What Teenagers Really Learn From Stock-Market Games
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,599,192 (-0.51%)       Melbourne $986,501 (-0.24%)       Brisbane $938,846 (+0.04%)       Adelaide $864,470 (+0.79%)       Perth $822,991 (-0.13%)       Hobart $755,620 (-0.26%)       Darwin $665,693 (-0.13%)       Canberra $994,740 (+0.67%)       National $1,027,820 (-0.13%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $746,448 (+0.19%)       Melbourne $495,247 (+0.53%)       Brisbane $534,081 (+1.16%)       Adelaide $409,697 (-2.19%)       Perth $437,258 (+0.97%)       Hobart $531,961 (+0.68%)       Darwin $367,399 (0%)       Canberra $499,766 (0%)       National $525,746 (+0.31%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,586 (+169)       Melbourne 15,093 (+456)       Brisbane 7,795 (+246)       Adelaide 2,488 (+77)       Perth 6,274 (+65)       Hobart 1,315 (+13)       Darwin 255 (+4)       Canberra 1,037 (+17)       National 44,843 (+1,047)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 8,675 (+47)       Melbourne 7,961 (+171)       Brisbane 1,636 (+24)       Adelaide 462 (+20)       Perth 1,749 (+2)       Hobart 206 (+4)       Darwin 384 (+2)       Canberra 914 (+19)       National 21,987 (+289)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $770 (-$10)       Melbourne $590 (-$5)       Brisbane $620 ($0)       Adelaide $595 (-$5)       Perth $650 ($0)       Hobart $550 ($0)       Darwin $700 ($0)       Canberra $700 ($0)       National $654 (-$3)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $730 (+$10)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $620 ($0)       Adelaide $470 ($0)       Perth $600 ($0)       Hobart $460 (-$10)       Darwin $550 ($0)       Canberra $560 (-$5)       National $583 (+$1)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,253 (-65)       Melbourne 5,429 (+1)       Brisbane 3,933 (-4)       Adelaide 1,178 (+17)       Perth 1,685 ($0)       Hobart 393 (+25)       Darwin 144 (+6)       Canberra 575 (-22)       National 18,590 (-42)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 6,894 (-176)       Melbourne 4,572 (-79)       Brisbane 1,991 (+1)       Adelaide 377 (+6)       Perth 590 (+3)       Hobart 152 (+6)       Darwin 266 (+10)       Canberra 525 (+8)       National 15,367 (-221)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.50% (↓)       Melbourne 3.11% (↓)       Brisbane 3.43% (↓)       Adelaide 3.58% (↓)     Perth 4.11% (↑)      Hobart 3.78% (↑)      Darwin 5.47% (↑)        Canberra 3.66% (↓)       National 3.31% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND       Sydney 5.09% (↑)        Melbourne 6.09% (↓)       Brisbane 6.04% (↓)     Adelaide 5.97% (↑)        Perth 7.14% (↓)       Hobart 4.50% (↓)       Darwin 7.78% (↓)       Canberra 5.83% (↓)       National 5.76% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.7% (↑)      Melbourne 0.8% (↑)      Brisbane 0.4% (↑)      Adelaide 0.4% (↑)      Perth 1.2% (↑)      Hobart 0.6% (↑)      Darwin 1.1% (↑)      Canberra 0.7% (↑)      National 0.7% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.9% (↑)      Melbourne 1.4% (↑)      Brisbane 0.7% (↑)      Adelaide 0.3% (↑)      Perth 0.4% (↑)      Hobart 1.5% (↑)      Darwin 0.8% (↑)      Canberra 1.3% (↑)        National 0.9% (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND         Sydney 28.7 (↓)       Melbourne 30.7 (↓)       Brisbane 31.0 (↓)       Adelaide 25.4 (↓)       Perth 34.0 (↓)       Hobart 34.8 (↓)       Darwin 35.1 (↓)       Canberra 28.5 (↓)       National 31.0 (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 25.8 (↓)       Melbourne 30.2 (↓)       Brisbane 27.6 (↓)       Adelaide 21.8 (↓)       Perth 37.8 (↓)       Hobart 25.2 (↓)       Darwin 24.8 (↓)       Canberra 41.1 (↓)       National 29.3 (↓)           
Share Button

What Teenagers Really Learn From Stock-Market Games

Successful investors diversify broadly, avoid unnecessary risk and rarely trade. So why are kids getting rewarded for doing the opposite?

By JASON ZWEIG
Mon, Mar 28, 2022 10:43amGrey Clock 3 min

Every year, more than a million high-school students across the U.S. learn about investing through stock-picking games. If you have teenagers, they may be playing this spring.

Proponents say these games are exciting and inspire an interest in investing.

We could make drivers’ education exciting, too, by teaching kids to run red lights and crash into brick walls. I suppose you could even argue that might make the survivors better drivers.

Of course, that isn’t how we teach teenagers to drive. Yet when it comes to investing and “financial literacy,” millions of teenagers learn what it’s like to take wild risks, using play money—often amplified with more fantasy money that they borrow—to fire off a barrage of fast trades in turbulent assets.

In the long run, investors who diversify broadly, avoid unnecessary risk and rarely trade are almost certain to do well. In these stock-market competitions, teenagers who behave like that are almost certain to lose.

Emma Freeman, a senior at Lewisburg Area High School in Lewisburg, Pa., won that state’s championship when she was in a ninth-grade economics class taught by Michael Creeger. She turned $100,000 in play money into more than $550,000 in 10 weeks. “I played it as if I was day trading,” she says.

Emma would look up which stocks had just risen the most, then sell them short so she could profit from a decline. “Anything that had jumped up like crazy, when it looked like just hype, we short-sold the crap out of it,” she says.

Emma traded up to 40 times a day. “My friends told me I looked like a madwoman,” she recalls. “I would be staring at the screen and making crazy faces and stuff because it was so intense.”

Last spring, another of Mr. Creeger’s ninth-grade economics students, Zachery Engle, won the state championship. He traded 117 times in 10 weeks.

Zach used about $200,000 in margin borrowing to drive his pretend portfolio up to $583,070. “It’s nice that they let you do that,” he says. “It makes it easier to make money.”

Or lose money—which is why Warren Buffett repeatedly warns investors not to use leverage.

Mark Brookshire, founder and chief executive of Stock-Trak Inc. of Montreal, which provides the stock simulation that Emma and Zach played, says more than 500,000 students participate in grades K-12. Most play only as part of a class, not in a wider competition.

Teachers can limit the number of trades, restrict margin or prohibit short selling. Outside of state-run contests, says Mr. Brookshire, only 14% of teachers permit margin—so most portfolios aren’t leveraged. Over the typical 10-week course, the average student makes 22 trades.

“Anybody who can turn $100,000 into $200,000 in 10 weeks with what they learned in their high-school class is just lucky,” says Mr. Brookshire. “The next 10 weeks they probably won’t be so lucky. That will be the lesson, that the more you do it, the more likely you’re going to lose. I want them to lose my virtual money before they lose their own real money.”

Ryan Monoski, a former business teacher at Montgomery High School in Montgomery, Pa., has come to doubt that lesson.

In 2016 and 2017, his teams won the national championship in the Capitol Hill Challenge, a stock-picking competition run by the Sifma Foundation, a nonprofit supported by the brokerage industry. His teams also won Pennsylvania’s state championship at least a dozen times.

All these contests “motivate students to take extreme risks that will bring extreme rewards and extreme losses, and that’s not the right way to invest,” says Mr. Monoski, who now runs a stock-picking channel on YouTube.

Like teams from other schools, Mr. Monoski’s students often borrowed money to sell short. They used 50% margin to buy explosively volatile triple-leveraged exchange-traded funds, magnifying daily market moves 4.5-fold.

The Capitol Hill Challenge no longer allows any of that.

However, sessions of the Sifma Foundation’s Stock Market Game, run in all 50 states and played by 600,000 children annually, may permit selling short and borrowing on margin. Teams often own as few as five stocks at a time, not nearly enough diversification by prudent investing standards.

“It’s important to recognize that the simulation plays a small part,” says Melanie Mortimer, president of the Sifma Foundation. “The real focus is the curriculum, which is all about the fundamentals of investing and the capital markets.”

Richard Daly, the foundation’s chairman, says the organization shares concerns that the game might teach children to take too much risk. But, he says, “we don’t want to lose the greater good of all the kids we’re touching that otherwise wouldn’t be exposed” to the stock market at all.

My drivers’ ed teacher taught me to put safety first, and yours probably did, too. That’s what children learning how to invest should be rewarded for. They shouldn’t be proclaimed “winners” for taking huge risks that could encourage a lifetime of bad behaviour.

Reprinted by permission of The Wall Street Journal, Copyright 2021 Dow Jones & Company. Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. Original date of publication: March 25, 2022.



MOST POPULAR

Consumers are going to gravitate toward applications powered by the buzzy new technology, analyst Michael Wolf predicts

Chris Dixon, a partner who led the charge, says he has a ‘very long-term horizon’

Related Stories
Money
The Great Wealth Transfer: How rich millennials will invest the billions coming their way
By Bronwyn Allen 01/03/2024
Money
Japan Is Back. Is Inflation the Reason?
By GREG IP 01/03/2024
Money
Welcome to the Era of BadGPTs
By BELLE LIN 29/02/2024
The Great Wealth Transfer: How rich millennials will invest the billions coming their way

The younger generation will bring a different mindset to how and where their newfound wealth is invested

By Bronwyn Allen
Fri, Mar 1, 2024 2 min

There is an enormous global wealth transfer in its beginning stages, whereby one of the largest generations in history – the baby boomers – will pass on their wealth to their millennial children. Knight Frank’s global research report, The Wealth Report 2024, estimates the wealth transfer set to take place over the next two decades in the United States alone will amount to US$90 trillion.

But it’s not just the size of the wealth transfer that is significant. It will also deliver billions of dollars in private capital into the hands of investors with a very different mindset.

Seismic change

Wealth managers say the young and rich have a higher social and environmental consciousness than older generations. After growing up in a world where economic inequality is rife and climate change has caused massive environmental damage, they are seeing their inherited wealth as a means of doing good.

Ben Whattam, co-founder of the Modern Affluence Exchange, describes it as a “seismic change”.

“Since World War II, Western economies have been driven by an overt focus on economic prosperity,” he says. “This has come at the expense of environmental prosperity and has arguably imposed social costs. The next generation is poised to inherit huge sums, and all the research we have commissioned confirms that they value societal and environmental wellbeing alongside economic gain and are unlikely to continue the relentless pursuit of growth at all costs.”

Investing with purpose

Mr Whattam said 66% of millennials wanted to invest with a purpose compared to 49% of Gen Xers. “Climate change is the number one concern for Gen Z and whether they’re rich or just affluent, they see it as their generational responsibility to fix what has been broken by their elders.”

Mike Pickett, director of Cazenove Capital, said millennial investors were less inclined to let a wealth manager make all the decisions.

“Overall, … there is a sense of the next generation wanting to be involved and engaged in the process of how their wealth is managed – for a firm to invest their money with them instead of for them,” he said.

Mr Pickett said another significant difference between millennials and older clients was their view on residential property investment. While property has generated immense wealth for baby boomers, particularly in Australia, younger investors did not necessarily see it as the best path.

“In particular, the low interest rate environment and impressive growth in house prices of the past 15 years is unlikely to be repeated in the next 15,” he said. “I also think there is some evidence that Gen Z may be happier to rent property or lease assets such as cars, and to adopt subscription-led lifestyles.”

Impact investing is a rising trend around the world, with more young entrepreneurs and activist investors proactively campaigning for change in the older companies they are invested in. Millennials are taking note of Gen X examples of entrepreneurs trying to force change. In 2022,  Australian billionaire tech mogul and major AGL shareholder, Mike Cannon-Brookes tried to buy the company so he could shut down its coal operations and turn it into a renewable energy giant. He described his takeover bid as “the world’s biggest decarbonisation project”.

MOST POPULAR

Consumers are going to gravitate toward applications powered by the buzzy new technology, analyst Michael Wolf predicts

Chris Dixon, a partner who led the charge, says he has a ‘very long-term horizon’

Related Stories
Property
Meet the neighbours before you buy: The real estate portal taking buyers behind the scenes
By KANEBRIDGE NEWS 19/02/2024
Money
The Embarrassment of Having to Explain Your ‘Monster’ Diamond Ring
By ALINA DIZIK 11/12/2023
Lifestyle
The 1% Club: What It Takes To Be Rich In The Lucky Country
By Nina Hendy 01/11/2023
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop