Why Not 100% Equities

Topics - Equities Asset Allocation Risk Parity

${ numberSection } ${ text }
Why Not 100% Equities

In a 1994 article “College and University Endowment Funds: Why Not 100% Equities?” Richard H. Thaler and J. Peter Williamson presented strong evidence documenting the historical superiority of investing in 100% equities compared with a more common investment policy of 60% equities and 40% bonds (60/40).

However, their recommendation that endowments invest in 100% equities actually mixes two distinctly different ideas: 1) endowments should take more risk than 60/40, and 2) they should take this added risk by investing 100% in equities.

Whether a long-term investor should take more risk is a fascinating and sometimes contentious subject that I do not address. Instead, this article focuses on whether 100% equities is the best way to gain more exposure to risk. The answer, generally, is that it is not, because a portfolio of 100% equities ignores the benefits of diversification.

Investors willing to bear the risk of 100% equities may do even better with a diversified portfolio, particularly when they are willing to lever. A diversified portfolio historically delivers more return, while not increasing risk (measuring risk along several different dimensions).

Regardless of which portfolio is chosen, this article argues that deciding how much risk to bear, and building a set of portfolios with the most expected return for a given amount of risk, are separate tasks. Choosing a portfolio of 100% equities based on their historical realized return misses this separation.

A long-term investment in 60/40 may, or may not, take enough risk. An investment in 100% equities almost guarantees an inefficient portfolio.

Published in

The Journal of Portfolio Management

AQR Capital Management, LLC, (“AQR”) provide links to third-party websites only as a convenience, and the inclusion of such links does not imply any endorsement, approval, investigation, verification or monitoring by us of any content or information contained within or accessible from the linked sites. If you choose to visit the linked sites, you do so at your own risk, and you will be subject to such sites' terms of use and privacy policies, over which AQR.com has no control. In no event will AQR be responsible for any information or content within the linked sites or your use of the linked sites.

The information contained herein is only as current as of the date indicated, and may be superseded by subsequent market events or for other reasons. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of AQR Capital Management, LLC, its affiliates or its employees. This information is not intended to, and does not relate specifically to any investment strategy or product that AQR offers. It is being provided merely to provide a framework to assist in the implementation of an investor’s own analysis and an investor’s own view on the topic discussed herein. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.


Hypothetical performance results have many inherent limitations, some of which, but not all, are described herein. The hypothetical performance shown was derived from the retroactive application of a model developed with the benefit of hindsight.  Hypothetical performance results are presented for illustrative purposes only.


Diversification does not eliminate the risk of experiencing investment loss.


Certain publications may have been written prior to the author being an employee of AQR.

This material is intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or tax advice, nor is it intended to replace the advice of a qualified attorney or tax advisor.


AQR Capital Management is a global investment management firm, which may or may not apply similar investment techniques or methods of analysis as described herein. The views expressed here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of AQR.