Your Basket
Your Basket
There are no funds in your basket. To add funds to your basket use the Green Plus Icon wherever you see it next to a fund.
Fund name
Aberdeen American Growth  
Fidelity American  
Schroder UK Mid 250  
M&G Recovery  
Jupiter Merlin UK Growth  
Close Basket Open basket

Login

Login

Register

It's look like you're leaving us

What would you like us to do with the funds you've selected

Show me all my options Forget them Save them
Customise this table
 

Asset allocation: How to protect your hard-earned cash

FE Trustnet looks at how first-time investors can spread the risk in their portfolios.

By Thomas McMahon, Reporter, FE Trustnet Follow
Saturday October 27, 2012


Asset allocation is one of the key weapons an investor has in the battle to avoid losing money, and can also be the source of the majority of their returns.

Investing in the stock market offers potentially unlimited returns – a company could, in theory, grow from two men in a Californian garage to the next Apple – but could also leave you with nothing if the company goes bust.

Spreading your investments across a range of companies, asset classes, and regions will help to insulate your portfolio against the shockwaves that can hit a single area.

Diversifying into bonds, property and cash offers investors the chance to limit their potential losses at the expense of potential gains. 

AWD Chase de Vere’s Patrick Connolly said: "The starting point is not to put all your eggs in one basket – don’t put all your money in one area, as if it falls then everything falls together, so you need to spread the risk by investing in different asset classes."

"What you are looking for in your investments are those that do not move up and down at the same time. You want some to be going up while others are going down, and over the long run they will all rise together." 

Shaun Port, chief investment officer at Nutmeg, points out that the benefits of good asset allocation are not only to protect against downside risk.

"The studies vary in the percentage but show that 50 to 90 per cent of returns are generated from asset allocation," he said. 

"Often being in the right market is better than having a manager who outperforms by 1 or 2 per cent." 

What this means is that the different asset classes, generally speaking, do not move up or down at the same time, so that if investors can predict the moment that, for example, the stock market will fall and the value of government bonds will rise, they can sell stocks and buy bonds and make a lot of money. 

In particular, they can make more money than by picking the right companies within their equity holdings or the right bonds within their fixed-interest investments, meaning that getting the right mix in your portfolio could be the most important decision you make.

However, when it comes to investing your hard-earned cash, the negative side is the first thing to consider – how much can you afford to lose?

"Before you put any money in risky assets you should make sure you have some money in cash in case something happens and you have a sudden need for it," Connolly continued.

Once you have your cash squirreled away, the next step is to decide on your objectives and time frame. If you are prepared to wait longer and to take on more risk, you will tend to have a higher exposure to equities. 

If you want to reduce the risk of losing your money, the majority of investors will raise their exposure to cash, bonds and perhaps property. Income-seeking investors will be more attracted to the latter two classes because of the interest they pay.

Investors change their positions – moving into and out of asset classes – in accordance with their view of the wider economic environment, which FE Alpha Manager Philip Saunders, head of global asset allocation at Investec, says can lead to the temptation to make short-term decisions that can backfire. 

"Placing too much emphasis on upcoming macroeconomic events and consequently too little on underlying fundamentals, such as valuations, is probably the most reliable way for investors to destroy value," he commented. 

Saunders explains that in 2012 there have been huge macroeconomic worries, such as those over the eurozone and disappointing growth in China, that have led many investors to be cautious and put their money in lower-risk investments such as bonds. 

However, global stock markets have actually done well, meaning those investors who were not swayed by the concerns have done better than those who were over-cautious. 

Data from FE Analytics shows that the UK and US stock markets, and even the Euro Stoxx 50 index of the top European companies, have increased in value by more than 10 per cent this year, meaning an investor who had £10,000 in those markets in January would now have more than £11,000. 


Performance of indices in 2012

ALT_TAG 
 
Source: FE Analytics

Connolly agrees that obsessing about bad economic news in the headlines can lead to your downfall.

"A common mistake is moving your investment due to short-term performance and sentiment, and the result is people will buy at the top and sell at the bottom when everybody is nervous," he continued. 

"There’s always something happening, there’s always something on the horizon, different asset classes will react in anticipation. The right approach for the vast majority of people is to have a long-term asset allocation strategy." 

One macroeconomic event that has gained attention this year has been the US election and the worries about the implications for investors.

Saunders says people should not be worried by the hype. 

"We suspect that markets are already responding positively to evidence that underlying economic conditions in the United States are improving and the degree to which either candidate can practically affect this as president is limited," he said. 

Saunders explains that on his portfolios he decides on the asset allocation strategy for the next three to seven years, and then adds to this with shorter-term tactical changes on a three- to nine-month horizon. 

One way of ensuring that you are not influenced by short-term concerns is to pick a multi-asset manager who can make the decisions for you – although this obviously depends on the manager himself being able to avoid short-termism.

Investors can buy multi-asset funds run by a single manager, or multi-manager funds that buy different funds that invest in different asset classes; both options leave the asset allocation decisions to the professionals. 

Saunders said: "The primary benefit is access to professional asset allocation capabilities. Investors are confronted with an overwhelming range of investment options and the selection of the right ones, in terms of quality, likely characteristics, cost and timeliness is challenging at the best of times." 

He adds that professional managers also have the ability and knowledge to use more complicated assets such as derivatives, which are beyond the understanding of most retail investors. 

Connolly is less positive about this option, however.

"Multi-asset funds and multi-manager funds are good for the lower-value clients or those who don’t want to be constantly checking their investments but would rather hand the responsibility to a manager," he said. 

The first downside, he explains, is that they are sold as "one-stop shops", meaning they are not tailored for your individual needs but intended for a wide variety of clients. 

The second is the cost of multi-manager funds. The fees can rise to more than 2 per cent, as the multi-manager passes on to investors the charges of the underlying funds he has bought and then adds on his own fee. 



How should I allocate my money?

Different assets have different risk profiles, and your portfolio should reflect a compromise between your willingness to take on risk and your desire to avoid losing your money.

If you have a lower appetite for risk you should be looking to limit the equities you hold.

Your aim should be to avoid a portfolio of correlated assets. If you aren’t sure how to construct one then you should consider taking advice.

A multi-asset or multi-manager fund offers a simple alternative that is particularly appealing to those who don’t have a large amount of money or who don’t want to have to think about when to switch between assets. 



 
Add your comment
Step 1: Tell us what you think...
 

Step 2: Prove you're not a robot...
You don't have to do this every time you submit a comment.

Login or register free and you won't see it again.
Enter the words above:
Step 3: Submit your comment...
Submit
 
Ark Welder Oct 29th, 2012 at 08:32 AM

Invesco Perpetual's Distribution and Monthly Income Plus funds are both multi-manager and multi-asset, but they are not multi-fund (i.e. fund-of-funds).

It is the fund-of-funds that tend to have higher charges. But multi-asset funds and multi-manager funds are not necessarily high-charging fund-of-funds.

Reply
Theo Oct 28th, 2012 at 05:28 PM

The first half of this article is sound economic theory but the second half is, as usual, sales talk.

I take exception to the last paragraph. Multi-asset or multi-manager funds should never be considered by any one, as they violate the principle of low cost and flexibility among other defects..

People who wish to invest in funds should already be buying their house and have a cash ISA and then they need only buy the lowest charging index tracker (with the same amount in each) in the UK, US, Emerging Markets and Bonds, to obtain very good diversification.

Rebalancing need only be done once every three years. People who would find that a chore rather than a pleasure and those with small savings (less than about £10,000), should not be investing in funds, whatever fund managers and IFAs tell them.

Reply
Tiny Clanger Oct 27th, 2012 at 07:07 PM

Leaving it to the professionals can also be a recipe for disaster. They still make money from you even if you lose out by following their advice. You only have to look at the mis-selling scandals over the last few months involving the major Banks to see that. Old people going in with, "I've just come into some money, what should I do with it?" "Put it into our super duper high return fund and you will double it in 6 months." A year later they have lost between 25 and 75% of it and found out that they were invested in precipice bonds or something similar and had no idea what a precipice bond was.
More recently, pop stars and footballers who invested in some tax avoidance schemes have fallen foul of the tax man because these schemes were not actually legal. Yet again, professional advisers were involved.
My own view is that if you have money there is always someone out there who will try and take it off you. If you feel incapable of finding investment funds on your own, keep the money in a cash account (preferably an ISA) and benefit from at least keeping hold of it.

Reply
John Clark Oct 27th, 2012 at 05:49 PM

Classic investment theory, but in the post-Lehman crash of 2009 virtually all asset classes fell together. Two observations:

First, keep costs down. High-charging funds are seldom good value.

Second, cash has a better return than industry statistics suggest - provided you choose the best savings accounts.

The industry has a perverse habit of comparing theoretical equity returns to the paltry interest earned on UK Treasuries, as a proxy for cash.

Reply
Bryan Matthew Oct 28th, 2012 at 05:44 PM

John - Lehmans was 2008 but it proved the need to have a balanced portfolio because the two asset classes that thrived in the wake of the financial meltdown were UK gilts (up 14%) and Gold (up 12%). So not all asset classes fall together- go back to previous crashes and generally the two assets that do well are Gilts and Gold -nothing has changed!

Any sensible investor (as opposed to saver) should have money in all of these classes to protect you in the bad days.

Also the other lesson is stay invested. Equities were down 32% in 2008 yet within 12 months they were up 30% and since then are up a further 20%.

Invest wisely across the classes - Equities, Bonds, Gilts, Commercial Property & Gold and you will do fine....

Reply
 

Back to top of page

 

Follow FE Trustnet

Video Headlines

More Videos

Why you should ignore the "slowdown" in emerging markets

GMT 12:30 | 04-Jun-2013

Why income investors cannot afford to ignore emerging markets

GMT 17:00 | 01-Jun-2013

 
Poll

Would you invest in a fund managed by someone who is nearing retirement age?

Yes

No

Vote

 
 
  • Stay connected with FE trustnet
  • Authorised and Regulated by the
    Financial Conduct Authority
  • © Trustnet Limited 2013. All Rights Reserved.
  • Please read our Terms of Use / Disclaimer
    and Privacy and Cookie Policy.
  • Data supplied in conjunction with Thomson Financial Limited,
    London Stock Exchange Plc, StructuredRetailProducts.com
    and ManorPark.com