Savings vs. Investments vs. Speculations - Definitions

Most people talk about savings and investments, but very few people (outside of the dark corners of economics & finance) actually stop to think about the differences.  Understanding the differences will be important for some of my upcoming posts on the subject.

If you spend less than you earn, most people would consider that savings.  It usually is, but not always.  If that difference is sitting in the bank, I would call it savings.  If you immediately put it into the stock market or bonds, then I would call it an investment (or even a speculation).

Savings

Savings is money you have set aside that you are not willing to lose.  Safety is your highest priority here, and you are willing to give up high returns in exchange (have you looked at what your bank account is paying lately?).  Typical places for savings would be bank accounts, CDs, mattresses, etc.

Investments

Investments are putting your money towards productive businesses with the expectation of higher returns than you get on your savings.  In exchange, you undertake some risk that you might lose some (or all) of your investment - hopefully just temporarily, but perhaps permanently.  Investing in stocks and bonds through a 401k, mutual funds, or even individual stocks where you are looking at longer-term business prospects would all be examples of investing.

Speculations

Speculations are generally riskier than investments in that you are usually taking more risk in order to get a quick or larger return.  Gambling is certainly an example of speculation, but not all speculations are gambling.  These are usually "hot stock picks" or short term guesses as to which way prices will move.  Speculations are typically short-term and not focused on the business itself, but just the price of the stock, option, etc.

When looking at your overall financial picture, it is important to understand which category above your various monies fall into.  Always start with savings, move on to investments from there if you want, and even dabble in speculations once you have plenty of savings and investments.  Many people should only ever have savings, and only a small percentage should ever be speculating (although many more cannot resist the temptation to dabble in speculations - ask me how I know!).  Even if you are very financially savvy and have all three, the majority should be in savings and investments.

Book Review: Be Principled and Grow Rich

Wow - a new post is WAY overdue! I just read a short book with some great information, so this is the perfect opportunity for a new post. And since stock investing can generate passive income if done right, the post is even on-subject.

Be Principled and Grow Rich by Kirk W. Tofte with Samuel Case

This book was a very quick read, which is perfect for me since I have a relatively short attention span (like start making a sandwich, get distracted by something - anything, really - then find the partially made sandwich an hour or more later - that kind of short).

Not knowing really what to expect, I was somewhat surprised to find that it was a study on improving stock performance using a really simple tool - what the authors call Principled Asset Rotation (PAR). You may have heard about it, but I hadn't, so it was completely new to me.

To boil it down to the bare takeaways:

1) Figure out if the S&P 500 or Russell 2000 performed better last year.
2) If the S&P 500 performed better, invest in large-company growth stocks (ticker symbol IVW if you are into ETFs) the following year.
3) If the Russell 2000 performed better, invest in small-company value stocks (ticker symbol IWN if you are into ETFs) the following year.

If you are interested in the principles behind it (like I am - I can take very few things at face value without understanding the underlying principles), definitely read the book. My brief explanation is thus:

The economy moves in cycles. The stock market is a forward indicator of the economy. Therfore, performance of stocks in certain sectors of the economy in one year predict where we will be in the economic cycle and therefore which stocks will do well.



There were a couple of things I found odd about the book:

1) The authors did not mention exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for using this investment strategy. I think they would be a perfect tool because they nearly perfectly mimick the indices the authors mention (less about a 0.2% expense ratio).

2) They propose several other strategies with historically worse returns (presumably because they get farther away from the underlying principles) because the transaction fees might be "too high" for some investors with small caps. With ETFs (or even the mutual funds they mention), this should not be an issue at all.

These things don't detract from the book, I just thought it interesting...

All of the data in the book ended in 2001. As a former engineer, I couldn't help but run the data from 2002 to 2007. The book's method outperformed the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 over that total time period (like 55% vs. 23% vs. 48%), but didn't do well at all in 2007 (based upon the 2006 indicator).

I suppose when you arbitrarily pick a calendar year, that is bound to happen, but I am certainly impressed with the overall results. (I will also mention that 2002 to 2007 was a little weird as the small-cap value was the choice every year over that timeframe.)

I plan to play with this using a small portion of my portfolio this year, then maybe move a larger portion (up to 25%) into this strategy.

If you have read the book or implemented the strategy, I (and other readers) would love to hear your feedback.

Good luck!