…to us as individual investors, for the portion of our assets we choose to manage actively.
As of the close of trade in New York last Friday, the Standard and Poors 500 was weighted, by sector, as follows:
IT 24.0%
Financials 14.8%
Healthcare 14.1%
Consumer discretionary 12.1%
Industrials 10.1%
Staples 8.1%
Energy 5.8%
Utilities 3.1%
Materials 3.0%
Real estate 2.9%
Telecom 2.0%.
The goal of active managers is to have better results than the index (I could say “an index fund,” but the two are the same, less the small fees an index fund purveyor charges). We’ll only have different results if we have different holdings than the S&P. And if our holdings aren’t different–either different names or different weightings (or both)–we can’t be better. In order to be different our first job is to know what the index looks like. The list above is a first cut.
Let’s rearrange it to show the sectors in order from the most sensitive to general economic activity to the least. I’m going to divide the sectors into three groups, from those that do best in a red-hot world economy, those that will still do well with so-so growth, and those that have the most defensive characteristics–meaning they do their best relative to the index when economies are contracting.
most economically sensitive
Materials 3.0%
Industrials 10.1%
Energy 5.8%
————————————-total = 18.9%
economically sensitive
IT 24%
Consumer discretionary 12.1%
Financials 14.1%
Real estate 2.9%
————————————-total = 53.1%
defensive
Healthcare 14.1%
Staples 8.1%
Telecom 2.0%
Utilities 3.1%
————————————-total = 27.3%.
I’ve stuck Energy in the most sensitive segment. Recently it’s been marching to its own drummer, as the big integrated oils restructure and as the crude oil price yo-yos up and down. Ultimately, though, I think in today’s world oil is just another industrial commodity that’s not that different from steel or aluminum. Put it somewhere else if you disagree.
This isn’t the only reordering we could make. We could also arrange the index by market capitalization in order to either emphasize big stocks or small ones in our holdings. But this is the most common one professionals, and their institutional customers, use. Personally, I think it’s also the most useful way to think about the index.
To my mind, the most striking thing about the S&P 500 is that it is mostly geared to a rising economy. If we think recession is brewing, tiny changes in holdings aren’t going to make much of a difference in relative performance.
Another–very important–point is that if you have a portfolio that’s, say, 10% Healthcare, and your benchmark is the S&P 500, you’re betting against Healthcare as a sector, not on it.
Pingback: What stocks to invest in = the structure of the S&P 500, and why it matters… « PRACTICAL STOCK INVESTING | Stock Investing