≡ Menu

Expected returns: Estimates for your investment planning

Expected returns are unpredictable. As symbolised by this picture of a pair of dice.

Understanding your future expected returns is an important part of your investment plan.

Your expected return is the average annual growth that you can reasonably hope your portfolio will deliver over time. It may be a real return of 4% per year, for example.

With a credible expected return figure you can work out whether you’re investing enough money to meet your goals – just by plugging your number into an investment calculator.

Give us a few minutes and we’ll show you how it’s done.

What are expected returns?

Expected returns are estimates of the future performance of individual investments – typically asset classes. Expected return figures are provided as average annual returns that you might see over a particular timeframe. Say the next five or ten years. 

The figures are usually based on historical data, but modified by current valuation metrics.

The Gordon Equation is the best known expected returns formula. 

Because future returns are highly uncertain, some sources offer a range of expected returns or probabilities. This emphasises the impossibility of precise predictions. 

Think of expected returns as a bit like a long-range weather forecast. You’ll get some guidance on conditions coming down the line. But expected returns can’t tell you when exactly it will rain. 

Even so, expected returns are a useful stand-in for the ‘rate of return’ required by investment calculators and retirement calculators.

For instance:

A retirement calculator picture shows you where to put your expected returns figure.

You’d put your portfolio expected return number in your calculator’s ‘rate of return’ slot.

By collating estimates for individual asset classes, we can calculate a portfolio’s expected return. See the table below.  

Moreover, because expected return calculations are informed by current market valuations, they may be a better guide to the next decade than historical data based solely on past conditions.

Expected returns: ten-year predictions

Asset class / Source

Vanguard (31/5/23)

 Research Affiliates (30/6/23) BlackRock (31/3/23) Monevator (13/7/23) Median (13/7/23)
Global equities 6.8 8.2 7.7 6.7 7.3
UK equities 5.5 10.8 6.9 8.3 7.6
Emerging markets 12.8 9.6 8.4 9.6
Global REITs 10.1 4.4 8 8
UK gov bonds 4.5 3.5 4.4 4.4
Global gov bonds (£ hedged) 3.5 3.5
Global aggregate bonds (£ hedged) 4.8 3.7 3.8 3.8
Inflation-linked bonds 7 4.6 5.8
Inflation 4.4 3.5 4

Source: As indicated by column titles, compiled by Monevator.

The table shows the ten-year expected returns1 for key asset classes, expressed as nominal average annual returns in GBP. 

We have sourced them from a variety of experts.

Monevator’s expected return on equities (including REITs) are calculated using the Gordon Equation.2

The expected return on UK government bonds is simply the prevailing yield-to-maturity of the ten-year gilt. 

For average inflation we used the ten-year UK instantaneous implied inflation forward curve (gilts) chart from the Bank of England

Make sure you subtract your inflation estimate from nominal figures. This gives you a real return figure to deploy.3

Their mileage may vary

As you can see from our table, opinions vary on the expected rate of return.

Methodology, inflation assumptions, and timing all make a difference.

Since our last update, equity return expectations have dropped a touch (less than 1% on aggregate) while the bond outlook has significantly improved. UK government bonds, in particular, are now projected to earn a small real return after inflation. That’s thanks to rising bond yields which inflict capital losses in the short-term but leave us better off in the long-run. 

Incidentally, Research Affiliates and BlackRock provide expected return rates for more sub-asset classes if those above don’t cover your needs. BlackRock’s tool even offers 30-year projections.

Of course, the longer your timeline, the bigger your pinch of salt.

Portfolio expected returns

Okay, so now what? 

Well, let’s use the asset class expected return figures above to calculate your portfolio’s expected return.

Your portfolio’s expected return is the weighted average of the expected return of each asset class you hold. 

The next table shows you how to calculate the expected return of a portfolio. Just substitute your own asset allocation for the example one below. 

Asset class  Allocation (%) Real expected return (%) Weighted expected return (%)
Global equities 60 3.2 0.6 x 3.2 = 1.92  
UK equities 10 4.8 0.1 x 4.8 = 0.48
Emerging markets 10 4.9 0.1 x 4.9 = 0.49
UK gov bonds 20 0.94 0.2 x 0.94 = 0.19
Portfolio expected return 3.08

Portfolio expected return = the sum of weighted expected returns. Giving us 3.08% in this example.

3.08% is not great. But it’s better than the 2.83% we were expecting only 12 months ago. (For this example I used Monevator’s nominal expected returns minus inflation to derive the real return.)

Feel free to use any set of figures from the first table. Or else mix-and-match expected returns for particular asset classes where you can find a source. Research Affiliates and BlackRock should cover most of your bases. 

The expected return of your bond fund is its yield-to-maturity (YTM). Look for it on the fund’s webpage.

Because most sources present nominal expected returns, remember to deduct your inflation estimate to get a real expected return. 

You should also subtract investment costs and taxes. Keep them low!

The expected return of a portfolio formula is therefore: 

  • The nominal expected return of each asset class – minus inflation, costs, and taxes  
  • % invested per asset class multiplied by real expected return rate
  • Add up all those numbers to determine your portfolio’s expected return

The resultant portfolio-level expected return figure can be popped into any investment calculator.

You’ll quickly see how long it’ll take to hit your goals for a given amount of cash invested.

How to use your expected return

Input your expected return calculation as your rate of growth when you plot your own scenarios

Drop the number into any good investment calculator or in the interest rate field of our compound interest calculator.

As we saw, the expected return rate we came up with in the portfolio above is pretty disappointing.

Historically we’d expect a 60/40 portfolio to deliver a 4% average rate of return.

But after a long bull market for equities and bonds – even given the recent declines – market pundits seem to feel there’s less juice left in the lemon. They’ve therefore curbed their expectations.

If you’re modelling an investing horizon of several decades, however, it’s legitimate to switch to longer-run historical returns

That’s because we can assume long-term averages are more likely to reassert themselves over 30 or 40 year stretches. 

The average annualised rate of return for global equities is around 5% since 1900. That’s a real return. Hence there’s no need to deduct inflation this time. 

UK equities weigh in around the same.

Meanwhile gilts have delivered a 1.8% real annualised return

Even though your returns will rarely be average year-to-year, it’s reasonable to expect (though there’s no guarantee) that your returns will average out over two or three decades. Because that’s what tends to happen over the long term.

Excessively great expectations

In contrast, planning on bagging a real equity return of 8% per year is living in LaLa-land.

Not because it’s impossible. Golden eras for asset class returns do happen. But you’ll need to be lucky to live through one of them if you’re to hit the historically high return numbers.

Nobody’s financial plan should be founded on luck. Luck tends to run out.

Opt for a conservative strategy instead. You’ll be better able to adapt if expectations fall short. And you can always ease off later if you’re way ahead. 

Remember your expected return number will be wrong to some degree, but it’s still better than reading tea leaves or believing all your dreams will come true. 

Don’t like what you see when you run your numbers? In that case your best options are to:

  • Save more
  • Save longer
  • Lower your financial independence target number

All are much preferable to wishing and hoping.

How accurate are expected returns?

Expected returns shouldn’t be relied upon as a guaranteed glimpse of the future, as if they were racing tips from a kindly time-traveller. 

Indeed the first time we posted about expected returns we collated the following forecasts:

Expected return predictions dating back to almost a decade ago.

These were long-range, real return estimates but the FCA one in particular was calibrated as a 10-15 year projection for UK investors. 

What happened? Well, the ten-year annualised real returns were actually:

  • Global equities: 7.6%4
  • UK government bonds: -2.6%5
  • A 60:40 portfolio returned 3.5% annualised

The expected return forecasts above now look amazingly prescient. Before 2022 they looked too pessimistic, but that turbulent year of rate rises has knocked both equities and bonds down a peg or three. 

Previously, 10-year actual returns were far ahead of the forecasts but one explanation is that our returns had been juiced by successive waves of quantitative easing from Central Banks. Perhaps, too, the retrenchment of globalisation is also a factor. 

Still, I wouldn’t expect even the greatest expert to be consistently on-target. Rather, it’s better to think of their expected returns as offering one plausible path through a multiverse of potential timelines.

Shock therapy

If you can stand it, go back to your investment calculator and dial in a more pessimistic scenario. Then plug in the lowest of all the respected expected return figures you can find.

Look at the pitiful outcome. Wonder if the decimal point got misplaced.

Scoring that nightmare onto your brain might stop you from anchoring on a shinier expected return.

Okay, that was horrible.

Now increase your expectations and peek at a rosier path for a quick morale boost. 

Feel better? More motivated? Great!

Now try to forget about the dream scenario, and simply invest for all your worth.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

P.S. This is obvious to old hands, but new investors should note that expected returns do not hint at the fevered gyrations that can grip the markets at any time.

Sad to say, but your wealth won’t smoothly escalate by a pleasant 4% to 5% a year.

Rather, on any given day you have a 50-50 chance of tuning in to see a loss on the equity side of your portfolio.

Every year, there’s on average a 30% chance of a loss in the stock market for the year as a whole.

And on that happy note, I’ll bid you good fortune!

Note: this article has been updated. Some comments below might be past their Best Before dates. Check when they were published and scroll down for the latest input.

  1. Note that most corporates badge their expected returns calculations as ‘capital market assumptions.’ []
  2. Current dividend yield data comes from relevant Vanguard and iShares index trackers. We added on inflation to make our numbers a nominal return. This is purely for comparison purposes with other sources who use nominal returns. Inflation should be subtracted from all nominal expected returns so you’re working with a more realistic real return. []
  3. Real returns subtract inflation from your investment results. In other words, they’re a more accurate portrayal of your capital growth in relation to purchasing power than standard nominal returns. []
  4. Source: Vanguard FTSE All World ETF []
  5. Source: Vanguard UK Gilt ETF []
{ 53 comments }

Weekend reading: Missing linkers

Weekend reading: Missing linkers post image

What caught my eye this week.

A friend of mine – someone in the investment business no less – was surprised when I mentioned I was looking into index-linked gilts for my latest Moguls membership article.

“Nobody normal knows about them anymore I agree – but nobody wants to either,” he laughed. “You should write about Apple. It’ll be $3 trillion again by Friday!”

My friend was right about Apple. But I think he is wrong about linkers.

Of course returns on these UK government bonds have been diabolical recently.

But for a would-be core asset class, that’s all the more reason to dig in now.

Index-linked gilt gore

Blowing off the mental cobwebs with linkers is necessary because it’s been a long time since they were attractively priced for anyone who actually had a choice about where to invest their money.

True, real yields were positive for a blink and you missed it moment amidst the Mini Budget chaos.

But linker yields were low or negative for a decade before that.

And of course it’s true that to bring us today’s more attractive opportunities, those already holding linkers suffered mightily.

Look at this five-year share price graph of the iShares index-linked gilt ETF (Ticker: INXG) – preferably from behind a sofa:

From nearly £23 in December 2021, this long duration basket of UK linkers has fallen 40% to under £13.50.

That the crash occurred during a bout of heady inflation must be particularly galling. (Even if you understand the reasons why.)

For those who heard bonds were ‘safe’ and didn’t read the small print, it’s been a rough ride.

No wonder many now seem to hate the asset class.

Here’s gains we made earlier

Realise though that the seeds for 2022’s losses were planted by many years of bountiful harvest, in which linkers delivered far more than was expected of them.

The low interest rate era was a windfall. Cop a load of INXG’s run-up to its gruesome swan dive:

An allegedly boring asset beloved of pension funds for liability-matching, doubling in a decade?

Nice returns if you can get them.

Linkers climbed even as alarm bells rang – not least for my co-blogger – and their yields went negative, causing a million economics textbooks to be earmarked for pulping.

If you liked linkers at -3%, you should love them now

Even when they were guaranteed to lose money in real terms, institutions (apparently) thought it worth buying linkers (presumably) for their known, inflation-protected cashflows.

In November 2021 the UK actually managed to sell a brand new 50-year linker on a negative yield of -2.4%. What were the buyers thinking?

As John Kay put it recently:

That is none of my business’, replied Pooh Bah. ‘My job is to ensure that everyone is certain to get the pension they have been promised, even 50 years from now.

That seems to confuse security with certainty, mused the Emperor.

Like Kay, I don’t think regulators pushing pensions into negative-yielding bonds made much sense. Protection from inflation is valuable. But negative yields mean savers had to shrink their retirement pots to pay for it – or else take on some other risk to make up the difference. (Leverage, say.)

With that said, we must beware hindsight bias.

Maybe in some other reality, governments and central banks didn’t deliver the massive support during the pandemic lockdowns that they’re now being derided for, and we slid into a depression.

In that no-growth other world, perhaps INXG went on to touch £30?

Perhaps – but it’s moot. Because in our world, interest rates did go up again.

Incredibly quickly, in fact. And linker prices duly crashed.

Linker inkling

As a direct result of last year’s rout, you can now get a small but real positive return when buying into index-linked gilts – even while protecting your money from inflation.

That’s a huge change. And it’s why I wrote 6,000 words on index-linked gilts for Moguls, despite my friend’s objections.

As I’ve said before, if 2022 taught you that bonds are bad then you learned the wrong lesson.

Recent bond returns have been ugly for the ages. But at today’s prices they haven’t look so attractive for a decade.

Have a great weekend!

[continue reading…]

{ 62 comments }

The CAPE ratio is widely considered to be a useful stock market valuation signal. So if you own a globally diversified portfolio then you may well be interested in good CAPE ratio by country data that can help you understand which parts of the world are under- and overvalued.

To that end I’ve collated the best global CAPE ratio information I can find in the table below. 

CAPE ratio by country / region / world

Region / Country Research Affiliates (30/06/23) Barclays Research (31/5/23) Cambria Investment (25/07/23) Historical median (Research Affiliates)
Global 22.5 n/a 15 23
Developed markets 26 n/a 19 23.5
Emerging markets 14 n/a 14 15
Europe 17.5 20 16.5
UK 13 15.5 14 14
US 31 29 28.5 16.5
Japan 21 21 20 33
Germany 14.5 19.5 15 17.5
China 10 11 10 15.5
India 29.5 31 31 21.5
Brazil 11 12 11 14
Australia 17 20 17.5 16.5
South Africa 14.5 16 14 18

Source: As indicated by column titles, compiled by Monevator

A country’s stock market is considered to be overvalued if its CAPE ratio is significantly above its historical average. The converse also holds. Meanwhile a CAPE reading close to the historical average could indicate the market is fairly valued.

You should only compare a country’s CAPE ratio with its own historical average. Inter-market comparisons are problematic.

There’s more countries and data to play with if you click through to the original sources linked in the table. All sources use MSCI indices. Cambria uses MSCI IMI (Investible Market Indices). Research Affiliates derives US CAPE from the S&P 500. You can also take the S&P 500’s daily Shiller P/E temperature.

But what exactly is the CAPE ratio, what does it tell us, and how credible is it?

What is the CAPE ratio?

The CAPE ratio or Shiller P/E stands for the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio (CAPE).

CAPE is a stock market valuation signal. It is mildly predicative of long-term equity returns. (The CAPE ratio is even more predictive of furious debate about its accuracy).

In brief:

  • A high CAPE ratio correlates with lower average stock market returns over the next ten to 15 years.
  • A low CAPE ratio correlates to higher average stock market returns over the next ten to 15 years.

The CAPE ratio formula is:

Current stock prices / average real earnings over the last ten years.

To value a country’s stock market, the CAPE ratio compares stock prices and earnings numbers in proportion to each share’s weight in a representative index. (For example the S&P 500 or FTSE 100 indices).

But company profits constantly expand and contract in line with a firm’s fortunes. National and global economic tides ebb and flow, too.

So CAPE tries to clean up that noisy signal by looking at ten years’ worth of earnings data. For that reason CAPE is also known as the P/E 10 ratio.

What can I do with global and country CAPE ratios?

The CAPE ratio has three main uses:

  • Some wield it as a market-timing tool to spot trading opportunities. A low CAPE implies an undervalued market. One that could rebound into the higher return stratosphere. Conversely, a high CAPE ratio may signal an overbought market that’s destined for a fall.
  • Similarly, CAPE – and its inverse indicator the earnings yield (E/P) – may enable us to make more sensible future expected return projections.
  • High CAPE ratios are associated with lower sustainable withdrawal rates (SWR) and vice versa. So you might decide to adjust your retirement spending based on what CAPE is telling you.

But is CAPE really fit for these purposes?

Well I think you should be ready to ask for your money back (you won’t get it) if you try to use CAPE as a market-timing divining rod.

But optimising your SWR according to CAPE’s foretelling? There’s good evidence that can be worthwhile.

How accurate is CAPE?

It’s certainly more predictive of negative energy than being told by a woman in a wig that you’re a Pisces dealing with a heavy Saturn transit.

But the signal is as messy as mucking about with goat entrails.

The table below shows that higher CAPE ratios are correlated with worse ten-year returns. Notice there’s a wide range of outcomes:

A table showing that high and low CAPE ratios correlate with low and high future returns but there's still a wide dispersion of results within that trend

Source: Robert Shiller, Farouk Jivraj, The Many Colours Of CAPE

The overall trend is clear. But a market with a high starting CAPE ratio can still deliver decent 10-year returns. Equally, a low CAPE ratio might yet usher in a decade of disappointment.

When it comes to hitting the bullseye, therefore, the CAPE ratio looks like this:

The CAPE ratio envisaged as a target board shows that

Portfolio manager Norbert Keimling has dug deeper. His work showed that the CAPE ratio by country explained about 48% of subsequent 10-15 year returns for developed markets.

This graph shows a relationship between country CAPE ratios and subsequent returns

Source: Norbert Keimling, Predicting Stock Market Returns using the Shiller CAPE

You can see how lower CAPE ratios line up on the left of this graph with higher returns, like prom queens pairing off with jocks.

There’s no denying the trend.

Not all heroes wear a CAPE

Strip away the nuance and you could convert these results into an Animal Farm slogan: “Low CAPE good. High CAPE bad.”

However animal spirits aren’t so easily tamed!

Keimling says the explanatory power of CAPE varies by country and time period. For example: 

  • Japan = 90%
  • UK = 86%
  • Canada = 1%
  • US = 82% since 1970
  • US = 46% since 1881

Despite such variation, however, the findings are still good enough to put CAPE in the platinum club of stock market indicators. (It’s not a crowded field).

In his research paper Does the Shiller-PE Work In Emerging Markets, Joachim Klement states:

Most traditional stock market prediction models can explain less than 20% of the variation in future stock market returns. So we may consider the Shiller-PE one of the more reliable forecasting tools available to practitioners.

But I wouldn’t want to hang my investing hat on World CAPE’s 48% explanation of the future.

Nobody should bet the house on a fifty-fifty call.

Don’t use CAPE to predict the markets

Let’s consider a real world example. Klement used the CAPE ratio to predict various country’s cumulative five-year returns from July 2012 to 2017.

As a UK investor, the forecasts that caught my eye were:

  • UK cumulative five-year real return: 43.8%
  • US cumulative five-year real return: 24.5%

The UK was approximately fairly valued according to historical CAPE readings in 2012. The US seemed significantly overvalued. 

Yet if that signal caused you to overweight the UK vs the US in 2012, you’d have regretted it:

UK vs UK index returns show that CAPE ratio predictions were wrong from 2012 to 2017

Source: Trustnet Multi-plot Charting. S&P 500 vs FTSE All-Share cumulative returns July 2012-17 (nominal)

From these returns, we can see that the ‘overvalued’ S&P 500 proceeded to slaughter the FTSE All-Share for the next five years. (In fact it did so for the next ten.)

As a result, CAPE reminds me of my mum warning me that I was gonna hurt myself jumping off the furniture. 

In the end she was right. But it took reality a while to catch up.  

Using the global CAPE ratio to adjust your SWR

The CAPE ratio is best used as an SWR modifier.

Michael Kitces shows that a retiree’s initial SWR is strongly correlated to their starting CAPE ratio:

A retirees starting Shiller PE is strongly correlated to their sustainable withdrawal rate (SWR)

A high starting CAPE ratio1 maps on to low SWRs. When the red CAPE line peaks, the blue SWR line troughs and vice versa. 

William Bengen (the creator of the 4% rule) concurs with Kitces’ findings: 

And Early Retirement Now also believes a high CAPE is a cue to lower your SWR.

However all these experts base their conclusions on S&P 500 numbers. Can we assume that CAPE ratio by country data is relevant to UK retirees drawing on a globally diversified portfolio?

Yes, we can.

Keimling says:

In all countries a relationship between fundamental valuation and subsequent long‐term returns can be observed. With the exception of Denmark, a low CAPE of below 15 was always followed by greater returns than a high CAPE.

Likewise, Klement found:

Shiller-PE is a reliable indicator for future real stock market returns not only in the United States but also in developed and emerging markets in general.

Michael McClung, author of the excellent Living Off Your Money, also advises using global CAPE to adjust your SWR.

The spreadsheet that accompanies his retirement book does the calculation for you. You just need to supply the World CAPE ratio and an Emerging Markets CAPE figure. Our table above does that.

Incidentally, one reason I included three sources of CAPE ratio in my table is to show there’s no point getting hung up on the one, pure number. Because there’s no such thing.

Meanwhile, Big ERN has devised a dynamic withdrawal rate method based on CAPE.

Conquering the world

Finally, if you want to use Bengen’s more simplistic Rules For Adjusting Safe Withdrawal Rates table shown above, you’ll need to translate his work into global terms.

Bengen’s over/under/fairly valued categories assume an average US historical CAPE of around 16.

You can adapt those bands to suit your favourite average from our CAPE ratio by country table.

Bengen’s work suggests that a CAPE score 25% above / below the historic average is a useful rule-of-thumb guide to over or undervaluation.

A base SWR of 3% isn’t a bad place to start if you have a global portfolio. Check out this post to further finesse your SWR choice.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

 

  1. The CAPE ratio is labelled Shiller CAPE in the graph. []
{ 24 comments }

Opportunities in index-linked gilts

The Monevator Moguls logo

Interesting times. As ever plenty to worry about, if your mind runs that way. But also exciting new pieces on the board, thanks to regime change and the bear market.

Indeed if you’re some combination of rich enough, frugal enough, and/or you know exactly when you’re going to die, then you can now create a portfolio that you can drawdown with a knowable sustainable withdrawal rate (SWR) over a particular number of years – while enjoying a near-certain positive return, and sidestepping asset price volatility and stock market crashes.

This article can be read by selected Monevator members. Please see our membership plans and consider joining! Already a member? Sign in here.
{ 51 comments }