|Home||Switchboard||Unix Administration||Red Hat||TCP/IP Networks||Neoliberalism||Toxic Managers|
|May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)|
Review of Intelligent Asset Allocator by William Bernstein
The Intelligent Asset Allocator: How to Build Your Portfolio to Maximize Returns and Minimize Risk
March 11, 2006
I am a programmer and usually do not write financial books reviews. Also it is
easy to criticize a book that was published 6 years ago (it was published September
22, 2000 when smell of the forthcoming dot-com crash was already in the air). At
the time of publication it was a very good book that definitely saved a lot of pensions
from complete decimation due to heavy doze of technology-related stocks (or funds),
an allocation typical for the level of greed (or appetite for risk taking) that
was typical during dot-com bubble.
But now we need to take recommendations more skeptically and at least check how they faired during six years since the book publication before jumping into action. And if we are talking about investment book it is prudent to judge its value on the base of performance of its recommendations in five years or even a decade after the publication.
Thinking about optimizing my 401K portfolio before possible this (or next) year stock slide due to an inverted yield curve I dusted off the book and simulated the performance for one of the recommended portfolios for the period from Jan, 2000 to Mar, 2006. The initial investment was assumed to be zero and monthly contributions assumed to be $1K. Rebalancing was done at the end of each year.
Please be aware that recommended on page 154 portfolio using the period and contribution mentioned above with the end of the year rebalancing produces almost zero return on the capital from Jan 2000 to March 2006 (7% total or ~1% annualized excluding taxes and fees). Taxes and mutual funds fees will drive return lower. For example Vanguard additionally charges annually $10 for any fund in which you have less then $10K. That means that any Vanguard money market fond provides better return with much less risk for this period. BTW without rebalancing the same portfolio produces 31% total or ~5% annualized beating S&P500 (17% total return with the monthly investment of 1K mentioned above). It looks like this "rebalancing-induced returns drop" is the most pronounced when you start with zero initial capital. If the initial capital distributed into the "slots" the first month is comparable to the subsequent investment (say $50K or $100K, while subsequent monthly investment for the period is 76K) "rebalancing-induced returns drop" is less pronounced and is approximately 50% of total return. BTW the book recommended the initial capital for this portfolio in $100K-200K range which helps to avoid some mutual funds fees inherent in splitting small initial capital into 9 slots, so the case above should be viewed as an extreme version of the "rebalancing-induced returns drop".
Unless my calculations are wrong ( I strongly recommend not to take my results for granted; anybody can redo the calculations using Excel; it's not that difficult) it looks like the idea of periodic end of the year "blind" rebalancing that the author preaches is open to review. Such rebalancing is just a blind trade of your assets determined by a very primitive algorithm that was never validated on large samples of data and different historical periods.
The idea of "split" stock and bond allocation (with possible additional diversification into less correlated asset subclasses) is an old and sound idea, but diversification should probably have some limits. When you start doing hair splitting into too many subclasses of each major investment class the portfolio performance probably became more dependent on the performance of the weakest component as year after year rebalancing will move money to the worst performer(s). If it is always the same worst performer you probably will eventually approximate the return from it. And this probability rises with the increase of the number of components.
Excessive complexity of portfolio might not produce better returns. For example 9-component portfolio that I tested above for 2000-2006 returns is a way too complex and nothing suggests that it can produce statistically better results than classic "age based" binary stock-bond allocation using, for example, Total Stock Market Index and Total Bond Market Index with, say, (100 - your age)% in stocks and rest in bonds, or, depending on the tax situation, with some small but rising with age percentage parked in money market (actually in March, 2006 one year CDs return more then 5% and this year might outperform most bonds). Those multi-component portfolios, which are supposedly cooked by experienced financial cooks and thus can be called "borsch allocations" might just increase taxes and mutual funds fees without improving returns. It makes sense to keep allocation simple.
Like alchemists in the past tried to convert mercury into gold, Bernstein tries to find magic mix of several mutual funds representing different classes of assets adding to the idea of (static) diversification the idea of weak correlation. Actually correlation is a very tricky thing for time series to rely on it in your money allocation decisions; basing your decisions on calculation of correlation for previous periods expose you to a similar risk as buying mutual funds based on past performance.
In reality it might well be impossible to get a good asset allocation with low risk on purely technical basis without right insight into the direction of world economy and major currencies. Stocks are inherently risky. Each allocation whether based on some magic calculations or not is essentially a prediction of future market direction which might be true or not. For example any 60:40 split of stocks and bonds is essentially a 60% prediction of solid stable growth of the economy. It does not work well for prolonged recessions like Japanese. Investment in gold is essentially a prediction of the forthcoming devaluation of dollar against basket of major currencies. And so on. From this point of view "frozen" in the book "year 2000 vision of the future" is nothing to boast about as in proposed allocations the author almost completely missed the possibility of dollar slide (currency risk), as well as dramatic raise of commodities, especially precious metals and energy.
It would be also interesting to make simulation runs based on the data from 1995 version of his book which permits checking a decade of performance but I do not have it.
Last modified: September 12, 2017
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Haterís Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least
Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time and without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.
Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info|
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.
Last modified: September 12, 2017