Why Stocks Are the Best Investments In Existence

Today, one of my twitter followers who I’ve had an increasingly friendly rapport with walked me through a preliminary briefing on the investment landscape around the commodity, uranium. It was very enlightening, and I’m going to do a bit more reading into it once I get home today, and then get back with her to continue the education.

One thing our conversations really underlined for me, though, is how superior stocks (or equity investments) are to all other form of investment assets. I don’t mean that necessarily from a financial point of view (although equity returns are often the highest of any other asset class) but more from a philosophical stand point.

When you invest in other assets, most of the time, you’re investing in objects. They’re things that sit there, and swing up and down in value, whether we’re talking commodities, currencies, or even bonds and real estate. The latter two are slightly better since they have some intrinsic value due to their income producing nature, but by and large, they can’t act or think or change their fundamental nature. They’re dependent on the forces of demand and supply, and your returns as an investor depends on your accuracy in forecasting the impact of demand and supply on them. Which is fun, but in a sense, static. Nigeria’s story with oil is a prime example, one day we’re the cock of the walk, then shale comes around, Saudi Arabia ramps up the production, demand slumps and suddenly, we’re the feather duster.

Equity on the other hand is a legal right over the products of human enterprise. It’s literally a bet on human ingenuity. Apple became the move valuable company in the world, enriching its investors beyond measure, largely because of Steve Jobs. If it had just sat there, the company would have died. Instead it went from nearly bankrupt tech hasbeen, to the global behemoth it is. No commodity can do that. SpaceX, Tesla, Disney, Coca-Cola, JP Morgan, Canada Pacific Railroad, Facebook, most of these don’t have anything else propelling their value beyond human intelligence, drive and ingenuity. If you invest in a company, and the market for what it drives dies, management can switch businesses. Berkshire Hathaway was a textile manufacture, then an investment partnership, and now a conglomerate/private equity fund.

If you want, you can set up a corporation that buys a house. If the house produces enough income, you can buy another, and another, and another. That’s how businesses work. You can issue bonds, and pay them off, invest in other things, and reap their profits. All the other assets can’t do that. A bond will always be a bond. A dollar will always be a dollar. A gold bar is always a gold bar.

These things may increase in value or decline in value, but they remain what they are. Equity, at the end of the day, is as free as the human beings who own it. That is why it always ranks near the top whenever asset classes are compared.


  1. I like to agree with you but I also want to make a case for other asset classes. I feel stocks are the most vulnerable asset class because a scandal or anything negative can drastically reduce the value of your asset within as short as even a few hours. I don’t think any other type of assets; whether commodity or to a large extent currencies can lose value as sharply as stocks do. However, the fact that equity is generally very flexible and liquid makes it more enticing.


    1. No doubt there’s always a good and bad side to any asset, but historically, equity has both the best returns and the best flexibility. And while your point is true, historically, Enron and WorldCom where there is such a flagrant scandal that drives the value of your stock entirely to zero is very very rare.
      Commodities and currencies also experience swings like that way more often than equities, however, the other asset classes like real estate and bonds do have more stability than equity which makes them preferred for protection.

      For any economy though, having a liquid equity market is a good way to bring human creativity into the economy, and to me that difference is worth the extra risk because the difference it makes, and the wealth it creates both for shareholders and for society at large is astronomical compared to all the other assets.


What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s