Thoughts on the Market

Andrew Sheets: Is 60:40 Diversification Broken?


Listen Later

One of the most common standards for investment diversification, the 60:40 portfolio, has faced challenges this year with significant losses and shifting correlations between stocks and bonds. Is this the end of 60:40 allocation?


---- Transcript -----

Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Chief Cross Asset Strategist for Morgan Stanley. Along with my colleagues, bringing you a variety of perspectives, I'll be talking about trends across the global investment landscape and how we put those ideas together. It's Friday, July 29th, at 2 p.m. in London.


The so-called 60:40 portfolio is one of the most common forms of diversified investing, based on the idea of holding a portfolio of 60% equities and 40% high-quality bonds. In theory, the equities provide higher returns over time, while the high-quality bonds provide ballast and diversification, delivering a balanced overall portfolio. But recently, we and many others have been talking about how our estimates suggested historically low returns for this 60:40 type of approach. And frequently these estimates just didn't seem to matter. Global stocks and bonds continued to hum away nicely, delivering unusually strong returns and diversification.


And then, all at once, those dour, long term return estimates appeared to come true. From January 1st through June 30th of this year, a 60:40 portfolio of U.S. equities and the aggregate bond index lost about 16% of its value, wiping out all of the portfolio's gains since September of 2020. Portfolios in Europe were a similar story. These moves raise a question: do these large losses, and the fact that they involved stock and bond prices moving in the same direction, mean that diversified portfolios of stocks and bonds are fundamentally broken in an era of tighter policy?


Now, one way that 60:40 portfolios could be broken, so to speak, is that they simply can't generate reasonable returns going forward. But on our estimates, this isn't the case. Lower prices for stocks and higher yields on bonds have raised our estimate for what this type of diversified portfolio can return. Leaving those estimates now near the 20-year average.


A bigger concern for investors, however, is diversification. The drawdown of 60:40 portfolios this year wasn't necessarily extreme for its magnitude—2002 and 2008 saw larger losses—but rather its uniformity, as both stocks and bonds saw unusually large declines.


These fears of less diversification have been given a face, the bond equity correlation. And the story investors are afraid of goes something like this. For most of the last 20 years, bond and equity returns were negatively correlated, moving in opposite directions and diversifying each other. But since 2020, the large interventions of monetary policy into the market have caused this correlation to be positive. Stock and bond prices are now moving in the same direction. The case for diversification is over.


This is a tempting story, and it is true that large central bank actions since 2020 have caused stocks and bonds to move together more frequently. But I think there's also a risk of confusing direction and magnitude. Bonds can still be good portfolio diversifiers, even if they aren't quite as good as they've been before.


Even if stocks and bonds are now positively correlated, that correlation is still well below 1 to 1. That means there are still plenty of days where they don't move together, and this can matter significantly for how a portfolio behaves, and how diversification is delivered, over time.


Another important case for 60:40 style diversification is volatility. Even after one of the worst declines for bond prices in the last 40 years, the trailing one-year volatility of the US aggregate bond index is about 6%. That is one third the volatility of U.S. stocks over the same period. Having 40% of a portfolio in something with one third of the volatility should dampen overall fluctuations. For all these reasons, we think the case for a 60:40 style approach to diversified investing remains.


Thanks for listening. Subscribe to Thoughts on the Market on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen and leave us a review. We'd love to hear from you.

...more
View all episodesView all episodes
Download on the App Store

Thoughts on the MarketBy Morgan Stanley

  • 4.8
  • 4.8
  • 4.8
  • 4.8
  • 4.8

4.8

1,246 ratings


More shows like Thoughts on the Market

View all
WSJ Your Money Briefing by The Wall Street Journal

WSJ Your Money Briefing

1,719 Listeners

Exchanges by Goldman Sachs

Exchanges

974 Listeners

Bloomberg Intelligence by Bloomberg

Bloomberg Intelligence

408 Listeners

Bloomberg Surveillance by Bloomberg

Bloomberg Surveillance

1,174 Listeners

Masters in Business by Bloomberg

Masters in Business

2,169 Listeners

Notes on the Week Ahead by Dr. David Kelly

Notes on the Week Ahead

199 Listeners

WSJ Minute Briefing by The Wall Street Journal

WSJ Minute Briefing

686 Listeners

Wall Street Breakfast by Seeking Alpha

Wall Street Breakfast

1,044 Listeners

UBS On-Air: Market Moves by Client Strategy Office

UBS On-Air: Market Moves

191 Listeners

Making Sense by J.P. Morgan

Making Sense

69 Listeners

At Any Rate by J.P. Morgan Global Research

At Any Rate

80 Listeners

Barron's Streetwise by Barron's

Barron's Streetwise

1,574 Listeners

The Memo by Howard Marks by Oaktree Capital Management

The Memo by Howard Marks

439 Listeners

Barron's Live by Barron's Live

Barron's Live

213 Listeners

What Should I Do With My Money? by Morgan Stanley

What Should I Do With My Money?

118 Listeners

The Markets by Goldman Sachs

The Markets

82 Listeners

市場の風を読む by Morgan Stanley

市場の風を読む

0 Listeners