SUBSCRIBE NEWSLETTER
  • Change Language
  • English
  • Hindi
  • Marathi
  • Gujarati
  • Punjabi
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Bengali
  • Guest Column Why it makes sense to shun hybrid funds

    Why it makes sense to shun hybrid funds

    Investors should invest in a combination of equity funds and debt funds instead of hybrid funds. Here is why.
    Joydeep Sen Jan 25, 2020

    SEBI norms allow fund houses to offer six variants of hybrid funds. However, most fund houses are active on two variants – aggressive hybrid funds and balanced advantage funds. Both the fund categories have the potential to deliver returns at par with a few categories of equity funds with a higher degree of safety because of their debt exposure; yet these funds have not met the expectations of many investors over the past few years.

    Let us look at both these categories one-by-one.

    Aggressive hybrid funds

    Earlier known as balanced funds, aggressive hybrid funds can invest 65%-80% of their corpus in equity instruments. Over the long term, this category is expected to give returns at par with multicap funds with a lower volatility. The advantage cited is that the debt component (20% to 35% of the portfolio) cushions the fund in a falling equity market. Though the overall portfolio would gain less in a bull equity market, returns are expected to even out by virtue of losing less in a bear market.

    Aggressive hybrid funds category has delivered CAGR of 9.1% in three years and 7.2% in five years as on January 03, 2020. We can compare these funds with multicap funds and ELSS as the fund managers do not have restriction to follow market capitalization in hybrid aggressive funds as well.

    Multicap funds have delivered CAGR of 12% in three years and 8% in five years, higher than aggressive hybrid funds. Similarly, ELSSs have  delivered 11.8% in three years and 8% in five years.

    Balanced advantage funds

    In BAF, a portion of the equity component, say 80% of the portfolio is hedged by taking contra positions in stocks. The extent of hedging is decided by the fund manager. The difference between hybrid funds and BAF Funds is that in the former, 65% to 80% is in open (i.e. unhedged) equity whereas in BAF, net of hedging i.e. the effective equity exposure is lower. This lower cushions the impact in volatile equity market phases.

    The CAGR return from a basket of 20 BAF funds is 9.2% and 7% in three years and 5 years respectively. Clearly, the returns are lower than that of multicap funds and ELSS.

    Conclusion

    Focussed allocation to equity and debt funds has an advantage of simplicity and clarity. Once you decide asset allocation of your clients, you may allocate to large cap / mid cap / small cap in equity, which is not possible with hybrid funds. Similarly, in debt, you may allocate to long duration or short duration depending on your clients risk appetite, which is also not possible with hybrid funds.

     Joydeep Sen is founder, Wiseinvestor.in

    Have a query or a doubt?
    Need a clarification or more information on an issue?
    Cafemutual welcomes all mutual fund and insurance related questions. So write in to us at newsdesk@cafemutual.com

    Click to clap
    Disclaimer: Cafemutual is an industry platform of mutual fund professionals. Our visitors are requested to maintain the decorum of the platform when expressing their thoughts and commenting on articles. Viewers are advised to refrain from making defamatory allegations against individuals. Those making abusive language or defamatory allegations will be blocked from accessing the web site.
    7 Comments
    Rahul Jain · 4 years ago `
    It is unfair to compare the returns of hybrid funds with multicap or ELSS. When you have recommended taking a combination of equity and debt rather than hybrid, the return comparison should also be hybrid funds vs combination of multicap+debt or ELSS+debt in the 65:35 ratio for a clearer picture
    Sandeep Nangrani · 4 years ago
    Agreed ????????
    Sandeep Nangrani · 4 years ago
    Agreed.
    Reply
    DANIEL S · 4 years ago `
    The said logic does not apply to all. May suit well for HNI category. BAF is still a good value proposition for the conservative investor, where the downside is protected. Also, comparing the perf. of Hybrid vs Pure Equity fund is quite irrational. Yes, static hybrid funds, whoever sold/bought with an idea of regular dividend inflow is such a failure.
    Rahul Agrawal · 4 years ago
    Even the taxation of Equity + Debt combo may not be as efficient as Aggressive Hybrid & BAF. Further, risk adjusted return is a better way to compare these funds.
    Reply
    Shib Kumar Jalan · 4 years ago `
    Time is rosy, so these kind of aticle make sense. Also, is it correct to assume that there is no 60+ investors or investors approaching 60?
    TARUN THAKKAR · 4 years ago `
    sir u cant compare in this maner, hybrid fud ger risky not due to his equity portion,but it risky due to its debt potion fund manager investing in bond fund ,long duration fund and due to this we face DHFL AND VODAFONE LIKE CIRCUMTANCES
    Login or Sign up to post comments.
    More than 2,07,000 of your industry peers are staying on top of their game by receiving daily tips, ideas and articles on growth strategies. Join them and stay updated by subscribing to Cafemutual newsletters.

    Fill in the below details or write to newsdesk@cafemutual.com and subscribe to Cafemutual Newsletter now.
    Cafemutual is an independent media platform and focuses on providing knowledge and information for the benefit of finance professionals. We do not promote any particular brand or asset category.