This year has been the worst year for bonds since the Great Depression. All major bond categories are down for the year, at a time when stock indices are also down. Even very short-term bonds, which historically have been very stable, are down. This has caused some fixed income investors to wonder "why hold bonds?"
It has been a bad year so far for bond returns
Source: Bloomberg, as of 10/31/2022.
Bloomberg US Agg 10+ Year Index (Long-term bonds), Bloomberg US Corporate Index (Corporate bonds), ICE BofA Fixed Rate Preferred Securities Index (Preferred securities), Bloomberg US Aggregate Index (Core bonds), Bloomberg US Corporate High Yield Index (High yield bonds), Bloomberg U.S. Securitized: MBS/ABS/CMBS and Covered Statis (Securitized bonds), Bloomberg US Treasury Index (Treasury bonds), Bloomberg US Treasury Inflation Notes Index (TIPS), Bloomberg US Agg 5-7 Year Index (Intermediate-term bonds), Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index Total Return Index Value Unhedged USD (Municipal bonds), Bloomberg US Agg Agency Index (Agency bonds), Bloomberg US Agg 1-3 Year Index (Short-term bonds), and Morningstar LSTA US Leveraged Loan 100 TR USD (Bank loans). Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For illustrative purposes only. Returns assume reinvestment of interest and/or dividends and do not assume taxes. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
2022 has been an anomaly
It's rare for high quality fixed income investments to have negative total returns over a 12-month period. For example, since 1976, there have only been 65 instances out of 550 total where the broad fixed income index was down over a 12-month period. That's just shy of 12% of all instances. It's even more rare for both stocks and bonds to be down at the same time over a 12-month rolling period (a rolling 12-month return is the total return for the preceding 12-month period; rolling returns can be useful because they smooth past performance to account for multiple time periods, not just a single instance).
Historically, bonds have provided a buffer when stocks fell. Since 1976, there have only been thirteen 12-month periods, or 2.4% of the time, where both stock and bond returns were negative.
Stocks and bonds are rarely down at the same time
Source: 12-month rolling returns from 1/30/1976 to 10/31/2022 for the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index (bonds) and the S&P 500 (stocks).
Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For illustrative purposes only. Returns assume reinvestment of interest and/or dividends and do not assume taxes. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Zooming in on only the 12-month rolling periods where stocks have been negative further illustrates how much 2022 has been an anomaly. The gray bars in the chart below rank the 12-month rolling returns for the S&P 500 from the worst to the least bad, beginning in the 12-months ending in 1977 and ending in October 2022. The mostly green bars are the returns for bonds during that same 12-month period. The highlighted bars show the instances where stocks (red bars) are down, and bonds (yellow bars) are down in the same period.
There are a few things to highlight in the below chart. First, when stocks have fallen, bonds have usually posted positive returns, as evidenced by the number of green bars. Second, this past year has been an exception. The 12 months ending October 31, 2022, have been among the worst periods for equities and for bonds. By contrast, for the 12 months ending in February 2009, equities were down more than 44% but bonds delivered a positive 2% total return.
Bond returns are usually positive when equities are negative
Source: Bloomberg, monthly data as of 10/31/2022.
Bonds are represented by the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index and stocks are represented by the S&P 500. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For illustrative purposes only. Returns assume reinvestment of interest and/or dividends and do not assume taxes. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
The negative year is unlikely to repeat
There's an old saying that "history doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes." While that can apply in many situations, we don't believe it applies to what's to come for bond returns. Returns have been historically weak this year for two primary reasons—starting yields were very low and the Federal Reserve's pace of rate hikes has been very rapid. Since March the Fed has increased the federal funds target rate five times, pushing it up from near zero to a range of 3% to 3.25%. It has been the fastest and most aggressive pace of tightening going back to the early 1980s. However, we believe that going forward the pace of rate hikes will slow and ultimately stop, which should limit the upside for longer-term bond yields (which move inversely to bond prices).
Now that yields have re-set at much higher levels, the blow from price declines should be cushioned by higher coupon income. Bond returns are mostly composed of a coupon return and changes in prices. Coupon returns are always positive and historically have provided a buffer from falling prices. Because yields were so low to start the year and rose very sharply, the coupon return wasn't large enough to offset the decline in prices, resulting in nearly the worst 12-month total return for the bond market since the 12-months ending in 1977.
Coupon returns have always been positive and have helped buffer price declines
Source: Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, annual data as of 9/30/2022.
2022 is year to date. For illustrative purposes only. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. Returns assume reinvestment of interest and/or dividends and do not assume taxes. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
What would it take for a repeat?
It's not impossible for this year to repeat, but it's highly unlikely. As of the end of October 2022, the 12-month total return for the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, which is a broad bond index, was down 15.7%. For the broad index to be down another 15.7%, the yield on the index would have to increase by nearly 4.6 percentage points, from roughly 5.0% to 9.6%. While a rise in yields of that magnitude is possible, we believe it's highly unlikely. There have only been six instances out of 550 since 1976 where yields rose more than four percentage points in a 12-month period. All those instances occurred in 1980 or 1981, when the Fed hiked the federal funds rates to as high as 20%.
The U.S. Agg yield would have to rise 4+ percentage points for total return to decline another 14.6%
Source: Schwab Center for Financial Research calculations using the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index.
Estimated 12-month total return is calculated as the change in prices assuming a modified duration of 6.29 years, a coupon of 2.62%, and a roll down return. For illustration only. 12-month change in yields are from 1/30/1976 to 10/31/2022 using the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. "Roll down return" is the estimated return of a bonds price based on the assumption that the price of the bond will converge from its current price to par at maturity. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Bonds can dampen portfolio volatility
One of the benefits of high-quality bonds is that historically, their returns have not fluctuated as much as equities have. This can help smooth diversified portfolio returns. For example, since 1976, the worst rolling 12-month total return for a portfolio of 30% bonds and 70% stocks was just over negative 30%. For a portfolio with a higher allocation to bonds, 70% in this case, the return over that same period was negative 12%. It's worth noting that the best returns for a portfolio that's weighted more toward bonds isn't as high as portfolio that's weighted more towards equities.
Portfolios with a larger allocation to bonds historically would have been less volatile
Source: Schwab Center for Financial Research calculations.
Monthly data as of 10/31/2022. Bonds are represented by the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index. Stocks are represented by the S&P 500. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. Returns assume reinvestment of interest and/or dividends and do not assume taxes. This chart is hypothetical and for illustrative purposes only. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Portfolio volatility matters for both risk capacity and risk tolerance. Risk tolerance is simply an investor's emotional comfort with taking risk. In other words, how big of a drop in your portfolio will keep you up at night? Risk capacity is how much financial risk you can afford to take without it impacting your lifestyle. Risk capacity is especially important to consider when taking withdrawals from a portfolio.
For example, the chart below shows the impact to a hypothetical $500,000 portfolio that's distributing $20,000 per year adjusted for inflation for 30 years. In each case, the portfolio experiences an annual return of 6% for all but one year. In the year it doesn't earn 6%, it loses 20%. In the "big drop initially" case the 20% drop comes in the first year the portfolio is taking distributions, whereas in the "big drop late" case the 20% drop comes in the last year. The portfolio returns are the same, it's just the timing that's different (this is a concept also known as "sequence of returns" risk).
In the case of the portfolio that experienced a 20% decline initially, it would have run out of money after 27 years of withdrawals assuming no other adjustments. However, the portfolio that experienced the 20% decline late would have ended with just shy of $400,000 after 30 years of withdrawals—a substantially different outcome, solely due to the timing of returns.
This matters because a portfolio with a greater allocation to bonds historically has been less volatile and less likely to experience large drops.
The timing of returns can have a significant impact on a retirement portfolio's ending value
Source: Schwab Center for Financial Research.
This chart is hypothetical and for illustrative purposes only. Markets generally do not follow return patterns like the example.
What to do now
It's been a brutal year for fixed income, but that's not a reason to avoid bonds going forward. This year has been an anomaly and is unlikely to repeat, in our view. Going forward, returns should be better because starting yields are higher and it's unlikely that rates will continue to rise like they have. We suggest investors consider extending duration to take advantage of the move up in yields and stay up in credit quality by focusing mostly on higher-rated bonds.
The information provided here is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The investment strategies mentioned here may not be suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decision.
Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research.
All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third-party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request.
Examples provided are for illustrative purposes only and not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results and the opinions presented cannot be viewed as an indicator of future performance.
Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions.
Investing involves risk including loss of principal.
Diversification and asset allocation strategies do not ensure a profit and cannot protect against losses in a declining market.
Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications and other factors. Lower-rated securities are subject to greater credit risk, default risk, and liquidity risk.
Tax-exempt bonds are not necessarily suitable for all investors. Information related to a security's tax-exempt status (federal and in-state) is obtained from third parties, and Schwab does not guarantee its accuracy. Tax-exempt income may be subject to the alternative minimum tax. Capital appreciation from bond funds and discounted bonds may be subject to state or local taxes. Capital gains are not exempt from federal income tax.
Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) are inflation-linked securities issued by the U.S. government whose principal value is adjusted periodically in accordance with the rise and fall in the inflation rate. Thus, the dividend amount payable is also impacted by variations in the inflation rate, as it is based upon the principal value of the bond. It may fluctuate up or down. Repayment at maturity is guaranteed by the U.S. government and may be adjusted for inflation to become the greater of the original face amount at issuance or that face amount plus an adjustment for inflation.
Preferred securities are often callable, meaning the issuing company may redeem the security at a certain price after a certain date. Such call features may affect yield. Preferred securities generally have lower credit ratings and a lower claim to assets than the issuer's individual bonds. Like bonds, prices of preferred securities tend to move inversely with interest rates, so they are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Investment value will fluctuate, and preferred securities, when sold before maturity, may be worth more or less than original cost. Preferred securities are subject to various other risks including changes in interest rates and credit quality, default risks, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, deferral risk, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors.
Bank loans are typically below investment-grade credit quality and may be subject to more credit risk, including the risk of nonpayment of principal or interest. Most bank loans are floating rate, with interest rates that are tied to LIBOR or another short-term reference rate, so substantial increases in interest rates may make it more difficult for issuers to service their debt and cause an increase in loan defaults. Bank loans are typically secured by collateral posted by the issuer, or guarantees of its affiliates, the value of which may decline and be insufficient to cover repayment of the loan. Many loans are relatively illiquid or are subject to restrictions on resales, have delayed settlement periods, and may be difficult to value. Bank loans are also subject to maturity extension risk and prepayment risk.
Source: Bloomberg Index Services Limited. BLOOMBERG® is a trademark and service mark of Bloomberg Finance L.P. and its affiliates (collectively "Bloomberg"). Bloomberg or Bloomberg's licensors own all proprietary rights in the Bloomberg Indices. Neither Bloomberg nor Bloomberg's licensors approves or endorses this material, or guarantees the accuracy or completeness of any information herein, or makes any warranty, express or implied, as to the results to be obtained therefrom and, to the maximum extent allowed by law, neither shall have any liability or responsibility for injury or damages arising in connection therewith.
The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.1122-22XA