We are excited to announce that Merriman Wealth Management, LLC was recognized as one of the Top 300 Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs) in 2014 by Financial Times!
Financial Times uses a number of quantifiable and objective measures of investor-centered criteria to select the top firms, including assets under management (AUM), AUM growth rate, years in existence, compliance record, industry certifications and online accessibility. We are proud to be named in this elite group.
Download a full copy of the Financial Times special report here.
Awards and recognitions by unaffiliated rating services, companies, and/or publications should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that he/she will experience a certain level of results if the Firm is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services; nor should they be construed as a current or past endorsement of the Firm or its representatives by any of its clients. The Firm makes no representation that the rating is representative of any one client’s experience. Neither the Firm nor its representatives paid a fee to participate in any survey. Rankings published by magazines and others are generally based on information prepared and/or submitted by the recognized advisor. Investment performance generally is not a criteria for an award. Moreover, with regard to all performance information contained herein, directly or indirectly, if any, note that past results are not indicative of future results. Please see below for a more detailed description of the criteria used with respect to the awards and recognition granted to the Firm or the Firm’s individual employees.The Financial Times 300 Top Registered Investment Advisers is an independent listing produced annually by the Financial Times. The FT 300 is based on data gathered from RIA firms, regulatory disclosures, and the FT’s research. The listing reflected each practice’s performance in six primary areas: assets under management, asset growth, compliance record, years in existence, credentials and online accessibility. This award does not evaluate the quality of services provided to clients and is not indicative of the practice’s future performance.The FT 300 is presented as an elite group, not a competitive ranking of 1 to 300.
There are many things in short supply, but uncertainty is not one of them. Three economists1 have compiled an index of uncertainty, which is comprised of newspaper coverage of policy-related uncertainty, expiring federal tax code provisions and disagreement among economic forecasters. You can see the trend in Figure 1 below. The index peaked with the debt ceiling imbroglio in late 2011, fell in the early part of 2012 and then rose again.
Throughout the year there has been a great deal of focus on a number of worrisome issues, including the U.S. deficit, debt ceiling and the fiscal cliff, high unemployment, and the European debt situation. Reflecting all this angst, investors through November withdrew a net $88.9 billion from actively-managed U.S. stock mutual funds (net of inflows into U.S. stock exchange-traded funds).2 Yet for 2012, stocks were up nicely.
How could stocks have gone up while uncertainty increased? While many people naturally worry about the past and still feel burned by previous sharp plunges in stock prices, the stock market is forward looking, incorporating the perceptions of millions of investors. While national economies are still relatively sluggish, actions taken by the U.S. and European central banks to combat economic weakness are having a positive impact.
Housing, while not rosy, is seeing some welcome improvements, with 6.9% of U.S. consumers planning to buy a house in the next six months, the most since August 1999.3 Confidence among U.S. homebuilders reached a 6 ½ year high in December.4 U.S. sales of previously occupied homes increased to their highest level in three years in November.5 And home prices rose 4.3% in the twelve months ending October 2012 in the S&P/Case-Shiller 20-City Composite.6
Another positive, with major longer-term implications, is the widespread development of hydraulic fracturing (or fracking, the process of extracting oil and natural gas from shale rock). The International Energy Agency projects the U.S. will become the largest global oil producer by around 2020, and a net oil exporter by around 2030.7 While there are important environmental issues associated with fracking, including potential contamination of local water supplies and massive use of water in the process, electricity produced by natural gas gives off 43% less carbon dioxide versus coal. Due to a combination of increased use of natural gas, the weak economy and more fuel-efficient cars, America’s emission of greenhouse gases has fallen to 1992 levels and is expected to continue to fall.8 So, like any energy source, there are costs and benefits. Cheaper energy will lead to more manufacturing being done in the U.S., which is good for the economy. One analyst estimates the U.S. will add three million new jobs by the end of this decade due to the natural gas industry.9
Waiting for that perfect time to invest when there is no uncertainty could lead to cash unproductively sitting on the sidelines. Investing only after good news also means buying stocks after they have gone up. A good example of this is the S&P 500 going up by 2.54% on January 2, the day after the fiscal cliff legislation passed. Another example is the MSCI EAFE index of developed countries in Europe, Australasia and the Far East, which increased 6.57% in the fourth quarter, reflecting the relative lack of bad news, and some stabilizing events, in Europe.
While uncertainty is an uncomfortable fact of life, it is easier to handle by following a well-formulated diversified investment plan that invests in stocks and bonds, the allocation to which incorporates your risk tolerance and long-term needs.
Many people are not optimistic about the chances of being able to retire at the traditional age of 65. In one survey, 39% of those surveyed said that they would work past age 70 or never retire.
A more recent study published by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College paints a more optimistic picture. It concludes that almost half of households can retire at 65 and maintain their standard of living in retirement. For those households whose members can’t afford to retire at 65, 23% would have to work another 1-3 years, and 17% of households would have to work an additional 4-6 years. The study concludes that 88% of households should be able to retire by age 70 and maintain their pre-retirement lifestyle.
Postponing retirement is a powerful way to improve your chances of not outliving your money. Each additional year you work means more savings, more chance for your investments to grow, fewer years to draw down your savings in retirement, and greater Social Security (which increases as you delay claiming it until the age of 70).
While you might not be enthusiastic about the prospect of having to work longer, the reality may not be as bad as you think.
If you want to understand this type of insurance and the risks it covers in much greater detail, please click here to read an excellent white paper on this subject, published by ACE Private Risk Services.
Merriman does not include a specific allocation to gold in our standard portfolios. This article, by Bryan Harris of Dimensional Fund Advisors, discusses why gold has not been an ideal long-term investment. It includes the following key concepts:
Gold has done well since the year 2000 and in the 1970s, and can potentially be a safe haven during times of political and economic stress. However, for the entire period of 1971 – 2011 gold performed worse than the S&P 500, U.S. small-cap stocks and non-U.S. stocks on an inflation-adjusted basis.
From 1980 – 1999, gold experienced a negative return after inflation of -6.5%, vs. strong positive returns for stocks.
While gold has held its value against long-term inflation, there have been extensive periods when gold did worse than inflation. Gold is also much more volatile than inflation, and can add substantial volatility to a portfolio.
Unlike stocks, which are productive assets which generate growing levels of income and dividends over time, gold has no cash flow and costs money to own.
For more detail and some illuminating graphs, please see the article.