7

The market is bleeding, so I'm selling!

Allison Lenthall.

To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.

Get Adobe Flash player

TEXT OF STORY

STEVE CHIOTAKIS: Last year's economy hit millions of people where it hurts the most -- retirement savings. All kinds of investments lost value, but some people's financial decisions may have contributed to the hit on their own nest egg. Many investors were so afraid of losing even more, they sold everything they had in stocks, even though prices were low. These sellers chose to ignore all the personal finance information out there that says not to sell when the market is bleeding. They did anyway. Sally Herships asks, "Why?"


SALLY HERSHIPS: Allison Lenthall lives in Maryland. She's in public relations. Before the recession she'd invested her 401K in aggressive growth stocks. She was only 35 so she figured she had plenty of time to let it grow.

ALLISON LENTHALL: So Dad had taught me to buy and hold. I can remember being in an economics class in high school where we were given funny money to put into the market, and see who could, you know, accrue the most, and it was always just buy and hold, buy and hold. I can hear it in my sleep.

But then Allison started learning everything she could about the market, reading business magazines, even watching Jim Kramer. Then, on Sept. 15, 2008 Lehman collapsed. A couple weeks later the market dropped by 777 points ... in one day. A month after that the market was down another 1,800 points. And Allison's portfolio had lost 50 percent -- $10,000. But even though she knew not to sell low she did.

HERSHIPS: Are these emotional actions or logical actions?

LENTHALL: Oh, these are clearly emotional actions. They almost occur like you don't have a choice, like they just become instinctual. You just do them.

Allison says if she could go back in time she'd do things differently. But she panicked. So why do people make decisions that are clearly not in their own best interests?

RICK KAHLER: When we panic, we literally lose our minds. We disconnect from the logical part of our brain. It is gone.

Rick Kahler is a certified financial planner in South Dakota. He writes books on the psychology of money.

KAHLER: You cannot be logical when you have been triggered, when you're flooded with emotion. And I think everybody can relate to this, in perhaps an argument you've had with a significant other and you say things, and you do things that you later regret.

When we lose it the limbic system --the part of our brain that handles emotion -- literally drowns out the cortex --the part of our brain that handles logic. But Kahler says there is a good side to this. Say you're crossing the street and a semi comes out of nowhere at 90 miles an hour. You don't want to just stand there, analyzing the situation.

KAHLER: This is why the limbic system shuts off the thinking part and says listen, just move!

We can react to a fall in the market in the same way we react to a speeding truck -- by panicking.

Jonah Berger is a professor of marketing at Wharton. And he says when these animal instincts kick in, we also start acting like sheep.

JONAH BERGER: If you look at herds that get scared. One thing gets scared, and it starts to move in a particular direction, and the rest of the herd goes and follows that thing.

Because they think the first sheep to run away has some piece of information that they don't. But the herd instinct is good in a lot of ways.

BERGER: It saves packs of antelopes from lions, and it saves people from situations that might not be good from them. But in other cases it leads them to zig when they should zag, because the first person who went ahead didn't know any better then the rest of the people.

So it's not always safe to follow the pack. Berger also says a lot of the information we share can be very selective. We tend to pass only along the most extreme, more interesting stories.

BERGER: There's that old news adage, right: if it bleeds it leads.

Because of that, it's the extreme stories that tend to get around more. And that, Berger says, can lead to outcomes that are unrealistic. Like the overinflated housing market.

BERGER: Part of the reason we had a bubble in the first place is because everyone was sharing stories about the friend they happened to know who, in a year, doubled the price of their home and made a huge profit and sold and got out.

So to make sure I'm not guilty of passing along extreme stories I wanted to find out how many people really did panic when the recession hit. I asked Brian Reid. He's chief economist at the Investment Company Institute.

BRIAN REID:: Most investors really sat tight during the stock market decline.

HERSHIPS:: So they did nothing?

REID:: They did nothing.

Reid says most Americans who own stock own it through mutual funds. And in the fall of 2008, during that very dramatic market drop, about 13 percent of investors closed at least one fund. Normally that number would be closer to 4 percent. But keep this in mind:

REID: We don't know where they took the money. Did they turn around after they sold one stock fund and invest in another stock fund?

He says we don't know. It's almost impossible to track.

Back in Maryland, Allison Lenthall is one of the sellers who hasn't reinvested yet.

HERSHIPS:: Do you regret your decision now to sell?

LENTHALL: Yes, I do regret my decision. I do. So now I am going to reinvest my money into smart choices, mutual funds, and I'm going to buy and hold.

HERSHIPS: You're going to follow the rule buy and hold this time.

LENTHALL: This time. I'm going to get a tattoo. It's going to say buy and hold.

Lenthall considers this a learning experience. If she'd held on to her funds instead of selling she'd have $6,500 to show for it. It's an expensive lesson, but at least it's one she'll always remember.

I'm Sally Herships for Marketplace Money.

About the author

Sally Herships is a regular contributor to Marketplace.
Charlie Bruns's picture
Charlie Bruns - May 22, 2010

I listened to the follow-up comments on this interview on the air by Tess a couple of weeks after it aired. Two very critical responses to the original interview were presented. Tess simply laughed them off. How disappointing. This topic is serious and very personal to the people commenting. The fact of the matter is that the stock market and investing in general has evolved without question into plain and simple gambling with one exception being insider trading. Now that people have instant access to their accounts and can buy and sell on impulse, there is no logic to the science. The only reason that I listen to Marketplace Money or any other business programs is for entertainment. The people presenting these programs have to produce something each week/day. I just hope to occasionally capture some unique pearl of information. This article was not one of them.

William Creed's picture
William Creed - May 11, 2010

Let's face it, the Stock Market is a casino and the only consistent winners are the brokerage houses that collect transaction fees whether the Market goes up or down. Frankly, I am tired of pundits who pretend to understand what makes various stocks move and have wonderful after-the-fact explanations as to what is going on. While the market surged, it was easy to pick winners. But where were the experts who predicted the worst recession in history? Did they learn anything or are they still preaching the same stuff that got us all in trouble the last time.

I think the market and economic forecasters need to be a bit more humble in acknowledging what they truly know and what they are "speculating" about.

Ben Yang's picture
Ben Yang - May 5, 2010

I agree that all the shouting during the low point of this recent recession made it really compelling to sell. I wonder, however, if there was ever a time when it did make sense. Would anyone at Marketplace be able to answer the following question:

If we suppose index funds of various countries were available throughout history, and we bought into the funds during the peak preceding every major crisis, was there EVER a crisis where we would not have recovered within 10 years? For example, if I bought an US index fund at the peak before the Great Depression, or a Japanese index fund before the Asian financial crisis, would I have recovered in ten or even fifteen years?

A different twist: What if one bought in during the peak and continued to dollar-cost-average through the crisis in question? Would it still be a loss after 15 years?

If the answer is that we would always recover, it makes a strong case to never sell during a crisis given a long time horizon.

I don't know how to research this question...would any of Marketplace staff be able to take a stab at it? Thank you!

Elmer Rich's picture
Elmer Rich - May 4, 2010

Of course, there is no single approach for all investors.

More the point of the article is how, largely unconsciously, impulsively and immediate-focused and reactively, we ALL can make investment decisions that have bad long-term consequences.

The fact is our brains are immediate-gratification and feelings/impulsed controlled much more than we would like and are even aware of.

What "feels" - very strongly - like the "right" thing to do NOW...may not be and, in fact, is often harmful.

Neuroscience helps us to get a perspective on that kind of behavior and factors, and advisors and sources of financial information - like this site - do as well. Not perfectly, but what is?

We talk and report on more of this on one of our blogs Brain for Business at http://bizbrain.tumbler.com

susan adler's picture
susan adler - May 3, 2010

The other 2 comments were very mild. This show infuriated me! How dare you scold people for selling! What about all the other advice we've gotten - I'm waiting to retire on the "conservatively estimated" 8% that we should get investing in stocks and bonds. How do you know that the current upswing isn't herd mentality? The crime is that Americans, unlike Europeans, are forced to take any risk at all for retirement. In other countries, government retirement payments are much higher. Isn't it possible that retirees and near-retirees are flocking back to stocks because the fed is keeping interest rates at 0% to prop up housing and the stock market? Your show said nothing about fundamentals. Should we have held because stocks were undervalued? Should we hold now because they're still undervalued? I only wish we had gotten out sooner.

Charlie Bruns's picture
Charlie Bruns - May 1, 2010

Mr. Creed's comments sum up the article well. If we return to March of 2009, we were being told from all directions that this was the worst financial situation since the 1930s. It was obvious that none of the experts could agree on anything. One could hear whatever one wanted to hear if he listened to enough interviews each day. I do not think that is was unreasonable for people to finally sell while they still had something left. It is so easy in hindsight to say "would have" and "should have". In fact, it is insulting. And let's remember that our current market situation may only be a "feel good" market. I do not see any basis for the current rising market other than the fact that people do not want to be left behind. Its possible that this story might have been written too soon. The final verdict may still be out.

William Creed's picture
William Creed - May 1, 2010

This was a very poorly done story. It assumes that anyone who bailed out of the market after it started to tank in the fall of 2008 was foolish or irrational. This analysis is all done with the benfit of hindsight now that the market has recovered somewhat. At the end of 2008 and into early 2009 no one knew if the market would recover or collapse completely. So bailing out of the market at that time was not irrational except in hindsight.

The notion that one should never sell because the market will always recover is not true. Market analysts never advise investors to sell, even at the top of the market. Why is that?

This piece was very misleading and just encourages amateur investors to stay in the market no matter what. That is irrational!