quantwise 1.2.0 → 1.2.2

package/.claude/skills/portfolio-manager/references/diversification-principles.md

@@ -0,0 +1,553 @@
+# Diversification Principles
+
+This document explains the theory and practice of portfolio diversification, providing frameworks for assessing diversification quality and identifying concentration risks.
+
+## Core Concepts
+
+### What is Diversification?
+
+Diversification is the practice of spreading investments across various assets, sectors, and geographies to reduce portfolio risk without proportionally reducing expected returns.
+
+**Harry Markowitz's Key Insight (1952):**
+> "Diversification is the only free lunch in finance."
+
+By combining assets with imperfect correlation, investors can achieve better risk-adjusted returns than holding individual securities.
+
+### The Math Behind Diversification
+
+**Portfolio Risk Formula:**
+
+For a two-asset portfolio:
+```
+σ_p = √(w₁²σ₁² + w₂²σ₂² + 2w₁w₂σ₁σ₂ρ₁₂)
+
+Where:
+σ_p = Portfolio standard deviation (risk)
+w₁, w₂ = Weights of assets 1 and 2
+σ₁, σ₂ = Standard deviations of assets 1 and 2
+ρ₁₂ = Correlation between assets 1 and 2
+```
+
+**Key Insight:** When correlation < 1.0, portfolio risk is less than the weighted average of individual risks.
+
+### Types of Risk
+
+**1. Systematic Risk (Market Risk)**
+- **Definition:** Risk inherent to the entire market
+- **Examples:** Recessions, interest rate changes, geopolitical events
+- **Cannot be eliminated** by diversification
+- **Beta** measures exposure to systematic risk
+
+**2. Unsystematic Risk (Specific Risk)**
+- **Definition:** Risk specific to individual companies or sectors
+- **Examples:** Management failures, product recalls, competitive losses
+- **Can be reduced** through diversification
+- **Diversification benefit:** Holding 15-30 stocks eliminates ~90% of unsystematic risk
+
+**Modern Portfolio Theory Goal:** Eliminate unsystematic risk while accepting systematic risk (compensated by market risk premium).
+
+## Optimal Number of Holdings
+
+### Individual Stocks
+
+Research shows diminishing diversification benefits beyond a certain number of holdings:
+
+| Number of Stocks | % of Unsystematic Risk Eliminated |
+|------------------|----------------------------------|
+| 1 | 0% (all risk remains) |
+| 5 | ~40% |
+| 10 | ~65% |
+| 15 | ~75% |
+| 20 | ~85% |
+| 30 | ~90% |
+| 50 | ~93% |
+| 100 | ~95% |
+
+**Recommended Range: 15-30 stocks**
+
+**Why not more than 30?**
+- Marginal diversification benefit very small
+- Increased complexity and monitoring burden
+- Higher transaction costs
+- Diluted impact of high-conviction ideas
+- "Closet indexing" (might as well own an ETF)
+
+**Why not fewer than 15?**
+- Insufficient elimination of unsystematic risk
+- Concentration risk remains significant
+- Single-stock events can severely impact portfolio
+- Correlation underestimation risk
+
+### ETFs and Mutual Funds
+
+**For diversified funds (broad market, sector, international):**
+- **5-10 ETFs** can provide excellent diversification
+- Each ETF already holds dozens to thousands of stocks
+- Focus on low overlap and complementary exposures
+
+**Example Well-Diversified 6-ETF Portfolio:**
+1. US Large Cap (S&P 500)
+2. US Small/Mid Cap
+3. International Developed Markets
+4. Emerging Markets
+5. US Bonds (Aggregate)
+6. Real Estate (REITs)
+
+## Correlation and Diversification
+
+### Understanding Correlation
+
+**Correlation coefficient (ρ) ranges from -1.0 to +1.0:**
+
+| Correlation | Interpretation | Diversification Benefit |
+|-------------|----------------|------------------------|
+| **+1.0** | Perfect positive correlation | None (redundant holdings) |
+| **+0.7 to +0.9** | Very high correlation | Minimal |
+| **+0.3 to +0.7** | Moderate positive correlation | Good |
+| **0 to +0.3** | Low positive correlation | Excellent |
+| **0** | No correlation | Maximum benefit |
+| **-0.3 to 0** | Low negative correlation | Excellent (hedging) |
+| **< -0.3** | Moderate to strong negative correlation | Hedging properties |
+
+### Typical Stock Correlations
+
+**Within Same Sector:**
+- Large tech stocks (AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL): ρ ≈ 0.6-0.8
+- Banks (JPM, BAC, WFC): ρ ≈ 0.7-0.9
+- Oil companies (XOM, CVX): ρ ≈ 0.8-0.9
+
+**Across Different Sectors:**
+- Tech vs Healthcare: ρ ≈ 0.3-0.5
+- Utilities vs Technology: ρ ≈ 0.2-0.4
+- Consumer Staples vs Energy: ρ ≈ 0.3-0.5
+
+**Defensive vs Cyclical:**
+- Utilities vs Industrials: ρ ≈ 0.2-0.4
+- Consumer Staples vs Consumer Discretionary: ρ ≈ 0.4-0.6
+
+**US vs International:**
+- US stocks vs International Developed: ρ ≈ 0.7-0.9 (increasing over time)
+- US stocks vs Emerging Markets: ρ ≈ 0.6-0.8
+
+**Stocks vs Bonds:**
+- US Stocks vs US Treasuries: ρ ≈ -0.2 to +0.3 (varies by regime)
+- Stocks vs Corporate Bonds: ρ ≈ 0.4-0.6
+
+### Correlation Pitfalls
+
+**1. Correlation Instability**
+- Correlations increase during market crashes ("correlation goes to 1 in a crisis")
+- Diversification benefits diminish when most needed
+- Solution: Include truly uncorrelated assets (gold, volatility strategies)
+
+**2. Hidden Correlations**
+- Stocks may appear different but share common risk factors
+- Example: Bank stocks + homebuilders both exposed to interest rates
+- Solution: Analyze underlying risk factors, not just sector labels
+
+**3. Globalization Effect**
+- International diversification less effective than historically
+- US and global markets increasingly correlated
+- Solution: Still valuable, but expect lower diversification benefit than in past
+
+## Concentration Risk Measurement
+
+### Position Concentration
+
+**Single Position Thresholds:**
+
+| Position Size | Risk Level | Action |
+|---------------|------------|--------|
+| **<5%** | Low | Acceptable for all positions |
+| **5-10%** | Medium | Monitor, ensure high conviction |
+| **10-15%** | High | Trim recommended unless exceptional conviction |
+| **15-20%** | Very High | Trim immediately (except rare cases) |
+| **>20%** | Extreme | Urgent trim required |
+
+**Top Holdings Concentration:**
+
+| Top 5 Holdings | Risk Assessment |
+|----------------|-----------------|
+| **<25%** | Well-diversified |
+| **25-40%** | Moderate concentration |
+| **40-60%** | High concentration |
+| **>60%** | Excessive concentration |
+
+**Example:**
+- If top 5 positions = 55% of portfolio → High concentration risk
+- If largest single position = 18% → Immediate trim recommended
+
+### Sector Concentration
+
+**Sector Allocation Thresholds:**
+
+| Sector Weight | Risk Level | Guidance |
+|---------------|------------|----------|
+| **<15%** | Underweight | May be intentional or opportunity |
+| **15-25%** | Normal | Typical for major sectors |
+| **25-30%** | Moderate overweight | Monitor, ensure intentional |
+| **30-40%** | High overweight | Trim recommended |
+| **>40%** | Excessive concentration | Urgent diversification needed |
+
+**S&P 500 Sector Benchmarks (approximate):**
+- Technology: 25-30%
+- Healthcare: 12-15%
+- Financials: 10-13%
+- Consumer Discretionary: 10-12%
+- Communication Services: 8-10%
+- Industrials: 8-10%
+- Consumer Staples: 6-8%
+- Energy: 3-5%
+- Utilities: 2-3%
+- Real Estate: 2-3%
+- Materials: 2-3%
+
+**Deviation Analysis:**
+- **>10% above benchmark** = Significant overweight (ensure intentional)
+- **>20% above benchmark** = Excessive overweight (trim recommended)
+
+### Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI)
+
+**Formula:**
+```
+HHI = Σ(w_i × 100)²
+
+Where w_i = weight of position i (as decimal)
+```
+
+**Interpretation:**
+
+| HHI Score | Concentration Level | Portfolio Characteristics |
+|-----------|---------------------|--------------------------|
+| **<1000** | Low concentration | Well-diversified (25+ equal positions) |
+| **1000-1800** | Moderate concentration | Typical diversified portfolio (15-25 stocks) |
+| **1800-2500** | High concentration | Concentrated portfolio (8-15 stocks) |
+| **>2500** | Very high concentration | Very concentrated (5-8 stocks) |
+| **>4000** | Extreme concentration | Poorly diversified (<5 stocks) |
+
+**Example Calculation:**
+
+Portfolio with 5 positions:
+- Position A: 30% → (30)² = 900
+- Position B: 25% → (25)² = 625
+- Position C: 20% → (20)² = 400
+- Position D: 15% → (15)² = 225
+- Position E: 10% → (10)² = 100
+
+HHI = 900 + 625 + 400 + 225 + 100 = **2250** (High concentration)
+
+## Multi-Dimensional Diversification
+
+Effective diversification requires spreading risk across multiple dimensions:
+
+### 1. Number of Holdings (Quantity)
+- **Target:** 15-30 individual stocks OR 5-10 diversified funds
+- **Measure:** Count of positions
+- **Risk:** Too few = concentration; too many = over-diversification
+
+### 2. Position Sizing (Weight)
+- **Target:** No single position >10-15%, top 5 <40%
+- **Measure:** HHI, top-N concentration
+- **Risk:** Unequal weighting creates concentration despite many holdings
+
+### 3. Sector Allocation (Industry)
+- **Target:** No sector >30-35%, diversified across 6+ sectors
+- **Measure:** Sector breakdown, compare to benchmark
+- **Risk:** Industry-specific shocks (e.g., tech crash 2000, financial crisis 2008)
+
+### 4. Market Cap (Size)
+- **Target:** Mix of large-cap (60-70%), mid-cap (20-25%), small-cap (10-15%)
+- **Measure:** Weighted average market cap, cap-based breakdown
+- **Risk:** Small caps more volatile; large caps may underperform in recoveries
+
+### 5. Geography (Region)
+- **Target:** US 60-75%, International Developed 15-25%, Emerging Markets 5-15%
+- **Measure:** Revenue geography, listing geography
+- **Risk:** Country-specific risks (politics, currency, regulation)
+
+### 6. Style (Growth vs Value)
+- **Target:** Balanced or slight tilt based on market cycle
+- **Measure:** Average P/E, P/B, growth rates of holdings
+- **Risk:** Style rotation (growth outperforms in some periods, value in others)
+
+### 7. Correlation (Independence)
+- **Target:** Average pairwise correlation <0.6
+- **Measure:** Correlation matrix of holdings
+- **Risk:** High correlation = false diversification
+
+### 8. Factor Exposures (Risk Factors)
+- **Target:** Balanced exposure to momentum, quality, volatility, etc.
+- **Measure:** Factor loadings (requires advanced analytics)
+- **Risk:** Concentrated factor bets (e.g., all momentum stocks)
+
+## Practical Diversification Strategies
+
+### Strategy 1: Equal Weighting
+
+**Method:** Each position gets equal allocation (e.g., 20 stocks = 5% each)
+
+**Pros:**
+- Simple to implement
+- Automatic rebalancing to smaller positions
+- Reduces concentration risk
+
+**Cons:**
+- Ignores conviction levels
+- May overweight low-quality names
+- Higher turnover (frequent rebalancing)
+
+**Best for:** Passive investors, index-like approaches
+
+### Strategy 2: Conviction Weighting
+
+**Method:** Allocate more to high-conviction ideas, less to lower conviction
+
+**Example Tiers:**
+- High conviction: 7-10% positions (5-8 stocks)
+- Medium conviction: 4-6% positions (8-12 stocks)
+- Low conviction / Satellite: 2-3% positions (5-10 stocks)
+
+**Pros:**
+- Reflects analytical edge
+- Better risk-adjusted returns if skill exists
+- Maintains diversification
+
+**Cons:**
+- Requires honest conviction assessment
+- Risk of overconfidence
+- Can lead to concentration
+
+**Best for:** Active investors with research capability
+
+### Strategy 3: Risk Parity
+
+**Method:** Allocate based on risk contribution, not dollar value
+
+**Example:**
+- Volatile stock (beta 1.8): 3% allocation
+- Moderate stock (beta 1.0): 5% allocation
+- Stable stock (beta 0.6): 8% allocation
+
+**Pros:**
+- True diversification of risk
+- More stable portfolio performance
+- Thoughtful risk management
+
+**Cons:**
+- Complex to implement
+- Requires volatility estimates
+- May overweight low-quality stable stocks
+
+**Best for:** Sophisticated investors, risk-focused approaches
+
+### Strategy 4: Core-Satellite
+
+**Method:**
+- **Core (60-80%):** Diversified, low-cost index funds
+- **Satellite (20-40%):** High-conviction individual stocks or sector bets
+
+**Pros:**
+- Combines passive diversification with active upside
+- Reduces risk of stock-picking errors
+- Cost-efficient
+
+**Cons:**
+- Performance depends on satellite selection
+- Complexity in management
+- Tax efficiency varies
+
+**Best for:** Investors who want both diversification and active involvement
+
+## Diversification Quality Checklist
+
+Use this checklist to assess portfolio diversification:
+
+**Position Diversification:**
+- [ ] Portfolio has 15-30 stocks (or 5-10 diversified funds)
+- [ ] No single position exceeds 10% of portfolio
+- [ ] No single position exceeds 15% of portfolio
+- [ ] Top 5 positions represent less than 40% of portfolio
+- [ ] HHI score below 1800
+
+**Sector Diversification:**
+- [ ] No single sector exceeds 30% of equity allocation
+- [ ] Portfolio includes at least 6 different sectors
+- [ ] Sector weights reasonably close to benchmark (within 15%)
+- [ ] Balance between growth, defensive, and cyclical sectors
+- [ ] No overconcentration in single industry (e.g., semiconductors within tech)
+
+**Correlation Diversification:**
+- [ ] Holdings span multiple industries with different drivers
+- [ ] Average pairwise correlation estimated below 0.6
+- [ ] Not all positions are high-beta growth stocks
+- [ ] Includes mix of cyclical and defensive names
+- [ ] Some low-correlation positions included (staples, utilities, healthcare)
+
+**Geographic Diversification:**
+- [ ] International exposure present (15-30% of equities)
+- [ ] Not 100% dependent on US economic performance
+- [ ] Emerging market exposure if appropriate for risk tolerance
+- [ ] Consider revenue geography, not just listing location
+
+**Market Cap Diversification:**
+- [ ] Mix of large-cap, mid-cap, and potentially small-cap
+- [ ] Not exclusively mega-caps (>$500B)
+- [ ] Not exclusively small-caps (<$2B)
+- [ ] Weighted average market cap appropriate for risk tolerance
+
+**Asset Class Diversification:**
+- [ ] Equity allocation matches risk tolerance
+- [ ] Fixed income present (unless very aggressive allocation)
+- [ ] Cash buffer for opportunities and liquidity
+- [ ] Alternative assets if appropriate (real estate, commodities)
+
+## Common Diversification Mistakes
+
+### Mistake 1: False Diversification
+
+**Problem:** Holding many stocks that are highly correlated
+
+**Example:**
+- Portfolio: AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL, AMZN, META, NVDA, TSLA (all large-cap tech/growth)
+- **Appears** diversified (7 stocks)
+- **Actually** highly concentrated (single sector, similar risk factors)
+
+**Solution:** Diversify across sectors, not just number of names
+
+### Mistake 2: Over-Diversification ("Diworsification")
+
+**Problem:** Holding too many positions, diluting returns with no additional risk reduction
+
+**Example:**
+- 100 individual stock positions
+- Overlap with index funds
+- Closet indexing with higher fees
+
+**Solution:** Stick to 15-30 best ideas OR use low-cost index funds
+
+### Mistake 3: Home Country Bias
+
+**Problem:** Overweighting domestic stocks, missing global opportunities
+
+**Example:**
+- US investor with 95% US stocks
+- US represents ~60% of global market cap
+- Missing international diversification benefit
+
+**Solution:** Allocate 15-30% to international equities
+
+### Mistake 4: Employer Stock Concentration
+
+**Problem:** Large position in employer stock creates correlated life risks
+
+**Example:**
+- 40% of portfolio in employer stock
+- Job + portfolio both dependent on same company
+- "Double jeopardy" if company struggles
+
+**Solution:** Trim to <10% of portfolio, diversify proceeds
+
+### Mistake 5: Sector Drift
+
+**Problem:** Letting winners run creates unintended sector concentration
+
+**Example:**
+- Tech stocks appreciate 200%, now 50% of portfolio
+- Investor didn't actively overweight tech, just didn't rebalance
+- Concentrated risk without conviction
+
+**Solution:** Regular rebalancing to maintain diversification
+
+### Mistake 6: Forgetting About Bonds
+
+**Problem:** 100% equities for investors who can't handle volatility
+
+**Example:**
+- Aggressive investor holds all stocks
+- Market drops 30%, investor panics and sells at bottom
+- Would have been better with 70/30 stock/bond mix
+
+**Solution:** Match allocation to risk tolerance and time horizon
+
+### Mistake 7: Low-Quality Diversification
+
+**Problem:** Adding poor-quality stocks just to increase position count
+
+**Example:**
+- Has 20 quality stocks, adds 10 speculative names to "diversify"
+- Speculative names drag down returns without meaningfully reducing risk
+- Quality dilution
+
+**Solution:** Diversify within quality standards, don't lower bar for diversification
+
+## Advanced Topics
+
+### Factor-Based Diversification
+
+Beyond traditional diversification, consider factor exposures:
+
+**Common Factors:**
+- **Value:** Low P/E, P/B stocks
+- **Growth:** High revenue/earnings growth
+- **Momentum:** Recent price performance
+- **Quality:** High ROE, stable earnings
+- **Low Volatility:** Low beta, stable returns
+- **Size:** Small cap vs large cap
+
+**Factor Diversification:**
+- Avoid loading entirely on one factor (e.g., all momentum stocks)
+- Balance factor exposures or tilt deliberately
+- Recognize factor cycles (value outperforms in some periods, growth in others)
+
+### Tail Risk and Black Swans
+
+**Problem:** Normal diversification fails in extreme events
+
+**2008 Financial Crisis Example:**
+- Stocks fell 50%+
+- Most correlations approached 1.0
+- Traditional diversification provided limited protection
+
+**Solutions:**
+- **Include uncorrelated assets:** Gold, long-volatility strategies, managed futures
+- **Tail hedges:** Put options, VIX calls (expensive, insurance-like)
+- **Portfolio construction:** Barbell approach (safe core + aggressive satellites)
+
+### Dynamic Diversification
+
+**Concept:** Adjust diversification based on market conditions
+
+**High Volatility Regimes:**
+- Increase diversification (more positions, lower concentration)
+- Add defensive positions
+- Reduce correlation among holdings
+
+**Low Volatility Regimes:**
+- Can handle slightly higher concentration
+- Focus on highest conviction ideas
+- Accept higher correlation
+
+**Implementation Challenge:** Requires market regime detection and discipline
+
+## Summary
+
+**Key Principles:**
+
+1. **Diversification reduces unsystematic risk** without eliminating systematic risk
+2. **Optimal range:** 15-30 individual stocks OR 5-10 diversified funds
+3. **Multi-dimensional approach:** Number, weight, sector, geography, correlation
+4. **Avoid false diversification:** Many holdings with high correlation
+5. **Avoid over-diversification:** Too many positions dilute returns
+6. **Regular rebalancing** prevents concentration drift
+7. **Match to risk tolerance:** More diversification for lower risk tolerance
+
+**Practical Guidelines:**
+
+- No single stock >10-15%
+- No single sector >30-35%
+- Top 5 holdings <40% of portfolio
+- 6+ sectors represented
+- International exposure 15-30%
+- Asset allocation matches time horizon and risk tolerance
+
+**Remember:** Diversification is about risk management, not return maximization. A well-diversified portfolio sacrifices some upside potential to protect against catastrophic losses. The goal is to "stay in the game" through all market conditions.