What it means
A strategy starts with the purpose of the money and the date it is needed. Cash a company will spend on a factory in eighteen months belongs somewhere entirely different from an endowment that must last thirty years, and confusing the two is the most expensive mistake in the field.
From the objective flows the asset allocation, which is the split between shares, bonds, property, cash and anything else. This split does most of the work in determining both the return and how uncomfortable the journey feels, far more than the choice of individual holdings.
Written strategies matter for governance as much as for returns. A documented policy gives trustees, boards and finance committees something to be held against, and it protects them from the charge of having made things up as they went along.
Implementation adds the practical rules: how much of a single holding is allowed, which sectors are excluded, how often the portfolio is rebalanced and what triggers a review. Rebalancing rules are the quiet workhorse, forcing the portfolio to sell what has grown expensive and buy what has fallen.
The nuance is that a strategy is not a forecast. It does not claim to know what markets will do; it sets out how the money will behave across a range of outcomes, which is why changing it because of recent performance usually defeats the point.
In practice
Real-world examples.
Example
A construction firm knows it must pay $3,000,000 for equipment in fourteen months, so its strategy for that money is entirely short-dated deposits and treasury bills. The finance director declines a higher-yielding bond fund because a 6% loss at the wrong moment would delay the whole project.
Example
A university endowment writes a strategy targeting inflation plus 4% over rolling ten-year periods, with 65% in growth assets and an annual spending rule of 4% of a three-year average value. The averaging rule exists so a bad market year does not immediately cut the scholarships the endowment funds.
Example
A founder's family investment company adopts a rule that no single holding may exceed 8% of the portfolio. When one technology share grows to 14%, the rule forces a partial sale that the founder resisted emotionally but had agreed to in writing three years earlier.
Formula
Calculation
Formula: Expected portfolio return = sum of (asset weight x expected return for that asset). Rebalancing trade = current value of asset class - (target weight x total portfolio value).
Worked example: a company reserve fund of $1,200,000 uses a 60/30/10 strategy. Equities are $1,200,000 x 0.60 = $720,000, bonds are $1,200,000 x 0.30 = $360,000 and cash is $1,200,000 x 0.10 = $120,000.
With expected returns of 7% on equities, 3% on bonds and 1% on cash, the contributions are $720,000 x 0.07 = $50,400, $360,000 x 0.03 = $10,800 and $120,000 x 0.01 = $1,200. The total expected return is $50,400 + $10,800 + $1,200 = $62,400, which is $62,400 / $1,200,000 = 5.2% for the portfolio.
Suppose equities then rise to $828,000 while bonds and cash are unchanged. The portfolio is now worth $828,000 + $360,000 + $120,000 = $1,308,000 and equities are $828,000 / $1,308,000 = 63.3% of it. Rebalancing to the 60% target means holding $1,308,000 x 0.60 = $784,800 of equities, so the fund sells $828,000 - $784,800 = $43,200 and moves it into bonds and cash.Case study
Seen in the real world.
Calder Reserve Fund is a fictional corporate reserve used purely as an illustrative example. Its board agreed a 60/30/10 strategy across equities, bonds and cash for a $1,200,000 pot, with an expected long-run return of 5.2% and annual rebalancing every March.
In the first year equities ran hard and grew to $828,000, lifting the fund to $1,308,000 and pushing the equity weight to 63.3%. Several directors wanted to leave the winners alone, but the written rule required a return to the 60% target, so the fund sold $43,200 of equities and topped up bonds and cash.
The following year equities fell sharply, and in this illustrative story the fund lost noticeably less than it would have done unrebalanced. The board's conclusion was that the strategy earned its keep not by predicting the fall but by removing the decision from anyone's judgement in the moment.
Watch out
Common mistakes.
- Writing a strategy around expected returns while never stating how much loss the organisation could tolerate, which guarantees the plan is abandoned in the first bad year.
- Confusing strategy with stock picking, when the split between asset classes explains most of the outcome and the individual names explain rather little.
- Changing the strategy after every quarterly review, which converts a long-term plan into a series of expensive reactions to recent news.
Questions
People also ask.
How often should an investment strategy be reviewed?
Formally once a year, plus whenever the underlying purpose changes, such as a new spending commitment or a shift in the time horizon.
Does a small business really need a written strategy?
Yes, if it holds meaningful reserves, because a one-page policy gives the board a defensible basis for decisions and a record of why they were made.
Is rebalancing worth the dealing costs?
Usually, since annual or threshold-based rebalancing keeps risk at the intended level, and doing it once or twice a year keeps the costs modest.
From the founder's library
Take it further with the book.
Build your financial confidence beyond this definition. Shihan's full-length guide, Accounting Fundamentals, takes the same plain-English approach and turns it into a complete, practical playbook for non-finance managers, business owners and students - with chapter-end quiz answers and presentation slides included.
25% off with code MMHQ25, applied at checkout. Priced in USD - checkout may show the equivalent in your local currency.
View the book and save 25%