Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 58

Think about risks as well as returns

When investors talk about stocks, the focus tends to be on which stocks have the potential to perform the best, and that is understandable. Professional fund managers typically do the same.

But portfolio risk management probably doesn’t get as much attention as it deserves. Risk management can make for boring conversation, but it is important for investors who hope to succeed over long periods of time.

In fact, in one sense, risk and return can be thought of as the same thing. This is best illustrated with an example. Imagine that you have two potential investments: one is an investment in a stock market index that is expected to return 10% per annum with a moderate level of risk. The other investment is in one stock that is expected to return 8% per annum but with half the risk of the stock market index. Let’s also assume you can borrow at an interest rate of 5%.

As a long term investor who is happy to accept the ups and downs of the stock market, you might think you are better off taking the 10% return, which should result in a better long term result. However, here is another way of thinking about it.

$100 invested in the first strategy has an expected return of $10 over one year, whereas $100 invested in the second has an expected return of $8 over one year. However, consider a strategy of investing $100 in the second stock, and also borrowing an additional $100 at 5% interest and investing that as well.

You now have $200 earning 8%, which gives you an expected return of $16. You will need to pay $5 of interest on the borrowed money, so your net return will be $11.

That $11 is better than the $10 you could get in the index, but what about risk – doesn’t the leverage make this a risky strategy? In this case, the answer is no. If the 8% strategy has half the risk of the 10% strategy, then in simple terms you can invest twice as much into that strategy and still have the same total level of risk. In other words, the leveraged approach that that gets you an $11 return has the same risk as the first strategy that gets you $10. Now which one should you prefer?

The point of all this is that risk and return can – to some extent – be thought of as substitutes for one another, and reducing risk can be worth just as much as getting a higher return. The consequence is that you can’t sensibly measure one without knowing something about the other.

This concept is important when comparing different fund managers. There is a tendency in the industry to rank fund managers on the returns they achieved over (for example) the last 12 months, with little regard to the risk taken to get those returns.

But managers have very different styles. Some will try to hit the ball out of the park by taking large bets on particular companies or themes, and even using leverage. When those bets succeed, that manager will be at the top of the league table (and will tell all and sundry about it). When they miss, the manager will be at the bottom (and stay relatively quiet). Managers who take a more cautious approach are less likely to be at either extreme.

Because of these differences, making performance comparisons is not a straightforward business. It is important for individual investors to think carefully about position sizes and in what circumstances they will hold cash or use leverage. It can be even more important in assessing fund managers: a manager who earns a performance fee in years when they do hit the ball out of the park is not going to give it back the following year if they strike out. As a result, high risk fund managers can impose substantial hidden costs on unwary investors. An investor should understand the risk as well as the expected return in any investment.

 

Roger Montgomery is the Founder and Chief Investment Officer at The Montgomery Fund, and author of the bestseller ‘Value.able

 

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

The huge cost of super tax concessions

The current net annual cost of superannuation tax subsidies is around $40 billion, growing to more than $110 billion by 2060. These subsidies have always been bad policy, representing a waste of taxpayers' money.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 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.