ARE GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS THE ONLY WAY TO DIVERSIFY AGAINST CERTAIN RISKS? I linked here to Professor Damodoran’s point that “it is harder to use diversification to reduce risk in portfolios than it was twenty years ago for two reasons: “1. The correlation across equity markets has risen dramatically”;and “2.Securitizing real estate and bringing it into portfolios has made risk in the real estate market more closely tied to the overall equity market.” For diversification to work, the prices of the assets should not be correlated. During a period when everybody is running for the exits together, the prices of all private assets tend to go down together; their movements are correlated. Kids, the lesson seems to be that a proportion of your assets has to be in cash or government obligations to protect against these crises.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
- Nick: Further informing my perspective was that in the writings of classical Romans the middle-aged authors opined...
- ARE PEOPLE LESS VIOLENT? (COMMENT). (2)
- Dick Weisfelder: My prior comment was just in the context of sports. Whether or not from Pinker, I have seen the...
- erik: It seems doubtful that human nature has changed. The most likely explanation would be that modern culture gives...
- HOW BANKS PREPARED FOR A U.S. DEFAULT. (2)
- GREECE’S ADVANTAGE IN THE CHICKEN GAME. (2)
- Nick: That makes sense. It reminds me of the stories Pater Familias would tell me about how in Boston the person with...
- Dick Weisfelder: Greece seems to me to be playing a game that Karl Deutsch called “underdog.” While one...
- FOOTBALL PLAYERS DELIBERATELY CAUSING CONCUSSIONS? (3)
- Nick: It was my understanding that boxing gloves were to protect the puncher’s hands and not the...
- Dick Weisfelder: Remember the Roman arenas? Bare knuckled boxing? Such injuries were taken as natural and accepted in...
- Mary Jane Schaefer: This isn’t about football. Or even sportsmanship. Well, it is about sportsmanship. But what...
- A 25 % CHANCE OF A EURO DEFAULT? (1)
- Nick: The fact that this has gone on for so long is pretty perplexing. The Economist is referring back to articles it...
- DECIDING WHAT KIND OF PATIENT YOU ARE. (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: One can be very open to new technology, but also risk averse. The recent debates about how to...
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
Meta
My economics teacher (the one other than my dad, I mean–the venerable Professor Coe) made a big deal about government bonds in class, but I never fully understood the concept. And maybe I’m even mistaken in talking about government bonds when you’re talking about government obligations. Is there a good book out there dealing with this kind of topic?
Good questions, Annalisa. A government obligation is anything the government is obligated to pay. A government bond is promise by the government to pay–a government obligation. Bonds of the United States can obligate the government to pay after 3 months or after 30 years (you are familiar with US savings bonds, which have complicated rules governing them). United States bonds can be–and are–bought and sold. United States bonds are attractive at times like this because there is no credit risk; the government is good for the obligation (a cynic might say that it’s because the government can ultimately print money if it has to).