Tax-Managed Portfolios for the Right Investor

Equity markets have delivered strong returns in recent years, leaving many investors with substantial unrealized gains across their portfolios. Let’s consider how a tax-managed long-short strategy could be a powerful tool in the pursuit of tax efficiency—for the right investor.

As equity portfolios have appreciated, expectations around tax management have also risen. Investors increasingly look to their advisors not only for market exposure, but also for thoughtful strategies that may help manage and defer taxes over time. One approach that has gained attention is the use of tax-managed long-short portfolios. Compared with traditional long-only direct indexing, these strategies have the potential to produce significantly higher levels of realized losses.

However, these additional losses come with trade-offs. Long-short construction introduces higher explicit costs, greater operational complexity and increased turnover—along with another dimension of risk: Active factor exposures designed to produce pre-tax alpha create tracking-error risk that is separate from the tax-driven objectives of the strategy.

For this discussion, we focus solely on the potential tax benefits and costs to explore which solution could be better at helping the investor meet their objectives.

Our goal is to provide a framework for evaluating when a tax-managed long-short SMA may be the right fit—and when a lower-cost, lower-risk long-only approach may be more appropriate.

To determine whether a tax-managed long-short SMA is suitable, we need to do more than simply evaluate the strategies by the amount of losses they generate. We also have to align the investor’s gain profile, time horizon, funding method and long-term objectives with a strategy whose tax benefits justify both its costs and its underlying risk exposures.

What is the investor’s need for losses, both current and future?

Many analyses assume that every realized loss can be used to offset a capital gain immediately. Under the assumption that the investor has effectively unlimited gains, long-short portfolios look highly attractive: Greater leverage simply produces the ability to realize more losses, and the investor’s willingness to accept tracking-error risk becomes the only constraint.

But most investors don’t have unlimited gains. When gain levels are constrained, the advisor’s objective shifts to generating just enough losses to offset the client’s gains, while avoiding the drag of unnecessary costs. In these cases, long-only may outperform long-short on a net-of-fee basis, and moderate leverage could be superior to higher leverage.