Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 418

The 60:40 portfolio ... if no longer appropriate, then what is?

Investors have been treated for the past two decades to a period of extremely strong returns. This has been driven by a massive structural decline in inflation and interest rates, set against the backdrop of reasonable economic growth, a global savings glut and supportive policy settings. There have been setbacks along the way, including the sharp downturns in the early 2000s, in 2008-09 and in 2020, but they have been met with increasingly aggressive monetary policy easing.

Most policy makers now wish to see higher wages, higher inflation, lower unemployment, and eventually more ‘normal’ interest rate levels. This pivot towards both arms of policy working in tandem is designed to not only reflate economies but spread the benefits more widely than experienced over the years of reliance on monetary policy alone.

The 60:40 portfolio has easily met its objectives

The traditional balanced portfolio (60% growth, 40% defensive) has performed strongly in the predominately disinflationary regime of the past two decades, generating returns of 7.9% a year over the past 10 years and 6.9% over the past 20 years.

With inflation averaging just 2% over 10 years and 2.5% over 20 years, the traditional portfolio has easily achieved its return objective with relatively low volatility.

When equity market drawdowns have occurred, bonds have generally provided the diversification expected through a combination of yield and capital growth associated with declining yields on long duration securities. Even in the COVID-19 equity market downturn in 2020, bonds provided some gains to help cover initial equity losses.

Inflationary periods are different

But in earlier, more inflationary periods, this was not always the case. As the following chart shows, in inflationary periods, despite high yields to begin with, bond returns in real terms failed to offset equity market declines, and in some cases, compounded the problem.

In future, we may not be able to depend on bonds for diversification benefits if the negative correlation between bond and equity returns reverts to a positive correlation in an environment of rising inflation but with low, perhaps even suppressed, nominal yields.

What to expect in the future

It’s obvious that the income attribute of bonds has diminished significantly. While bonds would still likely produce solid capital growth in a deflationary regime, helping to offset equity declines, their ability to provide a dampener on volatility is likely to be found wanting in a rising inflation environment.

Even in an environment of low growth, low inflation and extremely accommodative policy bonds now rely almost totally on further capital gains (declining yields) to produce an offset to equity weakness.

If we assume that the 10-year forward returns for a 60:40 portfolio reflect a return to mean valuations and earnings for equities, and that the current 10-year yield is a good approximation of bond returns for the next 10 years, then a simple 60:40 portfolio in Australia might be projected to return around 4% in nominal terms over the next 10 years.

With inflation back to the target of 2.5%, that would generate real returns of 1.5% a year, significantly below most ‘CPI plus’ objectives and recent history.

Rather than assume the naïve mean reversion scenario, it would be useful to reflect on what might happen in different inflation regimes.

In the chart below we show for the US, that the 10-year return outlook varies considerably depending on the inflation regime.

In a simple mean reversion scenario, returns for a US 60:40 portfolio might be expected to be zero over the next 10 years.

Under a higher inflation scenario, we might expect a significant de-rating of equities. The average Shiller PE in high inflation regimes has been around 16 times, dragging total returns lower to an estimated -2% a year over the 10 years in nominal terms and -5.5% in real terms.

On the other hand, a continued low inflation regime (with more moderate mean reversion) would see returns closer to 3% a year (or 1-2% in real terms).

What are the solutions?

Bonds still have a role to play, particularly in the event of a major equity market drawdown related to a deflationary event or regime. As we saw earlier, a high inflation regime is typically not good for bonds and equities. The equity bear markets since 2000 have all occurred within a deflationary backdrop.

Here are five possible scenarios:

  1. Seeking yield and defensive attributes in asset classes such as unlisted infrastructure and direct property is one approach but introduces a level of illiquidity and exposure to a rise in real yields from current extreme lows.
  2. Certain hedge fund strategies have provided solid performance in equity drawdowns since 2000 but limited data from the higher inflation periods and the dispersion of performance across managers in this space creates another set of challenges.
  3. Higher yield in credit is a feature of the current investment environment but credit has a relatively high correlation to equities and spreads are already hovering near record lows. Some credit markets also have considerable duration risk.
  4. Buying defensive characteristics in quality equity exposures, high dividend or defensive sectors can also play a role although equity beta is still high, and these sectors also carry an exposure to rising bond yields.
  5. Offshore currency exposure for an Australian investor has provided portfolio diversification benefits during equity drawdowns with unhedged global equities providing similar performance to that of high yield during equity bear markets over the past two decades.

The chart below shows the performance of a range of these assets during the last three major equity market drawdowns.


Register here to receive the Firstlinks weekly newsletter for free

Investors want the best of all worlds

Investors desire income, growth, downside protection and inflation protection although often in different doses. Projected income returns are now very low, growth exposures come with a heavy price tag, while downside protection and inflation protection are generally expensive, sometimes illiquid, and difficult to access.

Rather than think in terms of an arbitrary 60% growth and 40% defensive portfolio, investors need to think in terms of the growth/defensive continuum and building a robust portfolio for a range of different environments. Defensive assets are often characterised as such based on having lower volatility but perhaps investors should be more concerned about the ability of an asset to provide downside protection in different scenarios.

Bonds provide downside protection in deflationary environments but not in periods of inflation. Inflation-linked bonds, gold and commodities are more volatile, but may provide a defense against inflation. Protection strategies, gold and bonds may be useful in a deflationary environment. Infrastructure and property assets offer modestly defensive characteristics in disinflationary scenarios but perhaps not so in economic downturns or rising inflation and interest rate phases. Some growth assets have relatively more defensive characteristics than others if they carry a certain factor, sector or regional exposure.

For Australian investors, unhedged global equities can provide some downside protection. By understanding an asset’s attributes in different circumstances rather than merely focusing on volatility and arbitrary definitions of growth and defensive assets, investors will be better placed to build truly balanced portfolios for the more challenging investment environment ahead.

 

Damien Hennessy is Head of Asset Allocation at Heuristic Investment Systems, a subsidiary of Zenith Investment Partners. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.

 

2 Comments
SMSF Trustee
August 02, 2021

Well, my portfolio is structured like this:
- TD's sufficient to cover 5-7 years of expenditure
- the rest is in a mix of 65% growth, 25% corporate bonds, 10% actively managed TAA funds

The TD's mean that if the equity or property markets take a dive, I don't have to touch the rest of the portfolio until it's recovered.

I realise not everyone will have anything left if they allocate 5-7 years of expenditure in TD's, but I think the principle is reasonable.

Never, ever, use low yielding government bonds in this strategy. Who cares about having a bit of the portfolio that performs like crap most of the time but does OK when the stock market falls if you've already got your income needs covered. Go for higher yielding corporate bonds like Bentham's global income fund.

Growth allocation is biased domestically because of franking credits.

Doug Turek
July 29, 2021

Important contribution. Well done. Engineered, repressively-low yields coupled with possibly mean reverting high P/E and E equities, even before worrying about rising prices, indeed creates a pessimistic outlook for returns and sustainable withdrawals. While I read 75/25 is the new 60/40 I wonder if instead the simplistic bucket theory approach to allocation is the (new?) paradigm, eg. hold 2-3 years of spending in cash and growth-asset invest the rest? and so forget % targets, forget most bonds, and learn to live with volatility (and franking credits). With cash, and bonds yielding, less than 1%, some of the short-term bucket can for probably the first time much more justifiably be gold (unhedged for downside protection and maybe hedged for inflation/falling-US$ protection) and non A$-currency exposure outside equities. Locally I am still looking for a non-A$ defensive bond/currency fund*, ie. medium-duration, high/medium credit duration US$ (or basket with Yen & SFR) bonds. It seems we can only find USD (cash ETF) or quite long duration (eg 8 years?) non-A$ gov't bonds which offering maturity risk. (*not all want to buy direct bonds or buy enough if they do for sufficient diversification). Some new downside protection products arguably could fit into this role.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

How inflation impacts different types of investments

When rates rise, it's time to look for new players on the team

The risk-return tradeoff: What’s the right asset mix for a 5% return?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

10 little-known pension traps prove the value of advice

Most people entering retirement do not see a financial adviser, mainly due to cost. It's a major problem because there are small mistakes a retiree can make which are expensive and avoidable if a few tips were known.

Check eligibility for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card

Eligibility for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card has no asset test and a relatively high income test. It's worth checking eligibility and the benefits of qualifying to save on the cost of medications.

Hamish Douglass on why the movie hasn’t ended yet

The focus is on Magellan for its investment performance and departure of the CEO, but Douglass says the pandemic, inflation, rising rates and Middle East tensions have not played out. Vindication is always long term.

Start the year right with the 2022 Retiree Checklist

This is our annual checklist of what retirees need to be aware of in 2022. It is a long list of 25 items and not everything will apply to your situation. Run your eye over the benefits and entitlements.

At 98-years-old, Charlie Munger still delivers the one-liners

The Warren Buffett/Charlie Munger partnership is the stuff of legends, but even Charlie admits it is coming to an end ("I'm nearly dead"). He is one of the few people in investing prepared to say what he thinks.

Should I pay off the mortgage or top up my superannuation?

Depending on personal circumstances, it may be time to rethink the bias to paying down housing debt over wealth accumulation in super. Do the sums and ask these four questions to plan for your future.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Three ways index investing masks extra risk

There are thousands of different indexes, and they are not all diversified and broadly-based. Watch for concentration risk in sectors and companies, and know the underlying assets in case liquidity is needed.

Investment strategies

Will 2022 be the year for quality companies?

It is easy to feel like an investing genius over the last 10 years, with most asset classes making wonderful gains. But if there's a setback, companies like Reece, ARB, Cochlear, REA Group and CSL will recover best.

Shares

2022 outlook: buy a raincoat but don't put it on yet

In the 11th year of a bull market, near the end of the cycle, some type of correction is likely. Underneath is solid, healthy and underpinned by strong earnings growth, but there's less room for mistakes.

Gold

Time to give up on gold?

In 2021, the gold price failed to sustain its strong rise since 2018, although it recovered after early losses. But where does gold sit in a world of inflation, rising rates and a competitor like Bitcoin?

Investment strategies

Global leaders reveal surprises of 2021, challenges for 2022

In a sentence or two, global experts across many fields are asked to summarise the biggest surprise of 2021, and enduring challenges into 2022. It's a short and sweet view of the changes we are all facing.

Shares

What were the big stockmarket listings in record 2021?

In 2021, sharemarket gains supported record levels of capital raisings and IPOs in Australia. The range of deals listed here shows the maturity of the local market in providing equity capital.

Economy

Let 'er rip: how high can debt-to-GDP ratios soar?

Governments and investors have been complacent about the build up of debt, but at some level, a ceiling exists. Are we near yet? Trouble is brewing, especially in the eurozone and emerging countries.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2022 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.