From the GFC to Trump’s tariffs – what lessons can retirees learn from crises?

Generating returns ahead of inflation is crucial for sustainability of income in retirement. However, it is widely accepted that returns that exceed inflation cannot be achieved without taking risk. A previous article, The importance of growth assets for living annuity investors¹, by Ninety One Advisor Services Director Jaco van Tonder, discusses the need for exposure to risk assets to be able to grow your capital and maintain your income in retirement. This discipline of holding the right proportion of assets to balance risk and return is easy to do when markets are rising; however, it can quickly be forgotten by investors during a crisis when it becomes tempting to move to cash.

Donald Trumps ‘Liberation Day’ wreaked havoc on markets, resulting in equity losses in the trillions and deepening concerns about economic stability. The JSE All-Share Index shed 8.48% in the two days following Trump’s announcement on Wednesday, the 2nd of April, while the rand fell to record lows.

While drawdowns can be severe, inflection points in the market can be equally rapid and pronounced. Uncertainty about the duration of the crisis and concerns over further market declines are likely to cause many investors to consider switching into ‘safer’ assets. However, history has shown us that investors risk permanent loss of capital by switching into cash. This lesson was demonstrated during the GFC but was perhaps even more pronounced during the pandemic. It was not surprising that in such unchartered territory, industry views around the potential shape of the recovery varied, and concerns around another dip were rife. Despite these concerns, the market recovered the vast majority of its losses in approximately 3 months. Those on the sidelines missed out.

What about pensioners? The risk of repeating the mistakes of the past

Retirees in living annuities face an extra challenge during these times. Their requirement for income forces them to make regular withdrawals, even at times when the capital value of their investment has been reduced significantly. Many feel that selling into weakness to fund their monthly annuity will have a negative impact on the sustainability of their income and therefore switch into cash to preserve the value of their nest egg. While this instinct to try and avoid further capital erosion is understandable, in practice this behaviour often has the opposite effect to what was intended. Simply preserving capital is not enough because its value is eroded by inflation over time, and this effect is magnified when an investor also draws an income.

While the causes, magnitude and duration of previous market crises are always different, there are consistent learnings that we can glean from each. So, what lessons could the COVID pandemic of 2020 and the GFC of 2008 teach pensioners in navigating the current environment?

To address this question, we looked at a scenario where a client retired at the beginning of 2007, the year in which the GFC began. The client invested R5 million into a living annuity, drawing a 5% income with the rand value of the income escalating by inflation each year. We then considered five scenarios using the Ninety One Opportunity Fund (the Fund) as the underlying investment:

• The client remained invested in the Fund for the entire period.
• The client switched out of the Fund and into cash, and remained there.
• The client switched out of the Fund into cash and tried to time the market by switching back into the Fund a year later.
• The client held their nerve during the GFC and remained invested in the Fund but during COVID they switched to cash for a year before switching back into the Fund.
• The client held their nerve during the GFC but switched into cash during COVID and remained there.

We matched the rand value of the income drawn in all five scenarios. The outcome of the analysis (as at 31 March 2025) can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Remaining invested delivered the best outcome

Source: Morningstar and Ninety One Investment Platform, performance net of fees, NAV to NAV, gross income re-invested. R5 million invested from 1.01.07 to 31.03.25, 5% income drawn from inception, with a 5% p.a. escalation on the rand value implemented at the anniversary each year. Annualised performance figures, which are the average return per year over the period, used. The rand value of income drawn has been matched in all three scenarios. For scenarios 2 and 3, the switch to cash is assumed to have taken place at the bottom of the market on 1.03.09 and in scenario 2, the client remained in cash for the rest of the illustration. In scenario 3, the switch back to the Fund is assumed to have taken place on 1.03.10 and 01.04.25 respectively. In scenario 4 the switch back into the Fund is assumed to have taken place on 1.04.21. The A class of the Ninety One Opportunity Fund was used in all the scenarios. The investment performance is shown for illustrative purposes only.

The difference in outcome is astounding

1

Scenario one (staying invested), would have resulted in a final portfolio value of nearly R10 million and the last income drawn would equate to 6.04% when expressed as a percentage of capital.

2

Scenario two (permanent switch to cash), would have resulted in an end value of just R1.7 million and the income draw would have breached 17.5% in 2022, meaning that the income produced would no longer be sufficient to meet the investor’s income needs in the future.

3

Scenario three (timing the market), would have meant that the annuitant gave up more than 50% of the portfolio’s capital value than if the choice had been to remain invested. This would have resulted in an end value of only R4.8 million with an income draw of 12.28% of the capital value.

4

Scenario four would have resulted in a value of R8.6m, leaving the client with 13% less capital than if they had remained invested throughout. The final income draw increases to 6.88%.

5

Scenario five resulted in a value of R7.3m (>25% lower than remaining invested) and a dramatic increase in the income draw to 8.2%.

The strategy of remaining invested delivered by far the best outcome for retirees. Importantly, the capital value continued to appreciate but of greater significance is that the percentage income drawn remained within acceptable parameters over the 18-year time horizon (1 January 2007 to 31 March 2025). In the market-timing scenario, the level of income has started to reach a concerning level and the retiree may need to consider making some lifestyle adjustments. In the scenario in which the retiree permanently switches to cash, the percentage income drawn has escalated to a point where the pensioner would need to come up with another plan to fund retirement in their later years².

Scenario three demonstrates that even a temporary switch to cash can be damaging if it causes you to miss the strongest days of a market recovery — significantly increasing the risk of outliving your savings. Periods of market volatility occur more often than we’d like, and scenarios four and five highlight the importance of maintaining discipline through different crises. Investors who stayed the course during the Global Financial Crisis but lost their nerve during the pandemic ultimately paid the price.

Where clients remained invested the strong absolute and relative returns of the Ninety One Opportunity Fund helped deliver this outcome, but the way they have been generated has been equally important.

Dependable returns

The Ninety One Opportunity Fund focuses on producing absolute returns; therefore, downside protection and avoidance of permanent loss of capital is core to the investment philosophy. This is particularly important for investors who are drawing an income³. More stable returns increase the probability that members remain invested through difficult conditions where the drawdown of a more aggressive investment strategy might tempt them to move into cash.

Equity-matching returns at significantly lower risk

Since its inception in 2000, the A class of the Ninety One Opportunity Fund has delivered 13.1% p.a., matching the 13.1% p.a. for equities over the same period (approximately 25 years). Importantly, the annualised returns have been delivered at around half the volatility (annualised standard deviation of equity: 15.5%; Ninety One Opportunity Fund: 8.5%).

Figure 2: Ninety One Opportunity Fund – producing equity-matching returns at half the volatility since inception

Source: Morningstar, NAV to NAV, gross income re-invested, performance net of fees from 02.05.00 to 31.03.25. Equities represented by the FTSE/JSE All Share TR.

While attractive returns over time are important for long-term investors, the volatility of returns also has a material impact on the sustainability of retirees’ income. For living annuity clients in particular, a fund with more dependable returns is far more desirable than a fund with volatile performance.

Ninety One Opportunity Fund – delivering dependability for retirement savings

Finding more dependable returns regardless of market conditions should be the ultimate goal of all investors, whether saving for retirement or drawing an income from those savings. Consistently applying a disciplined investment process helps ensure that outcomes are more predictable. Balancing risk and reward, the Ninety One Opportunity Fund seeks to deliver steady returns to patient investors, even as markets fluctuate.

The one thing that retirees are blessed with is a long investment time horizon. Starting with the correct investment strategy means that the best course of action during periods of volatility is to sit back and do nothing. This is easier said than done, but lessons from past crises indicate that by following this discipline, retirees will be rewarded by improved outcomes over the long term.

Download PDF

¹ The importance of growth assets for living annuity investors.
² The importance of picking a safe income level is discussed in this article.
³ Why volatility matters for living annuity investors.