Skip to main content
diversification.com
← Back to E Definitions

Equal weighted indexing

What Is Equal Weighted Indexing?

Equal weighted indexing is a method of constructing an investment portfolio or an investment index fund where each constituent security is allocated an identical weight, regardless of its market capitalization or other financial metrics. This approach falls under portfolio theory, offering a distinct strategy compared to traditional weighting schemes. In an equal weighted index, every company, from the largest to the smallest, contributes equally to the index's performance. This method inherently promotes greater diversification by reducing the influence of large, dominant companies and increasing exposure to smaller, less influential ones. This contrasts sharply with market capitalization-weighted indexes, where larger companies naturally command a greater proportion of the index.

History and Origin

The concept of equal weighting in portfolios has existed for a long time in academic discussions, but its practical application in publicly traded investment products gained significant traction in the early 21st century. A notable moment in the history of equal weighted indexing was the launch of the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) in 2003. This Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) provided investors with an accessible way to gain exposure to an equal-weighted version of the widely followed S&P 500 Index. The emergence of such products marked a shift in passive investing, offering an alternative to the prevailing market capitalization-weighted benchmarks16. Over time, interest in equal-weight strategies has surged, particularly when investors express concerns about significant market concentration risk in traditional indexes15.

Key Takeaways

  • Equal weighted indexing assigns the same weight to every stock in an index or portfolio, promoting broader diversification.
  • It contrasts with market capitalization-weighted indexes, which allocate more weight to larger companies.
  • Equal weighted indexes typically require more frequent rebalancing to maintain equal proportions, which can lead to higher transaction costs.
  • Historically, equal-weight strategies have shown periods of outperformance compared to market capitalization-weighted indexes, particularly when small-cap stocks and mid-cap stocks perform well14.
  • The approach implicitly offers a value investing tilt by periodically trimming positions in outperforming stocks and adding to underperforming ones.

Formula and Calculation

The calculation for an equal weighted index is straightforward. Each security in the index is assigned an equal percentage weight of the total portfolio value. If an index contains (N) number of securities, the weight ((W_i)) for each security ((i)) is calculated as:

Wi=1NW_i = \frac{1}{N}

For example, if an index has 100 constituent stocks, each stock would represent ( \frac{1}{100} = 0.01 ) or 1% of the index's total value at the time of rebalancing. As market prices fluctuate, the weights of individual stocks will deviate from their equal allocation. To maintain the equal-weight characteristic, the index must undergo periodic rebalancing. During rebalancing, shares of stocks that have increased in value (and thus now represent a larger portion of the index) are sold, and shares of stocks that have decreased in value (and now represent a smaller portion) are purchased to restore each security to its ( \frac{1}{N} ) target weight. This disciplined approach of "selling high and buying low" is an inherent feature of equal weighted indexing.

Interpreting the Equal Weighted Indexing

Interpreting equal weighted indexing involves understanding its inherent biases and how it diverges from common market benchmarks. Unlike a market capitalization-weighted index, an equal weighted index does not naturally concentrate capital in the largest or most successful companies. Instead, it provides a broader, more even exposure across all companies within its universe. This structure means that the performance of an equal weighted index is less dependent on the performance of a few mega-large-cap stocks.

Consequently, an equal weighted index typically exhibits a smaller average market capitalization compared to its market-cap-weighted counterpart. This can lead to different return and volatility characteristics. Periods where smaller or value investing-oriented companies outperform tend to favor equal-weighted strategies, while periods dominated by mega-cap growth stocks may see them lag13.

Hypothetical Example

Consider a hypothetical equal weighted index composed of three stocks: Company A, Company B, and Company C.

Initially, at the beginning of the quarter, the index has a total value of $300,000.

  • Company A: Value = $100,000 (Weight = 33.33%)
  • Company B: Value = $100,000 (Weight = 33.33%)
  • Company C: Value = $100,000 (Weight = 33.33%)

Over the quarter, the stock prices change:

  • Company A's value increases to $120,000
  • Company B's value remains $100,000
  • Company C's value decreases to $80,000

At the end of the quarter, before rebalancing, the total index value is $300,000 ($120,000 + $100,000 + $80,000). The current weights are:

  • Company A: ( \frac{$120,000}{$300,000} = 40% )
  • Company B: ( \frac{$100,000}{$300,000} = 33.33% )
  • Company C: ( \frac{$80,000}{$300,000} = 26.67% )

To restore the equal weighting, the index would rebalancing at the start of the next period. Shares of Company A would be sold to reduce its weight back to 33.33%, while shares of Company C would be purchased to increase its weight back to 33.33%. This process of selling parts of the winners and buying more of the losers is a key characteristic of equal weighted indexing, contributing to a "buy low, sell high" dynamic over time. This approach aims to capture returns from the broader market rather than being heavily influenced by a few top performers within the investment portfolio.

Practical Applications

Equal weighted indexing finds practical applications primarily in the realm of Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) and mutual fund products. Investors utilize equal-weighted ETFs to achieve broader market exposure and mitigate concentration risk that can arise in traditional market capitalization-weighted indexes. For instance, the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) provides investors with exposure to the 500 companies of the S&P 500, with each stock initially holding an equal weight12.

This strategy is particularly appealing during periods when a few dominant large-cap stocks disproportionately drive overall market returns, as it ensures that the performance of the entire index is not overly reliant on these concentrated positions11. The periodic rebalancing inherent in equal weighted indexing also forces a contrarian discipline, effectively selling portions of stocks that have appreciated and buying more of those that have lagged. This can lead to different sector exposures compared to market-cap-weighted benchmarks; for example, equal-weight S&P 500 indexes often have higher allocations to sectors like Industrials and Utilities and lower allocations to Information Technology compared to their market-cap counterparts10.

Limitations and Criticisms

Despite its potential benefits, equal weighted indexing is not without limitations and criticisms. One primary concern is the higher turnover associated with frequent rebalancing. To maintain equal weights, portfolios must consistently sell appreciated assets and buy depreciated ones, which can lead to increased transaction costs and potentially higher tax implications for investors in taxable accounts9. This higher turnover can also negatively impact net performance, especially for larger asset bases8.

Another limitation is its inherent bias towards small-cap stocks and mid-cap stocks within a given index. By giving smaller companies the same weight as larger ones, an equal weighted index effectively overweights smaller companies relative to their actual market size. While this can be a source of potential outperformance during certain market cycles, it also means these indexes may be more susceptible to the volatility typically associated with smaller companies7. Critics from firms like Research Affiliates argue that while equal weight offers broad market exposure and can mitigate concentration risks, its design flaws, such as higher volatility compared to fundamentally-weighted strategies, limit its full potential6.

Equal Weighted Indexing vs. Market Capitalization Weighted Indexing

The fundamental difference between equal weighted indexing and market capitalization weighted indexing lies in how constituent securities are proportioned within an index fund or investment portfolio.

In equal weighted indexing, every security receives the same allocation. For example, if an index has 500 stocks, each stock would represent 0.2% of the index's value. This approach implicitly "buys low and sells high" through periodic rebalancing, as it trims positions in outperforming stocks and adds to underperforming ones to restore equal weights. This can lead to a slight value investing tilt and greater exposure to small-cap stocks and mid-cap stocks5. Its benefit lies in reducing concentration risk and potentially capturing a "size premium" over the long term.

Conversely, market capitalization weighted indexing allocates weight to each security based on its total market value (share price multiplied by shares outstanding). This means that companies with larger market capitalizations have a greater impact on the index's performance. The S&P 500, for example, is a market capitalization-weighted index, where a few mega-large-cap stocks can account for a significant portion of the index's total value4. This method is often seen as reflecting the collective wisdom of the market regarding company size and value. However, it can lead to higher concentration risk and a "momentum" bias, where the index becomes increasingly weighted towards companies that have already seen significant price appreciation3.

The choice between the two often comes down to an investor's philosophy regarding market efficiency, desired diversification level, and tolerance for higher trading costs associated with equal weighting.

FAQs

What is the main advantage of equal weighted indexing?

The primary advantage of equal weighted indexing is that it provides a more diversified exposure across all companies within an index by reducing the dominance of larger companies. This can help mitigate concentration risk and potentially offer a different return stream than traditional market capitalization-weighted indexes.

Why do equal weighted indexes rebalance more often?

Equal weighted indexes must rebalancing regularly to maintain their target equal allocations. As stock prices fluctuate, the weights of individual companies naturally drift. To restore each company to its equal proportion, the index manager must buy shares of underperforming stocks and sell shares of outperforming ones, leading to higher portfolio turnover.

Do equal weighted indexes always outperform market cap-weighted indexes?

No, equal weighted indexes do not always outperform market capitalization-weighted indexes. While historical data suggests they can deliver stronger long-term returns, particularly when small-cap stocks and mid-cap stocks are performing well, they can underperform during periods dominated by mega-large-cap stocks or during flight-to-quality events. Performance can vary significantly depending on market cycles and sector trends1, 2.

Is equal weighted indexing considered a type of smart beta?

Yes, equal weighted indexing is often categorized as a form of smart beta. Smart beta strategies aim to improve risk-adjusted returns or increase diversification by systematically breaking the link between the price of an asset and its weight in a portfolio. Equal weighting achieves this by assigning weights based on a simple rule rather than market capitalization.