In our view, a sound investment portfolio should exhibit the following characteristics:
Click here to speak with one of our principals
In Structure explains performance, we introduced the following five, progressively more growth oriented and, hence, risky portfolios:
Asset Class / Portfolios |
“90/10” |
“70/30” |
“50/50” |
“30/70” |
“10/90” |
Cash and fixed Interest* |
90 |
70 |
50 |
30 |
10 |
Australian Shares** |
6 |
18 |
27.5 |
35 |
45 |
International Shares*** |
4 |
12 |
17.5 |
25 |
30 |
Property**** |
0 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
15 |
|
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
*As measured by UBS Warburg 90 Day Bank Bill Index
**As measured by S&P / ASX300 Accumulation Index
***As measured by MSCI World ex Australia (net dividends)
****As measured by S%P / ASX300 Property Trust Accumulation Index
These portfolios can be constructed using readily available passively managed index funds. They track accepted asset class benchmarks at relatively low cost compared with the parallel asset class offerings from active fund managers. Portfolios built from index funds deliver on most of the desirable portfolio characteristics summarised above:
The table below provides some of the key performance characteristics of the portfolios, based on relevant asset class benchmarks, both before and after inflation, for the period December 1981-June 2008.
Sign up for free information to help you make smart financial decisions
Portfolio Performance
December 1981 – June 2008
Portfolio |
Annualised Return (%) |
Growth of $1 |
Annualised Volatility (%) |
|||
|
Before Inflation |
After Inflation |
Before Inflation |
After Inflation |
Before Inflation |
After Inflation |
“90/10” |
9.81 |
5.37 |
$11.95 |
$4.00 |
2.70 |
2.20 |
“70/30” |
10.67 |
6.20 |
$14.67 |
$4.92 |
4.98 |
4.68 |
“50/50” |
11.39 |
6.90 |
$17.45 |
$5.86 |
7.43 |
7.22 |
“30/70” |
12.01 |
7.49 |
$20.20 |
$6.79 |
9.96 |
9.79 |
“10/90” |
12.57 |
8.04 |
$23.08 |
$7.75 |
12.60 |
12.47 |
While we believe all these portfolios are sound, their appropriateness depends on a person’s desired risk exposure – they vary considerably in terms of their risk/return outcomes and expectations.
For example, the above data indicates that the most defensive portfolio – the “90/10” - returned an average of 5.37% p.a. after inflation over the period, with annualised volatility of 2.2% p.a. This implies that about 95% of the annual returns varied between 1.0% and 10.8%.
In contrast, the highest growth portfolio – the “10/90” - returned an average 8.04% p.a. over the period with annualised volatility of 12.6%, implying about 95% of the annual returns varied between about -16.9% and 33.0%. To achieve the higher long term returns, you would have needed to be able to handle extreme volatility.
Click here to speak with one of our principals
However, this volatility was considerably lower than that which would have been experienced by an investor who placed 100% of their investment funds into one of the individual growth asset classes (i.e. Australian shares, international shares or property) over this period. The table below compares the after-inflation returns, growth of $1, volatility and range of 95% of returns for the “10/90” diversified growth portfolio compared with the individual growth asset classes:
Performance Comparison
High growth Portfolio v Growth Asset Classes
December 1981 – June 2008
Asset Class / Portfolios |
Annualised Return (%) |
Growth of $1 |
Annualised Volatility (%) |
Range of 95% of Annual Returns (%)
|
“10/90” |
8.04 |
7.75 |
12.47 |
-16.9 – 33.0 |
Australian Shares |
8.45 |
8.58 |
17.27 |
-26.1 – 43.0 |
International Shares |
7.02 |
6.04 |
16.82 |
-26.6 – 40.7 |
Property |
7.21 |
6.32 |
13.08 |
-19.0 - 33.4 |
The “10/90” portfolio reveals the benefits of diversification across the asset classes, achieving returns comparable with the individual growth asset classes but with a significant reduction in volatility. Any individual asset class may significantly outperform the diversified growth portfolio over short term periods (e.g. up to 3-5 years). However, over the long term (i.e. 10 plus years) it will achieve returns roughly equivalent to the weighted average of the individual asset classes, but with portfolio volatility almost certainly significantly below the weighted average volatility of the individual asset classes – the “free lunch” provided by diversification.
Sign up for free information to help you make smart financial decisions
Can adding the “small” and “value” share sub asset classes offer additional, soundly constructed portfolios with desirable risk/return characteristics? We think they can.
Rather than just replicating the performance of Australian and international large share benchmarks for the share components of our portfolios, in the table below we assume that both the Australian and international shares’ allocations are held as 50% large, 30% value and 20% small shares. The table compares the after inflation performance characteristics of the indexed or benchmarked portfolios with the “structured” portfolios i.e. those that include weightings to small and value shares.
Performance Comparison (After-inflation)
Indexed versus Structured
December 1981 – June 2008
Portfolio |
Annualised Return (%) |
Growth of $1 |
Annualised Volatility (%) |
|||
|
Indexed |
Structured |
Indexed |
Structured |
Indexed |
Structured |
“90/10” |
5.37 |
5.50 |
$4.00 |
$4.13 |
2.20 |
2.14 |
“70/30” |
6.20 |
6.67 |
$4.92 |
$5.54 |
4.68 |
4.55 |
“50/50” |
6.90 |
7.76 |
$5.86 |
$7.05 |
7.22 |
7.07 |
“30/70” |
7.49 |
8.54 |
$6.79 |
$8.77 |
9.79 |
9.60 |
“10/90” |
8.04 |
9.38 |
$7.75 |
$10.77 |
12.47 |
12.25 |
For all portfolios over the period examined, the structured alternative outperformed the indexed alternative, with a similar annualised volatility. If you interpret volatility as risk, it appears that by adding small and value share components to the portfolios you would have achieved a higher return without additional risk.
We do not believe in such financial alchemy. If the structured portfolios outperformed the indexed portfolios in the past and are expected to do so in the future, they must be riskier. Volatility is only a measure of risk and not the measure of risk. There are other elements of risk (e.g. short term illiquidity, particularly for small shares) driving the higher returns.
So, we do not think the structured portfolios are necessarily better than the indexed portfolios. However, the funds to implement the portfolios are available in Australia and provide the opportunity to build sound portfolios with additional risk/return characteristics to those provided by indexed funds.
This eBook makes the value of financial planning more concrete by examining actual client experiences with the "Wealth Foundations Way". It examines the changes in the financial situations of ten clients who have agreed to share their progress over the time they have been working with a Wealth Foundations' principal
* No registration required
Should you find our eBook of value, please feel free to email to a friend or colleague or post on your blog.