Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 599

Read this before you go all in on US equities

US equities rule global markets, but history is littered with examples of markets that seemed invincible — until they weren’t.

Forecasting market returns is a fool’s errand, as history has repeatedly shown. Few predicted the 2023 AI-fuelled US tech rally after a bruising 2022, or the sharp bond selloff caused by stubborn inflation. There’s only one certainty: markets remain unpredictable. It’s a feature, not a bug.

For the past decade, US equities have been the undisputed stars, delivering an extraordinary run. The S&P 500, powered by the FAANG/Magnificent Seven stocks1, has vastly outperformed the majority of its global peers, giving rise to the US exceptionalism narrative.

But no market dominates forever. Japan ruled the 1980s, emerging markets were the darlings of the 2000s, and even Europe has had its moments in the sun. The US, while formidable, is not immune to weak performance.

This raises a critical question for investors: should you go 'all in' on US equities, riding the momentum of their recent strength, or should you consider a more diversified approach? After all, the smart money forecasts risks, not returns.

Diversification isn’t always as it seems

The conventional response is to allocate to global equities, such as the MSCI All Country World Index (ACWI), which spreads exposure across regions but remains heavily skewed towards US equities. That means a downturn in the US — whether sparked by rising interest rates, US President Donald Trump’s policies, Chinese AI developments, or any other unknown — can still leave your portfolio vulnerable.

Shifting the focus from returns to risk and constructing a portfolio that allocates based on diversification and risk balancing can produce a more robust solution. As Figure 1 shows, the ACWI concentrates heavily in US equities, while a risk-based approach allocates more evenly across regions such as Europe, Japan, and emerging markets. This ensures portfolios are better diversified and less tethered to the fortunes of one economy.

Figure 1. A balanced approach to global diversification

Source: MSCI, Man Group, as at January 2025.

While the S&P 500 has delivered strong returns over the past two decades, a risk-based allocation has delivered better risk-adjusted returns. As Figure 2 shows, a risk-based allocation outperforms both the S&P 500 and the MSCI ACWI Index in terms of Sharpe ratio (i.e., investors are better compensated for every unit of risk they take on). Crucially, this approach doesn’t require a crystal ball. It is not about predicting the next big winner but about creating a portfolio that is designed to navigate diverse market conditions without sacrificing upside potential.

Figure 2. Better risk-adjusted returns

Source: Bloomberg, Man Group, as at January 2025.

In equity investing, while risk-adjusted metrics like the Sharpe ratio are valuable, they rarely satisfy investors on their own. In risk-on environments, the focus inevitably shifts to delivering absolute returns — because, as the old adage goes, ‘you can’t eat Sharpe ratio.’

As Figure 3 highlights, a risk-based allocation strategy not only outpaced the MSCI ACWI but also kept pace with the S&P 500, doing so at a lower volatility — a compelling proposition for investors.

Figure 3. A smoother ride – the returns of a risk-based approach compared with the MSCI ACWI and the S&P 500

Source: Bloomberg, Man Group, as at January 2025.

The allure of US equities is understandable. They have been the stars of the investment world for years, and their track record is hard to ignore. But history is littered with examples of markets that seemed invincible—until they weren’t.

So, before you go 'all in' on the US juggernaut, consider whether there’s a better way to diversify. Because in investing, as in life, betting everything on one idea is rarely the safest path.

 

All data Bloomberg unless otherwise stated.
1. FAANG was the original group of tech superstar stocks Facebook (now Meta Platforms, Inc.), Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Google (now Alphabet, Inc.), that morphed into the Magnificent Seven, dropping Netflix, and adding Nvidia, Tesla and Microsoft.

 

Contributors: Tarek Abou Zeid, Partner, Client Portfolio Manager, Man AHL, Peter Weidner, Head of Total Return Strategies, Man AHL, Max Buchanan, Client Portfolio Management Analyst, Man AHL and Katerina Koutsouri, a quantitative analyst at Man AHL. Man Group is a fund manager partner of GSFM, a Firstlinks sponsor. The information included in this article is provided for informational purposes only.

For more articles and papers from GSFM and partners, click here.

 

  •   19 February 2025
  • 2
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Investing across deflation, inflation and stagflation

Sin stocks, divestment and the right to choose

The grass is always greener: Rethinking Australian vs global equities

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

How to minimise tax with a will

Inheritance tax implications in Australia may surprise some, as poor estate planning without proper wills or trusts can lead to costly tax bills and delays for beneficiaries.

Testamentary trusts post-budget: Estate planning, tax reform and the ‘death tax’ debate

Proposed Budget changes to taxation are casting new uncertainty over testamentary trusts, prompting closer scrutiny of estate planning structures and the real implications of reforms still taking shape.

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

New CGT rules could tip the scales in the super vs non-super debate. For those facing the Division 296 tax, the case for withdrawing has gotten more complex. A "comparison rate" tool may help assess decisions.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Latest Updates

Latest from Morningstar

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Economy

Was life really better in the good old days?

Are we worse off than previous generations? Lately, there seems to be a heightened level of angst that economic conditions are getting harder and that the two-party political system (and maybe democracy too) is failing voters.

Retirement

Australia has saved $4.5 trillion for retirement. Here's what matters more

Most Australians approaching retirement can tell you the exact dollar value of their super account. But success depends on more than a sizeable balance. Here's four key questions to ask yourself at the start of the financial year. 

Who gains in an AI-supercharged economy?

AI is already reshaping the economy, but companies building transformative technologies rarely capture the greatest long-term value. Instead, those benefits accrue to the users. We may well see this pattern reproduced. 

Taxation

Div 296's million-dollar reset worth $25,000

The 'cost base reset' for the new super tax is being sold as protection for pre-July gains. A worked example shows $1M of protection is worth about $25,000, and the real deadline has not passed.

Latest from Morningstar

The forecasting fix that Wall Street missed

Asking whether markets are overpriced may be the wrong question. New research suggests that traditional valuation metrics used to forecast returns may have been misread. Here are five takeaways for investors.

Investment strategies

Should a fund manager invest their own money differently?

Investors often like the idea that fund managers should invest client money exactly as they invest their own. But reality is more complicated. Unique circumstances make a different approach rational and, at times, beneficial.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 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.