Tag Archives: vbltx

What To Do When Your Stocks And Bonds Portfolio Reaches Minimum Volatility

Summary Investors typically increase exposure to bonds as they near retirement, hoping to reduce volatility and drawdown risk. It is very possible to reach a point where further increasing exposure to bonds will increase rather than decrease volatility. This phenomenon is more likely to occur with longer duration bond funds. Once you reach minimum volatility for a two-fund stocks and bonds portfolio, you can further reduce risk by (1) buying treasuries or (2) switching to a shorter term bond fund. There is no general result for which strategy is preferred, but (2) tends to give better returns and may be easier to implement. Expected Returns and Volatility as you Increase Bond Exposure Suppose you are implementing a basic stocks and bonds portfolio comprised of two Vanguard mutual funds: Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares (MUTF: VFINX ) and Vanguard Long-Term Bond Index Fund (MUTF: VBLTX ). Using historical data going back to Feb. 28, 1994, here is how expected returns and volatility of the VFINX/VBLTX portfolio vary with asset allocation. (click to enlarge) Here the top-right point represents 100% VFINX/0% VBLTX; the next data point is 90% VFINX/10% VBLTX; and so on until the bottom-most point, which is 0% VFINX/100% VBLTX. As you near retirement, you may increase your VBLTX allocation to reduce risk. If you go from 90% VFINX/10% VBLTX to 60% VFINX/40% VBLTX, for example, you reduce your expected returns a little (0.041% to 0.037%), while reducing volatility considerably (1.06% to 0.70%). Further increasing the VBLTX allocation reduces volatility, but only to a point. At 25.8% VFINX/74.2% VBLTX, you reach the leftmost point on the curve, and further increasing VBLTX allocation actually increases volatility while reducing expected returns. Of course, there is never a good reason to increase volatility and decrease expected returns. So looking back at the past 21.5 years, you would never have wanted to allocate more than 74.2% to VBLTX in a VFINX/VBLTX portfolio. Longer Duration Bond Funds Have Lower Critical Points The expected returns vs. volatility curve doesn’t always have a clear critical point like we saw for VFINX/VBLTX. In general, longer duration bond funds are more likely to exhibit this phenomenon. You can see this when you compare the curve for VFINX paired with VBLTX to VFINX paired with Vanguard’s short-term and intermediate-term bond funds, VBISX and VBIIX . (click to enlarge) Looking at the blue curve, VFINX/VBISX does have a minimum volatility point, but it’s at a very high VBISX allocation (4.3% VFINX/95.7% VBISX). Note however that if you’re using VFINX and VBISX you probably wouldn’t want to go higher than 90% VBISX, as doing so sacrifices considerable expected returns while reducing volatility very little (if at all). The green curve is in between the first two, with minimum volatility at 12.7% VFINX/87.3% VBIIX. I would not recommend going any higher than 80% VBIIX, though, from an expected returns/volatility standpoint. Reducing Volatility Beyond the Critical Point What do you do if you want to further reduce volatility after reaching your portfolio’s critical point? I see two reasonable options: Allocate some of your portfolio to treasuries (e.g. 10-year US treasury bonds). Swap for a shorter duration bond fund. Let’s go back to the first two-fund portfolio, VFINX/VBLTX. Suppose we’re at 25.8% VFINX/74.2% VBLTX and we recognize that we’ve reached minimum volatility. We would like to reduce volatility to one-fourth that of VFINX (the leftmost dotted line in the previous figures, at 0.298). We can’t do it with all of our assets allocated to VFINX or VBLTX. Let’s consider option (1). Allocating some of your portfolio to cash would pull the red curve down and to the left. But if you’re going to have cash, you may as well get some interest on it. So instead of cash let’s say we generate risk-free returns on whatever percentage we pull out of our VFINX/VBLTX portfolio, from investing those assets in US treasuries for example. The next figure shows the expected returns vs. volatility curves for various allocations to a risk-free investment that returns 1.5% annually. (click to enlarge) To clarify, the highest curve the same as we saw before; the next highest is 10% receiving risk-free 1.5% annual returns, and the remaining 90% split to VFINX/VBLTX in 10% increments; and so on until the lowest curve (which you can barely see), which is 90% risk-free 1.5% annual returns, and the remaining 10% split to VFINX/VBLTX in 10% increments. The first curve to extend to a volatility of 0.298 is the one with 40% allocated to the risk-free investment. For this portfolio, we would have to allocate the remaining 60% of our assets to 30% VFINX/70% VBLTX, to achieve an expected return of 0.0226% with volatility of 0.298%. Now let’s consider option (2). The next figure is the same as the last one, but with the curves for VFINX/VBIIX and VFINX/VBISX included. (click to enlarge) Interestingly, swapping VBLTX for VBISX lets us reach a volatility of 0.298 with a mean daily return slightly higher than that reached with VFINX/VBLTX and 40% risk-free. A 24.7% VFINX/75.3% VBISX portfolio has means returns of 0.0232%. A natural question is how the risk-free rate affects whether strategy (1) or (2) is better. For the Vanguard funds examined here, strategy (1) would always outperform strategy (2) if the risk-free rate was 4% or higher (i.e. rarely or never). Strategy (2) would always outperform strategy (1) if the risk-free rate was 0% (i.e. you held cash rather than treasuries). For risk-free rates between 0% and 4%, it really depends on the particular level of volatility you’re trying to achieve. Conclusions I think a lot of investors operate under the assumption that increasing exposure to bonds reduces volatility. But in fact there is often a point where further increasing exposure to bonds increases volatility and reduces expected returns. You don’t want to go past that point. To reduce volatility further than your two-fund portfolio allows, you can either allocate some of your assets to a risk-free investment, say US treasuries, or you can switch to a shorter duration bond fund. I favor the second strategy, as it tends to allow for greater expected returns and seems logistically easier to implement. More generally, I think it is very important to know where your portfolio is at in terms of the expected returns vs. volatility curve. You should have a good idea of how any potential change in asset allocation or choice of funds affects your portfolio’s characteristics.

VFINX/VBLTX Power-Up: Replace VFINX With UPRO Or SPXL

Summary I recently wrote about VFINX/VBLTX portfolios, and how to choose an asset allocation to maximize returns for the level of volatility you can tolerate. Swapping VFINX for a leveraged S&P 500 ETF makes the maximization game much more profitable. You can achieve a greater expected return for any particular level of volatility. You lose the benefit of completely free trades in a Vanguard account, but the improvement in expected returns is definitely worth it. Mathematically, using a leveraged version of VFINX allows you to increase your allocation to VBLTX, capturing a greater percentage of its alpha. I believe UPRO/VBLTX (or SPXL/VBLTX) can be an excellent core portfolio for many investors. VFINX and VBLTX In a recent article, I looked at the performance of various two-fund “stocks and bonds” portfolios comprised of Vanguard mutual funds. I paired the Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares (MUTF: VFINX ) with Vanguard bond funds of various durations, and found that the long-term bond fund, the Vanguard Long-Term Bond Index Fund (MUTF: VBLTX ), was generally the best choice in terms of maximizing expected returns for a particular level of volatility. Here is a slightly modified version of a graph from that article (curves for the other bond funds removed): (click to enlarge) To get you up to speed, the upper-right point on the curve shows that for a portfolio comprised of 100% VFINX, and 0% VBLTX, the mean and standard deviation of daily gains going back to 1994 are 0.042% and 1.192%, respectively. The next point, which represents 90% VFINX and 10% VBLTX, results in a slightly lower mean (0.041%) and considerably lower standard deviation (1.061%), making it arguably the better portfolio. You can see how mean and standard deviation vary as VFINX allocation increases in 10% increments all the way to 0% VFINX, 100% VBLTX. Notably, standard deviation is minimized for 25.8% VFINX, 74.2% VBLTX. So if you were a relatively conservative investor who wanted to take on no more than 75% of the S&P 500’s volatility, you would look at the second-from-the-right vertical line, and see that to maximize expected return you would need to be just below the 3rd data point from the right, or a VFINX allocation slightly below 80%. A nice aspect of a two-fund strategy based on Vanguard mutual funds is that trading costs are very low. The mutual funds have very low expense ratios and can be traded commission-free in a Vanguard account. 3x VFINX and VBLTX Something magical happens when you swap VFINX for a hypothetical 3x daily version of it: you get a drastically better expected returns for any given level of volatility. Take a look: (click to enlarge) (Note: Data points represent 10% allocation steps for VFINX/VBLTX, and 5% allocation steps for 3x VFINX/VBLTX. Also, daily gains for the hypothetical 3x VFINX fund were calculated by simply multiply VFINX gains by 3 and then subtracting a fixed value corresponding to a 1% annual expense ratio.) You can see that the blue curve offers drastically better mean returns than the red curve. For example, 90% VFINX/10% VBLTX (second point from the right on the red curve) has a standard deviation of 1.061% and a mean of 0.042%; 30% 3x VFINX/70% VBLTX (7th point from the bottom on the blue curve) has a very similar standard deviation of 1.064, with a much greater mean of 0.058%. In addition, with 3x VFINX/VBLTX you have the option of taking on more volatility than the S&P 500, and getting an excellent additional return. For example, if you can tolerate up to 50% more volatility than the S&P 500, you can achieve an 84.3% greater mean return (51.2% 3x VFINX/48.8% VBLTX: standard deviation 1.788%, mean 0.077%). CAGR vs. MDD I think the mean vs. SD plot best describes the performance of various VFINX/VBLTX portfolios. But CAGR vs. MDD is also very interesting, and highlights the huge improvement you get with 3x VFINX. (click to enlarge) You see drastically better raw returns for various maximum drawdowns with 3x VFINX/VBLTX compared to VFINX/VBLTX. One interesting special case, 35% 3x VFINX/65% VBLTX has about the same MDD as VFINX (55.4% vs. 55.3%), but with a much greater CAGR (14.7% vs. 9.1%). Also noteworthy, the CAGR for 3x VFINX/VBLTX portfolios starts to decrease once the allocation to 3x VFINX reaches about 70%. How to Invest in 3x VFINX Vanguard does not offer a leveraged version of VFINX (or any leveraged funds for that matter), but there are several 3x daily S&P 500 ETFs to choose from. The ProShares UltraPro S&P 500 ETF (NYSEARCA: UPRO ) and the Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bull 3x Shares ETF (NYSEARCA: SPXL ) are two options. They both have expense ratios right around 1%, and both have done an excellent job tracking 3x daily S&P 500 gains over their 6-7 year lifetimes. I know some readers will take issue with the fact that my results are based on sort of “fake” data, as I just multiplied daily VFINX gains by 3 to simulate a leveraged version of the fund (or, equivalently, the performance of UPRO or SPXL before they were around). I wouldn’t worry about this too much. All signs indicate that daily leveraged ETFs like UPRO and SPXL have very minimal tracking error. Mathematical Basis Intuitively, the reason 3x VFINX/VBLTX provides better mean returns for a given level of volatility is that it allows for a greater allocation to the alpha-generating VBLTX. Suppose you can achieve a volatility of 1% with either 90% VFINX/10% VBLTX or 40% 3x VFINX/60% VBLTX. Which will have greater expected returns? The second, because it retains 40% of VBLTX’s alpha rather than only 10%. Now for a more mathematical approach (feel free to skip). Consider a VFINX/VBLTX portfolio where C represents the proportion allocated to VFINX, and (1-C) the allocation to VBLTX; and a 3x VFINX/VBLTX portfolio where D represents the proportion allocated to 3x VFINX, and (1-D) the allocation to VBLTX. Suppose we start at the top-right part of the first figure (i.e. C = D = 1) and decrease both C and D to the point where both portfolios have the same volatility. It is easy to see that D will be less than C, i.e. you will have to allocate less to 3x VFINX than to VFINX to achieve a certain portfolio volatility. So the two portfolios have the same volatility, and D < C. Let's compare their expected returns. Let X = daily VFINX return and Y = daily VBLTX return. The first portfolio's daily return, say Z 1 , is given by Z 1 = C X + (1-C) Y. The second portfolio's daily return, say Z 2 , is given by Z 2 = 3D X + (1-D) Y. How do Z 1 and Z 2 compare? Let's subtract their expected values, and see if we can figure out if the difference favors one or the other. E(Z 2 ) - E(Z 1 ) = [3D E(X) + (1-D) E(Y)] - [C E(X) + (1-C) E(Y)] = [3D - C] E(X) + [(1-D) - (1-C)] E(Y) We know E(X) and E(Y) are both positive (otherwise we wouldn't invest in stocks or bonds). The coefficient [(1-D) - (1-C)] is also positive since D < C. Thus the entire expression will be positive as long as 3D > C, or equivalently D is greater than one-third of C. I’m sure there’s some way to prove this is true under certain circumstances. But it’s good enough to just look at a plot of C and D vs. volatility, and observe that indeed 3D > C (i.e. dotted black line is above blue line), except at the very left side of the graph. (click to enlarge) Conclusions The more I think about leveraged ETFs, the more valuable I realize they are. Here, I show that you can drastically improve performance of a S&P 500/long-term bonds portfolio by simply replacing the S&P 500 fund with a 3x version. Whatever level of volatility you are willing to tolerate, you can achieve higher expected returns by simply using a leveraged S&P 500 fund. The reason is positive alpha. Using a leveraged stocks fund lets you achieve a particular level of volatility while allocating a greater percentage of your assets to an alpha-generating bond fund. More capital generating more alpha means greater returns. The results here are shown for VBLTX, but the main points should also hold for other long-term bond mutual funds or ETFs. Additionally, for those wary of investing in long-term bonds given that interest rates are about to rise, I would suggest considering a similar approach with a short or intermediate-term bond funds.