📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Diversification and Balanced Investments

Options
What would you describe as a balanced portfolio?

Can an investor be over diversified?
«1

Comments

  • wombat42_2
    wombat42_2 Posts: 1,312 Forumite
    dboswell wrote: »
    What would you describe as a balanced portfolio?

    Can an investor be over diversified?

    I personally go for a mix of very safe and risky and nothing in between. I have cash savings and i have commodity investments - I belive that commodities in the long term are a very good bet.
  • Yes you can be over diversified. Big believer in diversification, however if you want growth in your portfolio, you have to take some level of risk with a decent proportion of you funds.

    Balanced would depend on the current economic climate and the current and future expectations of the markets, starting with the basic assets classes - cash, fixed interest (bonds), stock market funds, alternatives (commodities etc).

    I don't tend to invest clients in property as their overall portfolio is already heavy weighted towards property with their main residence.
  • theGrinch
    theGrinch Posts: 3,133 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    I agree with Brendan. If you over diversify you are reducing your risk but also your chances of out performing the market.

    for example, you need to determine how much of your overall investments you be in equities and then determine which regions, sectors, company types etc.
    "enough is a feast"...old Buddist proverb
  • Reaper
    Reaper Posts: 7,354 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    If you intend sticking your money into investments and then forgeting about it then diversification is important. Sectors go up and down so covering them all reduces risk.

    However if you are willing to research, move money about and take some mild risks to improve returns then diversifying into poorly performing sectors is not such a good idea.

    To give an example I recently set up a SIPP. I decided to put nothing into gilts because I don't think the future looks good for them. However if I was going to stick the money in and forget about it for 10 years then I would include them because they form a part of a balanced portfolio.
  • jon3001
    jon3001 Posts: 890 Forumite
    edited 14 April 2009 at 6:56PM
    theGrinch wrote: »
    I agree with Brendan. If you over diversify you are reducing your risk but also your chances of out performing the market.

    That's not necesssarily true. Roger Gibson examines portfolios in his book 'Asset Allocation'.
    http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q80oFFsiI3kC

    Consider four asset classes:
    A. Domestic Stocks (S&P 500)
    B. International Stocks (MSCI EAFE Index)
    C. Real Estate Securties (FTSE NAREIT Equity REITs Index)
    D. Commodity-Linked Securities (S&P GCSI Index)

    Between 1972 and 2005, an annually rebalanced portfolio consisting of ABCD (25% each) outperformed portfolios consisting solely of A, B, or D. Real Estate alone (C) had slightly higher returns (with much greater risk) but we know REITS have been disproportionately affected by the downturn in recent years.

    This was also among the least risky portfolios in terms of standard deviation of returns.

    exhibit5.png

    Further reading:
    http://www.tuveinvestments.com/pdf/Investing/AssetClass%20Investing.pdf
  • theGrinch
    theGrinch Posts: 3,133 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    edited 14 April 2009 at 8:33PM
    jon3001 wrote: »
    That's not necesssarily true. Roger Gibson examines portfolios in his book 'Asset Allocation'.
    http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q80oFFsiI3kC

    Consider four asset classes:
    A. Domestic Stocks (S&P 500)
    B. International Stocks (MSCI EAFE Index)
    C. Real Estate Securties (FTSE NAREIT Equity REITs Index)
    D. Commodity-Linked Securities (S&P GCSI Index)

    Between 1972 and 2005, an annually rebalanced portfolio consisting of ABCD (25% each) outperformed portfolios consisting solely of A, B, or D. Real Estate alone (C) had slightly higher returns (with much greater risk) but we know REITS have been disproportionately affected by the downturn in recent years.

    Naturally, you can find statistics for any book you wish to write, but perversely you confirm my point.

    The crux here is what we mean by "diversification". Thats the key.

    The inclusion of the four asset classes you cite is not over diversification in the slightest. In fact, I hold all four classes and more.

    Simply, thats diversification. I would say overdiversification, in the context of the OP is for example the use of a dozen funds tracking UK equities, where a smaller number of the top performers would suffice. Again, a dozen funds tracking a similar (but slightly different) basket of commodities could be considered overdiversification.

    You can have overdiversification between asset classes, but often it is within the asset class itself.
    "enough is a feast"...old Buddist proverb
  • Reaper wrote: »
    If you intend sticking your money into investments and then forgeting about it then diversification is important. Sectors go up and down so covering them all reduces risk.

    [FONT=&quot]Sticking money into an investment and forgetting about it till you need it (i.e. retirement) is extraordinarily lazy and irresponsible (sorry if I offended anyone).

    If you want your money to grow and become wealthier over time, you have to take a fairly active and sensible approach. Regularly reviewing is the key.[/FONT]
  • wombat42_2
    wombat42_2 Posts: 1,312 Forumite
    [FONT=&quot]Sticking money into an investment and forgetting about it till you need it (i.e. retirement) is extraordinarily lazy and irresponsible (sorry if I offended anyone). [/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]If you want your money to grow and become wealthier over time, you have to take a fairly active and sensible approach. Regularly reviewing is the key.[/FONT]

    But on the other hand it is good to keep a long term perspective and dont necessarily follow trendy fashionable sectors.
  • wombat42 wrote: »
    But on the other hand it is good to keep a long term perspective and dont necessarily follow trendy fashionable sectors.

    Absolutely! If the client has a long term horizon, then the investment plan will always be long term, the crucial thing to do is discuss with the client what is long term is so you're on the same page. However, short term changes can effect long term planning, hence the need to review.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 119,737 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Invest and forget is bad but also tinkering too frequently can be just as bad especially when fashion investing or trying to chase markets. Somewhere in between is better. Tinkering can be rebalancing to risk profile annually (and making sure investments held are still suitable).
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.