• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Jon Luskin, CFP® ● Hourly Advice for Do-It-Yourself Investors

Hourly Advice for Do-It-Yourself Investors

  • Home
  • About
  • Work with Jon
  • Blog
  • Bogleheads® Live
  • Publications
  • Speaking
  • Reading List

The Diversification Myth of Alternative Investments: How Illiquidity is Mistaken for Low Correlation

February 1, 2022 By Jon Luskin 16 Comments

Alternative investments are investments that are not stocks, bonds, or cash. The list of alternatives is endless: real estate, hedge funds, private equity, venture capital, timberland, fine art, farmland, reinsurance, private lending, and more.

Alternatives are often pitched as a magical way to diversify an investment portfolio. They are said to be immune from the same shocks that impact the stock market. Of course, that’s a story. Endowments heavily invested in alternatives saw their portfolios plummet during the financial crisis of 2007–2008. Without the touted benefit of diversification – but with high fees, it’s clear that investors are generally best off by shunning alternatives.

Unfortunately, countless financial professionals haven’t gotten the memo, and are still investing client money into high-fee alternatives. In this post, we’ll bust the diversification myth of alternative investments. To nerd out on why people (even financial professionals) mistakenly assume that alternatives offer diversification, read on.

Table of Contents

  • Correlation, Liquidity, & Volatility
  • Mistaking Missing Data of Alternatives for Low Volatility
  • Mistaking Missing Data of Alternatives for Low Correlation
  • Don’t Be Fooled by a Misunderstanding of Missing Data (Illiquidity) of Alternative Investments; Stick with Low-Cost Index Funds

Correlation, Liquidity, & Volatility

To clarify the misunderstanding about the value of investing in alternatives, we’ll dive into three technical investing principles: correlation, liquidity, and volatility.

What Is Correlation?

Correlation is a way to measure diversification. Correlation measures the degree to which two investments mirror each other’s movements. If two investments increase in value simultaneously, they are correlated.

Look at the performance of different investments during the 2020 coronavirus crash. Stocks and real estate (the latter expressed as publicly-traded REITs) lost value. Therefore, stocks and real estate are very correlated. Treasuries moved in the opposite direction from stocks, making Treasuries an excellent tool for managing risk.

Not shown above are private REITs. Yet, publicly traded and private REITs are also correlated. Yet, since private REITs aren’t publicly traded, we don’t see the correlation. This is because private REITs are illiquid.

What Is Liquidity?

Liquidity is the speed at which you can sell something. The faster you can sell something, the more liquid it is.

For example, the cash in your bank account is very liquid. You can access that money as quickly as you can swipe your debit card. The tickers listed in the graph above represent exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which are also very liquid. You can sell an ETF within seconds during market hours.

On the other side of the liquidity spectrum is your house, which is not liquid at all. Even in the best of circumstances, it would take days to sell your house.

It’s the same for alternatives. Generally, they are relatively illiquid. In some circumstances (such as private equity), it can take years to exit a position.

Sometimes illiquidity confuses investors, being mistaken for low volatility.

What Is Volatility?

Since ETFs constantly sell throughout the day, investors can see at any moment how much those ETFs are selling for. This liquidity lets investors easily determine if those investments are increasing or decreasing in value. The degree to which investments change in value is their volatility.

Investments that change a lot in value – such as individual stocks – are very volatile. High-quality bonds are less volatile. Ignoring inflation, cash has no volatility.

At the end of the last section, I wrote that illiquidity is confused with low volatility. How does illiquidity (the inability to sell something quickly) get confused for low volatility (an investment that doesn’t change much in value)? It comes from making assumptions when missing data.

Mistaking Missing Data of Alternatives for Low Volatility

Generally, alternative investments are illiquid and volatile, yet you can’t see the volatility. That’s because alternatives aren’t sold repeatedly throughout the day (unlike ETFs). So, no one’s reporting on how their prices constantly fluctuate.

Since you can’t see the value of the investment often, you may mistakenly assume that the price is not changing. However, that’s not accurate. And yet, this mistaken assumption of “no price data = no price change” is where the diversification myth of alternatives begins.

To explain how illiquidity gets confused for low volatility, consider an example: Sam Sedentary and Rachel Restless were neighbors. Sam and Rachel lived in identical homes, each simultaneously purchasing their respective home for $100,000. They lived in their homes for ten years, with each selling their home for $200,000 each in the 10th year.

Yet, Sam and Rachel went about the home sale process differently. Sam listed his home for sale only once: when he was ready to sell. Ultimately, Sam received one offer for $200,000, which he accepted.

Consider how to interpret that data: with limited information, the change in value of Sam’s home over those ten years looks like a smooth ride.

As mentioned, Sam waited ten years to list his home for sale. That wasn’t the case for Rachel; she listed her home for sale the month after she bought it, and kept her home listed for ten years.

Each month over those ten years, Rachel received an offer to buy her home. As you can imagine, the offer prices varied widely over time. Rachel received some offers greater than $200,000. Other times, offers were less than $100,000. Ultimately, Rachel – like Sam – accepted an offer of $200,000.

For Sam, he doubled his money and experienced no volatility along the way. That’s because Sam, unlike Rachel, effectively closed his eyes to the world around him. Prices were changing, yet Sam didn’t see those price changes. However, for Rachel, receiving new offers every month allowed her to witness the value change over time.

Both homes were illiquid, and both home prices were volatile. For Sam, the illiquid nature of the home hid price volatility. Sam assumed that his home was a stable investment, given the missing data.

It’s the same for alternative assets. Alternative assets don’t benefit from a continuous flow of price data. Absent that data, investors may wrongly assume they have a less volatile investment then they actually do.

Missing Data Makes Any Investment Less Volatile

Consider the performance of the S&P 500 during the 2020 coronavirus crash. Within that period, stocks lost roughly a third of their value. In the chart below, it’s difficult to miss that huge drop. Looking at a ~33% drop, you would conclude that the S&P 500 is quite volatile. And you’d be right.

But, what if you didn’t have any data on the stock market during the coronavirus crash? You could assume it was business as usual, with the market continuing on its path. The investment performance would have looked very different in making that assumption, with the S&P 500 being much less volatile.

The second chart of the S&P 500 – without the coronavirus crash data – looks like a much more stable investment than the complete data set would suggest. Of course, it’s literally the same investment.

In short, it doesn’t matter if it’s alternatives or plain-vanilla stocks and bonds; if you assume no price changes given a gap in data, any investment is going to appear less volatile.

Mistaking Missing Data of Alternatives for Low Correlation

Yet, when it comes to assumptions made with missing data, the mistakes don’t end with assumptions of low volatility. Investors may also mistakenly assume low correlation with other investments.

Recall that correlation is the degree to which two investments mirror each other’s movements. With missing data, you can compare the exact same investment to itself and have low correlation. Of course, that’s not actually low correlation; it’s just a mirage due to missing data.

Don’t Be Fooled by a Misunderstanding of Missing Data (Illiquidity) of Alternative Investments; Stick with Low-Cost Index Funds

And with that, we’ve further debunked the sales pitch of private REITs and other high-fee alternative investments. The tried-and-true (and exceptionally boring) approach for successful investing remains the same:

  • keep costs low
  • diversify
  • stay the course

Alternative investments fail the first test: low-cost. Moreover, this post shows that the diversification benefit of alternatives is actually a misunderstanding from missing data, and how that missing data leads to false assumptions about volatility and correlation. That’s why skipping high-fee alternative assets has been shown to produce better investment results. Smart investors do just that.


Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Paul Hanley says

    April 30, 2022 at

    One refinement I would call out is that two investments can be highly correlated but move with different magnitudes. High Beta stocks might be highly correlated with the overall market but move twice the magnitude; low Beta stocks might be highly correlated with the overall market but move half the magnitude. To be correlated means that the investments tend to move in the same direction, regardless of magnitude.

    Reply
    • Jon Luskin says

      April 30, 2022 at

      I won’t disagree with that.

      For this article, the important takeaway is that any correlation benefit of alternative assets is a mirage; investors should focus on keeping their costs low.

      🤓

      Reply
  2. George Aliferis says

    July 31, 2022 at

    A brilliant reminder, thanks Jon!
    What worries me is how the ‘new alts’ (art, farm, wine, etc.) use their illiquidity for marketing. With the typical trifecta: strong performance, low correlation, low vol, and produce stunning charts that can easily fool the non-initiated.

    Reply
    • Jon Luskin says

      August 2, 2022 at

      Thank you for the kind words, George.

      Indeed. That’s the issue.

      One can hope that those being pitched these products can remember the old adage:

      If something is too good to be true, it is.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Is a One-Day Financial Review Right for You?

Get Your Free Assessment ➔

Get in Touch with Jon Luskin, CFP®

  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Sign Up for New Blog Posts & Podcasts Delivered to Your Inbox

What I’m Reading Right Now

Recent Posts

  • Bogleheads® Live 40: Sean Mullaney on Recent Tax Law Changes for FIRE
  • Bogleheads® Live 39: Protecting Your Income
  • Bogleheads® Live 38: Medicare Questions Answered
  • Bogleheads® Live 37: Christine Benz on ‘How much can I spend in retirement?’
  • Bogleheads® Live 36: Mike Piper on ‘After the Death of Your Spouse’

Categories

  • Bogleheads® Live
  • Bonds
  • College Planning
  • Financial Planning
  • FIRE, FI, Early Retirement
  • Investing
  • Practice Management
  • Real Estate Investing
  • Tax Planning

Jon Luskin, CFP® Follow

Hourly Advice for Do-It-Yourself Investors. '@Bogleheads® Live' host. Advice-Only #CFP®. #fiduciary. @SDFLC volunteer. Tweets ≠ Advice. https://t.co/GJqMxem3Cr

JonLuskin
jonluskin Jon Luskin, CFP® @jonluskin ·
10 Feb

How to Buy Life #Insurance: Laddering Life Insurance Policies

Instead of buying a single life insurance policy with a term similar to the balance of your working career and the total coverage needed were you to die tomorrow, you could consider laddering policies.

1/n

Reply on Twitter 1624151247186976776 Retweet on Twitter 1624151247186976776 Like on Twitter 1624151247186976776 4 Twitter 1624151247186976776
Retweet on Twitter Jon Luskin, CFP® Retweeted
bogleheads John C Bogle Center for Financial Literacy @bogleheads ·
10 Feb

Mark your calendars for Thursday, 12:00 p.m. Pacific / 3:00 p.m. Eastern.

Will be answering your questions about the critical insurance coverage that is disability #insurance.

Set a reminder for my upcoming Space! https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1OyKAVAlnXqGb

Reply on Twitter 1624088094415933440 Retweet on Twitter 1624088094415933440 1 Like on Twitter 1624088094415933440 1 Twitter 1624088094415933440
jonluskin Jon Luskin, CFP® @jonluskin ·
10 Feb

It’s hard to make a case for any life #insurance that isn’t term life insurance.

Said differently:

Generally, run screaming from whole life, universal life, indexed universal life (IUL), variable life, variable universal life, or anything not term life insurance.

Reply on Twitter 1624060620948529154 Retweet on Twitter 1624060620948529154 1 Like on Twitter 1624060620948529154 37 Twitter 1624060620948529154
Load More

Is the One-Day Financial Review right for you?


Get Your Free Assessment ➔

Disclosures & Legal

Jon Luskin is a registered investment adviser in the states of Arizona, California, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington. The Adviser may not transact business in states where it is not appropriately registered, excluded or exempted from registration. Currently, there are no states where the adviser is not appropriately registered, excluded or exempted from registration – allowing the adviser to work with anyone in any state. Individualized responses to persons that involve either the effecting of transaction in securities, or the rendering of personalized investment advice for compensation, will not be made without registration or exemption.

Copyright © 2023