DOCSLIB.ORG

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly MARKET INDEXES AS BENCHMARKS The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly By Jeremy Wadsworth he first stock market index was cre- The Good 1. Indexes do not incorporate transaction ated in 1896 by Charles H. Dow. That The use of market indexes as the investor’s costs, expense ratios, or tax T market index, which he aptly named primary benchmark has had several signifi- consequences. the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), cant, positive influences on the investment 2. Indexes shift the focus to security selec- was an average of the top 12 stocks in the industry. Benchmarking against an index is tion rather than asset allocation. market. Over the next few decades, other simple to execute, easy to comprehend, and 3. Many asset classes have several companies began developing alternative creates a quantifiable goal for a manager. accepted indexes that have varying risk indexes and mechanisms that could mea- These traits have simplified investing for the and return characteristics. sure the movement of the overall market. general population. By increasing under- 4. Indexes may not focus or align with a In 1946, the S&P 500 as we know it today standing and clarity regarding the markets, client’s specific goals. was published. These indexes helped bring indexes have given individuals the confi- 5. Managing to an index may lead to poor transparency and a better understanding dence to put their hard-earned dollars to long-term performance. of the markets to investors. An unforeseen work in the market. Indexes have devel- consequence at the time, however, was the oped transparency for the average investor Indexes Do Not Incorporate influence indexes eventually would have as well as the media, making investing and Transaction Costs, Expense on the investor’s decision-making process. the markets part of everyday life. Ratios, or Tax Consequences Market indexes such as DJIA and S&P 500 The S&P 500 may accurately estimate the have become mainstays of the investment Furthermore, market indexes have revolu- overall movement of the U.S. equity mar- industry. Today, almost every fund man- tionized the investment industry through ket, but investing directly in the S&P 500 at ager is compared to the most relevant investment products designed to track zero cost is impossible. Exchange-traded index, and almost every financial advisor is market indexes. These passive investments funds (ETFs) and mutual funds have compared to the performance of the overall track the performance of a given market expense ratios, transaction costs, and bid- market. But a clear distinction must be index at a very low cost to investors— ask spreads (for ETFs) that the investor made between an index and a benchmark. sometimes as low as only a few basis points, must pay. Therefore, if a market index is An index is a group of securities gathered allowing investors to gain exposure to an technically unachievable, does it make together to provide a measure of a market. asset class at virtually no cost. This innova- sense to compare a manager to it? If the A benchmark, though, is a tool used to tion has had widespread effects, especially goal of a manager is to beat a benchmark, judge the relative performance of a stock/ in recent years, because active managers shouldn’t the benchmark be a realistic manager/advisor. Market indexes have have been forced to justify the higher fees investable alternative? Shouldn’t the bench- become the industry’s unrivaled bench- associated with their products. Margin mark represent a viable option if the inves- mark. Many advisors accept indexes as a pressure has occurred across the industry tor chose to invest alone, without the natural part of the industry and their work, and fees have been lowered almost univer- manager? but these man-made yardsticks need to be sally, certainly an advantage for investors. thoughtfully understood. This article pro- These benefits cannot be undervalued and This may seem trivial, but additional exam- vides a framework that can help advisors have transformed the investment industry ination illuminates the conundrum. Instead think about indexes and benchmarks and in a positive manner. of using the S&P 500, consider using an explain them to clients. The rise in promi- S&P index fund as a benchmark. Index nence of market indexes has been accom- The Bad funds are readily investable options, often panied by many influential and largely Market indexes have brought big-picture have no transaction fees on some custodial unintended consequences—some of them benefits to the investment industry, but they platforms, and typically have extremely low good, some of them bad, and some of them make poor benchmarks for the following expense ratios. Comparing a fund manager rather ugly. reasons: to an S&P index fund would largely result MAY / JUNE 2017 41 © 2017 Investment Management Consultants Association Inc. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved. FEATURE | The GOOD, The BAD, and The UGLY in the same conclusions as if one compared pre-tax basis. On an after-tax basis, how- due to larger allocations to international the fund manager to the S&P 500. However, ever, the PIMCO fund underperformed the equities and real estate, both of which pro- this story does not work for all asset classes. Vanguard fund by 0.8 percent. The tax effi- duced stronger returns than U.S. equities. Commodities, for instance, do not have a ciency of the Vanguard fund made it a bet- As seen here, the allocation decision played fund that closely tracks an accepted index ter option in a taxable account despite the a much larger role in the investor’s final for an extremely low cost. For example, the reported lower return. For any investor who return than the over/underperformance DFA Commodity Strategy is the cheapest is purchasing real estate in a taxable account, within an individual asset class. commodity fund available (expense ratio of comparing the after-tax returns is essential. 0.34 percent) and is one of the most index- Market indexes do not take into consider- This example does not make the case for like funds an investor can find in the com- ation any tax consequences, so a reasonable passive management; outperformance of a modity space. In this case, there is a higher comparison is difficult. benchmark within an asset class certainly possibility that a fund manager may under- adds long-term value. This example shows perform the Bloomberg Commodity Index, Indexes Shift the Focus to how asset allocation can have a greater the most widely accepted commodity Security Selection Rather effect than specific manager performance index, but outperform the DFA fund, a Than Asset Allocation on long-term returns. Across the industry, realistic investable alternative. Put simply, Using market indexes as benchmarks for significant resources and time spent with a pure index does not represent a genuine financial advisors is also problematic. An clients are focused on benchmark-oriented comparison. unfortunate side effect of comparing a returns within an asset class, and less atten- financial advisor’s performance to a bench- tion is placed on asset allocation. By focus- Additionally, indexes do not incorporate mark is the emphasis on security selection ing on benchmark-relative returns, the any tax consequences. For U.S. equities, one versus asset allocation. A U.S. equity fund investment industry may have its priorities could use a passively managed ETF, which that returns 11 percent when the S&P 500 backward when allocating time and rarely distributes capital gains or income, as returns 10 percent may make an investor resources. a benchmark rather than the S&P 500, and happy, but the allocation between various including tax consequences would not asset classes has a potentially bigger effect One way to emphasize asset allocation make a substantive difference. Other asset on this investor’s overall return. decisions may be to select a diversified classes, however, are not as tax-efficient. portfolio or fund as a benchmark when Within real estate, for example, there can be Table 2 shows that Investor A outper- evaluating financial advisors. Several exam- a large discrepancy between the pre-tax formed Investor B in every single asset ples fit this profile, including the Vanguard return for a fund and the after-tax return class. But Investor B outperformed LifeStrategy funds, the BlackRock Target for a fund. Investor A on a total portfolio basis due to Allocation funds, and the Fidelity Asset asset allocation decisions. Many people Manager funds. These funds typically invest For example, table 1 shows that the PIMCO would not question the allocation differ- in U.S. bonds, international bonds, U.S. Real Estate Real Return fund outperformed ence between Investor A and Investor B equities, and international equities through the Vanguard REIT Index fund by because both have a 30-percent allocation low-cost passively managed vehicles. 3.2 percent over the past 10 years on a to fixed income. The outperformance was Utilizing one of these funds as the primary benchmark would bring the allocation Table 1: 10-Year Return, Real Estate decisions made by the advisor to the fore- front of the conversation. An advisor who Fund Name Pre-Tax Return After-Tax Return is developing model portfolios for clients PIMCO Real Estate Real Return Strategy I 8.3% 3.0% would be judged more accurately against Vanguard REIT Index Fund Investor 5.1% 3.8% one of these funds (assuming equal levels of Note: Return data ending December 31, 2016 risk) rather than by being measured asset class by asset class. Table 2: Asset Allocation Many Asset Classes Have Allocation Return Several Accepted Indexes Asset Class A B A B That Have Varying Risk and Fixed Income 30% 30% 6% 5% Return Characteristics U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Our Approach to Equity Investing Generation to the Next)
    VIEWPOINTS OCTOBER 2015, ISSUE 2 Our Approach to Equity Investing The ongoing debate between active versus passive management (also called “indexing”) in the context of equity investing may never be fully resolved. While the purpose of this Viewpoints is not an attempt to resolve the debate, we will briefly touch on the differences between these two approaches and the reasoning behind our approach to equity investing. At Houston Trust Company, we believe both approaches have merit, and each may be useful in achieving a given client’s needs and overall portfolio objectives. However, for the vast majority of our clients, we believe core holdings of high-quality, individual stocks managed (at reasonable cost) by independent, third party investment professionals offers a greater degree of flexibility, control and transparency, and can deliver competitive returns over long periods of time with lower volatility than passively managed index mutual funds. Indexing and Active Equity Active equity management, in contrast to indexing, Management Defined seeks to exploit perceived market inefficiencies in an attempt to outperform the underlying index, or In theory, passive equity investing entails simply benchmark, over time. The degree of outperformance replicating the holdings in an underlying index by is commonly referred to as a manager’s “alpha” purchasing the same securities in the same weights (i.e. the value-added return in excess of the appropriate as the index. In practice, however, what the investor benchmark which is attributable to the manager’s actually owns is a financial instrument, the return of skill). In simple terms, long-only active equity which reflects the return of the particular index (S&P managers will attempt to earn positive excess returns 500, EAFE, etc.) that the instrument is designed to by overweighting underpriced securities/industry replicate.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Risk Adjusted Returns in Core-Satellite Portfolios: Changing the Conversation to Benefit the Smaller Investor by J
    Comparison of Risk Adjusted Returns in Core-Satellite Portfolios: Changing the Conversation to Benefit the Smaller Investor by John A. Molster, Jr. A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Wilmington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Business Administration Wilmington University October 2018 Comparison of Risk Adjusted Returns in Core-Satellite Portfolios: Changing the Conversation to Benefit the Smaller Investor by John A. Molster, Jr. I certify that I have read this dissertation and that in my opinion it meets the academic and professional standards required by Wilmington University as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Business Administration. Signed ___________________________________________________ John L. Sparco, Ph.D., Chairperson of Dissertation Committee Signed ___________________________________________________ Ruth T. Norman, Ph.D., Member of the Dissertation Committee Signed ___________________________________________________ Mary B. Lavoie, D.B.A., Member of the Dissertation Committee Signed ___________________________________________________ Kathy S. Kennedy-Ratajack, D.B.A. Dean, College of Business Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii Dedication .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Active Management and Market Efficiency: a Summary of the Academic Literature
    Active Management and Market Efficiency: A Summary of the Academic Literature Executive Summary This paper reviews the empirical evidence on trends in market efficiency in the United States and the role that active management plays in creating market efficiency. Efficient markets are among the cornerstones of developed economies. In an efficient market the prices of securities, on average, reflect the value of the assets underlying the securities. More efficient markets have three primary advantages: they encourage broader investor participation, they make diversifying risk easier and they encourage capital formation. Active management is the driver of market efficiency. Active managers perform research on issuers, analyze assets underlying securities and assess values. Through the buying and selling process, active managers establish the market prices for securities. By contrast, passive managers are usually “price takers” rather than “price makers.” Therefore, in the broadest terms, an increase in the amount of active management will lead to greater market efficiency, while an increase in passive management will reduce market efficiency. A body of academic literature studies how the increase in passively-managed assets – and the concomitant decrease in actively-managed assets – has affected market efficiency. Taken together, these studies suggest that: pricing efficiency has declined, return comovement has increased, securities prices are more volatile, liquidity has decreased and liquidity exhibits greater comovement. We believe that additional studies covering the most recent periods would be useful, as would studies that take a comprehensive view of indexing and that study the effect of indexing on IPOs. ACTIVE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL WHITE PAPER / MARKET EFFICIENCY: A SUMMARY OF THE ACADEMIC LITERATURE Introduction Efficient markets are among the cornerstones of developed economies.
    [Show full text]
  • Swiss Asset Management Study 2020 an Overview of Swiss Asset Management
    1 Inhaltsverzeichnis Inhaltsverzeichnis Swiss Asset Management Study 2020 An Overview of Swiss Asset Management Editors Jürg Fausch, Thomas Ankenbrand Institute of Financial Services Zug IFZ www.hslu.ch/ifz 1 Table of Contents Swiss Asset Management Study 2020 Table of Contents Preface 2 Executive Summary 3 1. Definition & Framework of Asset Management 5 2. The Swiss Asset Management Environment 12 3. Asset Management – An International Perspective 39 4. Asset Management Companies in Switzerland 47 5. Active versus Passive Investing – A Differentiated View on a Heated Debate 69 6. Conclusion & Outlook 77 7. Factsheets of Asset Management Companies in Switzerland 78 Authors 108 References 109 Appendix 120 2 Swiss Asset Management Study 2020 Preface The asset management industry is a growing segment of the Swiss financial center and offers a differentiating value proposition relative to private banking and wealth management. The strong expertise in asset manage- ment is highly relevant for Switzerland since it helps to diversify and complete the Swiss financial center. In this regard, the Asset Management Association Switzerland has the goal to further establish Switzerland as a leading provider of high quality asset management services and products domestically and abroad. In this context, the following study provides a comprehensive overview of the current status and various develop- ments in the Swiss asset management industry and consists of two parts. The first part starts with Chapter 1 in which a definition of asset management is provided and the methodological framework of the study is outlined. Chapter 2 gives an overview of the environment and discusses the political/legal, economic, social and technolog- ical developments relevant for the asset management industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Large Cap Equity Fund
    North Carolina Supplemental Retirement Plans Annual Review FEBRUARY 2013 Table of Contents • Defined Contribution Trends – Streamlining Investment Choices – DC Spend Down • Service Provider Disclosures – ERISA 408(b)(2) Regulations • Fee Review – NCSRP Fees – Stable Value Fund Fees • GoalMaker Discussion (Separate Slides) • Considering Other Fund Lineup Options • Fund Performance Review •Disclaimer MERCER 1 Defined Contribution Trends Trends for Large Plan Sponsors • Streamline number and types of investments offered – Combine style-specific (value/growth) choices for participants - Removes need to rebalance among styles - One fund choice that includes multiple underlying strategies across the style spectrum • Focus on retirement income MERCER 3 Streamlining Investment Choices • Research has shown that participants are neither good at making their own investment choices nor happy about this responsibility • Limited participant understanding remains one of the most significant challenges for plan sponsors • Plan sponsors are looking to: – Reduce redundant investment choices – Blend styles and managers – Lower risk for participants • Offering limited options allows clear and simple communication of plan • Allows each participant to create a portfolio that fits their risk tolerance and time horizon MERCER 4 Custom Funds Sample Large Cap Multi-Manager Structure Large Cap Equity Fund • Combining strategies with low or negative excess return correlations are expected to reduce the Index tracking error and increase the fund’s expected 5% information
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure and Performance of the Money Management Industry
    JOSEF LAKONISHOK Universityof Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ANDREI SHLEIFER Harvard University ROBERT W. VISHNY Universityof Chicago The Structure and Performance of the Money Management Industry IN 1990 TOTAL FINANCIAL assets in U.S. capital markets amounted to $13.7 trillion, of which $3.4 trillion was equities, and the rest were bonds, government securities, tax-exempt securities, and mortgages. These financial assets were held by two principal types of investors: individuals and institutions. The New York Stock Exchange defines an institution as a firm that employs professionals to manage money for the benefit of others (firms or individuals). At the end of 1990, $6.1 trillion of the total U.S. financial assets was held by institutions. Both the amount of institutional assets and the fraction of the total they represent have increased sharply over the past 30 years. In 1950, for example, institutional assets comprised $107 billion out of a $500 billion total, or 21 percent compared with 45 percent in 1990.1 The growth of institutional ownership of equities has paralleled their growth in the ownership of other financial assets. In 1955 institutions owned 23 per- cent of equities compared with 77 percent owned by individuals; in We thankSEI Corporationand Denise Handwerkerfor providingthe dataand Gilbert Beebower,Michael Duncan, Vasant Kamath, Christopher Schwartz, and Ron Skleneyfrom SEIfor theirinsights. We wouldalso like to thankGene Fama, Oliver Hart, Stewart Myers, GeorgePerry, Jay Ritter,and JeremyStein for helpfulcomments and Peng Tu and Randy Pollackfor researchassistance. Computing support was providedby the NationalCenter for SupercomputingApplications, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 1. These numbers are from the Institutional Investor Fact Book published by the New York Stock Exchange.Jean Tobin of the NYSE kindlyprovided the latest figures.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Vs. Passive Portfolio Management
    Page 1 of 2 Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. Jeff Ahrens Director - Investments 580 California Street, 23rd Fl San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 438-3076 [email protected] http://fa.opco.com/jeffahrens Active vs. Passive Portfolio Management One of the longest-standing debates in investing is over the company and its securities, it's difficult if not impossible to gain relative merits of active portfolio management versus passive an advantage over any other investor. As new information management. With an actively managed portfolio, a manager becomes available, market prices adjust in response to reflect tries to beat the performance of a given benchmark index by a security's true value. That market efficiency, proponents say, using his or her judgment in selecting individual securities and means that reducing investment costs is the key to improving deciding when to buy and sell them. A passively managed net returns. portfolio attempts to match that benchmark performance, and Indexing does create certain cost efficiencies. Because the in the process, minimize expenses that can reduce an inves- investment simply reflects an index, no research is required for tor's net return. securities selection. Also, because trading is relatively infre- Each camp has strong advocates who argue that the advan- quent--passively managed portfolios typically buy or sell secu- tages of its approach outweigh those for the opposite side. rities only when the index itself changes--trading costs often are lower. Also, infrequent trading typically generates fewer Active investing: attempting to add value capital gains distributions, which means relative tax efficiency. Proponents of active management believe that by picking the Popular investment choices that use passive management are right investments, taking advantage of market trends, and at- index funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
    [Show full text]
  • Active Vs. Passive Management: the Elusiveness of Alpha to the Modern Hedge Fund" (2017)
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Senior Theses Honors College 5-2017 Active vs. Passive Management: The luE siveness of Alpha to the Modern Hedge Fund Robert Wesley Long Jr Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/senior_theses Part of the Finance and Financial Management Commons Recommended Citation Long, Robert Wesley Jr, "Active vs. Passive Management: The Elusiveness of Alpha to the Modern Hedge Fund" (2017). Senior Theses. 204. https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/senior_theses/204 This Thesis is brought to you by the Honors College at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Long 1 Active vs. Passive Management: The Elusiveness of Alpha to the Modern Hedge Fund By Robert Wesley Long Jr Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Graduation with Honors from the South Carolina Honors College May 2017 Approved: Colin Jones Director of Thesis Justin Young Second Reader Steve Lynn, Dean For South Carolina Honors College Long 2 Table of Contents Thesis Summary................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Hedge Fund Structure and Media Portrayal Fee Structure ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Active Share
    Lazard Insights Interpreting Active Share Erianna Khusainova, CFA, Senior Vice President, Portfolio Analyst A number of studies and articles have emerged claiming that most Summary active managers underperform their benchmarks and investing in index funds and passive exchange-traded funds (ETFs) is a better • While the value of active management has been called into question, the aggregate performance alternative. However, some of these studies included “closet indexers,” of active managers improves when excluding funds that claim to be active, but in reality, are very similar to the so-called closet indexers, which can be identified index. The inclusion of these funds may lead to inaccurate results. by low active share. In addition to the traditionally used tracking error metric, Martijn • Active share is an important metric that helps Cremers and Antti Petajisto¹ introduced a new statistic for measuring determine how different a portfolio is from its benchmark. Together, tracking error and active active management called active share. Their research demonstrated share complement each other to make a more that funds with the highest active share significantly outperformed robust assessment of an active manager’s process. their benchmarks, both before and after fees. In other words, if you • The active share metric has limitations since it exclude closet indexers, active management’s aggregate results improve. is susceptible to several considerations, such So, what exactly is active share? It is the portion of a portfolio that is as the structure of the benchmark used and the dynamics of an individual portfolio construction invested differently than its benchmark. More precisely, active share is process.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Modern Portfolio Theory Still Modern?
    A reprinted article from July/August 2020 Is Modern Portfolio Theory Still Modern? By Anthony B. Davidow, CIMA® © 2020 Investments & Wealth Institute®. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved. JULY AUGUST FEATURE 2020 Is Modern Portfolio Theory Still Modern? By Anthony B. Davidow, CIMA® odern portfolio theory (MPT) This article addresses some of the identifies a few of the more popular assumes that investors are limitations of MPT and evaluates alter- approaches and the corresponding Mrisk averse, meaning that native techniques for allocating capital. limitations. For MPT and PMPT (post- given two portfolios that offer the same Specifically, it will delve into the follow- modern portfolio theory), the biggest expected return, investors will prefer ing issues: limitation is with respect to the robust- the less risky portfolio. The implication ness and accuracy of the data used to is that a rational investor will not invest A What are the various asset allocation optimize. Using only long-term histori- in a portfolio if a second portfolio exists approaches? cal averages of the underlying asset with a more favorable profile of risk A What are the limitations of each classes is a flawed approach.Long -term versus expected return.1 approach? data should certainly be considered—but A How should advisors evolve their what if the future isn’t like the past? MPT has a number of inherent limita- approaches? tions. Investors aren’t always rational— A What is the appeal of a goals-based The long-term historical annual return and they don’t always select the right approach? of the S&P 500 has been 10.3 percent portfolio.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Vs. Passive Portfolio Management
    Page 1 of 2 Lowell Weiss, WMS, J.D. 31500 Northwestern Hwy Suite 150 Farmington Hills, MI 48334 248-932-5450 [email protected] Active vs. Passive Portfolio Management One of the longest-standing debates in investing is over the company and its securities, it's difficult if not impossible to gain relative merits of active portfolio management versus passive an advantage over any other investor. As new information management. With an actively managed portfolio, a manager becomes available, market prices adjust in response to reflect tries to beat the performance of a given benchmark index by a security's true value. That market efficiency, proponents say, using his or her judgment in selecting individual securities and means that reducing investment costs is the key to improving deciding when to buy and sell them. A passively managed net returns. portfolio attempts to match that benchmark performance, and Indexing does create certain cost efficiencies. Because the in the process, minimize expenses that can reduce an inves- investment simply reflects an index, no research is required for tor's net return. securities selection. Also, because trading is relatively infre- Each camp has strong advocates who argue that the advan- quent--passively managed portfolios typically buy or sell secu- tages of its approach outweigh those for the opposite side. rities only when the index itself changes--trading costs often are lower. Also, infrequent trading typically generates fewer Active investing: attempting to add value capital gains distributions, which means relative tax efficiency. Proponents of active management believe that by picking the Popular investment choices that use passive management are right investments, taking advantage of market trends, and at- index funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Risk
    Invesco Aim Portfolio Principles RETHINKING Back to Basics: Conservative Cornerstones RISK for the Full Market Cycle Market turmoil has caused many investors to wonder whether modern portfolio theory (MPT) has failed us. After all, one of its key doctrines — diversifi cation — seemed to be of little benefi t during the downturn as correlations increased across asset classes and styles. In our view, MPT has not failed, but it’s time to re-examine how we implement asset allocation. Our conservative cornerstone investment strategy is based on three key tenets: downside protection, diversifi cation beyond style boxes and complementary use of passive and active management. We believe these strategies can form a solid basis for a broader allocation. Key points 1 Conservative cornerstone core equity investments seek to enhance downside risk management. This is crucial for long-term wealth creation and improving the investor experience. More meaningful diversifi cation may be achieved through complementary 2 investment disciplines, such as offense and defense, rather than relying solely on traditional style boxes. 3 Conservative cornerstones can anchor conservative core-satellite allocations by complementing passive indexing with active management. 1 Downside protection Bottom Line Bear markets are a reality of market cycles and should always be considered in portfolio construction. An investment strategy that seeks stronger downside protection may • Bear markets should always be amplify the power of wealth compounding over time, improve the client experience and considered in portfolio construction. help investors avoid costly panic-driven sell decisions at market bottoms. • Conservative, low-beta strategies may offer protection in downturns, Conservative, low-beta strategies may offer protection in downturns potentially creating a larger asset Chart 1 illustrates two different portfolio strategies — a high-beta portfolio that captures base on which to compound wealth 120% of the downside and a low-beta strategy that captures 80% of the downside.
    [Show full text]