Key Takeaways
- • Alternatives are defined as any assets outside equities, bonds, and cash—with the primary portfolio purpose being diversification rather than absolute returns.
- • Alternative assets split into two distinct categories: "different things" (property, infrastructure, gold, commodities) and "doing things differently" (absolute return funds, risk-weighted strategies, long-short equity approaches).
- • Direct property and property securities, while economically similar long-term, differ materially in valuation frequency, reported volatility, and liquidity profiles—a critical distinction for portfolio construction.
- • Traditional asset allocation frameworks often limit alternatives to property alone due to modeling constraints, missing opportunities to access broader diversification benefits from infrastructure, commodities, and alternative strategies.
- • Alternative strategies such as absolute return funds manage traditional assets with risk overlays to target absolute hurdle rates and downside protection, fundamentally different from passive asset ownership.
Summary
The classification of alternatives within multi-asset portfolios extends beyond a simple naming convention—it reflects a deliberate structural choice about how diversification functions. Defining alternatives as anything outside equities, bonds, and cash establishes a clear taxonomy, but the real utility lies in understanding why these assets warrant inclusion and how they operate within portfolio construction.
The alternative universe comprises two distinct sub-categories that serve different roles. The first encompasses "different things"—tangible or commodity-based assets such as property, infrastructure, gold, and commodities that provide exposure fundamentally distinct from traditional equity and fixed-income markets. The second category encompasses "doing things differently," which refers not to the asset type but to the investment methodology applied. Absolute return funds exemplify this approach: they may hold conventional equities and bonds but layer in risk management overlays designed to target absolute performance hurdles rather than benchmark-relative returns, effectively decoupling returns from broad market cycles.
A critical distinction exists within real asset allocation between direct property ownership and property securities. While their long-term economic drivers and performance characteristics converge, the trade-offs between them merit careful consideration. Property securities report volatility based on market pricing frequency, whereas direct property valuations update less frequently, artificially dampening reported volatility despite similar underlying risk exposure. Liquidity profiles diverge materially: property securities offer daily trading capability, while direct property requires months to execute transactions—a structural difference that influences portfolio rebalancing and cash management.
Many adviser firms default to property as the sole alternative holding, typically constrained by the limitations of their risk-profiling and asset allocation frameworks, which often cannot model or accommodate multiple alternative categories. This simplification sacrifices diversification breadth. A more granular approach to alternatives—incorporating infrastructure, commodities, and alternative strategies alongside property, and distinguishing between different strategies' risk management characteristics—enables portfolios to capture genuine decorrelation benefits across multiple return drivers operating on different market cycles.
The alternative universe comprises two distinct sub-categories that serve different roles. The first encompasses "different things"—tangible or commodity-based assets such as property, infrastructure, gold, and commodities that provide exposure fundamentally distinct from traditional equity and fixed-income markets. The second category encompasses "doing things differently," which refers not to the asset type but to the investment methodology applied. Absolute return funds exemplify this approach: they may hold conventional equities and bonds but layer in risk management overlays designed to target absolute performance hurdles rather than benchmark-relative returns, effectively decoupling returns from broad market cycles.
A critical distinction exists within real asset allocation between direct property ownership and property securities. While their long-term economic drivers and performance characteristics converge, the trade-offs between them merit careful consideration. Property securities report volatility based on market pricing frequency, whereas direct property valuations update less frequently, artificially dampening reported volatility despite similar underlying risk exposure. Liquidity profiles diverge materially: property securities offer daily trading capability, while direct property requires months to execute transactions—a structural difference that influences portfolio rebalancing and cash management.
Many adviser firms default to property as the sole alternative holding, typically constrained by the limitations of their risk-profiling and asset allocation frameworks, which often cannot model or accommodate multiple alternative categories. This simplification sacrifices diversification breadth. A more granular approach to alternatives—incorporating infrastructure, commodities, and alternative strategies alongside property, and distinguishing between different strategies' risk management characteristics—enables portfolios to capture genuine decorrelation benefits across multiple return drivers operating on different market cycles.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.