Using an SMA to Diversify a Concentrated Stock Position: A Practical, Tax-Aware Overview
A concentrated stock position can happen for many reasons: long-term employment equity, founder shares, early investments, or simply a stock that outperformed everything else. The upside is obvious, but the trade-offs tend to show up later as single-name risk, tax friction, and decision paralysis (“I want to diversify, but I don’t want a big tax bill.”).
One approach that often comes up in high-net-worth planning is using a separately managed account (SMA)—especially a “direct indexing” style SMA—to transition away from concentration more gradually and with more tax control than an all-at-once sale.
Why concentrated positions are uniquely tricky
Diversification sounds simple: sell some of the single stock and buy a broad portfolio. In practice, concentrated positions tend to create three frictions:
- Tax friction: selling appreciated shares can realize capital gains immediately.
- Risk timing: selling too quickly can feel like “missing upside,” while waiting can mean one bad year changes the family balance sheet.
- Rules and constraints: insiders, blackout windows, Rule 144 restrictions, or employer policies can limit when and how shares are sold.
These constraints are why many people look for solutions that balance risk reduction with tax management and operational simplicity.
What an SMA is (and what “direct indexing” changes)
An SMA is an investment account managed to a stated strategy, but held in your name (you own the underlying securities directly). A “direct indexing” SMA usually means the account holds a large set of individual stocks designed to approximate an index (like a large-cap benchmark), rather than holding a single index fund.
The practical implication is that an SMA can implement changes at the individual security level—which enables more customized tax management than a commingled fund can offer.
An SMA is not automatically “better” than ETFs or mutual funds. Its value is primarily in customization: constraints, exclusions, tax coordination, and gradual transitions.
How an SMA can support diversification
When people say they want to “use an SMA to diversify a concentrated stock position,” they usually mean a combination of these tactics:
Custom indexing around what you already own
Instead of selling the concentrated stock immediately, the SMA can build diversified exposure around it. Over time, as shares are sold (or gifted), the SMA can adjust holdings to keep the overall portfolio closer to a desired risk profile.
Systematic selling with a stated schedule
Many diversification plans fail because decisions are made only when emotions run high (after a big rise or a big drop). A written schedule (for example, monthly or quarterly sales within allowed trading windows) can reduce behavioral mistakes. For insiders, a properly structured Rule 10b5-1 plan may be relevant to pre-plan sales under defined conditions.
Tax-aware rebalancing and loss harvesting
Because the SMA holds many individual stocks, it may be able to realize losses in some holdings while keeping market exposure similar overall. Those losses can sometimes offset realized gains elsewhere (subject to your jurisdiction’s rules). The goal is not “free money,” but smoothing taxes across years while still moving toward diversification.
Constraint management
Many investors want to exclude certain holdings (for example: avoid doubling down on the same industry as their employer, avoid overlapping with private investments, or exclude certain sectors). SMAs can implement these constraints more directly than a single off-the-shelf fund.
Tax mechanics to understand before you act
Concentration planning often succeeds or fails on tax details. These are common “gotchas” worth understanding early:
Realized gains vs. unrealized gains
A diversified plan that looks good pre-tax can look very different after-tax if it triggers large gains in a single year. Many investors choose to diversify over multiple tax years to avoid stacking gains into the highest brackets.
Cost basis method matters
If you have multiple lots (different purchase dates/prices), selecting which shares to sell can significantly change the tax outcome. “Specific identification” approaches can be very different from default methods, depending on your brokerage settings and local rules.
Wash sale rules
If you harvest losses, wash sale rules can disallow a loss when you repurchase the same (or substantially identical) security within a specified window. This becomes especially relevant when combining SMAs with index funds, options, or automatic dividend reinvestment.
Charitable giving and estate considerations
For some households, the most tax-efficient “sale” is no sale at all: donating appreciated shares, using donor-advised funds, or planning around estate step-up rules (where applicable) can be part of the overall strategy. These topics are highly jurisdiction- and situation-dependent, so they’re best handled with a qualified tax professional.
Common alternatives and how they compare
An SMA is one tool among many. The right answer often depends on your constraints (insider rules, taxes, liquidity needs, time horizon, and risk tolerance). Here’s a comparison that focuses on the “why” behind each approach:
| Approach | What it tries to solve | Typical trade-offs | Who it often fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sell and buy broad index funds | Fast risk reduction | Potentially large immediate tax bill; timing regret risk | Those with low embedded gains or high urgency to reduce single-name risk |
| Direct indexing SMA transition | Gradual diversification + tax coordination | Fees, tracking error, operational complexity; requires good execution | Those with high embedded gains and desire for a structured multi-year plan |
| Exchange fund (where available/eligible) | Immediate diversification while deferring gains | Illiquidity for years, eligibility limits, fee structures, and vehicle-specific risks | Accredited investors comfortable with lockups and structure complexity |
| Options collar / hedging | Downside protection without selling | Caps upside, costs/premiums, complexity, tax treatment can be nuanced | Those needing near-term risk reduction but unable/unwilling to sell quickly |
| Borrowing against shares | Liquidity without triggering gains | Margin calls, interest costs, forced selling risk in drawdowns | Those with strong risk controls and conservative leverage practices |
| Charitable and estate planning | Tax-efficient transfer of appreciation | Complex planning; depends on philanthropic intent and jurisdiction | Those already planning significant giving or long-horizon wealth transfer |
In practice, households sometimes combine approaches (e.g., partial sales + an SMA transition + charitable giving), as long as the combined plan stays operationally manageable.
A decision framework that stays realistic
Instead of searching for a “perfect” solution, it can help to score choices on a few practical dimensions:
| Question | Why it matters | What to watch for |
|---|---|---|
| How quickly must single-name risk drop? | Speed changes the menu of feasible options | If the timeline is short, simplicity often beats optimization |
| What is the embedded gain and tax sensitivity? | Taxes can dominate outcomes | One-year tax minimization can increase multi-year risk |
| What constraints apply (insider rules, lockups, policies)? | Some “good ideas” are not executable | Coordinate with compliance and legal rules early |
| What level of complexity can you sustain? | Complex plans fail if they are not maintained | Automation and clear governance matter as much as product choice |
| What is the goal: tax minimization or risk reduction? | The best plan depends on the primary objective | Be explicit: which outcome are you optimizing? |
Pitfalls and trade-offs people underestimate
Tracking error and expectations
If an SMA is built to resemble a benchmark while honoring constraints (and harvesting losses), it may not track the benchmark perfectly. That’s not inherently bad, but it should be expected and measured.
Fees and “hidden” costs
SMA costs can include management fees, trading costs, and platform fees. The relevant question is whether customization benefits are likely to outweigh these costs over your timeframe.
Tax coordination across accounts
Wash sale rules, dividend reinvestments, and separate trading in retirement accounts can unintentionally disrupt a loss-harvesting plan. Portfolio-level coordination matters more than choosing a clever strategy in one account.
Concentration can come back
Even after reducing the original single-name holding, concentration can reappear through: employer stock refreshers, new private investments, sector-heavy indexes, or correlated exposures. A good plan includes a “maintenance rule,” not only a one-time fix.
This discussion is informational and not personalized financial, legal, or tax advice. The right approach depends on your jurisdiction, restrictions, liquidity needs, and the details of your cost basis and income profile.
Example “path” from concentration to diversification
Below is a simplified example of how a tax-aware transition might look conceptually. It’s not a recommendation—just a way to visualize the moving parts.
- Baseline assessment: quantify concentration risk (percentage of net worth, correlation to job/income, volatility impact) and map cost basis lots.
- Policy and constraint check: confirm selling windows, insider rules, restrictions, and whether a pre-scheduled trading plan is required.
- Set a multi-year target: define an acceptable “end state” (e.g., single stock below a chosen threshold of liquid net worth).
- Implement a rules-based sale schedule: sell defined amounts/percentages at defined intervals, aligned with tax-year planning.
- Build diversified exposure in parallel: allocate proceeds into a diversified portfolio (an SMA/direct indexing approach is one option).
- Coordinate tax tactics: use lot selection and (where appropriate) loss realization while avoiding wash sale issues across accounts.
- Review annually: adjust for price moves, new equity grants, changes in income, and evolving tax/regulatory conditions.
The best plans tend to be boring: clearly documented, consistently executed, and revisited on a schedule rather than in reaction to headlines.
High-quality resources to read next
For readers who want primary references and investor-facing explanations, these are generally useful starting points:
- Investor education on wash sales and basics: Investor.gov (wash sales overview)
- Tax background for investments and wash sale discussion: IRS Publication 550 (Investment Income and Expenses)
- Regulatory context for planned trading arrangements: SEC (insider trading and disclosures resources)
- Broad investor education on exchange-traded products: FINRA (ETPs and investor considerations)
If you’re considering an SMA specifically, focus your reading on how customization, tax coordination, fees, and tracking differences are handled in practice—not just the marketing summary.
Post a Comment