Should You Be 100% Long Stocks?

The New York Times is out with an investing column that posits the following: You should be 100% stocks in your portfolio because, given enough time, they should outperform everything else you can possibly own in an investment account.

And here is the data that “proves” it – as long as you’re willing to bet that the future will look precisely like the past:

Screen Shot 2016-02-13 at 1.10.28 PM

I’m troubled by this idea, although I do agree that there are select cases where this could make sense. The author is David A. Levine, a former chief economist at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company. And, to his credit, he does pay lip service to the idea that very few human beings can actually live with the volatility that a 100% equity portfolio will induce.

As we say at our shop, long-term returns are the only returns that matter, but the long-term is not where investors live their lives.

There are some cases where a 100% stock allocation makes sense. Here are five of them:

* The investor is under 35 years old, starting from a small base, and is automatically dollar-cost averaging every month.

* The investor is in a coma of an indeterminate length

* The investor has been diagnosed with a terminal disease and is going to be passing on the assets to the next generation soon.

* The investor’s portfolio is very small in comparison with their other assets, assets that are not fully correlated with stocks.

* The investor is going to be living on a desert island for two decades without access to TVs, radios, the internet or Barron’s.

Under any of the above circumstances, the idea of a 100% allocation to stocks is doable. The portfolio will probably perform miracles for the investor’s net worth so long as they don’t (or can’t) touch it for 20 years.

But I would postulate that it is unnecessary, for one thing, and may even be suboptimal given the ease and low cost with which real estate and bonds can be held and a periodic rebalance can be executed.

We’ve seen eleven bear markets during which stocks declined by over 35% in the eleven decades since Charlie Dow created his index in 1896. That works out to roughly one every ten years, although they don’t occur on a regular schedule. The majority of investors cannot live through two or three of those and have their money be fully exposed without making a major mistake or two.

Having worked directly and indirectly with investors from all walks of life and every region of the country over the last 18 years, I can promise you that almost no one can endure – emotionally speaking – the volatility and drawdowns that an all-equity portfolio brings to the table.

The good news is, investors don’t have to. The power of compounding is every bit as potent in a well-managed, diversified portfolio as it is in a kamikaze portfolio.


How Much of Your Nest Egg to Put Into Stocks? All of It (New York Times)



This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. click here commented on Sep 14

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More to that Topic: […]

  2. faux perfect clones commented on Dec 08

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Info here to that Topic: […]

  3. Harold Jahn Utah commented on Dec 19

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you can find 14792 additional Information to that Topic: […]

  4. repliki zegark��w commented on Jan 14

    … [Trackback]

    […] Here you will find 19404 more Info on that Topic: […]

  5. rbc login online banking commented on Jan 14

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More here to that Topic: […]

  6. bandar 77 commented on Jan 23

    … [Trackback]

    […] Here you can find 69508 more Info on that Topic: […]

  7. pendaftaran pns 2021 commented on Jan 31

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More on on that Topic: […]