Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 166

Investing is a balancing act

Balance is something we aspire to in many parts of our lives, be it work and family time, diet or exercise. Likewise, as the past 20 years has shown us, a balanced approach to investing can help navigate turbulent market times.

A strong body of research (including the 2013 Vanguard paper, The global case for strategic asset allocation) shows that the most important decision any investor makes is setting their asset allocation. However, it is almost impossible to pick which asset class will be next year’s winner, or in any subsequent year.

No discernible pattern of returns

When you plot the performance of all the major asset classes over the past 20 years, from domestic and international shares, domestic and international fixed income, domestic and global property and emerging markets, there is no discernible pattern.

It adds weight to the argument that past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. Indeed, when you plot the various asset classes in different colours, it looks more like a random patchwork quilt than a tool for making investment decisions.

The next winning asset class is impossible to predict

The next winning asset class is impossible to predict

This is not to say investment markets have not rewarded investors over the past two decades. If an investor had placed $10,000 in a broad Australian share index fund 20 years ago, it would have grown to around $51,480 by 2016. However, investors in international and domestic shares have had to endure a wild ride. Think of the ‘tech wreck’ of 2000 and 2008’s GFC. By comparison, investors in fixed income or cash have had a much smoother journey but have also missed out on the higher returns from other asset classes. A conservative Australian fixed income portfolio would have grown more sedately to $37,606 over the last 20 years.

In the real world, investors have to decide where on the risk spectrum, with cash and fixed income at the conservative end and shares at the higher end, they want to sit. Another lesson of the past 20 years is that market shocks appear from unforeseen sources, such as the US residential housing market and its influence on the GFC.

Tolerance for risk in asset allocation

Investors need to clearly understand how much risk they can tolerate before deciding which assets to allocate money to. Setting an asset allocation is the first decision, but sticking to it is another thing entirely.

Let’s take the example of three investors who each had the same balanced portfolio (50% growth assets and 50% fixed income) back in 2007. After the GFC hit, by February 2009, their respective portfolios had all fallen 18% in value.

The impact of rebalancing

One investor decides it’s all too much and switches the make-up of their portfolio entirely to cash to stop the losses. The second investor is also worried about the dramatic decline in the portfolio’s value and opts to switch to a more defensive asset allocation, shifting the portfolio entirely into fixed income. The third investor, while concerned by the global market gyrations, decides to stick with the 50/50 asset allocation of their balanced fund.

Not surprisingly, these changes resulted in quite different portfolio performances. If we move forward from February 2009 to February 2016, the portfolio of the investor who shifted to cash grew by 27%, the fixed income approach grew by a healthy 71% (helped by declining interest rates), but the portfolio of the investor who changed nothing and stayed the course with a 50/50 asset allocation grew by a 93% from the trough of the GFC.

The asset allocation decision has been shown to drive about 90% of a portfolio's performance, but it is not a once-off static decision. The asset allocation for a 30-year-old, given their investment time horizon, may well be more aggressive with growth assets than a 60-year-old approaching retirement may feel comfortable with. And as the 30-year-old moves through different life stages the asset allocation should rebalance.

The biggest lesson from the past 20 years is that we should expect different asset classes to regularly change positions on the annual performance rankings. The investor’s quest is keeping the balance right between the various asset classes to give the best chance of reaching an investment goal.

 

Robin Bowerman is Principal, Market Strategy and Communications at Vanguard Australia. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

4 Comments
kevin
July 28, 2016

While there are many studies and opinions there is no doubt it is fear that rules.As Stephen says the biases (often) cannot be overcome.

The fear of losing one penny will always be greater than the joy of perhaps making 100 pounds.

Stephen Romic
July 28, 2016

Strategic Asset Allocation calls on investors to simply bear the portfolio risk under all market conditions, suggesting it’s the best way for investors to get their portfolios to their required destinations. I’m not so sure.

The problem with Strategic Asset Allocation is that it compels investors to overcome their innate behavioural biases - that the anxiety they feel under turbulent markets conditions must be accepted and that they must sit tight under the ‘assurance’ that it will all work out in the long run? The reality is that such behavioural biases often cannot be overcome and that the journey is perhaps every bit as important as the final destination.

Strategic Asset Allocation also gives no consideration to prevailing market conditions. It suggests that the SAA portfolio should be held under stable market conditions as well as turbulent market conditions. It is also not concerned if assets are expensive or cheap.
While Strategic Asset Allocation works well enough under normal market conditions, it is appropriate to question whether it suited to the current environment of increasing economic and capital market uncertainty. Greater focus on risk management is likely to reduce anxiety levels among investors and lead to better portfolio outcomes under such conditions.

PS The Brinson et al study is often misunderstood and misquoted.

Peter Thornhill
July 13, 2021

Fear is based on ignorance. Asking people to accept lower potential returns because of fear is the biggest failing of this industry. How about educating?

Warren Bird
July 14, 2021

Indeed Peter. The number of people who wanted their non-equity portfolios only in TD's because they were afraid of duration risk in bonds, but actually took a massive short duration position as a result and missed out on locking in decent interest rates when they were available, probably can't be numbered. Add to that the folk who are afraid of equity volatility for no good reason and get duped into thinking that because you don't revalue a rental property every day it's a 'safe' investment and you can't argue against the proposition that fear as a crippling investment process.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Don’t underestimate the value of active rebalancing

How inflation impacts different types of investments

More please: FY2019 was almost everything up

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

The 'Contrast Principle' used by super fund test failures

Rather than compare results against APRA's benchmark, large super funds which failed the YFYS performance test are using another measure such as a CPI+ target, with more favourable results to show their members.

Property

RBA switched rate priority on house prices versus jobs

RBA Governor, Philip Lowe, says that surging house prices are not as important as full employment, but a previous Governor, Glenn Stevens, had other priorities, putting the "elevated level of house prices" first.

Investment strategies

Disruptive innovation and the Tesla valuation debate

Two prominent fund managers with strongly opposing views and techniques. Cathie Wood thinks Tesla is going to US$3,000, Rob Arnott says it's already a bubble at US$750. They debate valuing growth and disruption.

Shares

4 key materials for batteries and 9 companies that will benefit

Four key materials are required for battery production as we head towards 30X the number of electric cars. It opens exciting opportunities for Australian companies as the country aims to become a regional hub.

Shares

Why valuation multiples fail in an exponential world

Estimating the value of a company based on a multiple of earnings is a common investment analysis technique, but it is often useless. Multiples do a poor job of valuing the best growth businesses, like Microsoft.

Shares

Five value chains driving the ‘transition winners’

The ability to adapt to change makes a company more likely to sustain today’s profitability. There are five value chains plus a focus on cashflow and asset growth that the 'transition winners' are adopting.

Superannuation

Halving super drawdowns helps wealthy retirees most

At the start of COVID, the Government allowed early access to super, but in a strange twist, others were permitted to leave money in tax-advantaged super for another year. It helped the wealthy and should not be repeated.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 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 ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.