Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 248

Is it time for ‘set and forget’ to consider retirement?

The simplicity of set-and-forget investment approaches is that once established, you don’t need to worry about them too much. Set … and … forget. It’s simple and it rhymes! You will still need to determine things like rebalancing and reinvestment policies but month-to-month, day-to-day, and minute-to-minute, there’s a reasonable chance of achieving your return objective over the long term by sticking to the plan. Indeed, obsessing over market gyrations can lead to investors making a mistake (for example, selling at the bottom).

Set and forget or remember to revisit?

This set and forget approach has been best exemplified in the strategic asset allocation (SAA) arena. Here, the realisation of long-term average returns and volatilities have combined with the benefits of diversification to help many to meet and exceed their objectives over several decades. Ten years on from the GFC, the central-bank-fuelled ‘bull market in everything’ rages on and proponents of SAA strategies can safely declare victory. Set and forget wins. Right?

Not so fast!

While traditional SAA strategies have delivered in the past, there’s no guarantee this will persist. In fact, we would argue that market conditions are such that an SAA approach will likely fail to deliver in the period ahead. Further, SAA has typically focused on the theoretical long term and realising long-term returns in a shorter-term reality may not happen. That reminds us of a famous quote whose true source is ‘unknown’ but is mostly attributed to part-time philosopher and full-time athlete, Yogi Berra, NY Yankee Baseball player:

“In theory, there’s no difference between theory and practice … in practice there is.”

Sometimes the long run is too long

Unless you have an infinite time horizon, you cannot necessarily rely on ‘long-run average market returns’ to deliver on your investment objectives. Historical averages don’t foretell the future. In particular, long-term averages don’t contemplate current valuations, future correlations, and certainly don’t consider the path to get there.

Taking each of those points in turn.

First, consider the elevated level of valuations across equities and fixed income (illustrated in the chart below), with P/E multiples at extreme levels and bond yields around record lows. The starting point matters, even for the theoretical long term. Even with a relatively optimistic outlook, it’s safe to say that expected returns in the period ahead are lower than seen historically.


Source: Robert Shiller, Yale University, data to 31 December 2017. US 10-year sovereign interest rates or equivalent.

Second, the assumption that fixed income is defensive at all times and always offsets underperformance in growth assets is not borne out in the data. In fact, correlations between asset classes vary from period to period (see below). The average historical rolling 3-year correlation between global equities and global bonds of around 0.1 masks extreme changes in this relationship which has profound implications for diversification (maybe that lunch wasn’t ‘free’ after all).


Source: Bloomberg, CFSGAM as of 31 December 2017. Rolling 3-year correlation based on quarterly data on the MSCI World Net Total Return USD and Citi World Government Bond Index (WGBI) USD Indices

Finally, and perhaps the most concerning of all, is that set and forget SAA strategies have never really contemplated the problem of sequencing risk (or the order in which events, often negative, happen). Those approaching retirement should care deeply about the path taken to achieve objectives, since there is much less time to overcome a major negative event such as a 40% equity drawdown. In this sense, SAA strategies have never really considered the retirement phase, and we believe investors with more defined investment horizons, should consider phasing out of SAA strategies at the appropriate time.

The options

So what options do investors have?

We believe there are three strategies:

  • Do nothing: Accept potentially lower returns and/or higher volatility in an existing SAA strategy.
  • Increase risk: Increase growth assets, ride the inevitable volatility, and hope for the best.
  • Increase active management: This could take many guises, including more dynamic asset allocation strategies, allocations to alternatives or appointing more active security selection.

Despite the challenges outlined, we think achieving long-term objectives is possible without materially increasing portfolio risk.

 

Kej Somaia is a Senior Portfolio Manager at CFSGAM. This article is for general information only and does not take in account your individual financial circumstances.

For more articles and papers from CFSGAM, click here.

 

  •   12 April 2018
  • 2
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Is FOMO overruling investment basics?

The most important investment decision you’ll ever make

Defence beats offence in investing

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 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.