Are sector funds worth the hype? Not for most investors
Rising geopolitical tensions—from Indo-Pak border strains to Trump-era tariff shocks—are prompting investors to rethink where to park their money. As global uncertainty deepens, the spotlight is shifting away from sectors like IT and pharma and turning toward manufacturing and capital-expenditure-led industries, especially in India.
Investing in popular sectors or themes with the hope of beating the market can sound like a smart strategy. But in reality, consistently outperforming a diversified portfolio through active sector or thematic bets is as difficult as timing the market—often with results no better than a coin toss.
The challenges of picking winners
Sectors can appear attractive due to a mix of factors: regulatory changes, new product launches, global trade shifts, interest rate movements, government policies, or temporary commodity and currency disruptions. But understanding how these macroeconomic forces interact—while also evaluating company-specific aspects like leadership and execution—is no easy task, especially for retail investors.
As a result, most retail investors tend to make sectoral or thematic investment decisions based on two things: recent market performance of the sector, or media hype fuelled by product launches or industry narratives.
Also read: How red tape is costing public sector bank employees crores in NPS savings
Boom, bust, repeat
The stock market is forward-looking—it often prices in expectations long before actual results show up. This creates a cycle of booms and busts across sectors:
IT stocks soared between 1997–1999 (NSE IT Index: +173%, +193%, +493%), only to crash in the following three years (-35%, -36%, -6% from 2000–2002).
Pharma had a strong run from 2012 to 2015 (+32%, +26%, +42%, +10%) and then posted four straight years of negative returns (-14%, -7%, -8%, -9%).
Infrastructure, real estate, power, and NBFCs saw massive gains before events like the Global Financial Crisis or IL&FS collapse triggered steep declines.
Chemical stocks surged in 2020 and 2021 (+46% and +69%) but have since delivered lukewarm single-digit returns.
Even if an investor correctly identifies a sector on the rise, they still need to exit before the tide turns. That means getting both the entry and the exit right—a double challenge. Statistically, if the odds of one correct decision are 50%, the chances of nailing both fall to just 25%.
The limits of sectoral funds
One of the key limitations of sectoral investing is the narrow mandate that many of these funds operate under. Since sectoral funds are bound to invest only within a specific sector—say, IT or pharma—fund managers have little flexibility.
They are often forced to include nearly all companies in that sector, regardless of quality. This reduces the manager's ability to generate alpha through stock selection. As a result, the fund's performance is almost entirely driven by how the overall sector performs, not by active fund management.
Also read: Are sector rotation funds the answer to risks of sector downturns?
A smarter approach for retail investors
A more robust strategy, particularly for retail investors, lies in diversified portfolios managed by professionals who can actively adjust sector weights as market conditions evolve.
For conservative or first-time investors, it is advisable to start with broad-based investment options such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs), index funds, or diversified equity mutual funds that automatically spread risk across sectors and market caps.
Aggressive or more experienced investors can consider a core-satellite strategy—where 75% or more of the equity allocation is invested in diversified funds (like flexi-cap or multi-cap funds), and the remaining 25% is deployed tactically in sectoral or thematic funds based on strong, well-researched convictions.
Even here, thematic funds may be safer than pure sectoral funds, as they cut across industries. For instance, a 'capex" fund might include exposure to cement, utilities, auto, power, and real estate—providing broader diversification while still capturing a specific investment theme.
Be careful with sector-specific funds. It's hard for individual investors to consistently pick winning sectors better than professional fund managers. You might end up disappointed.
Instead, it's often smarter to let professional fund managers make these active choices within a diversified fund. This gives you much better chances of success.
Also read: Why balanced advantage funds are back in focus for moderate risk investors
Nishant Agarwal, senior managing partner, ASK Private Wealth.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
34 minutes ago
- India Today
He wants to speak to me: Donald Trump on plans to speak to Musk on phone
US President Donald Trump has said he has no immediate plans to speak with tech mogul Elon Musk, amid their escalating feud over the Republican-backed tax and spending bill. However, Trump also hinted he was open to a conversation, telling reporters, "If I were him, I would want to speak to me".Asked whether a phone call with the Tesla and SpaceX chief was on the horizon, Trump responded, "Umm I haven't really thought about it actually. I would imagine he wants to speak to me. Maybe he's already called. You'd have to ask him. Ask him if he's already called. But I'd have no problems with it".advertisementThe latest comments come after a dramatic fallout between Trump and Musk, once considered allies, following Musk's vocal opposition to a Republican tax-cut package championed by the White House. Though Musk hasn't directly addressed Trump in recent days, he has continued to slam the legislation, which included key components of Trump's domestic economic agenda. The rift became public last week when Musk, who had informally advised Trump during his first term, criticised what the president called the "Big, Beautiful Bill". Trump had initially remained silent, but later told reporters aboard Air Force One that he was "very disappointed" in the billionaire a sharp escalation, Musk declared that Trump would have lost the last election without his backing and even floated the idea of impeachment. The tech mogul, who reportedly spent nearly USD 300 million on Trump's 2024 presidential campaign, had previously vowed to reduce his political donations and called for the ouster of lawmakers who "betrayed the American people".advertisementIn response, Trump suggested his administration could sever government ties with Musk's companies, including lucrative contracts involving SpaceX and its satellite internet wing, the height of the standoff, Musk even threatened to withdraw SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft from NASA missions to the International Space Station, a move that would jeopardize the US space program. He later walked back the strained relationship threatens to ripple through Republican circles ahead of the crucial midterm elections next year. With Musk hinting at pulling financial support and other Silicon Valley donors watching closely, the Republicans risk losing a critical source of influence and InMust Watch
Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
View: Apple's India plans have two new threats: Trump and China's Xi
By Mihir Sharma Apple Inc. and its main manufacturing contractor Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. are still betting on India. When Hon Hai — better known as Foxconn — revealed through an exchange filing last week that it was putting another $1.5 billion into its operations there, it will have calmed a few nerves in New Delhi. Worries about the future of Apple in the country had been set off by President Donald Trump , who said last month that he had told the company's Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook that 'I don't want you building in India.' This seemed to contradict hopes, shared by both Cupertino and New Delhi, that most iPhones for the US market would come from India by the end of 2026. But on the ground, Apple's turn to the South Asian nation seems well-entrenched. Reports have emerged of a new Foxconn campus meant to house 30,000 employees — the largest such effort in India's recent history — and that another contract manufacturer, Tata Electronics , is now assembling the iPhone 16 in its South Indian plant. Yet CEOs and politicians may have begun to realize that the difficulties involved in shifting — or duplicating — an entire manufacturing ecosystem extend beyond placating Trump. This is a complex environment, and there are severe obstacles to moving it out of China. US politics is only one, though perhaps the loudest. Admittedly, Apple has had a lot of success in India already. That's why even Trump's talking about it. In just the last year, the value of its products manufactured there has jumped 60%, to $22 billion. Over $17 billion is exported; thanks to Apple, India's $38 billion of electronics exports now earn more than even its world-famous pharmaceutical sector. No other investment has produced anything near this scale of return. In fact, it may be the only success of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's pivot to industrial policy in the middle of his decade in power. This rare win happened because Apple and its suppliers were committed to moving production into India, and because both federal and state governments rewrote regulations and permissions to help them make the move. Politicians kept up this support, even when there might be a price to pay. After a border clash between China and India in 2020 that killed 20 of its soldiers, Indian officials restricted investment from Beijing. Those restrictions have slowly softened since then, primarily to ensure that Apple's contractors didn't get caught up in red tape. That experience should have served as a reminder to New Delhi that attracting an entire ecosystem needs three sets of players to cooperate: the companies, the destination market for their products, and the source geography. Apple and Foxconn might be on board; Trump and his tariffs might be managed — but what of China? A recent book by the former Financial Times journalist Patrick McGee argues that Apple in China, and Foxconn in particular, grew because American investors and engineers helped. That's no surprise. Any industrial power trains its competitors and successors. That's what Great Britain did for America centuries ago. The financiers, engineers and suppliers that make up an existing manufacturing ecosystem need to be willing and able to cooperate in creating a new one. They are generally well rewarded for it. Apple's contract manufacturers and component suppliers, large and small, in China might be willing to set up shop in India — after all, profits are profits wherever they are earned. Some of their engineers might be happy to move to supervise new shop floors. But, it turns out, Beijing might not permit that to happen. Many crucial, experienced employees have found themselves forbidden to travel to India and Southeast Asia. Apple and New Delhi have both tried to woo Trump, and make him accept the possibility that iPhones destined for the US will be made in India. But it appears that they may need to woo President Xi Jinping as well. Objectively, India's Apple-led mobile phone ecosystem is nowhere near challenging China's manufacturing dominance. China is, after all, the indispensable country not just for Apple, but for multiple companies struggling to shift production to India, Vietnam and elsewhere. But Beijing now appears to view Apple's India project as a risk — dangerous enough that a few barriers should be erected in its path. Trump, Apple, New Delhi, and Beijing appear agreed on Indian manufacturing's potential over the next few years, whatever the rest of us might think.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Rush to beat tariffs boosted India's FY25 exports to the US. Can the momentum last?
India's exports to the US jumped at the start of 2025, as tariff threats and global uncertainty prompted a frontloading of trade. But the coming months may test the resilience of this momentum amid a turbulent global trade reset. In the January–March (Q4) quarter, the surge in shipments helped FY25 end with an 11.8% rise in US-bound exports—even as India's overall exports barely grew. The US remained India's largest trading partner for the fourth straight year, with its share in India's exports rising to 20% in 2025, from about 10% in 2010. Over the past 15 years, trade between the two nations has grown steadily. In each of the three five-year periods since 2010, the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of exports to the US has outpaced that to the rest of the world. Read this | Trump tariffs: Here's how Indian exporters of apparel, drugs and tyres are preparing for all contingencies But FY26 could bring new headwinds: a potential US slowdown, policy flip-flops on tariffs, and a generally bleak global trade outlook. In this uncertain environment, a trade deal with the US could be India's best bet to cushion the blow and preserve gains. The US has tied its tariff regime to bilateral trade deficits, though these hikes are currently paused until 9 July, with only a 10% baseline rate in effect. For India, two issues loom large in the negotiations: its sizable goods trade surplus with the US and the relatively high tariffs it imposes on US imports. Tariff tremors Since January, Trump's renewed tariff threats have kept global trade on edge. While China rerouted some of its trade to Asean nations, India seized the moment to frontload exports, underscored by Apple reportedly airlifting 600 tonnes of iPhones from India to beat tariff deadlines. Read this | As US court declares Trump's tariffs illegal, experts urge India to reassess trade talks The data now confirms this frontloading: Indian exports to the US surged nearly 28% in the January-March quarter, with momentum continuing into April, which saw a 27.3% year-on-year jump. On a sequential basis, fertilizers (267%), electronic goods (124%), and petroleum & crude (108%) led the March-quarter growth. Manufacturing goods account for over 85% of India's exports to the US. The basket is primarily led by engineering goods, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. Notably, the share of electronics in the US manufactured goods exports basket doubled from 4.3% in FY06-FY15 to 8.6% in FY16-FY25, bolstered by government incentives to promote local manufacturing. But that growth could come under pressure, experts warn. The US administration's push for reshoring manufacturing may prompt companies to shift production back home. Trump has even threatened an additional 25% tariff on Apple if it doesn't relocate iPhone production to the US. While India may be insulated from tariff disruptions in some segments, electronic goods could prove vulnerable. 'The kind of goods that we export to the US (pharmaceutical products and machinery) have low demand fluctuations. This helps us maintain a strong momentum," said Saon Ray, visiting professor at the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations. In the case of electronic goods, diversifying to new markets quickly will be challenging for India due to varying "standards or specifications" needed in each market, Ray pointed out. 'I am more optimistic about the engineering and pharma sector, but for the electronics sector, it might be quite a challenge this year." Hard bargain As the world navigates a global trade reset, with the US and China inching toward a new deal, analysts and economists have dialled down the risk of a recession. Still, a slowdown in the US economy can't be ruled out if reciprocal tariffs are enacted. This could potentially mean lower exports to the US as the two are usually correlated to each other, Ray pointed out. Against this, Washington's trade deals with countries will be essential to avoid the slowdown. The US and China are currently holding talks to strike a trade deal, though there may be too many wrinkles to be ironed out before it is finalized. India is not perceived as a big a threat as China by the US, though the high trade surplus and high tariffs imposed by India on imports from the US has irked Trump. Before reciprocal tariffs, India's tariff markup over US tariff rate was as much as 11.5 percentage points, according to Fitch Ratings. Although there is a good case for India to offer lower tariff rates on the US products, experts believe India can and should drive a hard bargain with the world's largest nation. In a recent report, think-tank Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) argued that Trump's tariffs are purely based on the goods trade deficit it runs with other countries and omits services trade, where India is a big benefactor, completely. While India runs a small trade surplus in services trade with the US as well, GTRI estimated that it may not be taking into account the earnings by the US through education, digital services, financial operations, intellectual property royalties, and arms sales. Read this | As US court declares Trump's tariffs illegal, experts urge India to reassess trade talks "When you factor them in, the US isn't running a deficit with India at all—it is sitting on a $35–40 billion surplus," GTRI said in a report last month. 'For India, this means it has every reason to walk into free trade agreement negotiations with confidence, pushing back hard against inflated deficit claims and demanding fair and balanced terms."
