Diversification, Weapon Of The Underdogs


This is probably the most abused Warren Buffett quote I’ve read in many financial forums:

Wide diversification is only required when investors do not understand what they are doing.

For one reason or another, investors seem to interpret this as an excuse to concentrate. Let me rephrase the quote a bit.

If you don’t know what you’re doing, you ought to diversify.

Even Buffett, arguably the most astute of all investors, relies on 42 stocks to cut risks. Granted that the high stock count is probably necessary given his enormous wealth. However, if you don’t know what you’re doing, concentrating your stock portfolio will not turn you into an astute investor. Since no investor is omniscient, s/he can cushion any unforeseen blows from company-specific risks, such as strikes and natural disasters, by spreading your eggs to different baskets.

In my own portfolio, I have about 27 core holdings, a number of smaller positions, a couple of ETFs and a handful of mutual funds. Admittedly, the number of holdings seems excessive, but certainly not enough to qualify as diworsification. I don’t have plans to scale down at the present. Being primary a quantative investor, I find the current portfolio quite manageable.

Reduce volatility without sacrificing return
One of my favourite theories is the Modern Portfolio Theory, which goes something like this: when you construct a collection of high-risk, high-reward and uncorrelated stocks, it reduces the volatility of the overall portfolio without sacrificing the expected return. The key is to pick businesses that don’t correlate with each other. That way, individual stocks may oscillate violently around the expected return, but due to the low correlation, the oscillations cancel each other out, and you benefit from a smoother and more consistent return.

Reduce unsystematic risk
Diversification also reduces company-specific risks, also known as unsystematic risks. Examples include strikes at railway companies, broken oil and gas pipelines, and natural destructions by fires and hurricanes. This one goes along the line of not putting all your eggs in one basket. By diversifying, you can improve you odds of hatching most of your eggs.

I’ve been told that investors cannot diversify away from systematic risks, which include inflation, interest rates, recessions and political instability. Even though we can’t eliminate systematic risks, I’m open to the possibility of at least minimizing systematic risks by investing in companies with these characteristics:

  • Ability to pass inflationary costs to the customers
  • Clean balance sheet to insulate from rising interest rates
  • A lineup of consumer stables including essential products and services
  • Diversified international revenues

Further readings on diversification:
- Modern Portfolio Theory by Investopia
- Systematic Versus Unsystematic Risks by Investment Review
- How Many Stocks Diversify Unsystematic Risk? by Morningstar

 

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Reader Comments

The question is, however, if you are only beginning to invest with a modest amount of money do you diversify immediately and end up with a lot of little eggs in your basket or do you concentrate on two or three investments to concentrate on?

Nice summary of diversification.

ThickenMyWallet - my strategy for someone who is making contributions that are fairly large in proportion to the size of their portfolio (ie just starting out) is not too worry about diversification. The way I look at it, you can count the short term future contributions as part of the current asset allocation.

For example - if someone wants to have a portfolio of 50% Cdn eq and 50% US equity and has a portfolio of $0 but starts contributing $500/month. Within a year they are going to have about $6000 in their portfolio so I don’t see anything wrong with them just saving up and buying one security or fund at a time. Ie $3000 in Cdn first and $3000 in US second. It wouldn’t really matter for mutual funds but if they were buying ETFs or stocks then it would apply.

If you’re just starting out, your greatest asset is likely your ability to earn income, rather than the tiny portfolio. As FourPillars alluded, it should be fine to relax on diversification initially as long as you’re building toward it.

Ah, the concentration vs. diversification debate. I am firmly in the diversification camp and find it silly to advocate concentration to average investors.
A minor point: though the Berkshire portfolio has 40+ stocks, the bulk of it is in fact concentrated in a handful of names.

I Personally think that investing in mutual funds is a good stat when you don’t have much money to invest. However, when you have more money, you can concentrate around 30% of your portfolio into one industry and hopefully make some good money. In order to do such things, you must not be afraid of losing money!
FB.

Great Blog. First time reader. It’s refreshing to read about people who are taking their financial future seriously. Your knowledge and research skill seems to be quite remarkable. I look forward to reading more of your posts!