Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 337

A simple method to help mitigate sequencing risks

The number of people in Japan of working age was outnumbered by non-workers for the first time in 1994. In China, that number turned negative in 2015 and in Europe, 2011. The global population is ageing and changing the expectations and needs of a class of investors who may presently be uncatered for. In particular, those approaching retirement must consider risk much more seriously for they can least afford a permanent loss of capital.

Drawing out capital is opposite of 'dollar cost averaging'

For retirees, regular withdrawals of capital may be required where income is insufficient to meet lifestyle requirement. In an environment of ultra-low rates, generating a sufficient income is made more challenging. Consequently, restricted income means many investors must decide between spending less or eroding capital to meet lifestyle demands.

When an investor is required to make regular withdrawals regardless of the market level, capital losses experienced early in retirement can be deleterious. Sequencing risk, which describes the pattern of investor returns, or the order in which they are received, therefore looms large for retirees.

The impact of sequencing risk on retirement incomes is the opposite to the impact of dollar cost averaging, which can be employed to accumulate wealth. Dollar cost averaging involves making regular investments, while retirees in pension phase are required to take regular payments from their investment portfolio.

Typical dollar cost averaging examples involve an investor investing a fixed sum of money at predetermined regular intervals, for example, $20,000 every month. By fixing the dollar amount, a discipline is forced upon the investor. When share prices are low, more units are acquired, and when share prices are higher fewer units are purchased. For the dollar cost averaging strategy, volatility becomes an investor’s best friend. As a net purchaser of shares, lower prices can be anticipated with eagerness.

The opposite however is true for the retiree in pension phase and required to receive regular fixed dollar or percentage payments from their portfolio. For example, compulsary withdrawals from a superannuation pension account vary by age from 4% for people under 65, to 7% for aged 80 to 84, to 14% for over 94. These levels are set to encourage depletion of super assets to fund a retirement, not pass to an estate.

An investor, required to take fixed dollar withdrawals regularly from their portfolio, would experience the opposite of the dollar cost ‘averager’. At lower prices, a retiree would be forced to sell more units simply because more units are required to meet their minimum pension payment. After those units are sold, the remaining portfolio is smaller, and with fewer units, a greater burden is placed on the remainder of the portfolio to recover the losses.

It is therefore essential that large losses early on the investment journey are avoided or the risk at least mitigated.

Reserving a cash allocation

One method employed by advisers is to quarantine from volatile assets the cash needed for spending, lifestyle and healthcare needs to cover a period estimated to be required for markets to recover.

Take a hypothetical investor with $2 million at retirement who is advised to quarantine $300,000 to cover three years of expenditure, and invest the remaining $1.7 million. What happens if the markets decline 50% at the end of the three-year period, when there is nothing left in the cash reserve?

Clearly, the solution is to ensure that $300,000 is always quarantined and therefore $100,000 must be withdrawn each year from the commencement of the second year.

An alternative is to mitigate the anticipated volatility by diversifying the portfolio into a suite of asset classes or funds where returns are not correlated with the share market. But here again, zero interest rate policies and QE have ensured very high prices across all asset classes, increasing the level of correlation between asset classes that might one have offered protection.

A less familiar option is to invest in funds that have demonstrated some ability to protect the downside to some extent.

Less of the upside with less of the downside

The hypothetical example in Figure 1 shows the benefit to retirees of investing in a fund that captures 80% of the upside when the market rises but only 60% of the downside when the market falls.

Figure 1. Retirees benefit from 80% upside and 60% downside.

The blue upper line represents the performance of a $1 million invested in the S&P/ASX 200 Accumulation Index (dividends reinvested) over the past 27 years, which is roughly a period of retirement for somebody in excellent health retiring at age 65 today.

The performance depicted by the index however is not that experienced by a hypothetical Australian retiree required to make regular ‘super pension’ withdrawals over the same period.

The red line at the bottom illustrates the experience of a retiree who is 100% exposed to the vagaries of the market and required to begin drawing 5% a year from the age of 65, ratcheting up to 14% annually once they reach 90 years of age. Their ending balance is $1.85 million and super pension payments have amounted to $10.1 million.

Being required to withdraw funds irrespective of market conditions dramatically changes the outcome for an investor exposed to 100% of the upside and downside of the market.

An understanding of this dynamic confirms there is merit in aiming to preserve capital for investors simply by capturing less of the downside.

The green line in Figure 1 represents the hypothetical picture for a retired investor who invests $1 million at 65 years of age in a hypothetical fund that captures 80% of the market’s upside movements and 60% of its downside movements over the last 27 years.

The vast improvement over an index investment can be achieved by investing in a fund that preserves capital on the downside. The retired fund investor ends the investment period with a portfolio valued at just over $2.5 million and has received super pension payments of $12.9 million. The active fund investor’s portfolio is worth 37% more than the ‘index’ investor and it has generated 28% more in pension payments.

A significant proportion of the population is rapidly approaching retirement or has just entered it. Market conditions, and in particular, stretched market valuations, must put sequencing risk at the forefront of advice. Therefore, finding a fund with an upside/downside capture strategy should feature in discussions between a retiree client and an adviser.

Using the Morningstar database, here are some examples. Other funds using terms such as 'managed volatility' or 'low volatility' attempt the same.

 

Roger Montgomery is Chairman and Chief Investment Officer at Montgomery Investment Management. This article is for general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

6 Comments
Dee
January 12, 2020

Can you actually buy the ASX accum index ?

SMSF Trustee
January 12, 2020

Yes, it's easy. Just invest in an index Australian equity fund and reinvest your distributions. They're managing against an ASX index and the accumulation version is simply the price index with dividends reinvested.

Tax comes into it, of course, but pre-tax, index investing with reinvestment is the accumulation index.

James
December 21, 2019

So highlighting less downside capture is a positive I suppose if you want a meagre return and reduced risk of capital loss.  

Joe
December 20, 2019

FYI
See Timothy Marlo and Jeffrey Stark September 2016 study: Ability to Capture Up Market Returns and Avoid Down Market Losses: The Upside and Downside Capture Ratios.
In addition to its star rating system, Morningstar provides two other measures of fund performance: upside and downside capture ratios. Marlo and Stark used these metrics to determine whether mutual fund performance manifests itself in a fund’s ability to outperform in up markets or to reduce underperformance in down markets.
Their study covered the period from 2003 through 2015. The following is a summary of their findings:
There’s very little evidence that upside and downside capture ratios predict future fund performance.
• The upside capture ratio fails to provide any information on subsequent four-factor (market beta, size, value and momentum) alpha performance.
• The downside capture ratio also fails to provide information on future performance.
• Funds do not successfully outperform in up markets and minimize risks in down markets.
• Funds with a large upside capture ratio have significantly negative performances in the next down market, and funds with low downside capture ratios have significantly lower returns over the next up market — highlighting the risks of using capture ratios as a way to make investment decisions.
• Even funds with the ideal relationship between their upside and downside capture ratios fail to outperform in subsequent months, lending further support to the finding that mutual funds do not possess the ability to generate large returns in an up market and minimize downside risk in declining markets.
Despite the inability of the upside and downside capture ratios to explain future mutual fund performance, Morningstar continues to provide them to investors, and there’s a significant association with both ratios and subsequent fund flows. Specifically, Marlo and Stark found a stronger response to the upside capture ratio if the current market state is up, and a stronger response to the downside capture ratio if the current market state is down.

Joel
December 19, 2019

I feel that making this comparison using the ASX 200 accumulation index is designed to derive an outcome that overstates the benefits of these funds. A comparison with the non-accumulation index would be more representative, as it is unlikely that a retiree is going to reinvest dividends to only sell again to fund their income needs. It's more likely that they will use the income from dividends and then only sell to fund any shortfall. If this comparison were to show an improved outcome for the retiree with the more actively managed funds, then that would be a more compelling argument.

Dudley.
December 19, 2019

Withdrawals from super Retirement Accounts is mandatory; not mandatory are:
* transferring from super Accumulation Accounts to Retirement Accounts,
* spending withdrawals.

"a fund that captures 80% of the upside when the market rises but only 60% of the downside when the market falls":
100% / 0% funds?

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Housing cost is biggest threat to a comfortable retirement

Big increase in retirees expecting to outlive their savings

7-point checklist for managing the uncertain timing of death

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Five ways the Retirement Review points to new policies

The Retirement Income Review goes much further than an innocent-sounding 'fact base', and is sure to guide policies in the run up to the next election. It will change how we think about retirement incomes.

Graeme Shaw on why investing is at a pivotal moment

Company profits have not improved for many years but higher valuations have been driven by falling rates and excess liquidity. Conditions do not suit a value and contrarian manager but here are some opportunities.

Retirement Review gives strong views on hoarding of super

The Review includes some profound findings, most notable that retirement income should include drawing down far more capital. Expect post-retirement products to proliferate under a Retirement Income Covenant.

11 key findings on retirement dreams during the pandemic

A mid-pandemic survey of over 1,000 people near or in retirement found three in four are not confident how long their money will last. Only 18% felt their money was safe during a strong economic downturn.

Bank scorecard 2020: when will the mojo return?

Banks severely cut dividends in 2020 but are expected to improve payments in 2021. History provides clues to when the banks will return to their 2019 levels of profitability, but who is positioned the best?

Generational wealth transfers will affect all investors

It's not only that 60 is the new 40, but 80 is the new 60. Many Baby Boomers spend up in retirement and are less inclined to leave a nest egg to their children. The ways wealth transfers will affect all investors.

Latest Updates

Shares

Hamish Douglass on big tech and life after COVID

On the sidelines of the Morningstar Conference, the Magellan co-founder reflects on the pandemic and which sectors are set to gain and lose. He says we were lucky the pandemic hit when it did (videos and transcripts).

Superannuation

Cost of running an SMSF receives updated judgement

Administration costs can rise for complexity, especially owning property in an SMSF, but fees are highly competitive from a wide range of service providers. The break-even cost is less than previously reported.

SMSF strategies

Three areas SMSFs should consider outsourcing

SMSF trustees often cite ‘control of my investments’ as the number one motivation for setting up their own fund. But it still makes sense to outsource some parts of a well-diversified portfolio.

Retirement

Apparently, retirees should learn to SKI

The Retirement Income Review demonstrated limited understanding of the risks faced by self-funded retirees implementing rational human behaviour. Spending to qualify for the age pension is not a solution.

Retirement

7-point checklist for managing the uncertain timing of death

Average life expectancies are a weak predictor of individual outcomes, and it's better to consider a range of probable lifespans. A plan that lasts to the average will disappoint every second retiree.

Exchange traded products

'Quality' ETFs under the microscope

Interest in 'quality' factor ETFs has increased this year, helped by very attractive returns. However, not all ETFs are created alike and there are divergences in portfolio traits which investors can identify.

Shares

Is growth of zombie companies real or fiction?

Much has been written about the rise of 'zombie firms' which should have gone bankrupt, but new research should be comforting to economists and investors alike, with focus on a particular segment.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2020 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use.
Any general advice or class service prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, has been prepared by without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.