The Balancing Act Between Risk and Returns
The Balancing Act Between Risk and Returns Any smart investor would tell you that in taking the plunge with stocks, as with any dilemma in life, it is all about finding a sweet spot between going all out and keeping your powder dry. We at DailyTopStocks aren’t any different, and bring to you a definitive guide to adapting your objectives and mind-set to the growing set of things that a modern investor must contend with. What are the risks and what are the returns? The general consensus seems to be that high risk means high-reward, which is said to be the only upside to high risk investments. However, at times higher-risk investments can also become less risky over time, attracting more investors who then drive up the price. One important thing of note is that there is no promise of higher returns on risky investments, so the higher risk just tends to scare off potential investors, keeping the returns on a given investment low. Whether a riskier investment will actually generate higher returns is up to the individual investor to decide. Exactly how risk is assessed and the amount of expected returns change depending on the individual investor but investors tend to invest in higher-risk opportunities if they determine that doing so will generate higher returns. It creates a catch-22 situation. The takeaway is thathigher risk doesn’t necessarily mean higher returns, and only an expectation for an investment to provide returns shifts the investor’s inclination to take the plunge. High risk in itself isn’t, and shouldn’t, be the driving force behind whether the investor chooses to invest or not. When making a choice of investments, it therefore means that the risk should not be weighed up against the potential returns in order to justify taking them, but through techniques that we are about to discuss in the following sections. Diversification and the kind of risks it helps reduce You have probably come across this term being slapped across social media posts by a whole host of financial advisories, and it certainly has a ring to it that screams “security” and “risk aversion”. But why is this the case, and how so? The fact that no investment carries with it absolute certainty of good return and no risks means that companies try to bring in the term diversification to suggest less risk and more potential for higher returns. This is because of the fact that by investing across a variety of stocks, you can factor in the variation of the risks involved in each. How would that help? Well, a high risk in investment in one stock can simultaneously mean low risk across a whole bunch of other stocks. Some of them might even yield a good return, which mitigates the losses incurred and that is how diversification broadly works. Let us take a deeper dive into what we are looking at by considering an instance where a company haschosen to invest in two stocks. Should they change in value in ways that are the exactopposite, say, one falls in value by x percent, and the other rises by x percent as well, then amongst the two stocks, changes in value will consequently result in not only zero gain but also zero risk. The company in question is said to have diversified with the aim of reducing risk by finding investments that change in response to a variety of events, by different amounts and in completely opposite directions, and at different times. As a result of this, the company has reduced the possibility of losses incurred as opposed to dealing with the risk attached to investing in only onestock. Remember, the whole point of diversification is to mitigate the risks, while maintaining a healthy return. The question that now arises is why companies don’t invest in only the best stocks. If they diversify thei rinvestment portfolio by putting money into a variety of different assets, then do we, or the imaginary company, necessarily want to see any of them lose value, even if we know for a fact that they might? This where the concept of opportunity cost comes in. The opportunity cost is the cost of investing in a given entity, with respect to the opportunities lost in investing in some other stocks that we have chosen to not invest in, which held the potential of our investment but didn’t make the grade due to the fact that having put our eggs in one basket, we don’t hve room for further investments in them. With the opportunity cost in of an investment in mind, the aim should be to find the best stocks and after that, find investments that provide the highest potential returns but also with considerable risk of falling in value. Having dealt with the risk of some our investments falling in value, one thing to always keep in mind is that there are certain risks that no amount of diversification can eliminate. These risks are termed as systematic risks. An example can be a situation where a company or investor has understood the idea of diversification, and implemented it well across their portfolio, but then an economic recession occurs. How is one supposed to deal with such circumstances? Those are the only kinds of risks that are called systematic risks, and can’t be dealt with solely by diversifying – which outlines both the limitations and the effectiveness of diversification. Having touched upon the subject of systematic risks, we are also obliged to introduce the idea of specific risk, which is any kind of a risk attached to a given stock (or any investment) that has to do with its own properties. These are the types of risks that can be averted by diversifying. The Bottom Line There is always a trade-off between risk and return when it comes to stock investment. While higher risk stocks tend to offer higher returns, they are also more volatile and can result in losses. Lower risk stocks may not offer … Read more