Thoughts on multiple portfolios?

[gfinch88]

Just wondering peoples thoughts on running more than one portfolio?

For instance having one portfolio that you dedicate to high dividend yield stocks for a long term approach, and then another one that you play around with your trading system, possibly even a 3rd or 4th for different systems?

Is this something that people practise or could this leave you over exposed by having too much invested in the market?

Thanks in advance.

 

[luutzu]

Just wondering peoples thoughts on running more than one portfolio?

For instance having one portfolio that you dedicate to high dividend yield stocks for a long term approach, and then another one that you play around with your trading system, possibly even a 3rd or 4th for different systems?

Is this something that people practise or could this leave you over exposed by having too much invested in the market?

Thanks in advance.

I think any portfolio should be run the same way. Only difference would be who own the portfolio. Whether it's you and family; you hiding possible losses from the beloved one/s.

There's no reason why you can't have a "safe" set of investment and a few bucks to gamble on speculatives, all in the same portfolio.

 

[galumay]

I can see sense in it when there is no option, eg I have an SMSF portfolio and a portfolio outside super. Otherwise it makes no sense to me, but then I am only interested in one style of investing. Perhaps if someone wants to invest for the future but also gamble with some short term trading then it would work?

 

[pixel]

I can see sense in it when there is no option, eg I have an SMSF portfolio and a portfolio outside super. Otherwise it makes no sense to me, but then I am only interested in one style of investing. Perhaps if someone wants to invest for the future but also gamble with some short term trading then it would work?

Super and non-Super is the obvious one.
Likewise different ownership structures, Trusts, Joint, Individual accounts.

Not so obvious is the idea of not putting all eggs in one basket, so you split your investment between different brokers, which is especially valid when dealing with derivatives and market makers. If you stick with reputable brokers, you should be assured that holdings vest in your name and it's all above board.

However, I would warn anyone but the very experienced to manage more than one set of rules simultaneously. Unless you have a split personality with each capable of multitasking, it will most likely drive you nuts.

 

[blue0810]

... having one portfolio that you dedicate to high dividend yield stocks for a long term approach, and then another one that you play around with your trading system...
.

2 portfolio and 2 broker

Broker 1 : ETFs mainly and some dividend stock except TLS
Broker 2 : Shares/long &short and futures

 

[gfinch88]

There's no reason why you can't have a "safe" set of investment and a few bucks to gamble on speculatives, all in the same portfolio.

Thanks for the replys

This is more what i was getting at, not necessarily different portfolios but having the bulk of it dedicated to safer/ possibly higher yield stocks and the rest to play around with.

I dont think im at the stage to run a SMSF just yet, would be nice tho.

 

[luutzu]

Thanks for the replys

This is more what i was getting at, not necessarily different portfolios but having the bulk of it dedicated to safer/ possibly higher yield stocks and the rest to play around with.

I dont think im at the stage to run a SMSF just yet, would be nice tho.

Buffett said, something like, growth and value are one and the same thing.

That "value" is not about dividend yield; not about old and dying company just chugging along.

And "growth" does not mean any young company not making any money, or making some money but sells at a very high price (with the anticipation) that its future growth will make up for the pricieness.


I think I know where you're coming from... I, and I think just about all other investors, try to do the same thing: Have most of the portfolio in a safe place with a few bucks to try our luck. BUT... the approach might be different.

The way I approach it is this, not advise and such, just how I go about it... I have most of the money in companies I considered "established" and of a high quality. Ones I think I know is a pretty sure bet that over time, it's going to do pretty well unless something catastrophic happen to the world or the industry.

Those are "sure bets" if you like. Though it might not work out that way, but I can wait and no one's the wiser when it goes to heck.

The speculative bets are not just on any expensive or "hot" stock. But in companies I consider "risky", or at a point in their business life where it could very well die, or those that had not made any money but looks like it would "anytime now".

So the specs are not random, and I try to not get into them at a high price hoping it'll go higher. But more of a survival story where I reckon it's going to survive and would return a few times over when it does. Or it could kick the bucket and I'd lose a bit I can afford to.

It's the specs that, to me, are more time consuming and require a lot more work. The good quality business selling at a good price... those are rare but they don't take that much time to figure out. Better to stay with those but then that'd be quite boring

 

[gfinch88]

The reason i ask is when i first bought stock i bought quite a large order of a blue chip (large order compared to my capital)

After reading around i have a bit of a system im having a go with but its still quite a long term approach, so was wondering if i should keep the blue chip, or sell it off and use its value in the other systems.

I completley agree with the statement on spec stocks, if its a calculated pick and fits within your overall plan then go for it, thanks again and i think il hold onto it for now

 

[systematic]

I'm surprised at the responses thus far. Absolutely, gfinch88, it's common to run multiple portfolios. This is common to many, many investors. Let's say you're 100% systematic/mechanical. There'd be nothing unusual to run several systems. Or, if you're completely discretionary; to have several different approaches to the market.

What you describe is absolutely common, and in many circles (systematic or discretionary), frequently recommended.

Investors can diversify accross sectors, asset classes, countries, economic regions, investment styles...

 

[CanOz]

Multiple portfolios based on different strategies and or markets is a great way to smooth equity curves and reduce drawdown.