Why Chasing Past Winners is a Losing Game
I often speak with potential clients who tell me they wish they had purchased Tesla, Apple, Amazon, or Nvidia in the past. It's a common sentiment, fueled by the staggering returns these companies have delivered. This feeling of "what if" is a powerful emotional driver, but it can also be a trap that leads to poor investment decisions.
This desire to have bought past winners is a classic example of hindsight bias. When we examine a stock's chart today, its path to success appears obvious and inevitable. We often forget the high-stakes risks, market volatility, and numerous unknowns that existed at the time. For every Amazon that thrived, there were thousands of dot-com companies that failed spectacularly.
This article explains why focusing on past top performers is a flawed strategy. We'll explore the evidence for why a diversified portfolio is the most reliable path to long-term wealth, and how to avoid the regret that comes with trying to pick the next big winner.
The Illusion of Prediction: Why Chasing Top Stocks Fails
The core problem with chasing the top stocks is that it relies on a faulty premise: the ability to predict the future. While it's easy to look back at the "Magnificent 7" and see a clear upward trajectory, the reality is that their success was far from guaranteed. For decades, investment research has shown that consistently outperforming the market by picking individual stocks is a Herculean task, even for professional managers with vast resources. The vast majority of active funds, whose sole purpose is to beat the market by selecting stocks, fail to do so over the long run.
Reason 1: Market Leadership Is a Constantly Shifting Crown
The list of top-performing companies is not static; it's a dynamic, ever-changing roster. The companies that hold the most weight in an index today will likely be different tomorrow.
S&P Total Market Index – largest holdings and respective weightings 2010 and 2025
- Exxon Mobil(2.6%)
- Apple(2.1%)
- Microsoft(1.5%)
- General Electric(1.4%)
- Chevron(1.3%)
- IBM(1.3%)
- Procter & Gamble(1.3%)
- AT&T(1.2%)
- Johnson & Johnson(1.2%)
- JPMorgan Chase(1.2%)
- Nvidia(7.1%)
- Microsoft(6.5%)
- Apple(5.1%)
- Amazon(3.6%)
- Alphabet(3.3%)
- Meta(2.8%)
- Broadcom(2.3%)
- Berkshire Hathaway(1.4%)
- Tesla(1.4%)
- JPMorgan Chase(1.4%)
Consider the S&P Total Market Index, which tracks around 3,900 US companies of all sizes. Today, the "Magnificent 7" (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, and Nvidia) hold immense sway. Their dominance in the news and their massive market caps can make it feel like they have always been, and will always be, at the top.
But if we rewind to the end of 2010, the picture was dramatically different. At that time, companies like Exxon Mobil, General Electric, and Chevron were among the top 10 largest holdings in the index. Of today’s Magnificent 7, only Apple and Microsoft were in the top 10. The landscape of market leadership had shifted profoundly.
This underscores a fundamental truth about financial markets: disruption is the norm. Industries rise and fall, companies are born and die, and innovation constantly reshapes the economy. By concentrating your investments in a few of today’s leaders, you are making a bold, and often misplaced, bet that they will maintain their dominance indefinitely. A diversified approach, however, helps you capitalise on the entire market, positioning you to benefit from whichever companies or sectors rise to prominence next.
Reason 2: A Diversified Fund Captures Tomorrow’s Winners for You
If picking the next market leader is a fool's errand, how can you ensure your portfolio benefits from the next "Nvidia"? The answer is simple: you don't pick them; you own them all. This is the power of a diversified index fund. Rather than concentrating on a handful of stocks, these funds invest in hundreds, if not thousands, of companies across a wide range of industries and sizes. They don’t try to predict the future; they simply own a slice of the entire market.
Take the example of Nvidia. When it debuted in 1999, it was a tiny player with a market capitalisation of about $600 million. Few could have foreseen its future as the cornerstone of the AI revolution. If you had an index fund that held all the companies in the market, you would have owned Nvidia from the very beginning. As it grew, its weighting in your fund would have grown along with it. You didn’t need to guess its future; the fund did the work for you. This passive, diversified strategy is the opposite of an active, concentrated one. It’s an admission that you can't predict the future, but it's also a powerful affirmation that you don't need to. You don't have to find the needle in the haystack. As the famous investor Jack Bogle once said, "Don't look for the needle in the haystack. Just buy the haystack."
Reason 3: Diversification Softens Downturns and Reduces Risk
Perhaps the most important benefit of diversification is its ability to manage risk. While investing in a narrow theme or a few top stocks can sometimes bring impressive short-term gains, it also exposes you to significant risk if those companies or that sector hit a rough patch. If one company in your portfolio falls, your entire portfolio suffers, often dramatically. A diversified fund, on the other hand, spreads your investments across many companies, helping to cushion the impact when one sector or company experiences a sharp decline. An index fund doesn't eliminate risk entirely—its value can still go down—but it helps you weather downturns more smoothly. The data supports this: when you compare the dramatic dips of individual stocks to the broader index, the diversified fund almost always experiences a much gentler decline. This smoothing effect can be crucial for an investor's long-term success. It helps prevent emotional, panic-driven decisions—like selling at the bottom of a crash—which are often the biggest destroyers of wealth.
The Problem with Active Management
The evidence in favour of diversification over active management is overwhelming. A recent study by S&P Global found that over a 15-year period, more than 92% of large-cap US stock mutual funds underperformed the S&P 500 Index. Over a 20-year period, that number rises to more than 95%. These are not isolated findings; numerous studies confirm the same conclusion.
Why do so many active managers fail to beat the market?
High Fees: Active funds charge higher fees to pay for the salaries of their managers, analysts, and researchers. These fees eat into returns, making it harder to outperform a low-cost index fund.
Behavioural Biases: Even professional managers are susceptible to the same behavioural biases as individual investors, such as herd mentality, overconfidence, and recency bias.
The Zero-Sum Game: Before costs, the market is a zero-sum game. For every investor who outperforms the market, another must underperform by an equal amount. After fees and expenses, the average active investor, by definition, must underperform the market.
This is why, instead of trying to find a manager who can consistently beat the market, it is far more sensible to own the market itself through a diversified, low-cost index fund.
The Takeaway
Chasing the top-performing stocks may seem exciting, but history and evidence show it's a high-risk, low-probability strategy. Market leaders change, individual stock performance is unpredictable, and concentrating your investments exposes you to unnecessary risk. A diversified portfolio, particularly through a diversified index fund, is a more reliable and proven path to long-term financial success. It allows you to capture tomorrow's winners without needing to predict them, provides a smoother investment journey by reducing volatility, and puts the power of compound returns firmly on your side.
If your financial adviser is still recommending active funds and focusing on manager performance, then speak to me today. I will present the evidence to demonstrate why a diversified, evidence-based approach to investing is a more reliable path to long-term success.
Disclaimer: This article is produced by Ralph Woodcock and is not financial advice. This information is intended for non-UK residents only.
Want to know if and how we can help you? Get in touch!
By completing this form you are giving consent for us to use your data to contact you directly about the services we can provide. Your data will be kept securely and won’t be passed on to any third parties. After the initial contact is made, if you do not become a client, this data will be destroyed. You can read more about this here.