Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 253

How to use factors to tailor your investing

Factor-based investing has gained greater attention in recent years, in part because of the rise of alternatively-weighted indexes and ‘smart-beta’ products.

However, investing in factors is nothing new. Benjamin Graham and David Dodd published ideas on what we now call value investing in their book Security Analysis published in 1934.

Portfolios might tilt towards or away from certain factors. What is new about factor-based investing is using the factor lens to evaluate portfolios, crediting factors for their impact on risk and return.

Today, value investing is considered one type of factor strategy - with minimum volatility, quality, momentum and liquidity being other common factor strategies.

We think of factors as the DNA of an investment – the underlying attributes that explain and influence how an investment behaves. Factor strategies leverage the positive effects of factor exposures through systematic, diversified, and disciplined tilts.

With an increasing array of factor funds on offer, deciding what’s right for your portfolio can be difficult. By keeping some fundamentals in mind, investors can work out what might genuinely assist in reaching their financial goals.

Align your goals with your investment choices

How you use factors when constructing a portfolio depends on your goals. Rather than targeting pure outperformance with factor funds, you might be better off considering the kind of characteristics a certain factor can add to your portfolio. Your goals may involve specific time-horizon constraints, or varying risk profiles.

For example, those in pension phase with concerns about volatile markets may see the benefit in using a factor fund focused on minimising volatility in part of their equity exposure. This might apply especially when reallocating too large a sum to fixed interest could jeopardise the capital growth required to protect against outliving assets.

Historically, an investor may have looked towards equity funds that emphasised ‘defensive’ sectors or those with higher dividend yields for volatility reduction. However, while lower volatility can be, at times, a by-product of these types of strategies, it is not the objective. Additionally, products like these may lack proper diversification and not provide the downside protection when needed the most.

A minimum volatility strategy is optimised to provide equity returns with lower volatility than the broad markets in a diversified portfolio.

Alternatively, a growth-oriented investor might conclude that the style characteristics of their total global equities portfolio are not appropriate for the level of desired risk. If the investor wishes to maintain the outperformance potential of their existing funds while reducing the active risk, they could allocate a portion of their global equities portfolio to a value fund providing a value equity factor tilt.

Active or index?

Historically, investors may have accessed factor exposure through non-market capitalisation, index-weighted strategies. However, we view any portfolio that uses a non-cap-weighted scheme as an active portfolio. Factor-based investing uses factors like value, minimum volatility or a tilt to a certain sector to outperform the broader markets.

Using an active approach to factor implementation can provide greater control over factor exposure and reduce factor drift in the portfolio, with the flexibility to change portfolio holdings as needed. This is because positions can be adjusted as needed in order to maintain continual dynamic exposure to targeted factors.

Adopting lower cost active management to replace higher cost traditional active funds can remove one of the most persistent headwinds to active outperformance.

Consider the risks

Using factor products can help you employ a transparent, controlled active approach towards meeting your goals, but factor investing is not without risks. Similar to many forms of active management, factors can perform inconsistently and experience sustained periods of underperformance.

Factor-timing is difficult, in fact like any active tilt, factors carry higher risk relative to the broad market, and demand patience and conviction from investors. They must have the ability to resist the urge to sell down underperforming active positions which may recover and provide outperformance over the longer term.

Rather than trying to identify a sure-fire solution for outperformance in all market cycles, factor strategies should match your investment objectives and be sure you have the patience needed to stick with the strategy over the long term.

 

Michael Roach is Head of Quantitative Equity Group at Vanguard Australia, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. This article is in the nature of general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor.

 

  •   10 May 2018
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

What the market may be missing in FY27

The whirlwind is upon us

The psychology of REIT 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.

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.

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.

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.