저자: 미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
Jeremy Siegel의 'Stocks for the Long Run'을 바탕으로 장기 주식 수익률의 우위를 설명. 1929년 대폭락 후에도 월 15달러씩 꾸준히 투자했다면 1949년 연 7.86%, 30년 후 연 12.72% 수익을 냈다는 사례 제시. 주식은 장기적으로 채권보다 덜 위험하며 채권의 진짜 위험은 인플레이션이라고 주장. 필립모리스가 S&P500 원조 기업 중 최고 수익(50년간 연 19.88%)을 냈다는 사례로 배당 재투자의 힘 강조. 손실회피, 본전 심리, 근시안적 손실회피 등 행동재무학적 오류와 잦은 매매의 손해(수익률 7.1% 저하), 실시간 앱의 부작용을 지적. 베이비붐 세대 은퇴에 따른 매도 압력과 신흥국 성장의 필요성, 인덱스 투자 확산이 가격발견 기능을 해칠 수 있다는 우려로 마무리.
다듬은 글
Let's start with something very interesting. In this in-depth analysis, we will discuss statistics from Jeremy J. Siegel's famous book Stokes for the Long Run. Yes, and these figures are very old, meaning stock and bond returns after 1802. Absolutely. We will also understand behavioral finance and the global markets of the future.
Our goal is to understand why, even though the stock market seems volatile in the short term, it is the most reliable way to build wealth in the long term. We will also look at how human psychology causes investors to make big mistakes. Okay, let's start with the Great Crash of 1929. There is a story in the sources about a man named John J.
Roscob. Well, the same one who wrote the article in August 1929. Yes, the name of his article was Everybody Should Be Rich. He advised that if a person invested $15 a month in lions, he could become rich in 20 years. But look what happened, just seven weeks after the publication of his article, the biggest stock market crash in history occurred.
Oh yeah, the market fell 89% from 1929 to 1932. This means that people's money was turned into dust and Raskop was made a lot of fun. People must have thought that he was going to blow it up and kill it at the wrong time. But historical data tells something else. How is that? Sources say that if someone had followed his advice and continued to invest $15 per month even during the crash, they would have received an annualized return of 7.86% by 1949.
Wow, that was exactly double the yield of bonds at that time, and after 30 years, the yield had increased to 12.72%, which was nine times higher than T-bills. These statistics are shocking. Stop here, I'm pushing back a bit. It's fine on paper, but how can someone keep investing money when 89% of their money has sunk?
In real life, it's possible. I understand your question. This is the reason why patience is the most expensive thing in the market. When the market falls, the lions become very cheap, which means they were buying shares for $15 more. The right investor took advantage of the cheap stocks. When the market rebounded, those cheap stocks yielded big profits.
Yes, it makes sense, so if stocks win in the long run, then why do people find bonds safer? This is a huge mental illusion. Sources say that since 1802, the lions have given an annual profit of about 7% after taking out inflation. Yes, and on the other hand, the real risk of bonds is inflation. Look, ever since the gold standard ended, paper currency has been continuously printed.
Which causes inflation to increase, right? The author calls it inflation tax. Those who invest in bonds feel that their money is safe, but in reality, inflation eats away at their purchasing power. But if the very name of bonds is fixed income, isn't it difficult for people to understand that fixed does not mean safe purchasing power?
It is very difficult. In the era of paper notes, this fixed figure causes great harm in real life. The book clearly states that stocks are less risky than bonds over a 30-year period. This is a completely perspective-changing thing. Well, since we've been talking about the strength of the lions, let's look at the market indices.
Yes, like the S&P 500 index which started in 1957. According to the exact book data, the most profitable company among the original S&P 500 companies was Philip Morris. It's the same tobacco company, right? Yes, it has given an annual profit of 19.88% in 50 years. This is really amazing, but I am surprised.
This means that the company about which bad news was published in the newspapers every day and lawsuits were going on, has made the investors the richest. This is the strange truth of the market. Is it logical for an ordinary investor to invest money despite negative news? See, the magic of dividend reinvestment works here.
Philip Morris shares fell when the bad news came. Good thing the shares have become cheaper. Absolutely, but investors who continued to buy cheap shares of the same company with the dividends they received accumulated a large number of shares. Wow, bad news gave them an opportunity to buy cheap shares.
Yes, and in the long run, this strategy made them very wealthy. This is a great strategy, but if statistics work so well, why does our own brain become our biggest enemy ? This is where behavioral finance comes into play. The book cites the example of the technology bubble of 1999 to 2001. Yes, at a time when people blindly invested money in internet companies in the name of the new economy.
Absolutely. Experts call this loss aversion. Loss aversion means fear of loss. Yes, people are afraid to sell thorny lions because they don't want to give up, and another disease is get-even-its. What is the point of this "get even" thing? People insist on being even. They invest more money in losing stocks to cover their losses without thinking that the company is sinking.
Oh, this is just a waste of money. Exactly, and even further than that, there is another thing called myopic loss aversion. This may seem a bit confusing, but what does it mean? Look at the investors who don't look at their portfolios daily or very frequently, they sell shares out of fear of a small market decline.
Good sources also state that people who trade a lot have a 7.1% lower profit margin than average investors. Yes, excessive volatility always leads to losses. Hey, I have a very specific question here. We have mobile apps these days where we can see the price of our shares every second. Yes, it's on everyone's phone.
So, instead of benefiting us, are these apps harming us by hacking our brains? I completely agree with you. Too much information can be harmful to the country's investment. When we see the color red, our brain panics. That's right. Now that we understand history and psychology, let's look to the future.
Yes, the coming time is going to be very interesting. What big change is coming in the near future? The author warns about the edge wave. It's true that millions of baby boomers in America and Europe are about to retire. That means about a quarter of a billion, or 250 million people, will quit their jobs.
And when they sell their shares for their retirement, the biggest question is who will buy them? In Western countries, the number of young people is decreasing dramatically. This is the problem, the solution to which the author explains in Global Solution. Global solutions are essential for the development of developing countries such as China, India, and other emerging markets.
Only the youth of these countries will buy those shares. There was a time when 90% of the world's stocks were in America, but now it is less than half, global investment is no longer an option. Absolutely correct. But if these developing countries do not progress rapidly, will people in Western countries have to increase their retirement age to 75 years, as sources suggest?
I would confirm that if global markets and international trade do not grow, people in Western countries will not have money left for old age and will have to work for a long time. This is a very scary situation, so to sum up this entire in-depth discussion, it is important for the audience to understand that real wealth is not created by following the daily news or trading repeatedly.
Yes, these things only cause harm. Wealth is built from a long-term perspective, by participating in global markets and overcoming your fears, leaving behind absolute loss aversion and maintaining discipline. The real mantra is to remain disciplined. Well said and as I leave, I want to leave a new and profound thought for those who listen.
Yes, the book advises us to consistently invest passively and use index funds, but just think what would happen if everyone in the world started buying only index funds and no one did any real analysis of companies, i.e. active management? Hmm, this is a very big question. Yes, who will determine the real price of lions, i.e.
price discovery? Could this create a new market crisis in the future? This is something for everyone to think about. If you found this information useful, please subscribe to the channel Intelligent Sardar.
Comments 0