Tracking finances: Money, risk, contributions

I periodically calculate my my total financial holdings to get a read on the market. While I use MS Money to track expenses, etc. I also keep a spreadsheet seperate for this periodic tracking. I typically will check in every 3-6 months on the balances in each account and then the % change from the previous period. I started this in November 2004. In today's review, I decided to plot out each period's % change since inception. I have in total 14 data points and I find the results very interesting. 

	% Change Period
1
2	9%
3	4%
4	54%
5	58%
6	14%
7	1%
8	20%
9	5%
10	3%
11	-5%
12	-10%
13	-12%
14	-3%

• My gains started sliding in period 6 which dates August-2006 (almost two years ago)
  
• Growth has consistenty decelerated since period 8 which was June-2007 (almost 18-months ago)
  
• Period 14, while still a 3% loss, shows that the declines slowed down; does this mean the worst is past?
  

Here is the key question: Should I have reacted to this data earlier (if I had been tracking it)? I think the answer is yes... sorta.  Here is why I did not in the past but will do so in the future:

I have always thought of debt as Hard Money and investments as Soft Money. Hard money (debt) has a fixed cost value regardless of the fluctuation of the investment value and represents a primary risk if capacity to pay is 0.  Soft money (investments) has a variable cost and investment value tied to each other and independently represents no secondary risk if the amount goes to $0. In other words, there are tangible consequences for Hard Money losses and intangible consequences for Soft Money losses. The real life challenge is that for one's primary residence, hard money and soft money are so  intertwined that losses in soft money could represent a primary threat danger.

Our investment approach has always been to balance investment and incremental principal mortgage payments to maximize growth opportunities. The thinking goes that paying your mortgage down is not as smart an investment as investing 'in the stock market' especially when you are young and taking more risks (ie need less liquidity in your investments). I never bought into that line entirely but for the most part, put into the market at a 3:1 ratio vs. paying down the principal of our house (ie. payments in addition to our monthly mortage bill). Our thought process has been, our income is the primary method of paying our mortgage and our investments are our backup method.

Recent events have caused me to re-evaluate that position and look at an approach that would be closer to a 1:1 or 1:1.5 contribution ratio (investing:mortgage principal). Why? Treating real estate as an investment requires liquidity, appreciation and smart debt management. Treating one's primary residence as an investment ups the ante given the need for shelter and the emotional connection between person and home.  

If we are required to achieve liquidity on our house in the short term, the house will likely decrease in value due to urgency to sell (eliminating potential appreciation and perhaps pushing us under-water). The only instance where we would be forced to achieve immediate liquidity with the house would represent a time when we were unable to pay the montly mortgage; for that to occur, we must both be out of work (1930's saw 25-30% unemployment) and our investments would have to be essentially worthless (1930's saw 85+% stock market decline). As a result, logically speaking, using soft money to back hard money for your primary residence is a foolish choice.

It is time to de-couple hard money and soft money in our investment approach. It starts today with a better system for contributions (1:1 instead of 3:1) and tracking the ratio between the two so that we can do a better job of rebalancing in the future.

10/24/08 UPDATE: The market tanked 500 points again today (so far). The difference between this week and last week is that where as 100% of my mortgage was backed by soft money before, now only 60% of the mortgage is backed by soft money and 40% is backed by hard money. The worst case scenario for any family is to lose its home; this could happen through financial catastrophe, natural disaster or war. Much is out of my control, but evenn so, my job is to ensure that it does not happen via a failure to plan. I feel better this week than last week.