There is more risk in the world than most people realize, and it is often inadequately measured. Frequently practitioners measure risk using “standard deviation,” which assumes returns are “normal.” But what does this really mean?

 In a “normal” world, few surprises exist. Yes, there would be good and bad days in the market, but the ups and downs would be largely predictable, and good returns would mostly offset bad ones. If someone tells you they measure risk using “standard deviation,” they imply the world is dull and uneventful.  

Enter Common Sense

Even the most casual observations about the past couple of decades cast doubt on this “dull world” vision. Not only has the market experienced outsized bull runs, but also jaw-dropping declines. Systemic shocks to the financial system are far more common than expected by the “dull world” theory adherents. Panics seem to surface with increasing regularity and can roil markets unexpectedly. All of these events create what we call “tail risk” —  a rare occurrence that comes as a surprise and can turn a portfolio on its head.

Recent examples of adverse “tail risk” include Covid-19 (2020), Federal Reserve triggered taper tantrum (2013), European debt crisis (2011), Global Financial Crisis (2007-2009), several emerging market crises, the dot-com bust (2000), and U.S. corporate accounting scandals (2001-2002).

So, as you can see, the world is anything but boring. This common sense realization should put to rest that market returns are “normal” and that risk can be adequately measured by “standard deviation” alone.

How Can We Look at Risk?

The chart below offers a different and better way of looking at risk. It is called a “normal probability plot.” Despite the intimidating sounding name, it is simple to understand if you understand two points.

  • Point 1: A steeper line drawn through the points on the chart indicates more volatility.
  • Point 2: The more the dots depart from the straight line, the greater the degree of “tail risk” or probability of an unexpected outcome.

By looking at risk through this lens, we go beyond the inadequate “standard deviation” measure of risk and incorporate the fact that market returns are not “normal.”

Testing for “Normality” of Returns
Normal Probability Plot for “A” vs. “F”-Quality Firms

What Can We Do About Risk?

As shown in the chart above, owning high-quality companies can lessen risk. It can diminish both the day-to-day volatility (flatter line) and reduce the probability and magnitude of an unexpected outcome (“tail risk”). This should sound reasonable because high quality implies more flexibility, durability, and predictability, fundamentally mitigating risk.

We define quality grades based on operating consistency, asset profitability, and financial leverage. “A”-quality companies tend to have consistent operating profits, more productive assets, and lower debt. “F”-quality companies tend to have erratic profits, less productive assets, and more debt.

Not surprisingly, “A”-quality companies exhibit less volatility and lower tail risk.

Conclusion

As time goes on, evidence is mounting that risk is changing. Significant declines have become more common and episodic. Debt has become more prevalent in the financial system. The system itself has become more complex.

For these reasons, we think now is the time to take a closer look at risks that can disrupt your portfolio. Washington Crossing looks to mitigate these risks using fundamental analysis and active management focused on quality at a reasonable price.