Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 248

Is it time for ‘set and forget’ to consider retirement?

The simplicity of set-and-forget investment approaches is that once established, you don’t need to worry about them too much. Set … and … forget. It’s simple and it rhymes! You will still need to determine things like rebalancing and reinvestment policies but month-to-month, day-to-day, and minute-to-minute, there’s a reasonable chance of achieving your return objective over the long term by sticking to the plan. Indeed, obsessing over market gyrations can lead to investors making a mistake (for example, selling at the bottom).

Set and forget or remember to revisit?

This set and forget approach has been best exemplified in the strategic asset allocation (SAA) arena. Here, the realisation of long-term average returns and volatilities have combined with the benefits of diversification to help many to meet and exceed their objectives over several decades. Ten years on from the GFC, the central-bank-fuelled ‘bull market in everything’ rages on and proponents of SAA strategies can safely declare victory. Set and forget wins. Right?

Not so fast!

While traditional SAA strategies have delivered in the past, there’s no guarantee this will persist. In fact, we would argue that market conditions are such that an SAA approach will likely fail to deliver in the period ahead. Further, SAA has typically focused on the theoretical long term and realising long-term returns in a shorter-term reality may not happen. That reminds us of a famous quote whose true source is ‘unknown’ but is mostly attributed to part-time philosopher and full-time athlete, Yogi Berra, NY Yankee Baseball player:

“In theory, there’s no difference between theory and practice … in practice there is.”

Sometimes the long run is too long

Unless you have an infinite time horizon, you cannot necessarily rely on ‘long-run average market returns’ to deliver on your investment objectives. Historical averages don’t foretell the future. In particular, long-term averages don’t contemplate current valuations, future correlations, and certainly don’t consider the path to get there.

Taking each of those points in turn.

First, consider the elevated level of valuations across equities and fixed income (illustrated in the chart below), with P/E multiples at extreme levels and bond yields around record lows. The starting point matters, even for the theoretical long term. Even with a relatively optimistic outlook, it’s safe to say that expected returns in the period ahead are lower than seen historically.

Source: Robert Shiller, Yale University, data to 31 December 2017. US 10-year sovereign interest rates or equivalent.

Second, the assumption that fixed income is defensive at all times and always offsets underperformance in growth assets is not borne out in the data. In fact, correlations between asset classes vary from period to period (see below). The average historical rolling 3-year correlation between global equities and global bonds of around 0.1 masks extreme changes in this relationship which has profound implications for diversification (maybe that lunch wasn’t ‘free’ after all).

Source: Bloomberg, CFSGAM as of 31 December 2017. Rolling 3-year correlation based on quarterly data on the MSCI World Net Total Return USD and Citi World Government Bond Index (WGBI) USD Indices

Finally, and perhaps the most concerning of all, is that set and forget SAA strategies have never really contemplated the problem of sequencing risk (or the order in which events, often negative, happen). Those approaching retirement should care deeply about the path taken to achieve objectives, since there is much less time to overcome a major negative event such as a 40% equity drawdown. In this sense, SAA strategies have never really considered the retirement phase, and we believe investors with more defined investment horizons, should consider phasing out of SAA strategies at the appropriate time.

The options

So what options do investors have?

We believe there are three strategies:

  • Do nothing: Accept potentially lower returns and/or higher volatility in an existing SAA strategy.
  • Increase risk: Increase growth assets, ride the inevitable volatility, and hope for the best.
  • Increase active management: This could take many guises, including more dynamic asset allocation strategies, allocations to alternatives or appointing more active security selection.

Despite the challenges outlined, we think achieving long-term objectives is possible without materially increasing portfolio risk.

 

Kej Somaia is a Senior Portfolio Manager at CFSGAM. This article is for general information only and does not take in account your individual financial circumstances.

For more articles and papers from CFSGAM, click here.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Is FOMO overruling investment basics?

Defence beats offence in investing

Clime time: Asset allocation decisions for SMSFs

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.