Is the 60/40 Portfolio Still Relevant? Exploring Alternatives

Origin

With 12 trading days remaining in 2025, we wanted to revisit one of the most popular investment strategies that has broadly served investors well over the last few decades — the 60/40 portfolio. Pioneered by Harry Markowitz and his modern portfolio theory (MPT) framework in the 1950s, the 60/40 portfolio — comprised of 60% stocks and 40% bonds — argued that diversification among uncorrelated asset classes provided the investor with the most optimal portfolio allocation. Equities served as the growth engine, while bonds provided drawdown mitigation and predictable income; when combined, they should produce higher returns than stand-alone bonds and better risk-adjusted returns than stocks. The key to this strategy is the relationship between stocks and bonds — the two asset classes need to have less than perfect correlation, or better yet, be negatively correlated. In the latter scenario, this meant that if stocks were to fall, bonds would rise, limiting the overall drawdown and volatility experienced in a portfolio.

Track Record

The 60/40 portfolio was highly effective in the falling interest rate environment of the early 1980s, when rates meaningfully came down from a peak of 20%. The fall in rates led to a bull market in bonds, with the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index (Agg), a common proxy for fixed income performance, realizing an average annual return of near 13%. The drop in rates was also bullish for equities as borrowing costs fell, allowing corporations to boost profit margins and free up capital for growth initiatives. During this period, if one were to be invested in a domestic-only 60/40 portfolio, comprised of 60% equities (using the S&P 500 as a proxy), and 40% in the Agg, the investor would’ve realized an average annualized return of nearly 16%. While stocks and bonds both rose significantly over this period, their correlation remained low, in line with what the MPT would suggest.

This relationship largely held up in the 1990s and 2000s, with the correlation between the two asset classes remaining relatively low (below +0.5). The 60/40 portfolio provided a smoother return in a market period that experienced multiple significant expansions and contractions, such as the dot-com bubble and the Great Recession, with the average annualized return over this time frame being roughly 8%.

From 2010 onward, the diversification benefits of holding both asset classes began to erode, with stocks and bonds moving more in tandem with one another. While the 60/40 portfolio still performed well over this time frame (an annualized average return of roughly 10%), the streamlined returns investors once became accustomed to became less reliable.

60/40 Portfolio Still Delivering, Though Diversification Benefits Have Weakened

The 60/40 portfolio produced positive returns in all but two calendar years (assuming this year finishes up), highlighting its resilience over a full market cycle. While utilizing a 60/40 portfolio has largely been fruitful over this period, you’ll notice that 2022 was a particularly tough year. In 2022, inflation spiked to a 40-year high, causing the Federal Reserve to raise rates to levels not seen since the 2008 financial crisis. This led to a steep sell-off in stocks and bonds, with the S&P 500 falling 18.1% and the Agg dropping 13%, with the latter experiencing its worst drawdown in history. While the 16% loss in 2022 was one of the worst years since inception, over longer rolling periods, such as the 10-year rolling period (yellow line), this strategy has rarely fallen below a 5% annualized return, with the average 10-year annualized rolling return being 7.8%.