REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Many people here recommend an allocation to the REIT fund because it behaves differently than the total stock market. One fund may go up when the other goes down and there may be a rebalancing bonus. Why are REITs better for this than the other sector funds such as Energy, Health Care, Precious Metals and Mining, or the sector specific ETFs?
. |
The most important thing you should know about me is that I am not an expert.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Because while REITs are equity instruments, they represent holding companies for various categories of real estate. The factors driving real estate markets are distinctly different from other industries comprising the stock market: for example, land, rents, housing, timber, etc. and represent a larger part of the economy than represented by their capitalization within stock markets. The tax status of REITs requires the majority of earnings to be directly passed to shareholders. If you are considering REITs, you would need to place them in tax-advantaged accounts. Finally, not all Bogleheads will agree REITs should be a separate portfolio holding - the most common argument against is that REITs are already in the the broad market index, so adding is "tilting" much like when investors tilt to small value.
I do not hold them for a "rebalancing bonus" but for a higher risk-adjusted return. REIT's performance characteristics add diversification for me within the equity space. I also include international REITs for the same reason.
I do not hold them for a "rebalancing bonus" but for a higher risk-adjusted return. REIT's performance characteristics add diversification for me within the equity space. I also include international REITs for the same reason.
Last edited by NoRoboGuy on Fri May 17, 2013 11:42 am, edited 2 times in total.
There is no free lunch.
- abuss368
- Posts: 27850
- Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:33 pm
- Location: Where the water is warm, the drinks are cold, and I don't know the names of the players!
- Contact:
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
You don't need to place them in a tax advantaged account only.
John C. Bogle: “Simplicity is the master key to financial success."
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
The right word is "should" because in general they are tax-inefficient. You are correct if you mean there are exceptions. International REITs (like VNQI) and Plum Creek Timber (PCL) come to mind which have differing tax aspects. Does the foreign tax credit make it worthwhile to place VNQI in taxable? I would think not but others disagree.
There is no free lunch.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Lots of people are into the idea of holding the "optimal risky portfolio." With certain assumptions, this portfolio is often very close to global weighting of all assets.
However, we often use the stock market as a proxy for this "optimal risky portfolio." In reality, this optimal risky portfolio would include things like real estate, gold, and any other assets that investors hold. People use REITS as a proxy for real estate held directly, tilting towards it to get a portfolio that is more representative of the aggregate asset markets. TBH, I think the history of the tilt has a lot to do with performance chasing because RE hadn't yet had a major crash.
However, we often use the stock market as a proxy for this "optimal risky portfolio." In reality, this optimal risky portfolio would include things like real estate, gold, and any other assets that investors hold. People use REITS as a proxy for real estate held directly, tilting towards it to get a portfolio that is more representative of the aggregate asset markets. TBH, I think the history of the tilt has a lot to do with performance chasing because RE hadn't yet had a major crash.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
I just did a comparison chart on YahooREIT's performance characteristics add diversification for me within the equity space.
It looks like Energy and Precious Metal & Mining are less correlated with the S&P 500 than REITS. It looks like Health Care is more correlated.
So if you want diversification, wouldn't Energy or Precious Metal & Mining work better?
Last edited by tc101 on Fri May 17, 2013 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
. |
The most important thing you should know about me is that I am not an expert.
- zaboomafoozarg
- Posts: 2431
- Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 12:34 pm
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
60 or 70% in 2008/9 was pretty big.rmelvey wrote:TBH, I think the history of the tilt has a lot to do with performance chasing because RE hadn't yet had a major crash.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
tc101 wrote:I just did a comparison chart on YahooREIT's performance characteristics add diversification for me within the equity space.
It looks like Energy and Precious Metal & Mining are less correlated with the S&P 500 than REITS. It looks like Health Care is more correlated.
So if you want diversification, wouldn't Energy or Precious Metal & Mining work better?
Interesting. That surprises me, but I trust your efforts. One additional differentiator: Energy is already accounted for in the Vanguard Total Stock Market [as are Health Care and REITS, to be fair].
Is that a potential argument in favor of direct exposure to metals as a diversifier amidst a strategic rebalance policy?
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Feel free to double check me. I could have made a mistake.Interesting. That surprises me, but I trust your efforts.
. |
The most important thing you should know about me is that I am not an expert.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Oh, yes of course. I just think that tilting toward REITs was largely popular before that crisis and after the crisis the case for REITS diversification benefits appears weaker. Does anyone know at what time it started becoming kosher for indexers to carve out reits separately? It would be useful to have some historical context for the history of the tilt.zaboomafoozarg wrote:60 or 70% in 2008/9 was pretty big.rmelvey wrote:TBH, I think the history of the tilt has a lot to do with performance chasing because RE hadn't yet had a major crash.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
There must be an equal sector weight fund out there somewhere. First Google link: http://www.alpsetfs.com/eql-index.php
Last edited by rkhusky on Fri May 17, 2013 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
If you don't though, one is looking at the equivalent of a 1.4% expense ratio (if in the 25% tax bracket), or thereabouts, according to "table 1" at Principles of Tax-Efficient Fund Placement (boglehead wiki). That is, unless I'm interpreting that chart wrong?abuss368 wrote:You don't need to place them in a tax advantaged account only.
I would think for a traditional boglehead, a 1.4% expense ratio, or its equivalent, would be out of the question, which is to make no mention of the actual expense ratio of the fund.
- noyopacific
- Posts: 359
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:06 pm
- Location: Mendocino
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
I have had REIT, Energy & Health sector funds for nearly 20 years. I dropped the Vanguard Gold fund when they changed it to Precious Metals & Mining and later added Utilities after I found that the ETF: VPU was available. A prolonged run up in the Health Sector early on is what initially led me to believe I should start rebalancing annually. Then I noticed that I was getting what I eventually learned is called a rebalancing bonus. I can't claim this was what I had planned for, it was basically just an extended stroke of luck for me. My core holding has always been a broad market index fund. At first it was the S&P 500 and later changed to Total Stk Mkt. I've also kept Small Cap & International index funds in the mix. After my portfolio reached 50% of my retirement target, I moved 25% into the Total Bond Mkt fund. The portfolio is now over 90% of my retirement target. If it hits 100%, the plan is to increase the bond component to 40%.tc101 wrote:Many people here recommend an allocation to the REIT fund because it behaves differently than the total stock market. One fund may go up when the other goes down and there may be a rebalancing bonus. Why are REITs better for this than the other sector funds such as Energy, Health Care, Precious Metals and Mining, or the sector specific ETFs?
in response to your question: "Why are REITs better for this than the other sector funds" I have been wondering for a couple of years now how much of the recent interest in the REIT sector is people that might be chasing past performance.
The information contained herein, while not guaranteed by us, has been obtained from from sources which have not in the past proved particularly reliable.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Low correlation is not the only consideration. As I already stated (but probably not clearly enough), the factors driving real estate markets are distinctly different from other industries comprising the stock market and real estate represents a larger part of the economy than represented by its capitalization within stock markets. That said - I do not disagree if your assertion is that overweighting Energy or Precious Metal & Mining might provide reduced portfolio volatility within the equity space.tc101 wrote:I just did a comparison chart on YahooREIT's performance characteristics add diversification for me within the equity space.
It looks like Energy and Precious Metal & Mining are less correlated with the S&P 500 than REITS. It looks like Health Care is more correlated.
So if you want diversification, wouldn't Energy or Precious Metal & Mining work better?
There is no free lunch.
Re: REIT vs other sector funds for rebalancing
Bernstein's Coward's Portfolio has REIT separately and dates from 1996. The Coffeehouse Portfolio also separates REIT and dates, I think, from about the same time. So a long time before 2008.rmelvey wrote:Oh, yes of course. I just think that tilting toward REITs was largely popular before that crisis and after the crisis the case for REITS diversification benefits appears weaker. Does anyone know at what time it started becoming kosher for indexers to carve out reits separately? It would be useful to have some historical context for the history of the tilt.zaboomafoozarg wrote:60 or 70% in 2008/9 was pretty big.rmelvey wrote:TBH, I think the history of the tilt has a lot to do with performance chasing because RE hadn't yet had a major crash.