There's no reason to feel you have to master every market.

Financial planning is more complicated than it seems. Marc Lowlicht of Further Lane Asset Management handles the affairs of high net worth clients and spends a lot more time handling tax, estate and probate issues than he does choosing investment managers. The portfolio, he reminds us, is just one part of the picture.

So how complicated does the portfolio need to be? One consequence of the recent democratization of the markets is that virtually all investments are open to all people. Mutual funds and exchange-traded funds now mimic returns from private equity and hedge fund partnerships that are forbidden to retail investors. Stock options are now available through retail brokerages like TD Ameritrade and Charles Schwab. Foreign exchange markets are available through retail Internet platforms and through ETFs. Same with commodities futures.

The idea here isn't to say that you should never do these things. It's just that for most people a core portfolio of stocks, bonds and cash will suffice to generate good returns for retirement, college planning or to build an estate. The fancy stuff can work; it's just not required.

Nobody can master everything and, on Wall Street, few even try. Sure there are go-anywhere savants like Robert Bruce of the Bruce Fund (BRUFX) who seem as comfortable in currencies and debt instruments as they are stocks, but most people on Wall Street tend to specialize in one asset class--the currency analyst, macro-economist and stock analyst might share interests, but they don't usually share jobs. There are myriad skills to master in any one asset class.

The good news is that the typical investor really doesn't need to master them all. There's nothing wrong