The phrase "allocation to stocks" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in the context of finance or investment discussions, particularly when referring to the distribution of assets in a portfolio.
Example: "The financial advisor recommended an allocation to stocks to enhance the growth potential of the investment portfolio."
Alternatives: "investment in stocks" or "distribution to equities".
Other things being equal, Professor Stambaugh says, you would probably lower your portfolio allocation to stocks.
For example, he said, their portfolio's allocation to stocks was the same regardless of whether net exchanges out of stock funds were tiny or huge.
This Rosetta stone of planning is essential because it may necessitate increased contributions to retirement plans, a larger allocation to stocks or greater outside saving.
Still, some advisers suggested taking a closer look at your overall allocation to stocks, particularly if you're not well diversified, since bonds will provide less protection.
Some investors want an even-higher allocation to stocks than the glide path permits, particularly if they have more job security.
For many years, the rule of thumb for most long-term investors was "60/40," a 60 percent allocation to stocks and 40 percent to bonds.
Research from EBRI shows that older workers have been overdoing their allocations to stock funds, with 27% of investors 56 and older keeping 90% or more of their nest eggs in equities.
The typical socially responsible fund has an outsized allocation to tech stocks, so its strong performance in the 90's might have reflected no more than that sector's strength.
They made no allocation to international stocks.
In short, an allocation to international stocks would have hedged better against a dollar decline, with much lower volatility.
If an investor started with, say, a 20percentt allocation to small stocks two years ago and didn't adjust his portfolio, he would probably own more than he should by now.
