How Concentration Affects Portfolio Performance

One of the reasons why so many mutual funds fail to beat their benchmark is because so many stocks fail to beat their benchmark. This idea has been pushed forward with papers like The Agony & The Ecstasy: The Risks and Rewards of a Concentrated Stock Position and Do Stocks Outperform Treasury Bills?

Vanguard recently came out with a piece that provides investors with additional data to bring to this conversation.

They calculated the returns of Russell 3000 stocks over the last 30 years and found that 47% of stocks were unprofitable investments and almost 30% lost more than half their value. They also found, and this is the big one, that 7% of stocks had cumulative returns over 1,000%.

The implications for investors is obvious: If you’re picking stocks and you don’t own the 7%, it’s difficult to keep up with the index. In order to flesh this out, Vanguard quantified the effects of dart throwing to determine how many stocks are optimal in order to beat the benchmark, and the hurdles a concentrated position needs to overcome to get there.

The chart below shows the results from this study. The likelihood of performance from selecting just a few stocks randomly is not very attractive, to say the least.

There are a few of other charts worth checking out, but I want to make a quick point here that often gets lost when these studies are presented.

This is similar to showing what happens to the growth of $1 when you miss just the 25 best days. Nobody is going to only miss only the best days, they’re going to also avoid some of the worst days. Similarly, if you’re picking stocks, you’re not going to just miss the Apple’s of the world, you’re going to miss the General Electric’s as well. Now, this is not a great analogy because in the case of stocks, or more specifically index funds, the massive winners more than offset the losers. But here’s what I’m getting at. What if there was a strategy that focused on screening out stocks with unattractive business characteristics or those showing negative momentum?

What would the returns be if you owned the S&P 500 and screened out 50 expensive stocks whose growth was slowing and 50 “cheap stocks” trading below a moving average? I don’t know that this would necessarily improve the odds but this is  just a reminder that it’s worth thinking about the other side of every coin. Hit the link below to read the whole thing.

How to increase the odds of owning the few stocks that drive returns

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.

The Compound Media, Inc., 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.