Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility The case for a smarter approach to global equities - Janus Henderson Investors - Ireland Investor
For individual investors in Ireland

The case for a smarter approach to global equities

Equity markets have evolved, leaving some core global equity allocations less aligned with their original objectives. Matt Bullock, Head of Portfolio Construction & Strategy for EMEA & APAC believes there is a smarter, more efficient way to gain exposure to global equities.

16 Sep 2026
2 minute read

Key takeaways:

  • Equity markets have evolved, leaving some core global equity allocations less aligned with their original objectives. This is being driven by rising market concentration, and a greater need for selectivity and broader diversification.
  • Active versus passive need not be a binary choice. Passive exposure can be an efficient solution in highly researched markets, while active management may be better suited to less efficient areas where company selection can add value.
  • A smarter global equity allocation combines both approaches; passive in efficient markets and deploying active risk where alpha potential is the greatest.

Global equities offer attractive valuations and exposure to powerful secular themes, with real diversification benefits and the potential for long-term growth. Gaining exposure has typically been straightforward for much of the past decade – buy the broad market, with US mega-caps being a large default allocation of the portfolio and allow a handful of exceptional companies to do much of the heavy lifting. The next decision would have been which approach to take: Active or passive?

But thinking in a more pragmatic and practical manner, a more useful question would be: When and where does each approach make the most sense? While a purely passive approach may have worked well, it is based on the assumption that the global equity allocation is naturally diversified and suits every market environment. Some equity markets, for example US large caps, offer exposure to innovative global leaders and are well covered by research analysts, but these highly efficient markets are hard to beat consistently. Others like US small and mid-caps, and some ex-US stocks are less well researched, offering greater stock and sector return dispersion. These markets are more likely to be rewarded by active judgement.

We believe a smarter global equity allocation recognises those market differences and builds portfolios around them. For investors seeking a core global equity allocation that can unlock innovation and new opportunities, combining active and passive may create more ways to win.

These are the views of the author at the time of publication and may differ from the views of other individuals/teams at Janus Henderson Investors. References made to individual securities do not constitute a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, investment strategy or market sector, and should not be assumed to be profitable. Janus Henderson Investors, its affiliated advisor, or its employees, may have a position in the securities mentioned.

 

Past performance does not predict future returns. The value of an investment and the income from it can fall as well as rise and you may not get back the amount originally invested.

 

The information in this article does not qualify as an investment recommendation.

 

There is no guarantee that past trends will continue, or forecasts will be realised.

 

Marketing Communication.

 

Glossary

 

 

 

Important information

Please read the following important information regarding funds related to this article.

The Janus Henderson Horizon Fund (the “Fund”) is a Luxembourg SICAV incorporated on 30 May 1985, managed by Janus Henderson Investors Europe S.A. Janus Henderson Investors Europe S.A. may decide to terminate the marketing arrangements of this Collective Investment Scheme in accordance with the appropriate regulation. This is a marketing communication. Please refer to the prospectus of the UCITS and to the KIID before making any final investment decisions.
    Specific risks
  • Shares can lose value rapidly, and typically involve higher risks than bonds or money market instruments. The value of your investment may fall as a result.
  • Shares of small and mid-size companies can be more volatile than shares of larger companies, and at times it may be difficult to value or to sell shares at desired times and prices, increasing the risk of losses.
  • High exposure to a particular country or geographical region carries a higher level of risk than a more broadly diversified portfolio.
  • Derivatives may be used with the aim of reducing risk or managing the portfolio more efficiently. However, this introduces other risks, in particular, that a derivative counterparty may not meet its contractual obligations.
  • If the Fund holds assets in currencies other than the base currency of the Fund, or you invest in a share/unit class of a different currency to the Fund (unless hedged, i.e. seeks to mitigate exchange rate movements between the share/unit class currency and the base currency of the Fund), the value of your investment may be impacted by changes in exchange rates.
  • When the Fund, or a share/unit class, seeks to mitigate exchange rate movements of a currency relative to the base currency (hedge), the hedging strategy itself may positively or negatively impact the value of the Fund due to differences in short-term interest rates between the currencies.
  • Securities could become hard to value or to sell at a desired time and price, especially in extreme market conditions when asset prices may be falling, increasing the risk of investment losses.
  • The performance of the Fund is not expected to precisely match the performance of the index at all times and the deduction of fees and expenses means the Fund might deliver a lower total return than the index.
  • Losses could be incurred if a counterparty became unwilling or unable to meet its obligations, or as a result of failure or delay in operational processes or the failure of a third party provider.