Skip to main content

Am I really diversified?

 In the book A Random Walk Down Wall Street author Burton Malkiel argues that the stock market is, as the title suggests, a random walk. In the book, which is cited and echoed by famous industry titans like Jack Bogle of Vanguard fame, it:

1. Makes little sense to think that you can beat the market. Indeed, on average you'll lose money when picking stocks.

2. In looking at when to invest and cash out of stocks, if you try to time the market you'll inevitably do worse. 

This advice really stuck with me and I still believe this to be the case. But in the current environment, as many smart people do, I do find myself asking myself if it is different this time. Much of this is due to the performance of "broad market" indices.

Diversification is the idea that by spreading your investment over many companies, you lower the volatility. You might have less upside, but you also have less downside risk. In the end, you're hoping the market as a whole does well, more than any individual stock.

I echo the sentiments of many people who think that the market seems to be disconnected with reality. In the midst of the pandemic, indices like The Dow Jones Industrial Average had phenomenal results even while the market was shut down and we believed that there were no viable vaccines. The market plunge in March 2020 did not last long. And that run up has continued.

Indeed when considering the constituents of the S+P 500, more than 15 percent is in just three companies. 

So, if you believe the advice of titans, what does that mean about owning index funds that are based off of highly concentrated indices? In a world of high volatility where dramatic swings have such an impact on the constituents of market cap weighted indices, I think it is worth considering whether or not you are truly diversified if your goal of diversification is to take a slightly lower return as an exchange for less downside risk. 

Personally, I have several mutual funds, but when I compared them, there was a high degree of overlap in their top holdings. While I believe the advice of titans, I don't know that all mutual funds are truly providing the diversification that I thought I was getting. I did my rebalancing with this in mind and chose funds that met similar goals for my long term investing plan and adjusted during my rebalance to those funds to reduce the overall exposure to these large S+P names. 

Bulls will say that these stocks will do exceedingly well into the future, enough to justify these high ratios. I wouldn't bet against them, but for me, having a large chunk of my investments in companies that are so tightly linked feels riskier than I'd like. Couple that with the high ratios, and I was happy to rebalance.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Buying a Lifestyle...with a Fixed-Rate Mortgage

Despite all of the back and forth about sub-prime mortgages and the housing bubble, I am feeling just fine. The reason is that when purchasing, I followed some old advice: Don't expect to flip. In general, I've been told by many people that you shouldn't buy a home unless you plan to hold on to it for 7 years or longer. If the market does well and you decide to sell, fine. But if you want to be sure not to lose money, don't buy something that you only want for a year or two. I've been in my current location for more than 3 years. I like it. And I have no intention of leaving in the short or medium term. It seems to me, that real estate, like any asset class, has its ups and downs. But as a practical point, I don't look at my home as an asset per se. Rather, I consider it to be a fixed expense that I need to survive, much like food and water. Therefore, as long as the payment is reasonable and it functions to keep me warm and sheltered and comfortable, that is a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Do Better With Your Time

Recently, I've been extremely busy with some work commitments. The interesting thing for me is that this increased work activity has really helped crystallize some of my feelings with regard to time. And these ideas are a critical part about my view on personal finance. I'm curious to know if others feel similarly. Time is money. That is, Time, in some way, contains energy. Money, is also energy. In the act of working, I am able to compound and increase the amount of money that I have. I am exchanging my time and effort and thought which are components of my work, for the productivity that I produce. And this production gets me money from my employer. However, the first dollars that I make each day, week, or month are the most valuable. Then the ones that I make at the end are the most valuable. (Forget about taxes for a minute.) The reason is, the first ones help me have a place to live and food to eat. And the last ones are the ones that I can use to really improve my life lo...
3 comments
Read more

Blogging WealthTrack: Christine Benz (Retire Early? Or not?)

 This morning I've watched an interesting video on Consuelo Mack: WealthTrack. Here, Consuelo's guest, a longtime contributor, Christine Benz, a personal finance expert from Morningstar joined Consuelo for a discussion on issues related to retirement, in particular in the current market environments. This conversation is even more interesting against the backdrop of The Great Resignation. I found Christine's advice to be particularly interesting on a couple of fronts. Her advice in dealing with talking about retirement in general, in particular for people who are in the process of thinking about retiring early gave me pause. She is considering the traditional advice of a 4 percent withdrawal rate to be dangerous and indeed, actually concerning. According to the recent research she cites, a 3% withdrawal rate is a better option. Even more than the four percent rule, I think that her comments on annuities are particularly interesting. While annuities have been given a bad nam...
Post a Comment
Read more