Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JPM
    • Awards
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

User menu

  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in

Search

  • ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame
The Journal of Portfolio Management
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in
The Journal of Portfolio Management

The Journal of Portfolio Management

ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JPM
    • Awards
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

The Myth of Diversification Reconsidered

William Kinlaw, Mark Kritzman, Sébastien Page and David Turkington
The Journal of Portfolio Management August 2021, 47 (8) 124-137; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.2021.1.273
William Kinlaw
is head of State Street Associates, the research arm of State Street Global Markets, in Cambridge, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark Kritzman
is a founding partner of State Street Associates, chief executive officer of Windham Capital Management, and a faculty member at MIT’s Sloan School of Management in Cambridge, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sébastien Page
is head of global multi-asset at T. Rowe Price in Baltimore, MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Turkington
is a senior managing director at State Street Associates, the research arm of State Street Global Markets, in Cambridge, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
Loading

Click to login and read the full article.

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo 
Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options
US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045
EMEA: +44 0207 139 1600

Abstract

That investors should diversify their portfolios is a core principle of modern finance. Yet there are some periods in which diversification is undesirable. When the portfolio’s main growth engine performs well, investors prefer the opposite of diversification. An ideal complement to the growth engine would provide diversification when it performs poorly and unification when it performs well. Numerous studies have presented evidence of asymmetric correlations between assets. Unfortunately, this asymmetry is often of the undesirable variety: It is characterized by downside unification and upside diversification. In other words, diversification often disappears when it is most needed. In this article, the authors highlight a fundamental flaw in the way some prior studies have measured correlation asymmetry. Because they estimate downside correlations from subsamples in which both assets perform poorly, they ignore instances of successful diversification (i.e., periods in which one asset’s gains offset the other’s losses). The authors propose instead that investors measure what matters: the degree to which a given asset diversifies the main growth engine when it underperforms. This approach yields starkly different conclusions, particularly for asset pairs with low full-sample correlation. The authors review correlation mathematics, highlight the flaw in prior studies, motivate the correct approach, and present an empirical analysis of correlation asymmetry across major asset classes.

TOPICS: Portfolio theory, portfolio construction, quantitative methods, statistical methods, performance measurement

Key Findings

  • ▪ There is strong empirical evidence that asset class correlations are asymmetric, which poses complications in portfolio construction.

  • ▪ Investors prefer diversification when a portfolio’s main growth engine performs poorly and unification when it performs well.

  • ▪ To measure correlation asymmetry caused by nonnormality, investors must adjust for changes in correlation that arise mathematically when part of a sample is excluded.

  • ▪ Unlike prior research, investors should condition correlations on the performance of a single asset, not two assets.

  • © 2021 Pageant Media Ltd
View Full Text

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo

Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options

US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045

UK: 0207 139 1600

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?
PreviousNext
Back to top

Explore our content to discover more relevant research

  • By topic
  • Across journals
  • From the experts
  • Monthly highlights
  • Special collections

In this issue

The Journal of Portfolio Management: 47 (8)
The Journal of Portfolio Management
Vol. 47, Issue 8
August 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The Journal of Portfolio Management.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Myth of Diversification Reconsidered
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The Journal of Portfolio Management
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The Journal of Portfolio Management web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Myth of Diversification Reconsidered
William Kinlaw, Mark Kritzman, Sébastien Page, David Turkington
The Journal of Portfolio Management Jul 2021, 47 (8) 124-137; DOI: 10.3905/jpm.2021.1.273

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Save To My Folders
Share
The Myth of Diversification Reconsidered
William Kinlaw, Mark Kritzman, Sébastien Page, David Turkington
The Journal of Portfolio Management Jul 2021, 47 (8) 124-137; DOI: 10.3905/jpm.2021.1.273
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Tweet Widget Facebook Like LinkedIn logo

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • LITERATURE REVIEW
    • CORRELATION MATHEMATICS
    • CORRELATION ASYMMETRY BETWEEN ASSET CLASSES
    • IMPLICATIONS FOR PORTFOLIO CONSTRUCTION
    • SUMMARY
    • ENDNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)

Similar Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar
LONDON
One London Wall, London, EC2Y 5EA
United Kingdom
+44 207 139 1600
 
NEW YORK
41 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010
USA
+1 646 931 9045
pm-research@pageantmedia.com
 

Stay Connected

  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

MORE FROM PMR

  • News
  • Awards
  • Investment Guides
  • Videos
  • About PMR

INFORMATION FOR

  • Academics
  • Agents
  • Authors
  • Content Usage Terms

GET INVOLVED

  • Advertise
  • Publish
  • Article Licensing
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe Now
  • Sign In
  • Update your profile
  • Give us your feedback

© 2022 Pageant Media Ltd | All Rights Reserved | ISSN: 0095-4918 | E-ISSN: 2168-8656

  • Site Map
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies