Overview
Rebalancing is the practice of restoring a portfolio to its target asset allocation by buying and selling assets. Two practical rules dominate implementation: calendar rebalancing (rebalance on predetermined dates) and threshold rebalancing (rebalance when allocations move beyond tolerance bands). Both aim to control risk and maintain a disciplined strategy, but they differ in costs, tax effects, and how closely they track the original allocation.
In my 15+ years as a financial educator, I’ve observed that the optimal choice depends on three things: account type (taxable vs. tax-advantaged), portfolio size and trading costs, and the investor’s behavioral tolerance for drift and complexity. Below I show how each rule works, tradeoffs, tax considerations, implementation tips, and a simple decision framework to choose between them.
How each rule works
- Calendar rebalancing: you rebalance at fixed intervals — monthly, quarterly, semiannually, or annually. Example: rebalance every December 31 regardless of how much an asset class has drifted.
- Threshold rebalancing (band or tolerance rebalancing): you monitor allocations and only rebalance when an asset class moves beyond a pre-set band (for instance, ±5% around the target allocation). For example, a 60/40 target with a 5% band means you rebalance if stocks rise above 65% or fall below 55%.
Both methods can be combined (e.g., check allocations quarterly but only trade if thresholds are breached). That hybrid approach reduces monitoring while limiting extreme drift.
Concrete examples with numbers
Assume a $500,000 portfolio with a 60% stock / 40% bond target. Stocks outperform and the allocation drifts to 68/32.
-
Calendar annual rebalance: if you only rebalance each year and you hit your annual date after the drift, you sell enough stocks and buy bonds to return to 60/40. If drift occurs between rebalances, you accept the interim deviation.
-
Threshold (±5% band): with a 5% threshold, the upper stock limit is 65%. At 68% you already breached the band and would have rebalanced at the breach, reducing the time the portfolio carried the higher equity risk.
Practical takeaway: threshold rules act as a risk-control “guardrail” while calendar rules provide predictable, low-friction discipline.
Pros and cons (practical lens)
Calendar rebalancing
- Pros: simple to implement, predictable, easy to automate and document in an Investment Policy Statement (IPS).
- Cons: can allow larger drift between dates, may force trades that are unnecessary if markets are flat, and may miss opportunities when selling a winner shortly after a big rally.
Threshold rebalancing
- Pros: responsive to market moves, reduces prolonged drift, potentially better risk control during volatile periods, and may avoid unnecessary trades when markets stay within bands.
- Cons: requires ongoing monitoring, can produce more frequent trades (higher commissions or spreads), and increases tax-event risk in taxable accounts.
Tax and cost considerations (account-type first)
-
Taxable accounts: selling winners to rebalance creates capital gains. Threshold rebalancing often produces more turnover, so it can trigger more realized gains and higher taxes. IRS guidance on capital gains and rules (including how long positions must be held for long-term vs. short-term treatment) is essential to review (see IRS capital gains topics).
-
Tax-advantaged accounts (IRAs, 401(k)s): taxes are not a direct rebalancing cost, so threshold rebalancing is easier to justify. Use tax-advantaged space to absorb turnover.
-
Transaction costs: assess commissions, bid-ask spreads, and potential market impact for large portfolios. Many brokers now offer commission-free trades, but spreads and market impact remain. For small portfolios, transaction costs can outweigh any marginal benefit from active threshold-triggered trades.
-
Wash-sale and tax-loss harvesting interactions: aggressive rebalancing that includes realizing losses should consider the IRS wash-sale rule (which disallows a loss if you buy a substantially identical security within 30 days) and coordinate with tax-loss harvesting strategies (see FINHELP’s guidance on Tax-Loss Harvesting Strategies). Refer to IRS rules on wash sales for specifics (IRS guidance).
Expected turnover and a back-of-envelope cost model
Turnover approximates how many dollars are traded each year to maintain allocation. Rough rule-of-thumb:
- Annual calendar rebalancing typically produces 1 full rebalance per year — turnover ≈ half the absolute drift at rebalance times portfolio value for the affected assets.
- Threshold rebalancing with ±5% bands may trigger 1–3 rebalances per year depending on volatility; bands of ±10% will trigger less frequently.
Example cost estimate (conservative): if threshold triggers 2 rebalances per year on a $500k portfolio and average trading costs + market impact = 0.10% per trade, extra cost ≈ $1,000/year. Compare that with potential reductions in risk exposure and the investor’s tolerance for variance.
Behavioral and practical implementation tips
-
Use account layering: rebalance taxable accounts less frequently and prefer internal transfer/asset location changes (move bonds into tax-deferred accounts, equities into taxable) rather than selling winners in taxable accounts. See FINHELP’s piece on Building a Tax-Efficient Asset Allocation.
-
Leverage cash flows: use new contributions or withdrawals to bring allocations back toward targets before selling assets.
-
Partial rebalancing: instead of full rebalancing to target, reallocate a portion (e.g., move halfway back to target). This reduces trading and taxes while nudging risk toward the plan.
-
Hybrid rules: check allocations quarterly (calendar) and only trade when bands are breached (threshold). This balances monitoring cost and responsiveness.
-
Automate where possible: robo-advisors and many broker platforms can implement band or calendar rebalancing automatically for low friction.
Who benefits from each approach
-
Calendar rebalancing: investors who prefer simplicity, have high transaction costs relative to portfolio size, or want a predictable routine. It’s also appropriate where taxable considerations dominate — typically older investors in retirement accounts and small taxable portfolios.
-
Threshold rebalancing: investors with larger portfolios, significant exposure to volatile assets, frequent cash flows, or those who want tighter risk control. Works well inside tax-advantaged accounts or when taxes are managed via offsetting losses.
Decision framework: five questions to choose a rule
- Is the account taxable or tax-advantaged? Favor threshold in tax-advantaged space; favor calendar or hybrid in taxable accounts.
- What are trading costs and portfolio size? Below a certain size (commonly <$100k), keep it simple with calendar annual or semiannual.
- How volatile are your assets? Higher volatility argues for narrower bands or more frequent calendar checks.
- How disciplined are you? If you won’t monitor bands, pick calendar with automation.
- Do you use tax-loss harvesting or have offsetting losses? If yes, you can afford more threshold-triggered trades in taxable accounts.
Sample rebalancing policies
- Conservative IPS example (retiree, taxable mix): annual calendar rebalance every December + use cash flows for minor drift.
- Growth IPS example (high-net-worth, tax-advantaged focus): quarterly monitoring with ±4% bands inside retirement accounts; use partial rebalances to limit turnovers.
- Hybrid small-investor example: quarterly check, rebalance only if assets drift >7% and use new contributions to correct smaller deviations.
Common pitfalls to avoid
- Rebalancing without an IPS: define targets, bands, and tax rules in writing.
- Ignoring taxes: high turnover in taxable accounts can erode returns.
- Overreacting to short-term noise: bands that are too tight force excess trading.
Where to learn more and authoritative resources
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — investing basics and asset allocation (consumerfinance.gov).
- IRS — capital gains, wash-sale rules, and related tax topics for selling investments (irs.gov).
- For practical explanations and calculators, see industry resources like Investopedia and provider guides.
Professional takeaway
There is no universally “best” rule. Calendar rebalancing wins on simplicity and predictability; threshold rebalancing wins on responsiveness and tighter risk control. In my practice, a hybrid approach — periodic monitoring combined with sensible tolerance bands and account-aware tax rules — produces the best balance between cost, tax efficiency, and behavioral adherence.
This article is educational and not individualized financial advice. For a rebalancing plan tailored to your situation, consult a licensed financial planner or tax professional.
Further reading on FINHELP: see our glossary entries on Rebalancing, Portfolio Rebalancing, and Tax-Loss Harvesting Strategies.
Sources: IRS capital gains and wash sale guidance (IRS), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — investing basics and asset allocation guidance (CFPB), and industry primers on rebalancing (e.g., Investopedia).
