The world's most common balanced portfolio doesn't have a rigorous academic origin. It evolved from the Wellington Fund, created by Walter Morgan in the late 1920s as a bond-heavy strategy to avoid the devastation of a major stock market crash.
Related Insights
In high-inflation environments, stocks and bonds tend to move in the same direction, nullifying the diversification benefit of the classic 60/40 portfolio. This forces investors to seek non-correlated returns in real assets like infrastructure, energy, and commodities.
The 60/40 portfolio is obsolete because bonds, laden with credit risk, no longer offer safety. A resilient modern portfolio requires a broader mix of uncorrelated assets: cash, gold, currencies, commodities like oil and food, and short-term government debt, while actively avoiding corporate credit.
Contrary to popular belief, the 1929 crash wasn't an instantaneous event. It took a full year for public confidence to erode and for the new reality to set in. This illustrates that markets can absorb financial shocks, but they cannot withstand a sustained, spiraling loss of confidence.
The real benefit of diversification is matching assets with different time horizons (e.g., long-term stocks, short-term bills) to your future spending needs. All asset allocation is ultimately an exercise in managing financial goals across time.
During profound economic instability, the winning strategy isn't chasing the highest returns, but rather avoiding catastrophic loss. The greatest risks are not missed upside, but holding only cash as inflation erodes its value or relying solely on a paycheck.
Advisors who recommend fixed allocations like 60/40 without considering current expected returns and risk are committing a form of 'malpractice.' Investment decisions must be dynamic, as the relationship between risk and return is not constant over time.
For 40 years, falling rates pushed 'safe' bond funds into increasingly risky assets to chase yield. With rates now rising, these mis-categorized portfolios are the most vulnerable part of the financial system. A crisis in credit or sovereign debt is more probable than a stock-market-led crash.
Contrary to the retail investor's focus on high-yield funds, the 'smart money' first ensures the safety of their capital. They allocate the majority of their portfolio (50-70%) to secure assets, protecting their core fortune before taking calculated risks with the remainder.
Marks uses the analogy of a six-foot man drowning in a stream that's five feet deep on average. This illustrates that portfolio construction must account for worst-case scenarios, not just average outcomes. Survival through every market phase, especially the low points, is a prerequisite for reaching long-term goals.
Arguing against the traditional 60/40 portfolio amidst a market mania, Gundlach advises a radically different allocation. He suggests a maximum of 40% in stocks (mostly non-US), 25% in bonds (with non-dollar exposure), 15% in gold and real assets, and the rest in cash.
