Determining an Appropriate Asset Allocation
An investor with a very low tolerance for risk (due to a short time horizon
or lack of appetite for risk) is virtually forced to allocate close to 100% of
their funds to Cash.
Conversely an investor with a very high tolerance for risk (which usually
requires both a very long time horizon and a high tolerance for volatility) may
choose 100% equities.
Most investors probably fall in between. They may have a relatively long time
horizon. But there may be a chance that some life event could cause them to need
to liquidate assets unexpectedly. Also most people do not have a very high
tolerance for downward volatility and prefer to see a steadier march forward.
A proper determination of the asset allocation is probably best achieved
through the services of a competent Financial Planner. Planners can use
simulation software that can predict possible future volatility of a portfolio,
based on the asset mix chosen and on historic rates of return and volatility be
rate class. The software can show not only how the portfolio is expected to
grow, but also what can happen in extreme scenarios. Risk and return decisions
are not intuitive, most people will make very poor decisions unless they are
shown a full range of possible results from simulation software.
Left to their own devices, too many investors (who may need the money in the
short term) are probably taking on too much
risk by over-allocating to stocks. Investors tend to have a poor
understanding of the likely risks and rewards. We tend to be over-optimistic and
we tend to think that stocks are like playing the lottery, except we really
don't expect to lose.
Taking a lottery ticket approach is probably okay if we allocate a bit of
"fun" money to that game. But investors should not be thinking in terms of
winning the lottery when it comes to retirement funds. Rather, we should be
thinking of maximizing out expected returns within our risk constraint. That
means we first have to define our risk constraint and then understand the best
asset mix associated with that risk constraint. The best way to do that is to
consult a Financial Planner who has access to simulation software. Investors
should insist on seeing simulated results for multiple scenarios, before
deciding on their asset allocation.
In the absence of asset allocation modeling software, it may help to examine
graphs of actual performance of the three
asset classes over various periods of time.
For the investor that has a long time horizon and who is comfortable with the
volatility of annual returns and the volatility of potential long term outcomes,
a 100% allocation to stocks may be quite acceptable.
Modern Portfolio theory actually teaches that this investor could get the
same return with less risk by investing in a optimum combination of stocks and
bonds and then borrowing money to dial in more risk and more return. There are
several problems with this. First there is no agreement on what constitutes the
optimal "market portfolio" allocation of stocks and bonds. Second, most
investors are inherently nervous about borrowing for investment. Third, when I
attempted to simulate this strategy on actual data over the last 79 years, it
did not appear to work. There were some periods where stocks out-performed to
such an extent that no amount of leveraging of a portfolio with a significant
percentage of bonds, could keep up with the stocks. Over other periods the risk
reduction was minimal. I concluded that a highly risk tolerant investor should
simply invest in 100% stocks and not attempt to mix in bonds and then boost the
return through borrowing and leveraging.
Other Asset Classes
Some other asset classes including precious metals and real estate can
potentially offer high returns. In addition these asset classes are not highly
correlated with stock and bond returns. Investing a small percentage of assets
in these alternative asset classes can substantially reduce risk, while
potentially having a small positive or negative impact on overall long-term
returns. Again, simulation software is probably the only reasonable way to get a
handle on this.
Asset Class Timing and Rebalancing
It would be wonderful to constantly have most of your assets in the best
performing asset class each year. But attempting that on a large scale defeats
the risk management aspects of having a mixture of asset classes. If an investor
believes that they have access to a reliable way to predict which asset classes
will out-perform, then it may be worth it to slightly alter the asset allocation
in that direction. However, this strategy should be limited to only moderate
changes in the asset allocation in order not to destroy the risk management
aspect of asset allocation.
Asset rebalancing refers to re-setting the portfolio to the target asset mix
periodically. For example if stocks performed best, then some of the winnings
from stocks are reallocated to the other asset classes periodically in order to
prevent the stock allocation from getting much higher than the target allocation
to stocks. This also provides benefits from "dollar cost averaging" since it
forces investors to buy the asset class that has moved down in price and sell
the class that has moved up the most in price.
Conclusion
In conclusion, consider a visit to a Financial Planner who has proper asset
class simulation software. It pays to get this very basic investment decision
right before moving on to stock picking. Too many people are diving into stock
picking, hoping to "win the lottery", when they have not really stopped to
understand the rules of the game and the expected pay-offs.
November 27, 2002 (with minor edits June 17, 2005)
Shawn Allen, CFA, CMA, MBA, P.Eng.
President, InvestorsFriend Inc.