Mixing Investments? Don't Get Mixed Up
To build a winning portfolio, you need to mix together the right combination of stocks and bonds. But oftentimes, it's investors themselves who get mixed up.
Much of the blame, I believe, lies with conventional financial wisdom. Consider the four portfolio-building guidelines below.
All four guidelines are extremely popular -- and they're all seriously flawed.
1. Gun for Growth
Younger investors are frequently advised to load up on stocks of rapidly growing companies, especially technology companies. Good advice? I don't think so.
Contrary to popular belief, growth companies -- as a group -- don't generate superior long-run returns. In fact, history suggests that the best returns come from buying "value" stocks, many of which appear to have poor growth prospects.
Because value stocks are so suspect, they trade at cheap prices compared to current earnings or corporate assets. But with expectations so low, good news can mean startling stock-market gains.
Don't get me wrong: I am not arguing that younger investors should overweight value instead of growth. Rather, I think it is foolish to go overboard on any sector. Faced with all the uncertainty over which investments will perform best, I favor building a globally diversified stock portfolio.
Which brings me to a somewhat radical notion. Suppose you are age 25 and you think you can get the optimal mix of stock-market risk and reward by owning, say, 45% large U.S. stocks, 20% small U.S. companies, 5% real-estate investment trusts, 25% developed-foreign-market stocks and 5% emerging markets. If that mix is optimal at age 25, I would argue that it is probably also the right mix at age 65.
But what about changes in your risk tolerance as you grow older? I wouldn't fiddle with your mix of stock-market sectors. Instead, I would react to changes in your risk tolerance by changing your portfolio's mix of stocks and bonds.
2. Act Your Age
The standard advice, of course, is that we should boost our bond holdings as we grow older. But in reality, our risk tolerance doesn't always decline as we age.
"Youngsters are often much more risk averse than old folks, because they aren't accustomed to the market's volatility," notes William Bernstein, an investment adviser in North Bend, Ore.
Indeed, your stock exposure in your 60s may not be much lower than it was in your 20s. But this isn't just about risk tolerance. It's also, once again, about owning the optimal mix of investments.
As every investor quickly learns, bonds often perform well when stocks are suffering, and vice versa. Result: By buying both, you can build a portfolio that delivers a more attractive combination of risk and return.
If you run the numbers, you find 100% stock investors can trim their portfolio's overall price gyrations -- without hurting returns -- by moving 10% into bonds. Similarly, 100% bond investors can boost performance without increasing risk if they shift 25% into stocks.
In practice, the range of recommended portfolios is usually far smaller. Investment advisers typically suggest that retirees maintain at least 40% in stocks, while aggressive investors are usually told to cap their stock exposure at 80%. And many investors, both young and old, will end up somewhere in between, with maybe 50% or 60% in stocks.
3. Take Twenty
To build a well-diversified portfolio, all you need is 20 stocks. Or so says one of Wall Street's most popular rules of thumb.
There is some logic to this advice. If you own 20 carefully selected companies, your stock portfolio shouldn't perform much more erratically than the broad market.
Volatility, however, isn't the only measure of risk. There is also the issue of "tracking error," the chance that your 20 stocks will earn returns that are far better -- or worse -- than the market.
Let's say you earn 6% a year, while the broad market clocks 8%. Doesn't sound like a big difference? On a $10,000 investment over 20 years, you would amass $32,071. But if you had notched the market's return instead, you would have accumulated $46,610, or 45% more. The lesson: To be diversified, you need far more than 20 stocks.
4. Invest for Income
Retirees are frequently advised to load up on high-dividend stocks, like utilities, real-estate investment trusts and dividend-paying blue-chip companies. But that isn't a strategy I would recommend.
Partly, it's because you will have a lopsided portfolio. It is the same problem that young investors face, when they overweight growth stocks. If you overdose on dividend payers, you are making a big bet on one part of the market -- and it could turn out to be the wrong bet.
The advice to buy dividend payers, however, also reflects muddled thinking about how to generate income in retirement. Remember the old axiom that you should "never dip into principal"?
Believe me, it's alive and well. Many retirees are wholeheartedly committed to spending only their income and never touching their capital.
"You often see older individuals advised to tilt their portfolios toward income-producing securities," says Mr. Bernstein, the investment adviser. "But that's ridiculous. It's total return that matters, not income."
In other words, you should aim for decent overall portfolio performance, whether those gains come from dividends, interest or price appreciation.
But what about generating income? You can always raise cash by selling some of your stocks and bonds.
With that in mind, I typically advocate that retirees maintain a cash reserve equal to five years of spending money, with this money parked in short-term bonds and money-market funds. As retirees spend down this cash reserve, they should look to replenish it, by selling some of their stocks and riskier bonds.
If stocks fare well in a particular year, they can sell from that side of their portfolio. But if shares are suffering, they can leave their stocks alone and instead top up their cash reserve by unloading some of their riskier bonds.
投资的四个误区
为了保证投资组合能够盈利，你需要将股票和债券进行正确地组合。但在这个过程中，投资者常常会被弄得不知所措。
我想，这在很大程度上要怪传统的理财策略。让我们来看一看以下四种建立组合投资的策略。
这四种策略都非常受投资者的追捧，但也存在非常严重的瑕疵。
1. 追求增长型股票
年轻一些的投资者通常会被建议买进那些成长迅速的公司股票，特别是科技类公司。这是一个好建议吗？我可不这么认为。
和人们普遍的观点不同，成长型公司并不会带来丰厚的长期回报。事实上，历史经验表明，回报最高的是那些“价值型”股票，而许多此类股票的增长前景并不乐观。
由于价值型股票具有相当的不确定性，它们的股价相比当前盈利或是公司资产而言都相对较为便宜。但鉴于投资者对它们的期望值很低，任何利好消息都能推动股价的大幅上扬。
不要误解我的意思，我并不是要年轻投资者过多地买进价值型股票而减少对成长型股票的投资。我认为，过分追求任何一种类型的股票都是愚蠢的行为。由于面对如此众多的不确定性，我倾向建立一个包含全球各类股票的投资组合。
这让我有了一个略微大胆的想法。假设你今年25岁，你认为对你而言风险收益搭配最佳的一个投资组合是：美国大型股45%、美国小型股20%、房地产投资信托基金5%、发达国家市场（美国以外）股票25%、新兴市场股票5%。如果这是你25岁时的最佳投资组合，我认为，它可能也会是你65岁时一个正确的投资组合。
不过随著你年龄的增大，如果你对风险的承受能力下降了怎么办？我不建议你调整股市的投资组合，我建议你根据自己对风险的承受能力，调整投资组合中股票和债券的比例。
2. 投资应符合年龄特点
当然，通常的建议是，随著年龄的增长，我们应该提高投资组合中债券的比例。不过现实情况是，我们对风险的承受能力并不一定会随著年龄的增长而下降。
俄勒冈州的一个投资顾问威廉?伯恩斯坦(William Bernstein)指出：“与年长者相比，年轻人可能更倾向于规避风险，原因是他们还不太适应市场的波动。”
实际上，你在60多岁时承担的股市风险可能并不低于你在20多岁时承担的风险。不过，这不仅仅和风险承受能力有关系，还和上文提及的最佳投资组合有关。
每位投资者都能很快地了解这一点，即当股市低迷时，债券市场往往会有上佳表现，反之亦然。因此，同时持有股票和债券会使投资组合的风险收益更加具有吸引力。
如果仔细算算就会发现，纯股票投资者在将10%的投资转而投向债券后，能有效降低投资组合总体的价格波动，同时又不会减少收益。同样，纯债券投资者如果将25%的投资转向股票，就能增加盈利而同时又不会增大风险。
在实际操作中，投资顾问们推荐的投资组合比例的变化范围往往要小得多。投资顾问常建议退休老人将其投资组合中股票的比例至少保持在40%，同时建议那些大胆的投资者将股票的比例维持在80%以下。而许多投资者，包括年长的和年轻的，往往会将股票投资的比例最终定在这二者之间，可能会是50%或60%。
3. 挑选20只股票
为了建立一个风险多元化的投资组合，你所需做的就是挑选20只股票，这是华尔街最广为人知的投资经验法则之一。
这条策略有一定的道理。如果你精心挑选了20家公司的股票，你股票投资组合的表现就不应像大盘那样起伏不定。
不过，市场波动并不是衡量风险的唯一标准，其中还有可能出现“追踪误差”的问题，也就是说可能会出现你挑选的20只股票的收益回报远远好于或逊于大盘的情况。
假设你每年获得的投资回报率是6%，而大盘的投资回报率是8%，听起来差别不是很大？但是，假设你投入的是10,000美元，20年后最终将收回32,071美元，而如果你的投资回报率和大盘一样都是8%，那么你就能收回46,610美元，增加了45%。由此可见，为了分散风险，仅仅挑选20只股票是远远不够的。
4. 瞄准公司派息
已经退休的投资者常常会被建议多买进一些分红丰厚的公司股票，比如公用事业公司、房地产投资信托基金或是经常派息的蓝筹股。但我并不推荐投资者这样做。
部分原因是这可能会导致投资组合失衡。同样这也是年轻投资者面临的问题，因为他们可能会过多地买进成长型的股票。过多地买进那些派息公司的股票，就相当于将大量赌注押在某一类股票上，而你很有可能会下错了注。
不过，这条投资派息股票的建议也反映出人们对于退休后如何获得收入仍不是十分明确。记得这句老话吗：永远不要动用本金？
相信我，这句老话至今仍在流传。许多退休老人一门心思地只花费他们获得的红利收入，而从不动用投资本金。
投资顾问伯恩斯坦称：“退休老人们常常会被建议把投资组合向派息股票倾斜，这种做法有些荒唐，因为投资重要的是总体的回报，而不只是获得红利。”
换句话说，你应该关注投资组合的总体表现，无论获得的收益是来自派息还是来自股价上扬。
那么如何获得收入呢？你总是可以靠出售股票和债券来获得现金收入。
记住这一点，我常常会建议退休老人要保证现金储备足够维持自己5年的开销，可以将这部分钱投在短期债券和货币市场基金上。当这部分现金储备减少时，还可以通过出售股票或是风险较高的债券来进行补充。
如果某年股票市场市况良好，你可以减持投资组合中股票的头寸；如果股票表现低迷，你可以继续持有这部分股票，而减持风险较高的债券，以此补充现金储备。
本文作者乔纳森?克莱门茨(Jonathan Clements)自1994年10月起一直在为《华尔街日报》(The Wall Street Journal)个人理财专栏“投资参考”撰稿。乔纳森出生在伦敦，毕业于剑桥大学(Cambridge University)伊曼纽尔学院(Emmanuel College)，在校期间曾编辑过学生报纸。在他1986年移居纽约之前，曾担任过伦敦Euromoney杂志的撰稿人和研究员。乔纳森在1990年1月加入《华尔街日报》，此前他曾在《福布斯》(Forbes)负责共同基金的报导。
