The S&P 500 Sector Quilt

“Rule number one: most things will prove to be cyclical. Rule number two: some of the greatest opportunities for gain and loss come when people forget rule number one.” – Howard Mark

Here’s a breakdown of the S&P 500 sector ETFs ranked from best to worst performance by year over the past decade along with the first four months of 2014 (click to enlarge):

Sector Quilt

Some observations on this data:

  • As with any asset allocation quilt, this data makes you realize how fleeting leadership can be in the financial markets. There seems to be little rhyme or reason from one year to the next.
  • There have been 7 different sectors with the best returns over the past 7 full calendar years.
  • For those that dislike the banks, here’s something to hang your hat on – the financials had by far the worst returns of any sector from 2004-2014 with a total return of -3% versus the S&P 500’s gain of 108%.
  • One of the best performers over this period was the consumer discretionary sector. One of the narratives following the financial crisis was that the consumer was tapped out from the debt overhang. From 2009-14, consumer discretionary stocks were up nearly 222% versus the S&P’s gain of roughly 130% (Although that trend has finally reversed this year).
  • Another story investors should have ignored?  Remember when Obamacare was going to crush health care stocks under a cloud of uncertainty?  This sector is up roughly 100% in the last three years and change despite the uncertainty surrounding the health care bill.
  • The performance of these two sectors shows how often following the story on the news can be detrimental to investment decisions.  Expectations matter in the financial markets.  It’s not just absolute growth or a single news item that moves stocks. It’s the relative growth in relation to expectations and how much of that good or bad news is already priced into the stocks that matters.
  • It’s interesting to note that the energy sector outperformed the S&P 500 by nearly 7% per year with nearly the same standard deviation. That’s the kind of risk-adjusted (and absolute) performance hedge fund managers would kill for.
  • Many active managers have been complaining about increased correlations and low dispersion in stocks for the past few years as a reason for underperformance. The claim has been that it hasn’t been a “stock picker’s market.” Well, the range between the top and bottom performing sectors has been huge:
Sector ranges

That’s an average difference of 35% between top and bottom performing sectors. Just pick the right sectors and you don’t really have to worry about stock picking (obviously easier said than done).

The takeaway here is that most active managers track too closely to benchmark sector weights, making it much harder for them to outperform the market.  To outperform you must be willing to make investments that are far different than the make-up of the benchmark you are trying to beat.

This is no easy task as career risk and the possibility of years of underperformance can be difficult to stomach, for both portfolio managers and investors.




This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

The Compound Media, Inc., an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Hot Links: No Nonsense | The Reformed Broker commented on May 05

    […] “This data makes you realize how fleeting leadership can be in the financial markets. There seems to be little rhyme or reason from one year to the next.”  (WealthOfCommonSense) […]