Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 31

Managing credit risk requires healthy dose of cynicism

Successful investing is about taking appropriate risks for appropriate rewards to achieve realistic return objectives. If credit risk is not managed properly, it can be potentially disastrous for a portfolio. Managed well, credit risk can provide reliable, attractive income, with good levels of capital stability. This two-part series helps achieve the latter, especially at a time when many investors are switching out of term deposits in search for better yields.

Part 1 provided an overview of credit risk – what it is and why is it important. In this 2nd part the focus is on the key elements of managing credit risk. How can an investor not only capture the additional yield that credit risk provides, but keep that extra return rather than losing it to defaults? Capturing and keeping excess returns is the goal of credit risk management.

Corporate bonds, debentures and the like provide investors with an opportunity to capture higher returns than are paid by the safest investments such as cash or Australian government bonds. Markets have historically priced corporate bonds so that lower credit quality securities pay a higher yield than higher quality assets. AAA and AA rated bonds have normally paid investors around 1% more than similar maturity government bonds, with the spread widening to above 2% for BBB rated securities and more like 4 – 7% on BB and B.

There are more determinants of the yield on an individual bond than just its credit rating, but it’s a major influence.

Turning those higher yields into higher returns is the key to sound investment strategy. How can that be done?

Need for a cynical attitude

The simple answer is: avoid the duds. In the ideal situation you will do your research and always make very clever choices so that you never invest in companies that fail.

Credit research is different to equity research. Stock picking in the share market is mostly about looking for the positive stories, searching for upside opportunities for a company’s share price. Credit risk rating requires a cynical attitude. There is no ‘upside’ with bond investing. Either you earn your interest and get the principal back or you incur default losses which could be from small amounts to 100% of capital. That is why credit research has to focus on looking for what could go wrong, evaluating the downside risk. Assessing a borrower’s capacity to pay back their debt is very different to evaluating the prospects for growing earnings.

Further, you have to monitor each investment because credit quality can change. It’s not good enough to form a view when you buy an asset and then forget about it. Managing credit risk requires that if you detect deterioration in credit quality you think carefully about whether to sell out of that asset before things get worse.

Of course, in reality no one gets every decision right. Even if your research has been excellent, the world can change and a business’s franchise unravel. There is also the possibility of fraud. For these reasons, investors have to assume that some companies they believe are of good quality will fail. None of the credit ratings summarised in part 1 has a non-zero probability of default, even AAA.

You have to assume that even the best quality issuer, with the best intentions in the world, could let you down.

Minimise the impact of a bad credit

Therefore, the answer to the question about how to capture and keep the extra returns from credit investing has a second element: ‘minimise the impact of the duds on your portfolio’. This requires a high standard of portfolio construction, with an emphasis on diversification, which is the only way to effectively manage credit risk.

What does ‘diversification’ mean? In essence, diversification of a credit portfolio involves holding a large number of different investments, none of which is a significant proportion of the total.

Let’s say you have a portfolio of corporate bonds that provide an average yield that is 1.5% more than a ‘risk-free’ portfolio – say, a mix of cash and government bonds. If this portfolio is made up of only 10 individual assets, then if one of them defaults you could lose up to 10% of your total portfolio. That wipes out about 7 years’ worth of that extra 1.5% per annum in income you had expected to earn.

If, however, you had 100 individual assets in the portfolio and one of them defaulted, your loss would be only up to 1% of your capital. That would reduce your excess return in the year in which it happened to 0.5% above the risk-free return, but the remaining 99 bonds would continue to earn their average yield – close to 1.5% - thereafter. Obviously, if you have even more individual assets, then the impact of any one default reduces further. Conversely, a retail investor will not be able to assemble 100 individual bonds, but the same general risk diversification principle applies.

Reducing the impact of any default

The next element of a good diversification strategy is to minimise the risk that if one of your holdings defaults then so will another. You don’t want risks that are correlated. For example, if you have 2 or 3 bonds in the same industry in the same country, then if demand for their product dries up there’s a good chance that all of them might fail, not just 1 of them. It’s better to have both than only 1 (provided the credit quality is similar), but it’s even more properly diversified if you halved the weight for both of them and replaced that half with exposures to different industries altogether.

Finally, it is sound practice to have lower limits on the lower credit rated assets. A portfolio of AAA and AA assets can be more concentrated than one that goes down into A and BBB, and it is wise to have even smaller exposure limits on BB and B rated bonds. The probability of default should be inverse to the amount you invest.

The beauty of this is that you don’t have to give up return in order to manage risk. 100 bonds paying 1.5% above your benchmark will deliver the same gross return as 1 bond paying 1.5% above your benchmark. But you have a much greater chance of actually earning that 1.5% in a diversified portfolio than a single security investment.

In the world of credit risk, you need to understand the capacity of the borrower to pay what they’ve promised, then assume that they will let you down anyway and avoid concentrating your portfolio with them. Taking a large number of smaller exposures is the best way to capture and keep the returns that you are looking for.

 

Warren Bird was Co-Head of Global Fixed Interest and Credit at Colonial First State Global Asset Management until February 2013. His roles now include consulting, serving as an External Member of the GESB Board Investment Committee and writing on fixed interest, including for KangaNews.

 

  •   13 September 2013
  • 2
  •      
  •   
2 Comments
Tony Cavaliero
December 14, 2023

Warren,
One of your later articles led me to this article about managing risk. You say if your porfolie has "100 bonds....." but what is actually practical for smaller portfolios or position in this instrument? 100 bonds in 100k portfolio may not be practical.

Warren Bird
June 12, 2024

Tony, I have to confess that I didn't see this comment/question when you posted it a few months ago. So here's a belated response.

You are right - in an ordinary person's individual portfolio it isn't practical, or even possible, to directly acquire a sufficient number of bonds to diversify properly. Not only would it require buying very small amounts of individual bonds (in the example you give it would be 100 x $1,000 transactions) and that's not really possible. Even further, when I talk about diversification, I mean that you need to spread your holdings across industries and countries, which means you'd be trying to buy corporate bonds issued in around the world. That needs foreign currency to buy them and then you have to decide how to manage the FX risk.

That's why in my articles on credit risk management I've always said something like, 'this is where managed funds come into their own'. A pooled fund - a unit trust or an ETF - can easily acquire the number of bonds needed, managing the currency issues efficiently and spreading the risks appropriately. $100k invested in a fund like that enables small effective exposures to individual bonds.

Or, these days, there are funds that also gain exposure to loans. Private credit investing is a way of gaining some exposure potentially to a more diverse array of businesses that don't normally sell bonds into the public capital markets.

Personally, I further diversify by style of credit risk manager and have 3 different funds in my SMSF. Do your research and get advice, but there are some very experienced and well-respected fund managers in both bonds and private credit that are worthy of consideration.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Give this risk the credit it deserves

The case for high yield bonds

Now you can earn 5% on bonds but stay with quality

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Superannuation’s structural failings

Politicians are fighting over access to super, but they may be arguing about the wrong thing. The system’s three fundamental flaws have been hiding in plain sight for decades, costing Australians far more than they realise.

Planning

The great wealth transfer myth

Why do some families preserve wealth for generations while others struggle to? As the great wealth transfer unfolds, the determining factor is often not the structure of the estate, but the preparation of those who will inherit it.

Investment strategies

What comes after bank hybrids?

For years, bank hybrids have been a cornerstone of portfolio income. With tens of billions of dollars now disappearing from the market, investors face a critical question: what comes next, and are the obvious replacements enough?

Investment insights from the US

What happens when knowledge becomes a commodity? The latest themes emerging from the US tech sector suggest AI could reshape company moats, disrupt incumbents and create winners and losers in unexpected places.

Investing

Can Berkshire thrive without Buffett?

Warren Buffett's departure marks the end of an era. But the more important question for investors is whether Berkshire's culture, discipline and capital allocation framework can survive without the man who built them.

Retirement

The Bengen 4% Rule: Lost in translation

For years, retirees have been told to focus on withdrawal rates. But the real question is far simpler: how many dollars can you safely spend? The answer may be very different from what conventional retirement wisdom suggests.

Interest rates

Super low interest rates came with side effects

For more than a decade, investors lived through an era of near-zero interest rates. With bond yields now surging, it's worth asking whether cheap money solved economic problems, or introduced a much larger set of risks.

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.