|
Fixed-Income Diversification: Adding High-Yield Funds
by Paul
A. Merriman
Publisher and Editor
Most investors understand the benefits of diversification in
equity funds. Stick with only one fund and one style of investing long enough,
and you’re almost sure to regret it. Diversify properly, and your returns will
be better and your risk lower.
A lot of investors don’t realize it, but the same holds true for investing
in bond funds.
High-yield bond funds are shunned by many investors as too risky. These funds
buy bonds issued by companies with lower credit ratings, companies that for one
reason or another could have trouble meeting their obligations. Most of these
bonds never go into default, and in the meantime investors willing to take the
added risk can pick up higher yields.
High-yield funds that diversify in hundreds of such bonds keep their risks
very manageable while they pay higher dividends, too.
High-yield bond funds may be too risky by themselves for many investors, just
as emerging markets funds are uncomfortable for some stock investors. But in
each case, if you hold a specialized fund inside a diversified portfolio, you
can get the added benefits without taking undue risks.
Let’s see how this can work with high-yield bond funds.
We have often recommended that income investors divide their money three ways
in Vanguard Short-Term Corporate (VFSTX), Vanguard GNMA (VFIIX) and Vanguard
Long-Term Corporate (VWESX) funds.
Over the past 18 years, this combination has produced an annualized return of
9.2 percent for buy-and-hold investors.
In the table below, you will see the results from the same 18 years of
combining these three funds plus Vanguard High-Yield Corporate (VWEHX) in equal
amounts for a four-way diversified bond portfolio.
|
|
Vanguard
Short-term Corp
|
Vanguard GNMA
|
Vanguard
Long-term Corp
|
Vanguard
High-Yield Corp
|
Vanguard
4-fund Combo
|
3-month
T-bills
|
|
1984
|
14.2
|
14.0
|
14.7
|
7.7
|
12.7
|
10.3
|
|
1985
|
14.9
|
20.7
|
21.6
|
22.0
|
19.8
|
8.0
|
|
1986
|
11.4
|
11.7
|
14.3
|
16.9
|
13.6
|
6.3
|
|
1987
|
4.5
|
2.1
|
0.2
|
2.7
|
2.4
|
6.1
|
|
1988
|
6.9
|
8.8
|
9.7
|
13.6
|
9.8
|
7.1
|
|
1989
|
11.4
|
14.8
|
15.2
|
1.9
|
10.7
|
8.7
|
|
1990
|
9.2
|
10.3
|
6.2
|
(5.8)
|
4.9
|
8.0
|
|
1991
|
13.1
|
16.8
|
20.9
|
29.0
|
19.9
|
5.7
|
|
1992
|
7.2
|
6.8
|
9.8
|
14.2
|
9.5
|
3.6
|
|
1993
|
7.1
|
5.9
|
14.5
|
18.2
|
11.3
|
3.1
|
|
1994
|
(0.1)
|
(0.9)
|
(5.3)
|
(1.7)
|
(2.0)
|
4.5
|
|
1995
|
12.7
|
17.0
|
26.4
|
19.2
|
18.8
|
5.8
|
|
1996
|
4.8
|
5.2
|
1.2
|
9.5
|
5.2
|
5.3
|
|
1997
|
7.0
|
9.5
|
13.8
|
11.9
|
10.5
|
5.3
|
|
1998
|
6.6
|
7.2
|
9.2
|
5.6
|
7.2
|
5.0
|
|
1999
|
3.3
|
0.8
|
(6.2)
|
2.5
|
0.0
|
4.9
|
|
2000
|
8.2
|
11.2
|
11.8
|
(0.9)
|
7.5
|
6.3
|
|
2001
|
8.1
|
7.9
|
9.6
|
2.9
|
7.2
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Worst month
|
(1.3)
|
(4.8)
|
(4.6)
|
(6.1)
|
(3.4)
|
0.2
|
|
Worst 3 months
|
(2.2)
|
(6.6)
|
(7.0)
|
(12.5)
|
(5.0)
|
0.5
|
|
Worst 12
months
|
(0.1)
|
(1.5)
|
(8.1)
|
(9.4)
|
(2.6)
|
3.1
|
|
Annualized
return
|
8.3
|
9.3
|
10.1
|
9.0
|
9.2
|
6.0
|
As the lines at the bottom of the table show, the four-fund combo produced a
9.2 percent annualized return with a worst-12-months loss of only 2.6 percent.
You might expect a high-yield fund to bring higher returns, but in this period
it underperformed two of the other three bond funds. And it did not add to the
long-term return of the three-fund combination.
However, adding the high-yield fund made a dramatic difference in the area of
risk reduction. The combination’s worst one-month and worst three-months
losses were well below those of three of the four funds. And the worst-12-months
loss for the combination was far below that of either the long-term or the
high-yield funds.
This didn’t happen because the high-yield fund had less risk. As you can
see in the table, the high-yield fund had the highest losses of the four funds.
But the high-yield fund is a diversifier; its returns are non-correlated. In
other words, the gains and losses of the high-yield fund occurred at different
times than those of the other three funds. That smoothes out the overall returns
of the portfolio, adding stability. And that stability is just what bond
investors usually want.
In the two most recent calendar years, the high-yield fund lagged far behind
that of the other three funds, illustrating that high-yield bonds don’t always
produce high returns. But I believe that tide is likely to turn in the next year
or so when interest rates start rising.
Higher interest rates probably will accompany better economic times. A
stronger economy will make life easier for many issuers of high-yield bonds,
improving the outlook for those bonds. And that should make the bonds more
valuable.
In any case, a high-yield bond fund can add meaningful diversification to a
fixed-income portfolio. That reduces risk. And that, in turn, makes it easier
for long-term investors to stick with a plan and reap its rewards.
Source: http://www.fundadvice.com
|
Link to this article, just copy and paste following code:
<a href=http://www.investador.com/article228.html>Fixed-Income Diversification: Adding High-Yield Funds</a>
|
Article viewed 827 time(s). Read more: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
|