- About Us
- My Account
The views expressed are those of the author at the time of writing. Other teams may hold different views and make different investment decisions. The value of your investment may become worth more or less than at the time of original investment. While any third-party data used is considered reliable, its accuracy is not guaranteed. For professional, institutional, or accredited investors only.
THE PRIMARY GOAL OF REBALANCING is to minimize risk relative to strategic asset allocation targets, which are deliberately set to match an organization’s return, risk, and liability or spending profile. In short, rebalancing avoids overexposure to outperforming asset classes and underexposure to underperforming asset classes, all in the interest of maintaining a pre-defined risk posture.
While that all sounds very reasonable, the reality is that rebalancing can be an emotional decision, particularly in extreme market environments when our instincts may tell us to run from asset classes that are selling off in dramatic fashion. We believe a well-structured rebalancing policy that sets rules for when and how a portfolio is reallocated can help take emotion out of the process. In addition, while past performance is no guarantee, we have seen evidence that investors who have followed disciplined rebalancing policies have been rewarded over the long term for having “bought low” as the market went through a bottoming process rather than trying to time the precise market trough. And, of course, opting not to rebalance is an active decision with risks of its own, including less diversification and more volatility than intended.
In this paper, we share our rebalancing analysis, which focuses on the hypothetical results of three rebalancing strategies — calendar-based (at different frequencies), symmetric-range, and asymmetric-range — as well as the implications of “drifting” (having no rebalancing policy). Our key conclusions include the following:
Our research assumed a 60% equity/40% fixed income target asset allocation. As the evaluation of rebalancing strategies requires dealing with the time-period dependency of the results, we performed our analysis on a hypothetical portfolio over the entire 1960 – 2019 period, encompassing multiple market environments, as well as rolling periods and discrete decades. We examined risk-adjusted returns across all periods given that symmetric and asymmetric strategies tend to hold more equity exposure on average. We found our key conclusions were consistent over the various time horizons.
We define the three rebalancing strategies as follows:
1. Calendar-based rebalancing resets allocations to the strategic targets on a fixed schedule, regardless of interim market movements. The organization determines the frequency of rebalancing (e.g., monthly, quarterly, annual). The main advantages of this approach are ease of implementation and risk control. However, the systematic nature of calendar-based rebalancing ignores…
To read more, please click the download link below.