Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 535

Why avoiding losers is the key to successful investing

Novak Djokovic is, probably, the GOAT of tennis (Greatest Of All Time). Does he hit more winners than other top players? No, not particularly. But he makes fewer mistakes. While playing in Australia in early 2023 he hit 374 winners, while his opponents, cumulatively, hit 314 winners. This is a winner ratio of around 20% better than his opponents. What is more striking, however, is the difference in error count. Novak made 576 unforced errors in the same timeframe while his opponents, made 802 errors – they made around 40% more errors!

Novak’s low error count is a key part of his incredible, enduring success. It might not make him popular, but it makes him a winner. It’s the same in golf, or football, or rugby, or any other sport. Don Bradman, the GOAT of cricket, only hit 6 sixes throughout his storied career – if you don’t hit it in the air, you can’t get caught out.

Avoiding more errors than your opponents is the key to winning. And it’s the same in investing. Avoiding losers is just as important as picking winners. Unfortunately, this is not the approach that most investors follow.

Why? It’s mostly down to human nature.

Psychologically, we get more enjoyment out of winning, as opposed to avoiding losses. It’s more interesting and exciting to focus on how much your investments have increased in value, rather than talking about the poor performing companies you decided NOT to buy, or the companies you sold after they dropped 10%, but before they dropped 40-50%.

However, our experience shows that a more balanced approach to investing delivers much better long-term outcomes. An approach that considers, and carefully weighs, upside potential with downside risks is more likely to deliver better returns. To maximise long-term returns investors should give equal weight to what they could lose if things don’t turn out well, as well as what they could gain if things do go well.

You should only invest if the risk and reward is in your favour

This approach has been a hallmark of the IML process for more than 25 years, we have an equally vigorous approach to both upside analysis and downside protection. We do this because avoiding large losses in your portfolio can have a dramatic effect on your long-term returns.

There are three main reasons why:

1. It’s simple maths.

If you avoid big losses, your portfolio doesn’t have to rise as much to deliver good returns.

Shares, particularly smaller companies, can drop by 10% relatively regularly. It’s not too hard for them to rise 11% to make up the loss. But the further shares fall, the harder it becomes for them to make up that lost ground as the table below shows.


2. It’s critical for investors in, or close to, retirement

The technical term for this is sequencing risk – the risk that the ‘sequence’ of returns has a negative impact on an investor’s total savings.

Most sharemarket investors know that drops in the market happen, but they also know that over time markets tend to go up more than they go down, so this makes up for the losses. The main risk for sharemarket investors is that if one of these drops happens shortly before they are due to retire it can delay their retirement plans for years. And if it happens shortly after they retire it can significantly reduce the amount of money they have to live on in retirement.

To demonstrate this point, the chart below shows two people with very similar retirement plans who retire at 67 in line with the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA)’s current guidance on what they will need for a ‘comfortable retirement’:

  • They both retire with a balance of $600,000 and invest the full amount in the ASX 300.
  • They both withdraw $50,000 in the first year for living expenses and increase their withdrawal amount each year in line with inflation.
  • The only difference is that Investor A retires in 1997 and Investor B retires in 2007.


Source: IML, as at 23 October 2023

Investor A’s funds stayed above their initial starting point for more than 10 years, only dipping below as the global financial crisis (GFC) hits. From there they decline reasonably steadily, but still last 27 years to the age of 94, well past average life expectancy.

Investor B has the bad luck to retire around a year before the GFC, so their funds dip below their initial starting point reasonably quickly and never recover. Investor B’s savings run out in less than half the time, in 13 years, when Investor B is 80.

The outcome is so stark because making withdrawals from your savings at low points during the market means that you don’t have enough capital to make up lost ground when the market bounces. So, investment strategies which include greater levels of downside protection are particularly valuable for investors in, or approaching, retirement.

3. It helps investors stay invested through the cycle

It’s an investment truism that you shouldn’t sell out after a major sharemarket correction, because you lock in your losses and miss the inevitable recovery. But while it might be well known, it’s not necessarily well followed. Many sharemarket investors, especially new investors, give up on markets after they see their savings drop significantly. It’s just as hard to pick the bottom as it is to pick the top.

And it is true that when markets do bottom, the bounce back is often swift. If you miss the rally you can severely damage your long-term returns. The S&P 500 posted a median return of 15% for the month following the bottom of the eight bear markets over the past 40 years.

If investors’ portfolios drop less, they are less likely to sell out, and less likely to miss the bounce after markets bottom. A study by the Vanguard Group in 2016, "Downside Protection Strategies: A Review of the Evidence", found that investors who used downside protection strategies were more likely to stay invested during market downturns than those who did not.

How do you analyse the potential downside of an equity investment?

Just like there are many ways of estimating the upside potential of an equity investment, there are also multiple ways of analysing the downside potential.

Here are the main things IML looks at for Australian companies:

  • Cyclicality of earnings. Are earnings at a peak, on the way up, down or mid cycle?
  • Balance sheet. Can a company withstand a downturn in the economy or might it need to raise equity and so dilute the investments of current shareholders?
  • Management track record. Has management won or lost market share consistently? Has their capital allocation historically been sound, or are they likely to do value destroying acquisitions? How has management performed during difficult periods for the company or economy?
  • Financial accounts. Are they transparent or not? Are there any concerning issues buried deep in the accounts?
  • Is there regulatory risk or not? Does the company operate in an industry where the government is likely to change regulations? E.g. gambling, heavy-emitting industry etc
  • Does the valuation of the business look attractive relative to its long-term history, the quality of the business, its growth prospects and its peers?

Investing is emotional as well as analytical

Great investors are often just as good at controlling their emotions and biases as they are at analysing companies and markets. Whether you’re a hardened professional investor, or a first-time retail investor, it’s never easy to control your emotions and make rational decisions under pressure - yet this is what we need to do to be successful. A lot of avoiding big losses is ensuring that you are in control of your own emotions, that you don’t get caught up in the hype. That you don’t fall for fads or FOMO.

When the world looks like a bleak place it’s hard to focus on the opportunity, but that’s when investors most need to. It’s the time when you could get the opportunity to buy a brilliant company at a bargain price. Similarly, when markets are running hot and delivering outsize returns, it’s hard to focus on risk – but that’s often the time when risks are at their sharpest.

The key is to have a consistent, risk-adjusted approach to investing through all the different stages of the market cycle. This might not give you a bagful of great after-dinner anecdotes, but it’s likely to make you more money in the long run.

 

Daniel Moore is a Portfolio Manager at Australian equities fund manager Investors Mutual Limited. This information is general in nature and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. You should consider, and consult with your professional adviser, whether the information is suitable for your circumstances. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.

 

  •   15 November 2023
  • 7
  •      
  •   
7 Comments
Laurie
November 16, 2023

Hi Daniel

If one gets an idea from someone else - eg Howard Marks - it’s worthwhile to acknowledge it.

Neil
November 17, 2023

That thought went through my mind as well. Then, I also thought, what nincompoop retiree has 100% of their super invested in the ASX300. The principle that Daniel espouses is fine to demonstrate a point, but the real world means that a balanced portfolio example would have been more appropriate to use.

Stephan E
November 17, 2023

Laurie, that's not right, it wasn't an idea that originated with Marks either.

Marks took it from Charlies Ellis' book, Winning the loser's game, first published in 1975.

And Ellis adapted the idea to investing from a 1970 book by Simon Ramo called Extraordinary tennis for the ordinary player.

There aren't many original ideas in the investment world, and the world in general. So be it.



Dudley
November 17, 2023

Was Daniel Bernoulli the first to write about sequential risk?

https://iask.ai/?mode=question&options[detail_level]=detailed&q=Was+Daniel+Bernoulli+the+first+to+write+about+sequential+risk%3F

"One of the earliest documented discussions of sequential risk can be traced back to the work of mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal in the 17th century."

All brains have innate risk management systems.

NKG
November 17, 2023

Agreed, that what I was thinking as well. In addition, if only 4% of US Stocks outperform T-Bills, holding them is probably the most important, and that probably means wide diversification (https://wpcarey.asu.edu/department-finance/faculty-research/do-stocks-outperform-treasury-bills). Not sure if this finding applies outside the US.

Stephen E
November 19, 2023

Dudley,

Sequential risk is the danger that the timing of withdrawals from a retirement account will damage the investor's overall return.

The article isn't specifically about retirees nor being forced to withdraw money at the wrong time.

It's about minimising losses to maximise gains.

These are different things.

Laurie
November 20, 2023

fair enough, Stephan

 

Leave a Comment:

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Latest Updates

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

Latest from Morningstar

Does an American retirement rule work for Australians?

The 4% rule has survived decades of scrutiny, but Australia's retirement system changes the equation in ways most overlook. Before accepting or rejecting this rule of thumb, it pays to understand what really drives retirement outcomes.

Shares

Glencore lands on the ASX. Should BHP and Rio shareholders switch?

A coal-heavy miner with governance concerns isn't the obvious choice for investors. Yet, Glencore's ASX listing may offer something BHP and Rio can't. The challenge is working out whether the opportunity outweighs the risks.

Why does the system treat capital gains and losses differently?

Investors are often told not to let tax policy drive their investment decisions. Yet, under the new CGT rules, portfolio construction, volatility and even how assets are owned may have an outsized impact on their final outcome.

Economy

Three common sense reforms that Australia needs

What do frozen bank accounts, mortgage traps and pension penalties have in common? They're all symptoms of a system that makes life much harder. Yet the obvious solutions seem to have escaped the attention of Canberra.

Shares

The hidden cost of government debt for investors

Some of the important effects of rising public debt never make the headlines. Research shows the immediate effects may already be unfolding, influencing corporate behaviour in ways that many investors would never suspect.

Investment strategies

When do fundamentals matter?

Is fundamental investing losing its grip on markets? Investors continue to search for valuation-based explanations for every price move, but the dominant force behind short-term returns may be something else altogether.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 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.