Level 6/8 Help St, Chatswood NSW 2067Registered from 27 Nov 2024

contact@uriahinvestment.com.au+61 430 166 639

Risk budget reset after drawdown

Re-establishing volatility targets after a sharp equity decline without abandoning long-term allocation.

Risk budget reset after drawdown — illustrative photograph

Context

After a rapid market correction, the client’s portfolio drifted below minimum equity weights while cash rose from defensive sales made outside any documented process. Fear of further losses competed with IPS requirements to maintain growth for a 20-year horizon.

Drawdown path
Rebalancing tranches

Framework

We separated risk capacity (unchanged objectives) from risk perception (temporary stress). A three-tranche re-risking plan deployed cash into diversified equities over eight weeks, with pause triggers if realised volatility exceeded pre-set thresholds. Each tranche required written client consent tied to IPS clauses added for drawdown events.

Problems solved

  • Ad hoc sales that breached IPS minimum growth.
  • Absence of pre-agreed re-entry rules causing paralysis.
  • Reporting that highlighted peak-to-trough loss without horizon context.

Results

Allocation returned to policy bands within ten weeks. Client retained emergency cash above IPS minimum. Subsequent reporting added “distance to policy” metric to reduce emotional focus on single-day moves.

Questions about this risk budget reset

What is risk capacity vs perception?
Capacity reflects unchanged long-term objectives; perception is stress after drawdowns. The framework separates them before re-risking.
Why three tranches?
Staged re-entry reduces timing regret and requires documented consent per IPS drawdown clauses.
What are pause triggers?
If realised volatility exceeds pre-set thresholds, deployment pauses until reviewed—not hidden in footnotes.
Does this encourage market timing?
No. Tranches execute against policy bands after ad hoc sales breached minimum growth weights.