Systematic rebalancing is not necessarily best way to go

The value of systematic rebalancing of portfolios to bring them back closer to strategic allocations has been questioned in new research by Morgan Stanley.The research, by Morgan Stanley’s Martin Leibowitz and Anthony Bova, indicates that portfolios which have not been rebalanced over a 10-year period, have either outperformed those which were rebalanced quarterly or closely matched them for returns.

The main reason for this is that the non-rebalanced portfolios capture the value in market momentum which tends to be lost through rebalancing according to a fixed time schedule.

The authors recommend, instead, that institutional and other investors have a program of “slow rebalancing”, which will avoid much of the dangers of not rebalancing in a bubble but at the same time capture some of the upside from momentum.

They say: “The no-rebalancing strategy has disadvantages in its greater volatility, its beta drift and its intrinsic ‘untidiness’. However, the surprising finding is the extent to which the non-rebalanced portfolio values either exceed or closely match those obtained with more standard rebalancing strategies.

“To the extent that these results can be generalised beyond this specific model, they are supportive of a more flexible and more strategic ‘slow balancing’ approach to realigning a fund’s structure over time.”

The study indicates that setting ranges, such that rebalancing occurs after the portfolio reaches a certain maximum or minimum value, has some benefit but this, too, is not significant compared with either non-rebalanced or quarterly rebalanced portfolios.

Sponsored Content

Slow balancing involves the investor deferring the rebalancing action to a time when it more closely coincides with general revisions in the policy portfolio.

This therefore requires a more active approach to the allocation by the investor, along the lines of a dynamic asset allocation – looking at a shorter time horizon than strategic asset allocation but longer than tactical asset allocation.

Details of the study can be viewed at www.morganstanley.com

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Schapiro considers action on pay to play

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is currently considering pay-to-play activities and will report back on any proposed action in the next few weeks, according to its chairman Mary Schapiro, speaking via video at the annual International Corporate Governance Network conference this week. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Hermes chief calls for mandate overhaul

Pension funds should demand an overhaul in the product offerings of funds managers and change the terms of mandates to incorporate environmental, social and governance issues in portfolios, according to Colin Melvin, chief executive of Hermes Equity Ownership Services, who pointed to a number of funds in the UK, including the owner of Hermes, BT

How to allocate if the world has changed forever

The financial crisis has challenged pension funds to rethink standard asset allocation models, but as Jonathan Armitage, head of US equities at Schroders observes, a lot of investors are questioning whether they need to react. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Crisis fails to derail support for ESG

A new report commissioned by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank Group, has found environmental, social and governance investment criteria in emerging markets are being embraced by most of the asset management community despite the economic crisis. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

USS, ABP and PGGM collaborate on real estate

Three of Europe’s largest institutional investors have teamed up to investigate the way environmental issues are assessed and managed by real estate companies. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Shareholder influence under question: ICGN conference

The ability to appoint and dismiss company board directors is the most important shareholder right according to an overwhelming majority of delegates at the International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) annual conference, who were more cautious on whether shareholders could actually influence corporate governance once they had the right to vote. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2

Previous