New Here? Get the Free Newsletter

Oblivious Investor offers a free newsletter providing tips on low-maintenance investing, tax planning, and retirement planning. Join over 17,000 email subscribers:

Articles are published Monday and Friday. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Diversification with Individual Stocks

Over the last several years, I’ve read numerous articles suggesting that instead of using mutual funds, an investor can create a diversified portfolio by investing in 50 (or so) individual stocks.

At first glance, it seems to make sense. You’d be able to hold a few stocks from each of the major sectors. So it would seem reasonable to conclude that your return would (roughly) match the market return.

There’s one big problem though.

You might expect that the returns of individual stocks over a given period (if plotted on a chart) to look something like a bell curve:

bellcurve

  • Centered around the average market return,
  • Most stocks outperforming or underperforming by a couple percent, with a roughly equal amounts of stocks on either side, and
  • A small amount of outliers at either end.

But that’s not how it works.

In reality, over any period, there will be a handful of stocks that severely outperform the market and make up a disproportionate amount of the total return.

In contrast–to look at the other end of the performance chart–we know that there is a limit to how severely any stock can underperform the market. (No stock can go below zero, of course.)

In other words, we know that the severe outperformers are outperforming by a greater degree than the degree to which the most severe underperformers are underperforming. (Yikes, it’s a tongue twister almost!) From this, we can conclude that more than 50% of stocks must be performing at a “below average” rate of return in order to balance out those mega overachievers.

For instance, over the last 13 years, the market (as measured by the S&P 500) is up a total of 249%. Microsoft’s stock, on the other hand, is up a total of 18,332%. Clearly, in order to balance out Microsoft’s astonishing performance, there must have been a multitude of stocks that performed below average.

In short, over any given period, most stocks must be underperformers. The way I see it, this leads to two conclusions:

  1. Picking stocks is truly a gamble. There’s a possibility of a big payout, but the probability of any given stock even matching the performance of the market is less than 50%.
  2. A portfolio of just 50 stocks is similarly risky.

It looks to me like massive diversification is the only reliable way to make sure these overachievers are in your portfolio. Does that make sense? Or is there something I’m missing here?

New to Investing? See My Related Book:

Book6FrontCoverTiltedBlue

Investing Made Simple: Investing in Index Funds Explained in 100 Pages or Less

Topics Covered in the Book:
  • Asset Allocation: Why it's so important, and how to determine your own,
  • How to to pick winning mutual funds,
  • Roth IRA vs. traditional IRA vs. 401(k),
  • Click here to see the full list.

A Testimonial:

"A wonderful book that tells its readers, with simple logical explanations, our Boglehead Philosophy for successful investing." - Taylor Larimore, author of The Bogleheads' Guide to Investing

Comments

  1. I think I agree with you that stock picking probably isn’t the safest way to do things, so a lot of stocks is important. I wonder if ETFs and mutual funds — divers, of course — might be a way to help get more stocks into a portfolio. Of course, then you have to combat the costs…

Disclaimer: By using this site, you explicitly agree to its Terms of Use and agree not to hold Simple Subjects, LLC or any of its members liable in any way for damages arising from decisions you make based on the information made available on this site. I am not a financial or investment advisor, and the information on this site is for informational and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.

Copyright 2017 Simple Subjects, LLC - All rights reserved. To be clear: This means that, aside from small quotations, the material on this site may not be republished elsewhere without my express permission. Terms of Use and Privacy Policy