≡ Menu

Portfolio diversification

When deciding whether to buy a particular asset, we should also pay attention to the assets we already own.

A collection of assets is called a portfolio. By buying and holding assets with different characteristics, we can try to create a portfolio that offers the greatest return for the risk we’re prepared to take.

Holding such a mix is called portfolio diversification, and it has been described as ‘the only free lunch in finance’, since statistical studies have suggested it’s possible to reduce your risk to some extent without overly reducing your return.

Inevitably, diversifying away from the highest returning asset will reduce your return. The ‘free lunch’ isn’t an ‘All You Can Eat’ buffet!

Lower returns are the cost of ‘insuring’ yourself against greater losses.

Why you need to diversify your portfolio

Some investors dismiss diversification, saying you’ll make the most money if you hold only the most lucrative asset.

Obviously, that’s true. The trouble is you can’t be sure what that asset will be in advance, particular over the short-term. Also, the highest returning asset will usually be the most risky one, so the chances of loss are greater, too.

There are also time factors to consider when deciding what assets to hold.

Shares are the best performing asset over the long-term, but not always in the short term. A bear market in shares can savage your returns and your net worth.

For this reason, even investors with a long investment horizon will often hold a portion of their portfolio in less volatile assets. There is no point putting all your savings into shares for a prosperous retirement, only for market gyrations to cause your hair to prematurely fall out!

It’s very difficult to know what your attitude towards stock market volatility is until you’ve experienced it hitting your investments.

I’m comfortable buying in bear markets, but I’ve still felt bad about losing money. Because investors are only human, they will often want to hold less volatile investments with their shares to smooth their returns over shorter periods, even though it costs them money long-term.

The appropriate mix of assets will change over your lifetime, too. One rule of thumb is to invest 100 minus your age in shares, and the rest in bonds. Like this, you’re less exposed to drops in the stock market as you approach retirement.

Key principles in diversifying your portfolio

There are two types of diversification, horizontal and vertical diversification.

  • Vertical diversification spreads your money between different types of assets. Cash, government bonds, corporate bonds, property and shares can each be expected to behave slightly differently, and so potentially produce different returns, as circumstances change.
  • Horizontal diversification is when you hold different instances of the same asset class. This time you’re trying to reduce localised company or sector-specific risks, particularly with shares. Buying an index tracker is a cheap, efficient way to maximize horizontal diversification.

Creating a portfolio that offers the greatest return at the lowest risk is the Holy Grail of investing. Plenty of advisers will charge you for supposedly doing it, and some people have won Nobel prizes claiming to have done it, but there’s no foolproof rules you can follow.

The very best mix of assets you can hold to maximise return for a given level of risk is called the efficient frontier, after the risk/return curve described by particular combinations. The excellent MoneyChimp website has published a good, if rather long and technical, explanation of the efficient frontier if you’re interested.

I’ve read that article and the maths on the following pages and only understood half of it, so don’t worry if you’re linear regression theory is a little rusty. What’s clear from this and dozens of other books and articles is that there is no certain shortcut to the perfect portfolio.

Splitting a portfolio by large numbers works fine in practice. Tweaking by allocating an extra 1% here or there makes little difference to returns, even if you believe you can accurately predict the result in advance.

Portfolio diversification in practice

For most investors, the simplest approach is to split our portfolio between cash, government bonds and a stock market index tracker, perhaps by following the ‘100 minus age’ rule above to determine the allocation given to shares.

If you want to get funkier, you can might add property (via REITs or a buy-to-let investment) or perhaps even corporate bonds to the mix.

To complicate things further, you might invest some of your portfolio in an ETF or fund that invests in small-cap value or growth shares. If you allocated 10% of your portfolio to such a fund, you’d expect greater returns over time to compensate you for the risk and volatility. (Such an investment would count as part of the total share allocation of your portfolio, NOT an asset class in its own right.)

Those of us who invest directly in individual shares will need to consider whether our picks are too correlated with each other, as well as deciding what vertical diversification is appropriate. For more information, read my article on diversifying a portfolio of high-yield shares.

Final tip: remember a portfolio changes over time

As some assets do well while others do badly or simply hold their value, the inherent diversification of your portfolio will change.

A common example is an investor who puts 25% of their wealth into the stock market, and sees it double over a few years. If nothing changes, they now have 40-50% of their wealth exposed to one asset class, instead of the 25% they were initially comfortable with.

Another example was the dotcom boom, where stock market investors became massively overweight in tech shares due to that sector’s success, only to lose the lot when the shares crashed in 2000-2003. A similar thing happened recently with resource stocks.

The subject of rebalancing your portfolio is an article in itself, but for now remember to guard against your risks becoming unintentionally concentrated, whether due to success or failure.

{ 13 comments }

How the bear market hit the high yield portfolio

Long-time Monevator readers might remember my series of posts from September 2007 on selecting a high yield share portfolio (HYP) to secure a growing dividend income.

For those who missed it, the series so far comprises:

  • Grow your income with dividends from high yield shares: HYP Part 1
  • How to choose a good high yield share for the long haul: HYP Part 2
  • Diversifying your high yield portfolio: HYP Part 3
  • Selecting the shares for your high yield portfolio: HYP Part 4

I also picked an example high yield share portfolio in that fourth article, published on September 26th 2007.

I could not have chosen a worse time to write-up a demonstration portfolio.

Two weeks later the FTSE 100 closed at 6,730, just shy of the high it reached in summer. Then began the bear market we’re still living with today.

I’ve known for nearly 18 months that my demonstration portfolio must have taken a beating. Bank shares have been reliable constituents of income portfolios here in the UK for decades, and along with property companies they were murdered in the subsequent crash.

I recalled the portfolio included RBS, for one. I must sheepishly admit that revisiting this portfolio has not been top of my priorities!

Monevator is of course only meant as general entertaining thoughts on investment, and is certainly not investment advice. I think part 4 spelled out clearly the big risks of a bear market, and also made clear that my articles were not meant to (and never will) advise you to put your money into any particular shares.

That aside, the posts are some of my most popular articles, and I often get emails asking for parts 5 and 6.

But I don’t feel I can continue the series without taking a look back first.

I can hardly complain about fund managers advertising their winning funds while quietly closing their losers if I’m not prepared to monitor my own posts: good or bad.

I’ve therefore worked out how the demonstration HYP from part 4 has fared, and set out the results below.

[continue reading…]

{ 3 comments }

Things can only get better. Right?

A quick thought on this week’s money news

Another action-packed week, with fears about banks continuing, manufacturers slashing jobs as if cutting grass, and house repossessions in the UK soaring.

No wonder stock markets fell. The UK FTSE 100 dropped 3.32% to close at 3,889, flirting again with the last year’s lows.

The thorn is whether we’re looking at Armageddon, or Growth, Interrupted.

As Behaviour Gap wrote this week, surprises go both ways.

If things do get better in the underlying credit markets – if banks do (or can) regain their appetite for risk, and if currently shunned bonds and other financial assets regain some semblance of fair value – then a virtuous circle will kick in very quickly as balance sheets strengthen and stocks recover.

You don’t need to believe we’ll see a return to the go-go credit years for this scenario to play out. Corporate bonds are apparently pricing in worse defaults than the Great Depression, so arguably just avoiding that dire outcome offers plenty of upside.

Will we avoid it? As governments spend money as only people who own the printing presses can, that’s the several trillion dollar question.

In the meantime, I’m still trickling money into the markets.

{ 0 comments }

The recession is not a lifestyle choice

Image by: Mangpages

It’s been so long since we’ve had an economic downturn that people have forgotten recessions are about being fired, losing your home, and companies going under.

The mainstream press is instead treating the recession more like a seasonal change in fashion.

In a strange echo of the frivolous attitude that stoked up the debt bubble in the first place, much of the media seems to see the recession as a new ‘story’, just as they’d salute skirts going back above the knee or the return of cashmere.

Over the past few months I’ve noticed:

  • Articles in glossy magazines explaining how to throw a thrifty Christmas party, with top tips such as forgoing a party bag for each guest, and plumping for free-range turkey instead of a goose for that special retro touch
  • Fashion writers talking of a new austere mood on the catwalks, which supposedly means that a £5,000 jacket with a few less shiny buttons is in touch with the times
  • Photos of well-groomed kids tumbling out of Range Rovers in remote corners of the country in articles extolling the joys of a stay-at-home holiday
  • Countless jokey references to the credit crunch and resultant penury throughout the lifestyle sections of newspapers and magazines

I don’t want to sound too mean-spirited about this; lifestyle journalists have mortgages to pay, too, and I’ve nothing against a bit of fun to brighten up dark times.

But what worries me is that for the average person in the street, these silly articles constitute their main information diet for dealing with the recession!

Wake-up call to the world: The recession is not a lifestyle choice.

[continue reading…]

{ 3 comments }