New Update: Healthcare Costs Increasing by Over 60% in Some States. Will you be impacted?

Learn More

Investing Insights for University of Chicago Employees: The Pros and Cons of Dollar-Cost Averaging vs. Lump-Sum Contributions

The Value Series

What is Book Value?

Testing

Weighting

The Brandes Research Institute

About The Retirement Group

Sources

The Value Series

Given the current elevated market volatility, we think now is a good time to revisit important value metrics in our four-part series. As an employee or retiree of University of Chicago, who likely has little market analysis experience, we understand that the valuation process can seem confusing. However, we are here to tell you that the valuation process does not have to be complex to be successful. Simple valuation techniques such as the price-to-book ratio are generally easy to use and have been proven to be effective if utilized correctly. Investors are often looking for ways for their clients to beat the market. If you're one of those investors, you may want to consider the following strategy that has been implemented by the investment greats. Some value investors have historically beat the average annualized returns of the S&P 500, and many have successful track records spanning several decades to prove it. University of Chicago employees, it is important to be knowledgeable regarding tactics used by famous investors such as Warren Buffett, Benjamin Graham, David Dodd, Charlie Munger, Christopher Browne and Seth Klarman. The investment style implemented by these professionals focus on four metrics that characterize a value investment. These four metrics include the Price to Earnings Ratio, the Price to Cash Flow Ratio, High Dividend Yield and the Price to Book Ratio. These metrics, as you will see, are strong indicators of undervalued security. If undervalued security is brought back to fair value then we would see positive returns on that security. For University of Chicago employees, it is possible to utilize these metrics to better position yourself in the market for heightened returns. We will examine the effect of investing based off of certain characteristics and how their investment returns are correlated. Today, I want to end the four-part TRG Value Series with the granddaddy of metrics, the Price-to-Book value ratio (P/B).

What is Book Value?

Book value is preferred by many value investors to cash flow and earnings metrics because it is more stable year-to-year whereas cash flow and earnings can vary greatly. This is an important property for those at University of Chicago to look out for due to the following reason: When a business at a cyclical trough with diminished cash flow and earnings might look expensive on the basis of price-to-cash flow or price-to-earnings, that same business may appear cheap on the basis of price-to-book value. This is because book value won’t fall much or at all in a downturn, and vice versa. Thus, the argument goes, the price-to-book value gives a more reliable picture of a company’s usual business performance, which University of Chicago employees can use to elevate their investment decisions and investment performance. Benjamin Graham popularized the indicator in his books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor”. Nobel Prize winner Eugene Fama and his research partner Kenneth French used the ratio in their three- and five-factor models to describe stock returns. Professor Joseph Piotroski uses the ratio as the only valuation measure in his F-Score methodology.

Testing

We understand the importance of data driven research for University of Chicago employees and retirees. Set out below are the results of two Fama and French backtests of the book value-to-market equity (the inverse of the PB ratio) data from 1926 to 2013. As of December 2013, there were 3,175 firms in the sample (Carlisle-PB, P2). The value decile contained the 459 stocks with the highest earnings yield, and the glamour decile contained the 404 stocks with the lowest earnings yield.

The average size of the glamour stocks is $7.48 billion and the value stocks are $2.54 billion. (Note that the average is heavily skewed by the biggest companies. For context, the 3,175th company has a market capitalization today of $404 million, which is smaller than the average, but still investable for most investors). Portfolios are formed on June 30 and rebalanced annually. When accounting for this backtest, University of Chicago employees may recognize how two portfolios are weighted by market capitalization, which means that bigger firms contribute more to the performance of the portfolio, and smaller firms contribute less. Here, we can see that the value decile has comprehensively outperformed the glamour decile, returning 12.6 percent compounded (17.7 percent in the average year) over the full period versus 8.6 percent for the glamour decile (10.9 percent in the average year) (Carlisle-PB, P3).

These returns are considerably lower than the returns found for the price-to-earnings and cash-flow ratios discussed earlier. Despite the irregularity, University of Chicago employees must be aware that the earnings and cash flow back tests ran back to only 1951, and the book value return data begins in 1926. The difference is due to the 1929 crash, which had an oversized impact on returns. The impact of the crash is visible on the chart; it took twenty years for the value decile to fully recover. University of Chicago employees must also note how something similar has happened to the glamour decile since 2000; it hasn’t grown in 13 years. To make a comparison possible of the book value’s performance to the performance of earnings and cash flow over the same period, I also measured the returns beginning in 1951. Since 1951, the low P/B value decile has generated a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.0 percent and an average annual return (AAR) of 17.9 percent. Over the same period, the glamour decile returned a CAGR of 9.6 percent and an AAR of 12.6 percent (Carlisle-PB, P5). These returns are approximately the same as the returns generated by the low P/CF and P/E studies over the same period.

In their study, they found that the quintile of the lowest P/E stocks significantly outperformed the high P/E quintile. The portfolio containing the lowest P/E stock returned 11.61% annualized compared to 4.83% for the highest P/E portfolio and 7.55% for the used universe of stocks. The graph below shows how the cumulative returns compare (it’s not even close). University of Chicago employees can utilize this information to avoid investing in underperforming assets and better predict economic trends that translate into higher ROI.

Articles you may find interesting:

Weighting

It is important for employees and retirees of University of Chicago to understand how market capitalization-weighted returns are useful for demonstrating that the outperformance of value over glamour is not due to the value portfolios containing smaller stocks. Unless you’re running an index (or hugging an index), they’re not really meaningful. The easiest portfolio weighting scheme is to simply equally weight each position. (If we’re prepared to put up with a little extra volatility for a little extra return, we can also Kelly weight our best ideas). Kelly Weighting is determined by the Kelly Criterion which is a formula used to determine what percentage of their capital should be used in each trade to maximize long-term growth. There are two key components to the formula (Kelly % = W- [(1 - W) / R]): the winning probability factor (W) and the win/loss ratio (R). The winning probability is the probability a trade will have a positive return. The win/loss ratio is equal to the total positive trade amounts divided by the total negative trading amounts. The result of the formula will tell investors what percentage of their total capital they should apply to each investment. By utilizing the Kelly Weighting, investors employed or retiring from University of Chicago can have a better grasp of their exposure to each individual asset in their portfolio and make informed decisions regarding their asset allocation.

University of Chicago employees should also account for the equal weight return statistics for book value. In the equal weight backtest, the value generated a 20.2 percent compounded return (27.3 percent on average), beating out glamour’s 6.3 percent compounded return (10.4 percent on average) (Carlisle-PB, P10). Since 1951 the equally weighted P/B value decile has generated a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 20.0 percent and an average annual return (AAR) of 25.4 percent (Carlisle-PB, P11).

Over the same period, the glamour decile returned a CAGR of 6.4 percent and an AAR of 10.8 percent. These returns are close to the same as the returns generated by the low P/CF and P/E studies over the same period. When accounting for this information, University of Chicago employees must recognize that the value portfolios outperformed because they bought more book value per dollar invested than the glamour portfolios: 4.57x on average versus 0.25x in the glamour portfolios (Carlisle-PB, P12). In the equal-weight portfolios, value has significantly outperformed glamour since 1999, beating it by an extraordinary 15.9 percent compounded, and 16.1 percent in the average year (Carlisle-PB, P13).

The Brandes Research Institute

Because we understand just how important data-driven solutions are for our University of Chicago employees and retirees, we have provided another study, which discusses the P/CF ratio. In a Brandes Research Institute study, Exhibit 6 below illustrates the global all-cap findings across three price metrics.

The results confirmed a consistent value premium across all metrics. We will focus on the P/CF ratio and the outperformance in the decile 10 value stocks. The smallest outperformance between decile 1 glamour stocks and decile 10 value stocks can be observed with the P/B measurement, where the average outperformance was 7.1% (Brandes, p. 8).

About The Retirement Group

The Retirement Group is a nation-wide group of financial advisors who work together as a team.

We focus entirely on retirement planning and the design of retirement portfolios for transitioning corporate employees. Each representative of the group has been hand selected by The Retirement Group in select cities of the United States. Each advisor was selected based on their pension expertise, experience in financial planning, and portfolio construction knowledge.

TRG takes a teamwork approach in providing the best possible solutions for our clients’ concerns. The Team has a conservative investment philosophy and diversifies client portfolios with laddered bonds, CDs, mutual funds, ETFs, Annuities, Stocks and other investments to help achieve their goals. The team addresses Retirement, Pension, Tax, Asset Allocation, Estate, and Elder Care issues. This document utilizes various research tools and techniques. A variety of assumptions and judgmental elements are inevitably inherent in any attempt to estimate future results and, consequently, such results should be viewed as tentative estimations. Changes in the law, investment climate, interest rates, and personal circumstances will have profound effects on both the accuracy of our estimations and the suitability of our recommendations. The need for ongoing sensitivity to change and for constant re-examination and alteration of the plan is thus apparent.

Therefore, we encourage you to have your plan updated a few months before your potential retirement date as well as an annual review. It should be emphasized that neither The Retirement Group, LLC nor any of its employees can engage in the practice of law or accounting and that nothing in this document should be taken as an effort to do so. We look forward to working with tax and/or legal professionals you may select to discuss the relevant ramifications of our recommendations.

Throughout your retirement years we will continue to update you on issues affecting your retirement through our complimentary and proprietary newsletters, workshops and regular updates. You may always reach us at (800) 900-5867.

Sources

What to do with an Early Retirement Ebook
Social Security Ebook
Lump Sum vs. Annuity Ebook
401(k) Rollover Strategies Ebook
Closing the Retirement Gap Ebook
Brandes Institute, The. “Value vs. Glamour: A Long-Term Worldwide Perspective”. 2014. < https://www.brandes.com/docs/default-source/brandes-institute/value-vs-glamour-worldwide-perspective>.
Carlisle, Tobias. “Investing Using the Price-to-Earnings Ratio and Earnings Yield (Backtests 1951 to 2013)”. May 26, 2014. <http://greenbackd.com/2014/05/26/price-to-earnings-ratio-backtest-1951-to-2013/>.
Causeway Capital. “The Compelling Case for Value Stocks”. 2018 https://www.causewaycap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/201802-TheCompellingCaseforValue-1.pdf
Research Affiliates. “To Win with ‘Smart Beta’, Ask if the Price is Right” September 7, 2016 < https://seekingalpha.com/article/4004564-win-smart-beta-ask-price-right>
Tweedy Browne Company LLC. “What Has Worked in Investing: Studies of Investment Approaches and Characteristics Associated with Exceptional Returns.” 1992. <http://www.tweedy.com/resources/library_docs/papers/WhatHasWorkedFundVersionWeb.pdf>.
Yuan, Vera. Guru Focus. “Earnings, Free Cash Flow, Book Value? Which Parameters Are Stock Prices Most Correlated To?”. August 2, 2013. < http://www.gurufocus.com/news/225255/earnings-free-cash-flow-book-value-which-parameters-are-stock-prices-most-correlated-to->.
Fama and French Backtesting http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data_library.html

What are the eligibility criteria for participation in the SEPP plan for employees of The University of Chicago, and how can factors like years of service and age impact an employee's benefits under this plan? Discuss how these criteria might have changed for new employees post-2016 and what implications this has for retirement planning.

Eligibility Criteria for SEPP: Employees at The University of Chicago become eligible to participate in the SEPP upon meeting age and service requirements: being at least 21 years old and completing one year of service. For employees hired after the plan freeze on October 31, 2016, these criteria have been crucial in determining eligibility for newer employees, impacting their retirement planning as they do not accrue benefits under SEPP beyond this freeze date.

In what ways does the SEPP (Staff Employees Pension Plan) benefit calculation at The University of Chicago reflect an employee's years of service and final average pay? Examine the formulas involved in the benefits determination process, including how outside factors such as Social Security compensation can affect the total pension benefits an employee receives at retirement.

Benefit Calculation Reflecting Service and Pay: The SEPP benefits are calculated based on the final average pay and years of participation, factoring in Social Security covered compensation. Changes post-2016 have frozen benefits accrual, meaning that current employees’ benefits are calculated only up to this freeze date, affecting long-term benefits despite continued employment.

How can employees at The University of Chicago expect their SEPP benefits to be paid out upon their retirement, especially in terms of the options between lump sum distributions and annuities? Analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each payment option, and how these choices can impact an employee's financial situation in retirement.

Payout Options (Lump Sum vs. Annuities): Upon retirement, employees can opt for a lump sum payment or annuities. Each option presents financial implications; lump sums provide immediate access to funds but annuities offer sustained income. This choice is significant for financial stability in retirement, particularly under the constraints post the 2016 plan changes.

Can you elaborate on the spousal rights associated with the pension benefits under the SEPP plan at The University of Chicago? Discuss how marital status influences annuity payments and the required spousal consent when considering changes to beneficiary designations.

Spousal Rights in SEPP Benefits: Spouses have rights to pension benefits, requiring spousal consent for altering beneficiary arrangements under the SEPP. Changes post-2016 do not impact these rights, but understanding these is vital for making informed decisions about pension benefits and beneficiary designations.

As an employee nearing retirement at The University of Chicago, what considerations should one keep in mind regarding taxes on pension benefits received from the SEPP? Explore the tax implications of different types of distributions and how they align with current IRS regulations for the 2024 tax year.

Tax Considerations for SEPP Benefits: SEPP distributions are taxable income. Employees must consider the tax implications of their chosen payout method—lump sum or annuities—and plan for potential tax liabilities. This understanding is crucial, especially with the plan’s benefit accrual freeze affecting the retirement timeline.

What resources are available for employees of The University of Chicago wishing to understand more about their retirement benefits under SEPP? Discuss the types of information that can be requested from the Benefits Office and highlight the contact methods for obtaining more detailed assistance.

Resources for Understanding SEPP Benefits: The University provides resources for employees to understand their SEPP benefits, including access to the Benefits Office for personalized queries. Utilizing these resources is essential for employees, especially newer ones post-2016, to fully understand their retirement benefits under the current plan structure.

How does The University of Chicago address benefits for employees upon their death, and what provisions exist for both spouses and non-spouse beneficiaries under the SEPP plan? Analyze the specific benefits and payment structures available to beneficiaries and the conditions under which these benefits are distributed.

Posthumous Benefits: The SEPP includes provisions for spouses and non-spouse beneficiaries, detailing the continuation or lump sum payments upon the death of the employee. Understanding these provisions is crucial for estate planning and ensuring financial security for beneficiaries.

What factors ensure an employee remains fully vested in their pension benefits with The University of Chicago, and how does the vesting schedule affect retirement planning strategies? Consider the implications of not fulfilling the vesting criteria and how this might influence decisions around employment tenure and retirement timing.

Vesting and Retirement Planning: Vesting in SEPP requires three years of service, with full benefits contingent on meeting this criterion. For employees navigating post-2016 changes, understanding vesting is crucial for retirement planning, particularly as no additional benefits accrue beyond the freeze date.

Discuss the impact of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) on the SEPP benefits for employees at The University of Chicago. How do divorce or separation proceedings influence pension benefits, and what steps should employees take to ensure compliance with a QDRO?

Impact of QDROs on SEPP Benefits: SEPP complies with Qualified Domestic Relations Orders, which can allocate pension benefits to alternate payees. Understanding how QDROs affect one’s benefits is crucial for financial planning, especially in the context of marital dissolution.

How can employees at The University of Chicago, who have questions about their benefits under the SEPP plan, effectively communicate with the Benefits Office for clarity and assistance? Specify the various communication methods available for employees and what kind of information or support they can expect to receive.

Communicating with the Benefits Office: Employees can reach out to the Benefits Office via email or phone for detailed assistance on their SEPP benefits. Effective communication with this office is vital for employees to clarify their benefits status, particularly in light of the post-2016 changes to the plan.