1

Is there a theory about what typically happens to some markets when a country goes to war? If yes, should a passive portfolio be rebalanced accordingly? For example industrial metals.

closed as off-topic by Dilip Sarwate, Victor, Dheer, MD-Tech, Nathan L Sep 19 '16 at 16:23

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions on economics are off-topic unless they relate directly to personal finance." – Dilip Sarwate, Victor, MD-Tech, Nathan L
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    You can invest in military suppliers... Whether you should is something you have to decide for yourself. – keshlam Sep 18 '16 at 20:35
  • Best to invest in companies that don't have their assets physically within an enemy country. Oh, and try and guess which ones wont have their assets bombed to oblivion. – Dale M Sep 19 '16 at 5:07
5

At a risk of stating the obvious: a passive portfolio doesn't try to speculate on such matters.

  • 1
    That's what I was also thinking, but historically it sometimes takes decade(s) to recover, which is within the resolution of passive investing, – Sparkler Sep 19 '16 at 2:36
1

Normally, in a war everybody suffers and the entire economy goes down. Military contractors do better than average, but the average sucks. The way to take advantage of knowing a war is coming is to leave as soon as possible.

There are strategic materials that can become valuable in a war, but such investments are generally very specialized and not something an ordinary investor would be in a position to exploit.

The most profitable businesses in war are food, oil, and ammunition.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .