Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 67

Diversification: past, present and future

Diversification. The word once appeared to suggest higher returns delivered with lower risk. Through the GFC however, diversification’s fabled benefits appeared to vanish just when needed most, leaving many disillusioned. So what does diversification actually promise, and what can it realistically deliver? In this trilogy of articles we’ll look at diversification through a retirement planning lens, from its earlier incarnations to its potential future applications.

Diversification through the ages – from Shakespeare to Sharpe

One of the earliest references to diversification appears in Shakespeare’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’. The merchant, Antonio, when asked whether his melancholy might be due to worrying about his ships at sea, says…

Believe me no. I thank my fortune for it –
My ventures are not in one bottom trusted,
Nor to one place, nor is my whole estate
Upon the fortune of this present year.
Therefore my merchandise makes me not sad.

Antonio, in owning more than just one vessel, was applying the principles of diversification. He knew that while it was possible that one of his ships might be lost on any one voyage (denting his wealth a little), it was extremely unlikely that all his ships would be lost (in different seas and weather conditions) at the same time, leaving him destitute. Thus from the earliest days, diversification was recognised as a tool better suited to avoiding financial disaster than to maximising wealth. Another 350 odd years passed before diversification’s investment benefits were quantified in a 1952 paper titled ‘Portfolio Selection’ written by a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Chicago.

Enter the diversification engineers

In writing his doctoral dissertation on the role of risk in investing, Harry Markowitz applied the concept of variance, a statistical measure of ‘spread’ around an average outcome. He used variance as a measure of risk, with a risky investment being one with a large range of possible outcomes around its expected return. Markowitz was thus the first person to put a number on investment risk, albeit a risk metric that primarily measures the volatility of returns. Today a close relative, standard deviation, is the most commonly used measure of risk in institutional asset management.

Markowitz demonstrated in mathematical terms how investment diversification works: you can have two individually risky assets (high standard deviations) and yet combine them to produce a less risky portfolio (his choice of words) provided the two assets do not move in identical fashion in response to the same stimulus. This co-movement is known as correlation, and the lower the better. Thus a portfolio consisting of just two shareholdings, one an ice cream maker and the other an overcoat maker, should result in a less risky outcome than holding either in isolation. The seasonal variations in temperature would benefit one if not the other.

William Sharpe wrote part of his doctoral dissertation under Markowitz and took his supervisor’s ideas further in the early 1960s when he recognised that the single biggest influence on the direction of a company’s share price was the direction of the share market as a whole. He also noted that investors were, by then, able to diversify their shareholdings relatively easily and at low cost. Sharpe surmised that the benefits of diversification were available to all, and as such investors should not expect to be compensated for risk that could be diversified away by holding a broadly-based share portfolio.

Sharpe introduced the dichotomy of diversifiable (company-specific) idiosyncratic risk and non-diversifiable systematic (market) risk. He felt that investors in competitive share markets should only expect above-market returns from any systematic risk they choose to hold in excess of market risk. In short, in the absence of superior and enduring investment insight, to beat the market you have to accept more risk than the market.

Together Markowitz and Sharpe provided a theoretical foundation for diversification. These efforts saw both awarded (along with Merton Miller) the 1990 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences “for their pioneering work in the theory of financial economics”. At heart however Markowitz and Sharpe were merely expressing mathematically the practical wisdom in two age-old sayings: “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket” and “Nothing ventured, nothing gained”. The aim of all prudent investing is to find the right balance between these two adages.

Asset classes – Diversification grows up

Markowitz and Sharpe were concerned primarily with risk and return from a share market perspective. Investors tend to hold their wealth in assets other than just shares. Prudent investors will allocate wealth across a number of asset classes, each with its own risk/return characteristics. At the highest level these asset classes are cash, fixed interest (debt), shares (equity) and property.

The diversification principles underlying portfolio construction have changed little in the past 50-odd years. The process starts with an investment policy which states the overarching investment objective(s) and the acceptable risk/return trade-offs. Asset classes are named as are their policy weights. Taken together these form the portfolio’s ‘Strategic Asset Allocation’ (SAA).  Each asset class will have a benchmark against which performance is monitored. Finally an allowable limit might be set for intentionally deviating from the SAA to take advantage of perceived shorter-term valuation anomalies (often termed tactical or dynamic asset allocation).

How does all the above translate into the real world? As the SAA ‘pie chart’ that has become a ubiquitous part of investing today. Below is the current asset allocation of the average default superannuation fund option, offered by Australian super funds, as compiled by global consulting firm Mercer:


Source: Financial Services Council, Asset Allocation of Pension Funds Around the World (February 2014)

As the chart indicates, some 51.4% is allocated to equities, both domestic and international. Together with property, the total allocation to ‘growth’ assets sum to almost 61%. Part of the 16.5% in ‘Other’ might also have growth-like characteristics, such as allocations to private equity, hedge funds and certain types of infrastructure.

By investing across various asset classes, superannuation funds seek to apply Markowitz and Sharpe’s principals of diversification. Pie charts tell us how capital is allocated. They tell us little, however, about how risk is allocated. In the next article we turn our attention to the risks embedded in diversified portfolios such as the one above.

 

Harry Chemay is a Certified Investment Management Analyst who consults across both retail and institutional superannuation, focusing on post-retirement outcomes. He has previously practised as a specialist SMSF advisor, and as an investment consultant to APRA-regulated superannuation funds.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Diversification lessons from the GFC

SMSFs drop the ball on risk in asset allocation

Asset allocation in a world of riskier developed markets

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Which generation had it toughest?

Each generation believes its economic challenges were uniquely tough - but what does the data say? A closer look reveals a more nuanced, complex story behind the generational hardship debate. 

Maybe it’s time to consider taxing the family home

Australia could unlock smarter investment and greater equity by reforming housing tax concessions. Rethinking exemptions on the family home could benefit most Australians, especially renters and owners of modest homes.

The best way to get rich and retire early

This goes through the different options including shares, property and business ownership and declares a winner, as well as outlining the mindset needed to earn enough to never have to work again.

A perfect storm for housing affordability in Australia

Everyone has a theory as to why housing in Australia is so expensive. There are a lot of different factors at play, from skewed migration patterns to banking trends and housing's status as a national obsession.

Supercharging the ‘4% rule’ to ensure a richer retirement

The creator of the 4% rule for retirement withdrawals, Bill Bengen, has written a new book outlining fresh strategies to outlive your money, including holding fewer stocks in early retirement before increasing allocations.

Chinese steel - building a Sydney Harbour Bridge every 10 minutes

China's steel production, equivalent to building one Sydney Harbour Bridge every 10 minutes, has driven Australia's economic growth. With China's slowdown, what does this mean for Australia's economy and investments?

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Super crosses the retirement Rubicon

Australia's superannuation system faces a 'Rubicon' moment, a turning point where the focus is shifting from accumulation phase to retirement readiness, but unfortunately, many funds are not rising to the challenge.

Economy

Should Australia follow Trump's new brand of capitalism?

A new brand of capitalism may be emerging - one where governments take equity in private companies. Is it state overreach, or a smarter way to fund public goods without raising taxes?

Gold

Why gold may keep rising - and what could stop it

Central banks are buying, Asia’s investing, and gold’s going digital. The World Gold Council CEO reveals the structural shifts transforming the gold market - and the one economic wildcard that could change everything. 

Investment strategies

Fact, fiction and fission: The future of nuclear energy

Nuclear power is back in the spotlight, including in Australia. For investors exploring the sector, here are four key factors to consider in this evolving energy landscape. 

Taxation

The myth of Australia’s high corporate tax rate

Australia’s corporate tax rate is widely seen as a growth-killing burden. But for most local investors, it’s a mirage - erased by dividend imputation. So why is it still shaping national policy? 

Taxation

Should we change the company tax rate?

The headline 30% corporate tax rate masks a complex system of dividend imputation and franking credits that ensures Australian shareholders are taxed only once, challenging traditional measures of tax competitiveness. 

Investing

Noise cancelling for investors

A lot of the information at an investor's fingertips today has little long-term value. The modern investing greats are not united by access to faster information, but by their ability to filter out what doesn’t matter.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 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. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. 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.