If you're new here, you may want to learn what this site is about. I encourage you to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
April is Financial Literacy Month, during which Get Rich Slowly will explore the fundamentals of personal finance. Today we’ll take a quick look at diversification.
Last year, I shared a series of YouTube clips from Michael Fischer, who is on a mission to educate people about essential personal finance skills. His book, Saving and Investing, is 132 pages of fantastic financial information. Fischer doesn’t provide any scams or gimmicks — he just gives the facts. (The drawback? The book is a little dry.)
Fischer has created some new videos, which I intend to share in the coming weeks. In the first, he again explores diversification. “Diversification is one of the most important concepts that relates to saving and investing,” says Fischer says. “Diversification means not putting all of your eggs into one basket.”
In general, the movements of stocks and bonds and commodities and real estate are not strongly correlated. Just because the stock market is down doesn’t mean the real estate market will be down. In general, the returns on these investment classes are independent of each other. By putting some money into each class, you’re able to reduce your risk while theoretically maintaining your return on investment.
This might sound complicated, but it’s not. Think of it this way: If I ask you to bet $100 on the flip of a coin, and promise to give you $220 if you make the right call, but I get to keep the $100 if you lose, you would probably refuse. The risk is too high. But if I asked you to agree to stake $100 on each of ten similar coin tosses, would you do it? I suspect you might. Your expected rate of return is still the same (10%), but your risk is significantly reduced.
That is the power of diversification. Each coin flip is like owning an individual stock. Buy owning more stocks, you can maintain a similar rate of return while decreasing your risk. (Note that you also reduce your potential gains, however.)
You can diversify your investments simply by adding a couple funds to your portfolio. You might put 10% of your money into a bond fund, for example, and 10% into a real estate investment trust (which is like a mutual fund for real estate). In the same way that it’s better to own more than one stock, it’s also better to own more than just stocks.
The two best discussions of diversification I’ve found are in:
- Burton Malkiel’s The Random Walk Guide to Investing [my review], from which I borrowed the coin-toss example above.
- Kathy Kristof’s Investing 101, which I hope to review soon.
These are both great books for beginning investors. They’re not technical, and they approach the subject with the average person in mind. Both of them note that there are several ways to approach diversification, including:
- Diversification among stocks. “If you want to take some extra money and gamble it on some high-flying biotech stock, go ahead,” Malkiel writes. “But for your serious retirement money, don’t buy individual stocks — buy mutual funds.” In particular, he recommends a portfolio of index funds.
- Diversification among asset classes. In Investing 101, Kristof spends 32 pages discussing the importance of diversification, exploring different asset classes in detail. She discusses investing for safety (with cash or cash-equivalents), investing for income (with certificates of deposit, Treasury bonds, REITs, etc.), investing for growth (with stocks and mutual funds), and investments that protect you from inflation (such as precious metals). She discusses the pros and cons of each class, and explains why the ideal portfolio has a little of each.
- Diversification over time. Many investors practice dollar-cost averaging as a means to mitigate risk. (Though most of us dollar-cost average because we don’t have huge lump sums to invest.) Malkiel writes, “Periodic investments of equal dollar amounts in common stocks can reduce (but not avoid) the risks of equity investment by ensuring that the entire portfolio of stocks will not be purchased at temporarily inflated prices.” (Please note that dollar-cost averaging has critics with valid points.)
Some investors also diversify internationally, or within asset classes (owning both CDs and Treasury bonds, for example).
How much should you diversify? And which investments should you choose? There’s no one right answer. The answer depends on you and your financial goals. The U.S. Government Securities and Exchange Commission has an excellent beginners’ guide to asset allocation, diversification, and rebalancing. If you’d like to learn more about this subject, it’s a great place to start. (I also found an asset allocation calculator, but I wouldn’t take the results as gospel. Use them as a starting point, but make your own decisions.)
Michael Fischer spent nine years at Goldman Sachs, advising some of the largest private banks, mutual fund companies and hedge funds in the world on investment choices. Look for more episodes of Saving and Investing at Get Rich Slowly during the month of April. For more information, visit Michael’s site, Saving and Investing, or purchase his book.
.jpg)

April 7th, 2008 at 5:45 am
I liked this post, and the way diversification is dissected (among stocks, among asset classes, and over time). I am a big fan of diversification for the average investor.
I remember though that Robert Kiyosaki has agreed (in principle, as you pointed out) to an interview on your blog. He is, for one, against diversification. He contends that most of the world’s richest people are concentrated, not diversified. I tend to agree with this too, although Warren Buffett is an interesting case study.
I’m certain you have received tons of questions to ask him. Could you add this to the list:
I understand that as a beginner, diversification is my best friend. As I do more research, observe market trends, and generally become a more savvy investor over time, how is my approach towards diversification supposed to evolve?
Thanks. Great post, as usual
April 7th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Thanks, J.D. I’ll be listening to Fischer’s YouTube video as I work my second job tonight. As for diversification, I do invest automatically in mutual funds (through a 403b) but am struggling with the ‘high risk’ versus ‘medium risk’ options. I have a looooonnnnngggg way to go before I retire, and would prefer to go high risk all the way, but the investment advice I’m getting is telling me to add a little safety into my funds.
I’ll look forward to your review of Investing 101, since it appears that Kristof also spends some time on this issue.
April 7th, 2008 at 7:56 am
The best book on diversification I have read is “The Intelligent Asset Allocator.” He also uses the coin flip example to make things very tangible.
His book, more than any I have read, hammers on the importance of rebalancing. Without rebalancing, most of the advantages of diversification are not fully realized. No one else gets that point across as well in my opinion.
April 7th, 2008 at 7:59 am
Diversifying for the sake of diversification just doesn’t make much sense to me.
It’s like a basketball coach going, “Ok, I’m going to put my crappy players, mediocre players and my all-stars on the court at once…just so I’m diversified.” Why on earth would an investor do that — it makes more sense to only put your all-stars on the court and only the best companies in your portfolio.
If one doesn’t have the time to do the proper research, studying, etc. to make sure that only the greatest companies are in their portfolio, then buy a low-cost index fund and sit back and relax. Over a long period of time you’ll average about 11% per year, which is what the market does anyway. And it’ll save you a ton of fees/commissions along the way (as opposed to buying several types of asset classes and individual investments in each class).
I praise the guy for trying to educate people, but I think there’s a better way to educate folks.
-Wayne
April 7th, 2008 at 8:04 am
So far, I am only investing in mutual funds. I’m just not comfortable investing in individual stocks due to the risk. I think that the only way that average joe can succeed in investing is through educating themselves on the market, and diversifying.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Most of the people who win big in Vegas or sports betting or investing are people who bet big on the correct thing, but these bets/predictions are hard to make and these success stories are not widespread. For most people, diversification is the smarter play, but congratulations to those who bet everything on a concentrated bet and won big.
April 7th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Diversification, Asset Allocation, Dollar Cost Averaging, Rebalancing, and Time are the ingredients of portfolio success.
April 7th, 2008 at 9:15 am
“How much should you diversify? And which investments should you choose? There’s no one right answer. The answer depends on you and your financial goals.”
Completely agree. Many financial advisers tend to give cookie-cutter-type advice on diversification and asset allocation. But people should be aware of their unique goals and their own risk tolerance and diversify accordingly.
April 7th, 2008 at 9:45 am
I’m glad you pointed on the benefits if inflation protected securities such as precious metals.
Until you break the $250k barrier in investments, its best to stay in index funds due to the fees. As you get above that mark its good to look into absolute return strategies. Hedge funds, commodities (oil, coffee, orange juice) and REITs (real estate mutual funds).
Once you are looking into 6 figure investing, the fees for many of these investment vehicles become justified, though I still question most hedge funds due to the lack of regulation.
No matter what your nest egg looks like, always rebalance. Good post JD.
April 7th, 2008 at 10:14 am
I like your coin flip example. I may make a game out of it (paper betting only of course) with my friends to demonstrate the results. It is hard to demonstrate the hidden risk of buying a company that seems to be “best of breed” only to find out it is all a facade (World Com, Enron, etc). For that reason alone it should make sense to never put all of your eggs in one basket.
April 7th, 2008 at 10:46 am
I’m a big fan of careful diversification. But even when diversifying, it is important to carefully consider your investment options and goals, and to make sure that you are choosing good investments for your situation. Diversification isn’t the answer to everything, and won’t help if you make consistently poor decisions.
April 7th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I have to agree with Wayne Mulligan on this one.
Diversifying for the sake of diversification just doesn’t make much sense to me.
The smart investors are able to find larger returns because know what they are doing and have calculated the risks in their favor either way.
Diversifycation is for investors that don’t understand the industries they are investing into.
April 7th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
The average investor lacks the time and the inclination to search for quality stocks. And even if she finds some she likes, what are the odds that they’ll produce returns that beat the market in the long-term?
Diversification isn’t just a casual whim. It’s one of the foundational elements of modern portfolio theory. It works.
April 7th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
I’ve been thinking about this recently, so this was a great post. I eventually decided to use a lifecycle fund for my IRA (Fidelity Freedom Fund) Because I have very little invested at the moment, it doesn’t make sense for me to diversify myself (particularly where many funds have investment minimums). I had also considered putting it all into a stock index fund, but then I got worried about having 100% of my money in stocks. Has anyone else taken this approach?
April 7th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
It’s like a basketball coach going, “Ok, I’m going to put my crappy players, mediocre players and my all-stars on the court at once…just so I’m diversified.” Why on earth would an investor do that — it makes more sense to only put your all-stars on the court and only the best companies in your portfolio.
I think that analogy is a little flawed. Diversification isn’t like putting all-stars and crappy players together; it’s more like building a team composed of players with complementary skills. The most successful teams have offensive threats that provide the bulk of the scoring (like high-performing stocks), good ballhandlers that distribute the ball well but don’t score as prolifically (like bonds and mutual funds), and defensive specialists that can keep a game close when the team’s leading scorer is having an off night (like CDs and money market). To be successful in basketball or investing, you’ve got to be solid in multiple facets of the game, instead of relying on just one.
And now I feel silly for sounding like a T. Rowe Price advertisement…
April 7th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
I agree with Wayne Mulligan and Curt.
InvestEveryMonth: did you just equate gambling to investing? A smart investor would do the research, read the annual reports, subscribe to news alerts, etc. On the other hand, the smartest thing you can do when gambling is to try and count cards in blackjack - which, once again, has a scientific, rational and mathematical basis.
J.D.: “And even if she finds some she likes, what are the odds that they’ll produce returns that beat the market in the long-term?” There is an investment fund that has outperformed the market every year for the last 43 years, and its average annual growth is ~22%. That fund is Berkshire Hathaway and the man in charge of it is Warren Buffett, who also happens to be the richest man alive. When he was asked about diversification, he said, “You put all your eggs in one basket. And then you watch that basket!” - and I agree wholeheartedly.
April 7th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Peter:
Great analogy!
April 7th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Warren Buffett is Warren Buffett. You and I are not. Here is what Warren Buffett actually believes about diversification:
If you are not a professional investor, if your goal is not to manage money in such a way that you get a significantly better return than world, then I believe in extreme diversification. I believe that 98 or 99 percent — maybe more than 99 percent — of people who invest should extensively diversify and not trade. That leads them to an index fund with very low costs. All they’re going to do is own a part of America. They’ve made a decision that owning a part of America is worthwhile. I don’t quarrel with that at all — that is the way they should approach it.
GL is right that Berkshire-Hathaway has outperformed the market over the past 43 years, but it is the exception and not the rule.
April 7th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Warren Buffett also uses his management expertise to acquire stakes in companies and make sure they are on a path to success. Berkshire-Hathaway is successful largely because of Buffett’s general business acumen. General investors don’t get that sort of say-so in the companies they invest in.
April 7th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
“Berkshire-Hathaway … is the exception and not the rule.”
True, but as a rule, their exceptional performance has been extremely reliable.
As opposed, of course, to the go-go funds of the 1970s (or was it the ’60s?), the best of which produced a 116% annualized profit before going up in flames. My point here is that Berkshire-Hathaway is an exceptional company that’s very well diversified (Coca-Cola, Gillette, GEICO, etc.) and I don’t see any reason not to trust my money to them, instead of going solo and trying to diversify.
By the way, J.D., thank you for commenting back - in my experience, bloggers don’t spend too much time reading their readers’ comments. :]
April 7th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
As for Berkshire-Hathaway: yes, I’m with you there. Just the other day I was thinking I’d like to own a piece of them. I know I can’t afford the A shares (or whatever they’re called), but don’t they have a cheaper version? I’ll have to look into it…
April 7th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
I’d love to get some A shares too. My point was more that individual investors can’t expect to ‘pick stocks’ like Warren Buffett because much of Warren Buffett’s success is based on something other than just picking stocks.
April 7th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
J.D. and Ryan:
actually, that very concern was the reason they instituted the B shares. One B share is about 1/30th of the A share. Over the past year, the highest price for the B share (BRK.B) was $5,059 - and in the past few weeks it’s been fluctuating around $4,200-4,400. (It closed at $4,405 earlier today.) In other words, now is a great time to buy.
There’s also http://www.sharebuilder.com - I don’t know too much about that site, but I believe they allow you to buy shares of shares, which means you can own a bit of Berkshire for, say, $100.
And just a disclaimer - I do not work for, nor am I affiliated in any way with, Berkshire-Hathaway. I just happen to be a big fan of Buffett. :^D
April 8th, 2008 at 6:52 am
J.D. - You just said the same thing I did…read my sentence about buying a low cost index fund, that’s EXACTLY what Buffett advocates. If we start getting crazy buying all of these other asset classes then we’re doomed to taxes and fees.
-Wayne