James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Uniform Acts, Modern Portfolio Theory, and An Unintended Consequence
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: August 8, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
Trustees had been governed by the Reasonable Man standard for investing trust assets that were designed to preserve principal and avoid risk. Then, Modern Portfolio Theory came into prominence and the Reasonable Man rule fell into disfavor. Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), supported by the work of Nobel Laureates, became the prevailing theory. In the most simple of terms, MPT requires diversification by allocating capital among asset classes or sectors so as to minimize risk.
The Uniform Prudent Investor Act (UPIA) incorporates MPT that requires trustees to diversify investment portfolios. Diversification is achieved through statistical methods that are designed to minimize investment risk, through the selection of securities that respond differently to market changes. MPT notes that some stocks react, up or down, in lockstep with the market index. Defensive stocks, such as utilities, do not decline as rapidly in bad markets and do not rise as rapidly as the market in good times as the index. A diversified mix of stocks among unrelated sectors minimizes the overall risk of loss to the trust assets. MPT believes that risk can be minimized for any targeted level of returns.
The rule of UPIA can be overridden by the Trustee. A Grantor may leave a closely-held business in a trust and therefore must allow for the holding of a concentrated position by the trust. Not every successful investor uses MPT. Warren Buffet distains MPT and at one time had one-third of his portfolio in the stock of Coca Cola.
The Uniform Trust Code (UTC) is a comprehensive statute designed to improve state trust law. UTC Section 404 demands the trust “benefit the beneficiaries,” a rule that can cause conflict with a Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee. Imagine a trustee, bound by the instructions of the Grantor who waived the application of MPT as permitted by UPIA, and now faces a challenge based upon the UTC. The problem is that the UTC gives beneficiaries a reasonable basis to mount a challenge that will overturn the Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee. The beneficiaries may claim that the trust, as administered, does not meet their needs, disregarding what is written in the trust instrument. The beneficiaries may also claim the Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee represents control from the grave that prevents the trust from adapting to current circumstances and being administered for their benefit. Not every potential conflict is be resolved by uniform legislation.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Uniform Acts, Modern Portfolio Theory, and An Unintended Consequence
Author: James F. McDonough
Trustees had been governed by the Reasonable Man standard for investing trust assets that were designed to preserve principal and avoid risk. Then, Modern Portfolio Theory came into prominence and the Reasonable Man rule fell into disfavor. Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), supported by the work of Nobel Laureates, became the prevailing theory. In the most simple of terms, MPT requires diversification by allocating capital among asset classes or sectors so as to minimize risk.
The Uniform Prudent Investor Act (UPIA) incorporates MPT that requires trustees to diversify investment portfolios. Diversification is achieved through statistical methods that are designed to minimize investment risk, through the selection of securities that respond differently to market changes. MPT notes that some stocks react, up or down, in lockstep with the market index. Defensive stocks, such as utilities, do not decline as rapidly in bad markets and do not rise as rapidly as the market in good times as the index. A diversified mix of stocks among unrelated sectors minimizes the overall risk of loss to the trust assets. MPT believes that risk can be minimized for any targeted level of returns.
The rule of UPIA can be overridden by the Trustee. A Grantor may leave a closely-held business in a trust and therefore must allow for the holding of a concentrated position by the trust. Not every successful investor uses MPT. Warren Buffet distains MPT and at one time had one-third of his portfolio in the stock of Coca Cola.
The Uniform Trust Code (UTC) is a comprehensive statute designed to improve state trust law. UTC Section 404 demands the trust “benefit the beneficiaries,” a rule that can cause conflict with a Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee. Imagine a trustee, bound by the instructions of the Grantor who waived the application of MPT as permitted by UPIA, and now faces a challenge based upon the UTC. The problem is that the UTC gives beneficiaries a reasonable basis to mount a challenge that will overturn the Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee. The beneficiaries may claim that the trust, as administered, does not meet their needs, disregarding what is written in the trust instrument. The beneficiaries may also claim the Grantor’s instructions to the Trustee represents control from the grave that prevents the trust from adapting to current circumstances and being administered for their benefit. Not every potential conflict is be resolved by uniform legislation.