One of the best things about the financial markets is that it's a bottom line business. At the end of the year, investors tally up their performance and everyone knows if they made money or lost money. Even though results are pretty objective, that doesn't stop managers from attempting to put their own spin on them - taking victory laps in the good years and passing the buck in the bad. Some excuses are more common (and more disingenuous) than others, however, so investors would do well to be on the look out for these familiar weak excuses.

SEE: Does Your Investment Manager Measure Up?

Look for Explanations, Not Justifications
Right off the bat, it's important to recognize that many investment managers do conduct themselves with integrity and are willing to communicate candidly about the reasons why the assets under their management failed to perform as expected.

These managers will often highlight particular mistakes or instances where the markets developed contrary to their expectations. Perhaps the manager made a few bad stock picks or failed to pick a couple of real winners. In other cases, portfolio allocation could be at fault - picking the wrong asset types, markets and sectors can wreck performance, and so can keeping too much (or too little) cash.

To a certain extent, these are forgivable mistakes (though they must be viewed in the context of long-term performance, relative performance and the cost of those services).

SEE: Is Stock Picking A Myth?

Don't Blame Me, It Was the Market's Fault!
One of the more common ways that managers will try to cover for mistakes is by passing the buck all the way back to the market. Now to a certain extent, this can be legitimate. If an investment manager invests solely in U.S. equities and major U.S. indexes are all deeply in the red, it's probably not fair to expect great performance in that year.

Most managers work with a broad mandate, though, and can move assets between classes like equities, bonds and so on. Likewise, feckless managers may try to blame markets that had little or no bearing on their mandate - blaming poor small-cap performance when they run a blue-chip portfolio or vice versa.

It's also worth noting that there's almost always better performance and money to be made somewhere. Even in the worst of the post-tech and post-housing bubbles, there were stock markets around the world that rose and plenty more sectors and individual stocks that were in the black. So while blaming a bad market for poor performance is easy, investment managers are typically hired with the expectation of doing better than the market and should be held to that expectation.

SEE: Active Management: Is It Working For You?

I Confess, They Did It!
Closely related to blaming the faceless and impersonal market is finding other scapegoats for poor performance. At various times in the last couple of decades, managers have tried to explain market moves by claiming that it was the Saudis, the Japanese, the Chinese, the day traders, or the program trading algorithms that were moving the market.

The implication here is that the manager made the right moves, only to be undone by the uncontrollable and unpredictable moves of "those guys." Not surprisingly, this is a popular excuse among individual investors as well; it's never their fault that the stocks they picked failed, it was the nefarious dealings of hedge funds, short-sellers, pumpers, journalists and so on.

Nobody Could Have Known
One of the most common excuses that mortgage bond managers used during the collapse of the housing bubble was that the events that were occurring in the market were so unbelievably rare that no manager could have foreseen them. According to this line of thinking, their models said that the meltdown of the credit markets was a "once in a billion years" event, even though housing prices were at all-time highs, affordability was at all-time lows, personal debt levels were soaring and so on.

These excuses come up all the time; they were used during the collapse of the tech bubble and have been used in almost every post-bubble meltdown that has occurred in the markets. Apparently these models have difficulty factoring in the old homily "easy come, easy go." On a smaller scale, this also frequently happens with individual companies; arguably the most common word to go with "earnings" is "surprise" and managers will frequently blame so-called earnings surprises from portfolio companies as an excuse for their performance (while happily taking credit for the surprises that happen to go their way).

It's Not Me, It's You
Arguably the worst of the worst are those managers who defend themselves by attacking you. When confronted with poor performance, these managers will quickly reach for their files and show you where you signed documents attesting that you understood the risks involved, that there were no performance guarantees and that you agreed to have your funds managed as they saw fit.

Along these same lines, less reputable managers may try to blame you for their failings, pointing to "arbitrary" restrictions in their mandates that kept them from investing your money better. According to this line of thinking, the manager could have prevented your losses if only you allowed him or her to invest in other asset classes or investment types.

Closely related to this are those managers who will blame clients for withdrawing their money in the face of huge losses. While it is true that a sudden spate of redemptions can force asset managers to dump illiquid assets at unattractive prices, it is nevertheless poor practice to blame an investor for protecting him or herself from further losses at the hands of an underperforming manager.

SEE: The Cost And Consequences Of Bad Investment Advice

The Bottom Line
All in all, the best excuses for investors are no excuses at all - investors should seek out those managers who speak with candor about their performance in both good times and bad. While it may be impractical for a manager to explain every aspect of their investment process, they should at a minimum, clearly explain how their discretionary actions impacted results.

At no point should investors allow managers to make them feel responsible for their own management mistakes, nor should they accept the premise that the manager was helpless to adapt to changing market conditions. While no manager will be perfect and make only correct calls, reliable managers show themselves in the tough times by speaking frankly about their mistakes and taking responsibility for their performance.

Related Articles
  1. Professionals

    Are Hedge Fund ETFs Suitable for Your Portfolio?

    Are hedge fund ETFs right for you? Here's what investors need to consider.
  2. Investing Basics

    How AQR Places Bets Against Beta

    Learn how the bet against beta strategy is used by a large hedge fund to profit from a pricing anomaly in the stock market caused by high stock prices.
  3. Term

    What's an Investment Advisor?

    An investment or financial advisor makes investment recommendations and analyzes securities.
  4. Investing Basics

    Explaining the High-Water Mark

    A high-water mark ensures fund managers are not paid performance fees when they perform poorly.
  5. Professionals

    State Street Shifts to Hedge Funds

    ETF pioneer State Street has been losing market share to its peers. Here's how it plans to turn that around.
  6. Professionals

    Career Advice: Management Consulting Vs. Hedge Fund

    Compare careers in management consulting and hedge funds using criteria such as skills needed, educational requirements, salaries and work-life balance.
  7. Investing

    How To Invest For The Greater Good

    We discuss why is important to prioritize economic, social and governance factors when making investment decisions, regardless of gender or generation.
  8. Economics

    2 Hedge Fund Managers Who Predicted the Oil Crash

    Learn about a pair of hedge fund managers who predicted the massive decline in crude oil prices and made substantial amounts of profits.
  9. Stock Analysis

    Should You Invest in STAY (or Should You Go?)

    Bank of America is warning its advisors to steer clear of John Paulson's Advantage Fund, partially because of Extended Stay America (STAY). Should you?
  10. Economics

    Volcker Rule: How It Will Affect You

    Learn how the Volcker Rule has a limited impact on individual investors but restricts the types of activities in which banks can engage.
  1. Organizational Behavior - OB

    Organizational Behavior (OB) is the study of the way people interact ...
  2. Board Of Directors - B Of D

    A group of individuals that are elected as, or elected to act ...
  3. Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS)

    A UK program that helps smaller, riskier companies to raise capital ...
  4. Tactical Trading

    A style of investing for the relatively short term based on anticipated ...
  5. Maximum Drawdown (MDD)

    The maximum loss from a peak to a trough of a portfolio, before ...
  6. Gross Exposure

    The absolute level of a fund's investments.
  1. What is the 12b-1 fee meant to cover?

    A 12b-1 fee in a mutual fund is meant to cover the fees of companies and individuals through which investors of a fund buy ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. Which federal regulatory agencies approved and are now responsible for enforcing ...

    Five federal regulatory agencies approved and are jointly responsible for enforcing the Volcker rule. These agencies include ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. What is the purpose of the Volcker Rule?

    The Volcker rule limits two main types of activities by large institutional banks. Banks are prohibited from engaging in ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. What types of positions might a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) hold?

    The types of positions that a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) is likely to hold include any position that deals with large ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. What does a high information ratio tell an investor about a mutual fund?

    A high information ratio tells an investor that the sustained performance of a mutual fund's active manager is high and that ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. Why is Manchester United (MANU) carrying so much debt?

    The takeover of Manchester United by the Glazer family beginning in 2005 saddled the historic club with substantial amounts ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center

You are using adblocking software

Want access to all of Investopedia? Add us to your “whitelist”
so you'll never miss a feature!