Rebalance Your Investment Portfolio Periodically: Mantra or Myth?

Michael D. Mattei, Daniel Bauer
{"title":"Rebalance Your Investment Portfolio Periodically: Mantra or Myth?","authors":"Michael D. Mattei, Daniel Bauer","doi":"10.56734/ijbms.v5n3a3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The investment mantra goes something like this: “have a well-diversified mix of stocks and bonds and rebalance it to maintain your strategic asset allocation.” Recent publications in the financial press have begun to question the value of periodic portfolio rebalancing. This research examines the equity portion of a well-diversified investment portfolio and shows that the “numbers” just don’t support the mantra. In fact, this research indicates that traditional rebalancing is the worst strategy, on a risk adjusted basis, for long-term portfolio growth when compared to three other strategies. While the mantra has intuitive appeal, it does not make financial sense. A very popular portfolio strategy is to execute rebalancing of the equity portfolio periodically, generally every 12 months – for example selling the overperformers. Recent research has noted investors utilizing this strategy may be depriving themselves of the gains that extend beyond one year (Clements 2005 and Constable 2021). Thus, limiting the equity portion of an investment portfolio to passive, low-cost S&P 500 Index fund and avoiding more costly rebalancing strategies in the longer term typically results in both greater reruns for the level of risk and lower fees than the cost of continuous rebalancing.","PeriodicalId":505986,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Business & Management Studies","volume":"19 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Business & Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56734/ijbms.v5n3a3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The investment mantra goes something like this: “have a well-diversified mix of stocks and bonds and rebalance it to maintain your strategic asset allocation.” Recent publications in the financial press have begun to question the value of periodic portfolio rebalancing. This research examines the equity portion of a well-diversified investment portfolio and shows that the “numbers” just don’t support the mantra. In fact, this research indicates that traditional rebalancing is the worst strategy, on a risk adjusted basis, for long-term portfolio growth when compared to three other strategies. While the mantra has intuitive appeal, it does not make financial sense. A very popular portfolio strategy is to execute rebalancing of the equity portfolio periodically, generally every 12 months – for example selling the overperformers. Recent research has noted investors utilizing this strategy may be depriving themselves of the gains that extend beyond one year (Clements 2005 and Constable 2021). Thus, limiting the equity portion of an investment portfolio to passive, low-cost S&P 500 Index fund and avoiding more costly rebalancing strategies in the longer term typically results in both greater reruns for the level of risk and lower fees than the cost of continuous rebalancing.
定期重新平衡您的投资组合:咒语还是神话?
投资的口号是这样的"对股票和债券进行合理的分散组合,并对其进行再平衡,以保持战略资产配置"。最近财经媒体发表的文章开始质疑定期调整投资组合的价值。这项研究考察了多元化投资组合中的股票部分,结果表明 "数字 "并不支持这种说法。事实上,这项研究表明,与其他三种策略相比,在风险调整基础上,传统的再平衡策略是最不利于投资组合长期增长的策略。虽然这一口号具有直观的吸引力,但在财务上并不合理。一种非常流行的投资组合策略是定期对股票投资组合进行再平衡,一般每 12 个月一次--例如卖出表现优异的股票。最近的研究指出,采用这种策略的投资者可能会失去一年以上的收益(Clements 2005 和 Constable 2021)。因此,将投资组合中的股票部分限制在被动型、低成本的标准普尔 500 指数基金上,并避免长期采用成本更高的再平衡策略,通常会带来更大的风险收益,而且费用也会低于持续再平衡的成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书