Diversification is a very important element in my current investment activity. By spreading my investing funds across a number of industries and sectors I hope to "iron out" some of the markets intriguing movements and insulate myself from any particularly poor period in any one sector or industry.
As a result, I want to be able to accommodate some of the more cyclical industries with their potential for bigger gains (and losses). However, I also want to steady the ship with some of the more resilient and stable industries.
I have originally used the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) in order to classify my investments. It appealed to me due to its simplicity. However, as I have moved on it has become clear that it simplicity does result in some disadvantages.
As a result (the eagle-eyed amongst you may have already noticed), I have chosen to switch the classification breakdown of my portfolio on my "Holdings" page to the Industry Classification Benchmark.
For me the ICB classification system has the benefit of being more "specific" but not too unwieldy with it. It also is used (slightly modified, it seems) by the FT.
However, I have chiefly used only down to the sector level rather than sub-sector (that is drilling down deeper than I need currently or anticipate to need in the future).
Eventually I will use this to slowly but surely uncover some of the key industries and sectors* where I am "underweight" and then investigate companies in that sector to see if there are any appealing stocks.
As a result, this is how my classification table looks:
[Creative Commons image reproduced from Flickr user Glynlowe]
Want to keep up to date with the Dividend Drive? You can subscribe by email or follow me on Twitter.
As a result, I want to be able to accommodate some of the more cyclical industries with their potential for bigger gains (and losses). However, I also want to steady the ship with some of the more resilient and stable industries.
I have originally used the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) in order to classify my investments. It appealed to me due to its simplicity. However, as I have moved on it has become clear that it simplicity does result in some disadvantages.
- Its simplicity often seems to result in it inadequately (and sometimes crudely) classify some companies.
- My favoured financial information source (FT.com) does not use GICS. Consequently, it takes a little more effort to use the classification of my portfolio to guide me to "underweight" industries.
As a result (the eagle-eyed amongst you may have already noticed), I have chosen to switch the classification breakdown of my portfolio on my "Holdings" page to the Industry Classification Benchmark.
For me the ICB classification system has the benefit of being more "specific" but not too unwieldy with it. It also is used (slightly modified, it seems) by the FT.
However, I have chiefly used only down to the sector level rather than sub-sector (that is drilling down deeper than I need currently or anticipate to need in the future).
Eventually I will use this to slowly but surely uncover some of the key industries and sectors* where I am "underweight" and then investigate companies in that sector to see if there are any appealing stocks.
As a result, this is how my classification table looks:
Industry | Supersector | Sector | |||
0001
|
Oil & Gas
|
0500
|
Oil & Gas
| 0530 | Oil & Gas Producers |
0570 | Oil Equipment, Services & Distribution | ||||
0580 | Alternative Energy | ||||
1000
|
Basic Materials
| 1300 | Chemicals | 1350 | Chemicals |
1700
|
Basic Resources
| 1730 | Forestry & Paper | ||
1750 | Industrial Metals & Mining | ||||
1770 | Mining | ||||
2000
|
Industrials
| 2300 | Construction & Materials | 2350 | Construction & Materials |
2700
|
Industrial Goods & Services
| 2710 | Aerospace & Defense | ||
2720 | General Industrials | ||||
2730 | Electronic & Electrical Equipment | ||||
2750 | Industrial Engineering | ||||
2770 | Industrial Transportation | ||||
2790 | Support Services | ||||
3000
|
Consumer Goods
| 3300 | Automobiles & Parts | 3350 | Automobiles & Parts |
3500
|
Food & Beverage
| 3530 | Beverages | ||
3570 | Food Producers | ||||
3700
|
Personal & Household Goods
| 3720 | Household Goods & Home Construction | ||
3740 | Leisure Goods | ||||
3760 | Personal Goods | ||||
3780 | Tobacco | ||||
4000
|
Health Care
|
4500
|
Health Care
| 4530 | Health Care Equipment & Services |
4570 | Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology | ||||
5000
|
Consumer Services
|
5300
|
Retail
| 5330 | Food & Drug Retailers |
5370 | General Retailers | ||||
5500 | Media | 5550 | Media | ||
5700 | Travel & Leisure | 5750 | Travel & Leisure | ||
6000
|
Telecoms
|
6500
|
Telecoms
| 6530 | Fixed Line Telecoms |
6570 | Mobile Telecoms | ||||
7000
|
Utilities
|
7500
|
Utilities
| 7530 | Electricity |
7570 | Gas, Water & Multiutilities | ||||
8000
|
Financials
| 8300 | Banks | 8350 | Banks |
8500
|
Insurance
| 8530 | Nonlife Insurance | ||
8570 | Life Insurance | ||||
8600
|
Real Estate
| 8630 | Real Estate Investment & Services | ||
8670 | Real Estate Investment Trusts | ||||
8700 | Financial Services | 8770 | Financial Services | ||
8900
|
Investment Instruments
| 8980 | Equity Investment Instruments | ||
8990 | Non-Equity Investment Instruments | ||||
9000
|
Technology
|
9500
|
Technology
| 9530 | Software & Computer Services |
9570 | Technology Hardware & Equipment |
Notes
*Incidentally, to add a little confusion. GICS uses as its highest classification level "sector". In contrast, ICB uses "industry". This is somewhat annoying but not a great issue.[Creative Commons image reproduced from Flickr user Glynlowe]
Want to keep up to date with the Dividend Drive? You can subscribe by email or follow me on Twitter.
No comments:
Post a Comment