This is the fourth and final part of the SIP Case Study which made use of HDFC Top 200 as the chosen fund. In previous post, I had evaluated the impact of considering the interest accrued on Market Crash Fund. You can read that analysis here.
In this post, I am evaluating the impact of changing the trigger point to one which is dependent on P/E Ratio of the index rather than NAV of the mutual fund (HDFC Top 200 in this case).
So after much deliberations and reader feedbacks, I came up with the following scenario to evaluate:
Scenario 1:
Investment of Rs 10,000 will be split between MF SIP & Recurring Deposits on basis of following conditions:
- If index PE between 17 and 22, SIP=Rs 5000 and RD=Rs 5000
- If index PE>22, SIP=Rs 0 (i.e. SIP stops) and RD=Rs 10,000
- If index 15<PE<17, SIP=Rs10,000 (i.e. SIP doubles) and RD=Rs 0
- If index PE<15, SIP=Rs 10,000 and RD=Rs 0; and Market Crash Fund (MCF) is utilized as follows – As soon as PE goes below 15, accumulated MCF is split into 3 parts. First part is deployed immediately and remaining two over the next two months.
Simple speaking, MCF Trigger point will be at 15PE. At this point, money accumulated will be split into 3 parts and deployed over next 3 month. SIP investments will stop if PE>22. SIP investments will double if PE<17.
The graph below shows the amount invested in SIP and amount added to MCF for all months starting 1996. I have also added the index PE for the day to show the correlation between the PE and amounts going into SIP and MF (as explained in scenario above).
 |
| Correlation between Index PE & SIP+RD Amount (monthly basis) |
As usual, the above ‘complex’ scenario was compared with a simpler one below:
Scenario 2
Investing Rs 10,000 every month, without any regard for markets movements, PE levels or for that matter, anything.
Note – Since the chosen fund – HDFC Top 200 started in 1996, I required index PE data starting from 1996. But problem I faced was that index PE data is available starting only from 1999. Hence, from 1996-1999, I chose SIP+RD (Rs 5000 each) irrespective of index or PE levels.
Final Results of Analysis
In first scenario, the total money outgo (put in SIP, used from Market Crash Fund and money still lying in MCF) is Rs 23.1 Lacs. Of this, Rs 12.8 lac is invested as SIP, whereas around Rs 5.5 Lacs was invested in parts, at regular intervals, as and when a trigger points were reached. The money currently available in MCF is around Rs 4.8 lacs, where interest has been considered @ 8% per annum and has been calculated and added to MCF after completion of 12 months. Wherever trigger point is reached in less than 12 months, interest has been ignored for that 12 month period.
There is no change in second scenario and the entire Rs 21.8 lac is invested as SIP of Rs 10,000 every month.
I have chosen the SIP investment (& PE) dates as the first trading day of the month (whether 1st, 2nd, 3rdor 4th…)
So results are as follows:
This time, the pure MF SIP (Scenario 2) delivers Rs 2.46 crores. And a combination of SIP+RD (Scenario 2) delivered Rs 2.47 Crores. If we were to include the money currently available in MCF, it would be Rs 2.52 Crores.
 |
| Scenario 1 & 2 Comparison |
So…let see what it means…
It might seem that SIP+MF combination has beaten the pure SIP this time. But in reality, it’s not true. Why?
I have not considered the penal charges & tax implications of liquidating the MCF (via RDs). Though it might not be significant, it still brings down the returns over a period of almost two decades. Another thing to note here is that I have considered interest on RD as 8% calculated yearly. This itself can fluctuate depending on prevalent interest rate scenarios during the last 20 years.
But most importantly, this outperformance of Rs 1 lac (or Rs 6 lac if you consider the accumulated MCF), requires you to monitor PE ratio all through these 20 years and be ready to calculate how much to invest (if PE breaches 15 on lower side or 22 on upper side) every month. Also the charges of starting / stopping RD, and for that matter SIP is also something which needs to be taken into account.
By the way, if you are interested in having a look at the exact numbers, click on the image below:
 |
| Full Analysis |
Final Comments
So this analysis has once again proved (like previous parts 1, 2and 3) that, for average investors, it is more than enough to continue investing as much as possible every month in a good diversified mutual fund. They should not pay much attention to ups and downs of markets and whether markets are overvalued or undervalued. No need to put your money regularly in a Market Crash Fund (MCF) solely for purpose of investing in MF when markets are down.
 |
| PE Ratio of Index & Amount Accumulated in Market Crash Fund |
But if you are lucky to have some surplus funds when markets are trading at low valuations (around PE15), then make it a point to invest. Don’t be afraid. People around you would try to convince you not to invest. They will try to tell you that markets will go down further. Please don’t listen to them. Even if it goes down (even upto PE12), remember that it will soon revert back to mean (17-18) and then you will be happy that you invested during the downtimes.
What Will I Do?
Personally, I do maintain a Market Crash Fund (MCF) which is funded by interests, dividends and any surplus income which I generate. And I use this fund for buying direct stocks (as and when I feel that stocks I like, are trading at low valuations). I generally don’t use this MCF for MF investments.
So what will I do going forward?
The above analysis clearly shows that there is not much point in taking such an approach. And that is because the additional returns generated by this approach do not justify the efforts put in last two decades. But when not buying individual stocks, I might still use my personal MCF to buy MFs in lumpsum. But I will do it only when I am not absolutely sure of which stocks to buy… but I am pretty sure that markets are grossly undervalued and should be invested in.