The Rationale of Buying and Selling

Investing is as much about making sound decisions when buying assets as it is about knowing when to sell. At the core of successful portfolio management lies the principle of diversification and the allocation of capital to investments across asset classes and within those classes. As assets grow at different rates, it's critical to manage your portfolio proactively to adjust the exposures to sectors and investments.  

Asset allocation is a critical part of portfolio management. A well-diversified portfolio will include a mix of growth-oriented assets such as property and stocks and defensive assets like fixed interest bonds, hybrid securities, term deposits, and cash. Then there is diversification within each of the asset classes. Most of our long-term client portfolios will hold 15-20 Australian stocks and a similar number of international stocks. This broad exposure helps to mitigate risk while optimising potential returns. 

If a portfolio is set up to have 70% exposure to growth assets and 30% to defensive assets as the growth assets increase over time the growth defensive split will skew high. Left unchecked you end up with the growth assets being a much higher percentage of the portfolio. It's critical to adjust these weightings periodically to ensure that you don't inadvertently end up with a greater exposure to higher risk assets than you intended to or than is prudent. This also applies to the levels of exposure to each asset class and the specific investments within asset classes, such as when an individual stock grows to become a larger part of the portfolio than is prudent.  

A common conversation I have with clients, especially now as stocks have performed so strongly, is around the timing and rationale of selling to take profits and rebalance the portfolio and then identifying entry points for new investments. If a stock's price has increased significantly faster than its profits, it might be an opportunity to lock in profit, reduce your exposure to the stock and reallocate funds to undervalued investments. The market can often overreact, pushing prices beyond reasonable levels. Selling gradually, or "averaging out," helps manage this risk and ensures gains are locked in while leaving room for further upside as you keep the bulk of the holding.  

A good example of this currently is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA). Over the past year, its share price climbed from $105 to $160, even as its profits fell slightly. There is a disconnect between the share price increase and CBA’s profit growth. Many investors now have an overweight position in CBA and the banking sector. I think it’s prudent to take some profit as the price rises well beyond the stocks fair value. In many cases we’ve sold small amounts for clients at $150 a share and again at $160. This approach retains the bulk of the holding while strategically reducing exposure to an overvalued asset. If the CBA share price goes higher in the short term, I am happy to continue selling incrementally knowing that we’ve prudently derisked and reinvested in better value assets elsewhere.  

Once profits are realised, the next step is reinvesting. This could mean allocating to another asset class, depending on the portfolio's overall balance, or investing in undervalued companies. Opportunities often lie in overlooked or neglected stocks trading below their fair value. While buying into such companies can be challenging, it’s essential to remain focused on their underlying value rather than current market sentiment. Both buying and selling should follow a measured approach. Investing incrementally allows you to spread risk, especially when markets are high and corrections are more likely. Similarly, gradually selling ensures you benefit from further gains while locking in profits. This disciplined strategy prevents overreactions to short-term market movements, both up and down, and aligns with a fundamental long-term investment philosophy. 

Managing a portfolio is a dynamic process that requires balancing opportunities with prudence. Whether it's reallocating capital from overvalued stocks or identifying undervalued opportunities, the goal is always the same: to manage money in the most efficient and effective way possible. By staying disciplined—buying low and selling high—you can navigate the complexities of the market while maintaining a robust and resilient portfolio. 

General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Solving the Housing Crisis

The solution to fix the housing crisis is simple because it’s a supply and demand issue. We need more houses or less people. More supply or less demand. While the solution may be simple that doesn’t mean it is easy.  

The obvious way to increase supply is to build more homes and apartments. But this is constrained by the realities of market forces around capacity, finding workers, the cost of materials, and time. It will take many years to build the number of houses and apartments needed to solve the problem.  

Achieving the massive increase in supply needed will address the issue in the medium to long term. It will also play a huge role in the continued growth and prosperity of our country. But increasing supply is not going to solve the housing crisis we face right now. 

There are two distinct phases to solving this problem. A short-term solution to fix the crisis and a long-term solution to solve the issue once and for all. The short-term solution will incur economic pain, but it is necessary to avoid a more serious crisis.  

The short-term solution is simply to substantially reduce immigration for a period of time, say 12-24 months. Many people don’t like that idea but the rapid rise in immigration is a big part of the issue. I’ve got no issue with immigration levels where they are at, I think it’s great for our nation and the economy more broadly. But you can’t just keep bringing people in if you don’t have enough homes, and at the moment we don’t.  

If you owned the only hotel in town and had say 100 rooms and you booked them out to 110 families who are flying in from overseas that weekend, it would be a problem. Not only is it unethical its irresponsible. Your lack of planning or deliberate overbooking is ruining the holidays of many people because you are being either greedy or lazy. 

When you bring in almost 550,000 people from overseas annually when you don’t have enough homes, our nation is doing exactly what the hotel operator in my story above is doing. Except what we are doing is even worse. Many of the people coming into our country are relatively wealthy including the students from overseas and can afford to pay higher accommodation expenses.  

The people most severely impacted here are everyday Australians who are being priced out of the market. Rents and property prices are being forced ever higher, not because they should be but because of the dynamic we have created by our own poor planning. As with any business or enterprise, you need to ensure you build your capacity ahead of ramping up sales or you will crumble under the weight of the increased demand.  

To be clear, I am not suggesting a lower immigration policy beyond what is needed to address the crisis Australian families are facing right now and will continue to in the 12-24 months ahead. There are massive benefits for our country and the economy by opening our doors to people who can contribute to our nation. But right now, we need to take a step back to take the next sustainable leap forward.

General Advice Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.

Head in the Sand

There are dozens of different types of risks and biases that investors need to consider when making investment decisions. Some such as market risk, concentration risk, credit risk, liquidity risk and time horizon risk are easier to quantify and are well understood. Others such as recency bias, confirmation bias and herd mentality are more nuanced and require some self-reflection to mitigate or offset their impact.

Share markets have been kind to investors over the past several months, and our portfolios have enjoyed solid returns on the back of this. However, the recent buoyancy in share markets has not changed my underlying cautiousness regarding the risks that investors face. I still think the world is precariously placed, even though the share market doesn’t seem particularly concerned now. Wars can escalate, inflation may not be over, the list goes on.

Investors have become complacent and seem to ignore any potential for bad news. Rather than factor in risks more conservatively, the share market has taken an attitude that everything is great until it has been proven that it is not. This binary thinking isn’t very smart because it doesn’t account for the reality that there are indeed risks that exist with varying degrees of probability. These risks need to be factored in.

To make the math simple, let’s imagine there are 2 separate global events, event A and event B. Let’s further assume each event has a 50% probability of occurring in the next 12 months and would result in a 20% decline in the share market. Based on the probability of each of the 2 events happening, the following outlines the combination of possible outcomes and their probabilities of occurring:

1.      25% chance that neither event A nor event B occur.

2.      50% chance that either event A or event B occurs.

3.      25% chance that both event A and event B occur.

Unfortunately, investment markets often misprice event risk. Perhaps it is due to complacency or the intangible nature of assessing risk. Nevertheless, in the absence of an event occurring, the default assessment of these risks by investors in the current market seems to be to ignore it until it happens.

This might turn out to be ok in the 25% chance where neither of the 2 events occurred. But that results in a mispricing of risk until that point because there was a 75% chance of a negative outcome whereby at least one of the events occurs. If the events do occur markets need to adjust much more aggressively. In the basic scenario I outlined above, there is a 50% chance that one or the other event occurs, resulting in a 20% fall. While there is also a 25% chance that both events occur leading to a much larger fall in the share market.

In reality, there are many risks at play of varying probability and consequence. But in today’s complex geopolitical and global economic environment, where there are many more event risks than usual, the prudent assessment of risk is imperative. It’s critical to think differently and ensure you don’t get caught up in the herd mentality as markets throw caution to the wind. Consider the way various biases impact your thinking and assessment of risk.

So, while investment markets and many investors seem to have taken a head in the sand approach to considering these risks, I am happy to carefully consider them. It means that we continue to take profit from time to time as share markets go ever higher. We want to be prepared for the day when one or more of these events do occur because eventually, they will.


General Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature only and may not be relevant to your particular circumstances. The circumstances of each investor are different, and you should seek advice from an investment adviser who can consider if the strategies and products are right for you. Historical performance is often not a reliable indicator of future performance. You should not rely solely on historical performance to make investment decisions.