Key Takeaways
- Benchmarking your financial progress is a key tool for success, but it's often done referencing the wrong things and over the wrong timeframe
- Benchmarking is often done as a rear-vision exercise. Decision-making should be forward-looking
- At its extreme, incorrect benchmarking can leave investors prone to “chasing winners”, which may hinder their ability to meet their financial goals
- Benchmarking against peers or an index is a concept used to help define whether an investment proposition is delivering value. It is well intentioned; however, we should acknowledge the shortcomings
- Investors have unique goals, so any benchmarking should ideally align with those goals.
- Peer relative. Often done in quartiles, where portfolios are ranked against comparable managed portfolios on a scale of 1 to 4
- Index relative. Where a portfolio is measured against a passive benchmark net of fees
- Absolute return. Often seeks to return a consistent positive level over time, regardless of inflation, interest rates, and other variables
- Real return. Seeks to deliver a level of return over inflation, growing the purchasing power of the portfolio over a defined period.
- Is there a clearly-defined financial goal your portfolio can map to?
- Are you appraising your investment results over a suitable time horizon?
- If using an benchmark, is it realistic and investible?
- Do you need to account for inflation?
- Have you accounted for risk taken?
- Does your portfolio—as a whole and each position within it—stand up strongly in a forward-looking context?
- Can you avoid the recency bias (focusing beyond the recent past)?
- Are you aware of your own loss aversion (avoiding selling in a panic)?
- Can you avoid the overconfidence bias (by thinking probabilistically)?