by Lance Roberts, RIA
āIs cash a good hedge?ā Itās a focus of a recent article discussing āfastā versus āslowā risk which examined the financial impact on equities and cash over long-term periods. To wit:
āThe simplest analogy to differentiate between fast risk and slow risk is heroin vs. cigarettes. Heroin is a fast risk. Cigarettes are a slow risk. Heroin tends to kill people quickly (especially in the event of an overdose), while cigarettes tend to kill people slowly.
Stocks have lots of fast risks, but little slow risks. The S&P 500 could drop 20% tomorrow, but 30 years from now itās likely to be much higher than it is today. On the other hand, cash has lots of slow risks, but little fast risks. Next year your dollar should be worth about the same as it is worth today. But 30 years from now? Not so much.ā ā Nick Maggiulli
The analysis is correct. The probability of being down 5% during a 20-year period is zero.

Notably, Nickās point is that cash is NOT a āfinancially risk-freeā asset.
āThis is why cash isnāt really a risk-free asset but more of aĀ fastĀ risk-free asset. Cash still has plenty of risk, but it is of theĀ slowĀ variety.
Slow risk doesnāt make headlines. Every time a hedge fund blows up you will probably hear about it. But you never hear about the person who sat in cash for 20 years because they were too afraid to get invested. Both are equally devastating, but one seems less spectacular than the other.ā
When thinking about the question of is cash a good hedge or not, remember that holding cash during a bull market can be devastating to financial outcomes. Unfortunately, however, āholding stocksā can also be just as destructive.
Let me explain.
Stocks Have āFastā And āSlowā Risk
Letās revisit the graph above. When analyzing returns over long periods, how you interpret the data is crucially important. So, according to the chart, the probability of an index being down 5% over 20-years is zero.
However, this is a vastly different statement than the total return on an investment over a 20-year holding period.
Over a short-term holding period, stocks do indeed have āfastā financial risk. Recently, we reviewed how often stocks mean-revert to their 200-dma.

As noted, corrections to the 200-dma, or more, happen regularly. Sometimes, those drawdowns can be small. At others, they have coincided with crushing bear markets.
The chart below shows the market from a different perspective. It is the S&P 500 index compared to valuations at 10, 15, and 20x trailing earnings. As shown, the market tends to oscillate between the top of the valuation channel and the bottom over time.

As Nick notes, these āoscillationsā represent the financial āfast risksā associated with investing in the equity market. Sometimes, these fast risks can take weeks, months, or a couple of years to play out.
However, investing in the stock market also has āslow risk.ā
Starting Valuations Matter To Financial Outcomes
Nick is correct that over 20 years, holding stocks has not had a negative return. However, there is more to the story.
In the short term, a period of one year or less, political, fundamental, and economic data has very little influence over the market. In other words, āprice is the only thing that matters.ā
Price measures the currentĀ āpsychologyāĀ of theĀ āherdāĀ and is the clearest representation of the behavioral dynamics of the living organism we callĀ āthe market.ā
But in the long-term, valuation matters. Both charts compareĀ 10- and 20-year forward total real returnsĀ to the margin-adjusted CAPE ratio.


Since many regularly discount the importance of trailing P/E valuations, I will also provide you with the current price to sales ratio.

All three charts suggest that forward returns over the next 10- to 20-years will fall somewhere between -2% and +3%. Such is the āslow riskā of investing in the stock market when valuations get elevated at the beginning of the investment cycle.
To visualize the importance of āslow risk,āĀ the chart below shows $100,000, adjusted for inflation, invested in 2000 versus a 6% annual compound rate of return.Ā The shaded area presents the difference between the portfolio value and the 6% rate of return.
As noted, due to the impact of two bear markets, the investor that started in 2000 is still well short of the rate of return promised.Ā The investor that began in 2007 only just recently achieved their goal. However, a bear market in the future will set them back markedly.

The problem of ātimeā is crucially important. For example, if you were 45 in 2000, you didnāt make your retirement goal.
With markets now back to some of the highest valuations on record, the āriskā of āslow riskā has risen markedly.
Is Cash A Good Hedge?
The problem for investors is obvious. Both cash and equities have risks. However, as noted, cash has no āfast riskā but does have āslow risk.ā Equities, unfortunately, has both āfast and slow risk.ā
That is an important statement. If cash has no āfast risk,ā then cash acts as a natural hedge against that risk.
Nick misses in his analysis that investors should never weigh one asset over another over an extended period. Thus, investors never face a choice of solely one investment over another. Instead, the goal is to invest in the correct asset at the correct time. When one is unsure, cash is a natural hedge against uncertainty. As many great investors throughout history state in one form or another:
āThe goal of investing is not only the āreturn ON my principalā but also ensuring the āreturn OF my principal.'ā
If I ignore the relevant risk, the outcome is that I will fall short of my financial goals.
Importantly,Ā I am not talking about being 100% in cash.Ā Instead, I am suggesting that during periods of uncertainty, cash provides both stability and opportunity.
Yes, cash will lose purchasing power over the holding period, but equities can lose a lot more when āfast riskā happens.
With the fundamental and economic backdrop becoming much more hostile toward investors in the intermediate term, understandingĀ the value of cash as aĀ āhedgeāĀ against loss becomes more important.Ā
Given the length of the current market advance, deteriorating internals, high valuations, and weak economic backdrop,Ā reviewing cash as an asset class in your allocation may make some sense.
Of course, since Wall Street does not make fees on investors holding cash, maybe there is another reason they are so adamant that you remain invested all the time.
Copyright Ā© RIA