratio is provided by Robert Shiller. The emerging
market CAPE ratio is based on the MSCI Emerging Market Index
1.
(prices and earnings in U.S. dollars), which provides earnings data
starting in 1995.
Prior to 1995, the MSCI Index data were augmented
by data from Global Financial Data (GFD), which reports both total
return and price index data for emerging markets. Using this data
it is possible to infer the dividend yield for each period that is used,
along with the average payout ratio, from the current MSCI data to
calculate the earnings per share and CAPE prior to 2005. Details on
creating an historical emerging markets index can be found in the
Credit Suisse Global Investment Returns Yearbook, 2014.
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 6
.
FUNDAMENTALS
October 2015
Disclosures
The material contained in this document is for general information purposes only. It is not intended as an offer or a solicitation for the purchase and/or sale
of any security, derivative, commodity, or financial instrument, nor is it advice or a recommendation to enter into any transaction. Research results relate
only to a hypothetical model of past performance (i.e., a simulation) and not to an asset management product. No allowance has been made for trading
costs or management fees, which would reduce investment performance.
Actual results may differ. Index returns represent back-tested performance
based on rules used in the creation of the index, are not a guarantee of future performance, and are not indicative of any specific investment. Indexes are
not managed investment products and cannot be invested in directly.
This material is based on information that is considered to be reliable, but Research
Affiliates™ and its related entities (collectively “Research Affiliates”) make this information available on an “as is” basis without a duty to update, make
warranties, express or implied, regarding the accuracy of the information contained herein. Research Affiliates is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for results obtained from the use of this information. Nothing contained in this material is intended to constitute legal, tax, securities, financial or
investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment.
The information contained in this material should not be acted upon
without obtaining advice from a licensed professional. Research Affiliates, LLC, is an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisors Act of
1940 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Our registration as an investment adviser does not imply a certain level of skill or training.
Investors should be aware of the risks associated with data sources and quantitative processes used in our investment management process. Errors may
exist in data acquired from third party vendors, the construction of model portfolios, and in coding related to the index and portfolio construction process.
While Research Affiliates takes steps to identify data and process errors so as to minimize the potential impact of such errors on index and portfolio
performance, we cannot guarantee that such errors will not occur.
The trademarks Fundamental Index™, RAFI™, Research Affiliates Equity™, RAE™, and the Research Affiliates™ trademark and corporate name and all
related logos are the exclusive intellectual property of Research Affiliates, LLC and in some cases are registered trademarks in the U.S. and other countries.
Various features of the Fundamental Index™ methodology, including an accounting data-based non-capitalization data processing system and method for
creating and weighting an index of securities, are protected by various patents, and patent-pending intellectual property of Research Affiliates, LLC.
(See all
applicable US Patents, Patent Publications, Patent Pending intellectual property and protected trademarks located at http:/
/www.researchaffiliates.com/
Pages/ legal.aspx#d, which are fully incorporated herein.) Any use of these trademarks, logos, patented or patent pending methodologies without the
prior written permission of Research Affiliates, LLC, is expressly prohibited. Research Affiliates, LLC, reserves the right to take any and all necessary action
to preserve all of its rights, title, and interest in and to these marks, patents or pending patents.
The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of Research Affiliates, LLC. The opinions are subject to change without
notice.
©2015 Research Affiliates, LLC.
All rights reserved.
620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 900 | Newport Beach, CA 92660 | + 1 (949) 325 - 8700 | www.researchaffiliates.com
Page 7
.