Skip to main content
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Access every election story that matters
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Dan Richards is president of Clientinsights. He is a faculty member in the MBA program at the Rotman School at the University of Toronto.

Diversification is one of the time-honoured tenets of investing - the "don't put all your eggs in one basket" notion that spreading stock investments across countries and regions will reduce risk.

But faith in diversification was one of the many casualties of the financial meltdown, as even the most diversified stock portfolios took a big hit.

Story continues below advertisement

Earlier this month, four McGill academics released a surprising paper examining the degree to which different stock markets operate in tandem. To the extent that stock markets move in lock step, downside protection in declining markets is minimal.

Developed markets

The authors first looked at 16 developed markets in North America, Europe and Japan going back to 1973.

Assigning each of these markets equal weight (so that Denmark was as important as the United States), they looked at the extent to which stock price movements among developed markets were correlated - with 0 meaning there was absolutely no correlation at all, 1 meaning they were perfectly correlated. The higher the correlation, the less the benefit of diversification.



John Heinzl's 2010 Investor Education series for advanced investors:



In a conversation with Peter Christoffersen, one of the study co-authors, he said: "There's been a lot of movement up and down along the way. But if you strip out the noise, correlations between developed markets have nearly doubled to 0.8 today from 0.4 in the early 1990s.

What that means is that today the diversification benefits of investing across developed economies have been reduced. That doesn't mean there can't be good investment opportunities in other developed markets - but these decisions should be made on their investment merits, not to diversify risk away."

Emerging markets

Story continues below advertisement

The authors went on to look at what happened to correlations when you added emerging markets to the mix.

Leading up to the financial crisis, there was lots of talk about "global decoupling" - the notion that economies like China and India had reached the point that their markets would perform independently of the U.S., Europe and Japan.

Another of the study authors, Vihang Errunza, has been researching emerging markets since 1972, and in the 1980s played a lead role in developing the World Bank's emerging markets database. We discussed the trend in correlations, based on the five years to June of last year. His conclusions:

Within 17 emerging markets, correlations averaged about 0.5

Among 16 developed markets, correlations averaged roughly 0.7.

Looking at all 33 markets together, correlations averaged around 0.6 - adding emerging markets reduced correlations compared with investing in just developed markets.

Story continues below advertisement

It's important to remember that this study assumes equal importance to all markets - a practice that no one would recommend.

The key conclusion, despite that: There do appear to be some diversification benefits to adding emerging markets to a portfolio, although these are shrinking over time.

Extreme periods

The final and most important question the study authors examined is the correlation of emerging and developed markets during periods of extreme market events, "the chances of two markets going crazy at the same time," as Mr. Christoffersen put it, "when investors need diversification the most."

Here the news was more positive - over the five years to last June, adding emerging markets significantly reduced the chances of extreme movements happening simultaneously.

When I asked the study authors to run the correlation data for the fourth quarter of 2008 - the heart of the financial crisis - here's what the correlations looked like:

Story continues below advertisement

Within 16 developed markets: 0.71

Within 17 emerging markets: 0.50

Within all 33 markets: 0.57

Rethinking diversification

Historically, many of the fundamental principles that guided investors were a matter of faith.

Increasingly it's possible to look at some of these beliefs under the microscope of hard data - some stand up to scrutiny, others don't.

Story continues below advertisement

When it comes to the benefits of geographic diversification in reducing stock risk, the message is clear.

First, diversification across developed markets offers limited protection against risk.

Diversification into emerging markets offers more risk reduction, although that appears to be shrinking as well. As a result, investors will increasingly have to look for strategies beyond geographic diversification to reduce risk.

Offsetting that, for the five years to last June at least, the data indicates that during market crises when investors need diversification the most, the case for emerging markets remains strong. And that's perhaps the most powerful argument of all for emerging markets.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies