Back in lesson 3 of this series, we saw how different assets can perform differently at different times.
But what are these assets? And why should they go their own way?
An asset is something you can own, buy, and sell. It’s the opposite of a liability.
- A house that you own is an asset.
- Your mortgage is a liability.
One person’s asset can be another person’s liability.
Your mortgage is a valuable asset for your bank. You’re contractually obliged to pay it back, plus interest.
The main asset classes
The natural world is divided into broad classes like mammals, fish, and fungi – and mammals are then divided into cats, monkeys, and more.
The world of investing works much the same way. Assets fall into broad groups, with subdivisions within each one.
In investing, the big groups are called asset classes.
The main ones are:
- Bonds
- Government bonds (UK Gilts or US Treasuries)
- Corporate bonds
- Shares – Also known as equities
- Property
- Commercial property
- Residential property (your house or a buy-to-let investment)
- Commodities – especially gold, but also stuff like timber, wheat, and oil
- Alternative assets
- Wine
- Paintings
- Stamps
Different asset classes perform differently for two main reasons:
- Economic conditions – Inflation, interest rates, and economic growth affect different asset classes differently, and at different times.
- Emotion – Investors (asset buyers) are by turns fearful and greedy.
More on that below.
Asset classes in (un) reality
Let’s consider a fictitious company: Brixton Unlimited Nappy Services (Stock market symbol: BUNS).
BUNS was founded in 2000 to sell nappies to mums across London.
To raise the money to get started, BUNS floated on the stock market by issuing 100,000 shares at £10 each, raising £1,000,000. These shares can now be freely traded between investors, so the price changes. Each share is a part ownership in BUNS, entitling the owners to a certain share of the company’s fortunes.
Note that only the initial flotation actually invested money into the company.
If you buy ten shares in BUNS from me, a fellow private investor, then no money goes back to BUNS. It’s similar to if you buy a 1930s semi-detached house or a Van Gogh painting – no money goes back to the builder or to the artist from these second-hand purchases.
Only shares issued directly by the company bring money back to its own coffers.
After a while BUNS wants to expand. It could issue more shares to do so – raising more money by dividing itself up to increase the shares in issue to say 200,000 – but that would dilute existing shareholders and reduce the price of existing shares.
Many BUNS directors are also BUNS shareholders, and they don’t like the sound of that!
Instead it issues 100,000 bonds at £1 each. These bonds promise to pay the owner 10% interest every year for 10 years, at which time they will be redeemed by the company (cancelled) and anyone owning the bonds will get £1 back.
The bond issue raises £100,000. The company spends £60,000 of it buying and fitting out a new nappy shop in Chiswick – an investment in commercial property. It keeps the other £40,000 as cash in the bank for future investment. The annual interest due to the bondholders is paid from the company’s earnings.
After a while, the managers get fed up with the price of their nappies going up due to rising raw material costs. They spend £30,000 to buy an exchange-traded fund (ETF) tracking commodities like cotton. They hope that if cotton prices go up, reducing profit margins, this will be partly offset by the ETF price rising.
Business goes well, and soon BUNS is making millions. It can easily pay the interest on its bonds and also pay shareholders an increasing dividend.
Eventually success goes to the directors’ heads, and they decide they deserve to work in classier surroundings. They’re also a bit bored of the boring nappy business. They buy several trendy paintings by the graffiti artist Banksy for the office.
They tell shareholders that the paintings are an investment in alternative assets!
Asset classes and risks and rewards
Different asset classes have their own risk versus reward traits.
We’ve already seen, for example, how cash is the safest asset class. The riskiest mainstream asset class is shares, but the rewards can be higher, too.
As we saw in lesson three, however, a lot depends on when you buy your assets.
Asset classes or sub-classes can become overvalued as a whole – think Spanish property in 2008 or meme stocks in 2021 – as well as undervalued.
But the risk/reward tends to follow this fun graph:
Risk and potential reward rises towards the top right of the graph.
Asset classes and diversification
Note the difference between an asset class, and an asset within that class:
- Tesco and Barclays shares are both assets from within the equities asset class.
- Cash you keep in a Barclays bank account is from an entirely different asset class – cash.
Some investors think they are well-diversified because they have a portfolio of 20 different companies.
But all those holdings are from the same class: shares!
- Vertical diversification – Splits money between several different asset classes.
- Horizontal diversification – Hold different assets within an asset class.
To achieve a well-diversified portfolio, an investor first divides her money between different asset classes, and then further spreads it around by buying different assets with each sub-division.
For example, allocating 20% of your money to equities gives you that exposure to the asset class of shares 1.
If you put that 20% equity allocation into a UK index-tracking fund, then it’s further spread across the many companies that make up the UK index. Choose a global tracker fund and your investment is spread even more widely.
- Vertical diversification helps protect you from stuff like a stock market crash or a property slump – or from missing gains because all your money is in cash.
- Horizontal diversification protects you from local troubles, such as a company making a loss, or an individual bond issuer defaulting on the income it owes you.
The philosopher Francis Bacon had all this figured out 400 years ago, writing:
Money is like muck. No good unless spread.
By muck he means animal manure. Great if spread about to fertilize future crops. A potentially stinking liability if left in a pile in one corner!
Why do the asset classes move differently?
I’ve explained how diversification across different assets helps spread your risk.
Put simply: when one asset is zigging there’s a chance another is zagging.
But why is this the case? They’re all investments, after all. So why should bonds ever go up, say, when shares go down?
Well, the first thing to say is they might not. Diversification is not a panacea.
Investors talk about the correlation between different asset classes, which is a way of describing how they tend to move versus one another. And almost all assets are somewhat correlated with the others. There’s no precise formula you can use to create perfectly offsetting combinations of assets in your portfolio.
Okay, so with that said, why aren’t they all perfectly correlated?
Essentially it’s because different asset classes respond differently to changes in the economy – and also to shifts in fear and greed among the investing masses.
Your pain is my gain
For example, imagine that inflation suddenly jumps.
Cash in the bank becomes less attractive because rising prices erode its purchasing power.
Nominal bonds may also suffer, especially if interest rates rise to combat inflation.
However companies might eventually pass the higher costs onto customers, and so their profits can recover. Property rents may increase, helping to support valuations.
Over the long run, these asset classes have generally beaten inflation.
Commodity prices often rise during inflationary periods, too. That’s because they are the raw materials whose prices are increasing in the first place.
Again, none of these reactions is guaranteed. And they certainly don’t run to the same timetable.
Sometimes shares and property rise together. Bonds can go down even in a stock market crash. And one asset class can have a great year while another struggles.
This imperfect relationship is exactly why investors diversify. Rather than trying to predict which asset class will be next year’s winner, you follow Francis Bacon’s advice and spread your muck around!
Asset allocation and you
Owning a diversified portfolio means you’ll never do as well in a particular year as you would if you only owned the best-performing asset.
But you will also avoid having all your money in the worst. And sometimes – such as when stock markets crash – you’ll be very grateful for that.
Over long periods, a diversified portfolio will very likely deliver a smoother journey than betting it all on a single asset.
So should you own a bit of everything, then?
Well, the long answer is a bit beyond the scope of this investing lesson.
But the short answer is: not really.
Most private investors build their portfolios from just one to three asset classes.
A handful of appropriate funds – with a well-diversified equity fund at the heart of the portfolio, typically married with high-quality bonds – has long been seen as the gold standard for set-and-forget investing for the masses.
This sort of diversification – the so-called 60/40 portfolio – is core to very popular fund-of-funds like Vanguard’s LifeStrategy offerings.
Just tweak your equity exposure to match your risk tolerance and then get back to Netflix.
Beyond the beginner stage
There was a time when the 60/40 was central to Monevator thinking, too.
However our take has evolved, and we now have doubts that standard government bonds alone will always provide sufficient diversification:
- Why a diversified portfolio needs more than bonds
- The 60/40 portfolio’s glaring weakness
- How to improve the 60/40 portfolio
- The minimal viable alternative to the 60/40 [Members]
With all that said (and read!) if you’re a beginner, I’d still suggest getting started with a very simple asset allocation.
Leave the complications for a few years down the line when you’ve amassed some capital to think about preserving. Otherwise you risk being overwhelmed and never starting.
Long-term investing success usually depends more on regularly saving, keeping costs low, and maintaining an appropriate balance between shares and safer assets than on owning every asset class that you can muster some enthusiasm for.
Key takeaways
- There are only six main asset classes that you really need to know about: Cash, shares, bonds, property, commodities, alternative assets.
- Different experts classify assets slightly differently, but these six broad groups cover almost everything most investors encounter. (If in doubt – say, Bitcoin – I’d usually call it an alternative asset.)
- Within each asset class are many different specific assets.
- Good diversification is spread between asset classes, as well as assets.
This is one of an occasional series on investing for beginners. You can subscribe to get our articles emailed to you and you’ll never miss a lesson! Why not tell a friend to help them get started?
- Remember: Equities is just a fancier word for shares.[↩]






Since you are handing out a free education, I’ll give you a free teaching tip. Never use the same number for two different items in an illustration. Thus “The bond issue raises £100,000. The company spends £60,000 of it on a new nappy shop in Chiswick – an investment in commercial property. It keeps the other £40,000 as cash in the bank for future investment …. They use the £40,000 to buy a special kind of share …” See: there is now no chance of the novice confusing one £50k with the other £50k, because instead we have a £60k and a £40k. Remember the whole point of being a novice is that you are struggling to understand new stuff: the teacher should supply silent help.
Keep up the good work; it’s much appreciated.
Is it just me .. or shouldn’t vertical and horizontal be the other way round? (I think of asset types as silos, moving between them horizontally and digging down into them vertically)
Only commenting to clarify, keep up the good work!
Is it worth pointing out for beginners that the term equity can be used for things other than shares?
Thus if one owns a house with a mortgage on it the value of the house minus the value of the outstanding mortgage is considered to be the equity that one has in the house.
Hence if you take out a large mortgage on a house and the value of the property falls below that of the mortgage one is said to be in negative equity.
@dearieme — Point taken, I’ve changed the numbers above to follow your advice. Cheers!
@PC — Well, it *is* you in that I have used the correct terms from finance above. So for any novices reading who are similarly confused, fear not, the terms I’ve used above are the right ones. 🙂
That said, I do see what you’re saying. I think of silos, too. I think the terms come from “verticals” in other areas of business, so if (say) Virgin decides to get into the smartphone business, that would be a new “vertical” whereas if it added helicopter flights to its Virgin Atlantic Airlines (assuming it still owns them – I forget!) then that’s diversification within its “air transport” vertical.
@Ignorant — Yes, I suppose that could be a confusing word for newcomers. Very hard to know where to draw the line with these things — it’s just one post, but any point in it could be expanded to several chapters of a book. I’ll leave your comment in for anyone confused however.
@All — I have deleted a couple of comments. As I say in the post, I’m not interested confusing beginners with left-field theories about what is or isn’t an asset class, for instance. That can be left for the Masters Classes available elsewhere. 😉
A most excellent piece of work!
However, this bit is questionable: “After a while BUNS wants to expand. It could issue more shares to do so – raising more money by dividing itself up to increase the shares in issue to say 200,000 – but that would dilute existing shareholders and reduce the price of existing shares.”
All things being equal (since this is a siml,e teaching model), the newly issued shares will be sold at the market price of the existing shares, and those proceeds will accrue to the company. Therefore, the assets of the company increase by as much as the value of the extra shares issued (asset class: cash).
The price of the existing shares doesn’t fall at all — there is no dilution of value whatsoever.
There is an apparent dilution of control, because each old shareholding now has half as many rights as before, thanks to the new shares, but the size of the company being controlled has doubled.
Issuing new shares for cash at market value is neutral for existing shareholders.
@Jonathan — Yes, perhaps better I took that approach for simplicity, although nearly always a share price will fall in response to a cash raise beyond the theoretical equilibrium in my experience, at least for a time.
The shareholders are diluted in terms of votes, of course. Moot for small fry like us but not for the directors! 🙂
It looks like Property is a bit of a halfway house between Bonds and Equities.
Nice work – and nice improvement with dearieme
Great article. This is exactly what Tim Berners-Lee must have must have hoped for. If they were alive the creators of TV would look on in horror at the use of the medium they created. Thankfully the internet has stepped in to get knowledge to the people. Well done and I look forward to more advanced posts!
Cheers chaps!
I like very much this educational “beginner’s” posts.
I never get tired of reading the same simple fundamentals explained 40 times in 40 different ways.
And for all the complexity of finance, to have a clear grasp of the most important basic ideas is what really matters at the end of the day.
Thank you for a very interesting article on assets. How would you classify a future entitlement to a final salary pension in terms of an asset class? I am due to retire in just over 7 years on a pension of 50% of final salary and a lump sum of 3 x annual pension. In today’s money that will be a pension of around £27,000 and a lump sum of £81,000. I have just started a passive index investing approach to supplement my pension. I have only one fund which is a HSBC World index Fund. My thinking is that the final salary pension resembles a fixed income asset and dwarfs the £10000 I have invested in the above ETF. Would you agree that however I allocate my savings there is no need for further fixed income? I appreciate that you are not a financial advisor but on the general question of how to classify a future pension entitlement I would be interested in opinions.
Please keep up the brilliant work.
Cliff
As a passive reader, I would like to say thanks for keeping at it. It’s the best investment blog I read and I invariably learn something new each week thanks to you and your well-chosen links. You have saved me from many expensive mistakes and helped me refrain from unnecessary activity. So, sorry about lack of feedback and thanks again.
@Cliff- I retired last year with a DB pension covering some of my spending needs, and had the same thought process as you. As my pension rises with inflation, I think of it like an IL Gilt fund, and tilt to equities a bit more than I would otherwise. Although it’s a great thing to have, and I know most people aren’t so lucky, it does have differences to an IL Gilt fund which alter the dynamics- the most obvious two being that (1) I can’t rebalance with it and (2) it’s halved for my widow the day I croak.
If equities fell through the floor in an inflationary environment I don’t have more pension to buy the cheap equities with. I therefore have commodities, nominal gilts and IL gilts in the portfolio (though less of the IL gilts than I would otherwise). I’m enjoying @TA’s series on this.
The other issue is at what point you start considering your pension as fixed income? Now, in 7 years, or perhaps gradually? I basically ignored it up until the day I retired. I can’t say that was the right or the wrong option. Good luck though, whatever! (And I can thoroughly recommend retirement!)
@windinthefens #14
Check the date on Cliff’s post.
I put a smiley in there but obviously not posted that bit so I’ve edited to add this.
@Alan Haha, thanks,I didn’t spot that!! Ah well, I can only hope my advice from the distant future was helpful to him, even if it was about 5 years after he actually retired!!
Windy
@Windinthefens
Cliff retired around February 2025. You can find him on YouTube as @retiredguy007 (I recognised the avatar on his post above). I assume his divorce delayed his retirement.
@Curlew
Thanks for letting me know! I’ve had a look- looks like he probably didn’t need my advice!!
Windy