Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Portfolio Power Tools

Portfolio Power Tools: Diversification, Asset Allocation, and Rebalancing

Y'all know about power tools. Those are the tools that magnify what you might do manually. Often, they allow you to do things that couldn't be done any other way. Here are three portfolio power tools that are safe, efficient, effective, inexpensive, and easy to use.
Diversification
Diversification means that different kinds of investments are held in many countries, roughly in proportion to the size of the markets they represent.

For example, the US has the largest single-country representation of stocks with about 55% of global assets. The other 45% is spread across all the other countries with Japan, China, Hong Kong, the UK and Europe comprising the largest segments. 

Diversification also means holding investments in smaller companies as well as the behemoths, and across all major industries. While the behemoths represent about 70% of global markets, diversification benefits can be realized by holding mid and small-sized companies. Hence, a total stock market fund would be a more diverse holding than an S&P500 fund.

Holding three major bank funds or ETFs is not diversification. Neither is hanging on to your company's stock because you're so loyal.

In the bond market, diversification means holding a spectrum of maturities from short to long, and a spectrum of quality from AAA to junk.

Diversification reduces portfolio volatility. The major advantage of this is that it makes it easier to stick with a portfolio in high-stress markets.

Diversification helps manage non-systemic and systemic risk. That's geeky jargon for risks that can be minimized and risks that are simply unavoidable.

Non-systemic risk is company-specific risk. It's the risk that batteries catch fire, food is tainted, proprietary computer systems are hacked. This risk is avoidable. Just own a lot of different companies. While a few may be spectacular failures and others equally spectacular successes, the entire package remains viable.

Systemic risk is market-specific risk. It's the risk that remains after non-systemic risk is diversified away. Think of it as "market risk"-- the risk of overall market chaos and dysfunction. It's the risk that appeared in 2008. This risk cannot be diversified away; it is a market feature. The only way to avoid it is not to invest there.

Reference:

Asset Allocation
There are only two major asset classes that comprise most security-based* investment portfolios: equities (stocks) and fixed income (bonds). Everything else is a sub-class of those two things. "Cash" itself is a high quality, short-duration class of fixed income.

Asset allocation is the result of deciding how much of the portfolio to put in each asset class. This is not hard to do. Effective global asset allocation can actually be accomplished with one fund.

Factors that come into play when deciding on allocating assets are:
  • Desired returns. Higher returns require a greater allocation to stocks; more modest returns, more bonds.
  • Willingness to endure price volatility. More willingness allows for more equities; less willingness, more fixed income.
  • How long it will be until the money is used. Sometimes this is called timeframe. Our Five-Year Rule says that any money earmarked for use within five-years must be invested in a bond asset class. Conversely, 100% of any money earmarked for use beyond five-years can be invested in stocks.
* None security-based investment portfolios would include real estate, collectibles, commodities.

Rebalancing
Rebalancing is when adjustments are made to a portfolio in order to hew it closely (within 5%-10%) to its intended asset allocation. Three things might lead to a rebalancing action:

1. Large portfolio withdrawals.
2. Large portfolio additions.
3. Significant outperformance or underperformance occurred in one or more asset classes.

A Vanguard paper concluded that more frequent rebalancing is not especially productive, and that even a policy of not rebalancing is a viable strategy. There's even a thing called "rebalance timing luck." The robo-adviser industry hype of frequent rebalancing is fluff; it's main purpose is to impress you that they're doing something to your great advantage.

There's no point in making this more complicated than necessary. Like most things, simple beats complex; less tinkering leads to better results. Don't just do something; sit there.


A 2017 paper titled Vanguard's Framework for Constructing Globally Diversified Portfolios provides a more detailed treatment of these power tools.

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

Globally Diversified Portfolios

Globally Diversified Portfolios

The portfolios of most Americans exhibit significant and unjustified home country bias-- the tendency to favor their own country's securities more than other countries.

In fact, US and non-US stocks historically move to their own drummers. The charts below illustrate this. And that's really why globally diversified portfolios contain both US and non-US stocks. This is the source of the so-called diversification benefit.

But just how much of an allocation to non-US stocks does a portfolio need to have to be effectively diversified? Here are some guidelines:
  •  The value of non-US stocks is about 45% of the world's total and US stocks are about 55%. So, a globally diversified portfolio could begin there. It means that 45% of the equity portion of a portfolio could legitimately be in non-US stocks. 
  • Vanguard's Life Strategy and Target Date Funds are quite close to this. They consistently maintain a 40% non-US allocation in those funds.

Interestingly, a recent Vanguard Blog post, from which several of the charts shown below were drawn, drew comments that were unanimously hostile to international investing. This only encouraged to me to add my own comment-- something I do about once every 10 years-- to say that I just love it when everyone gets on the same side of the boat. It's the biggest 'tell' there is. Perhaps I should be more direct: I'm a huge proponent of international investing.

Global equity valuations: Cheap again.

 
https://www.topdowncharts.com/single-post/2019/01/27/Global-Equity-Valuations-Cheap-Again

 


https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/financial-basics/investing-in-international-stocks




Line chart showing time periods where global equity volatility was less than U.S. equity volatility.
 https://vanguardblog.com/2019/02/14/the-case-for-global-equity-investing-and-a-happy-marriage/

About Correlation
Correlation measures the tendency of two investments to move in the same or opposite direction. Highly correlated assets pretty much move together; lowly correlated ones tend to diverge. Correlation does not measure magnitude and correlation is rarely cause.

VTI (total US stock market) and VXUS (total international stocks) have a very high positive correlation-- .88-- but very different returns. Why is this good? In the chart below, you can see that between 2002 and 2007, U.S. stocks nearly doubled, while international stocks nearly tripled. In the last few years, U.S. stocks have far outperformed.



No one knows which will do better over the next few years. In the meantime, owning the world still provides diversification in this highly correlated world.

 
Countries Adding the Most to Global Growth 

 The Economies Adding the Most to Global Growth in 2019


A recent paper by Bridgewater Associates highlights the skewed allocations of many portfolios and argues for a more diversified approach. For additional points of view on this topic, go here, here, here, and here.

Update: June 7, 2019
From Morningstar: Investors Have Fewer Reasons than Ever for Home Bias


Update: May 24, 2019 
From a Vanguard paper titled "Embracing A Global Stock Market."