All of their eggs in one basket: portfolio neglect and intuitive accumulation among Scottish PRS landlords
Andrew Robert Watson
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to understand how private landlords approach asset allocation in the Scottish private rented sector (PRS). It explores the extent to which landlords conceptualise their investment holdings as portfolios, identifies how they approach diversification and portfolio building, and examines what drives these approaches. Design/methodology/approach The research adopts a sequential mixed-methods design, beginning with an online survey of over 1,000 Scottish landlords followed by 33 semi-structured interviews with landlords and PRS professionals. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to examine variation in those behaviours by landlord and portfolio characteristics, including cross-tabulations and chi-square tests with Cramér’s V reported for effect size. The qualitative material provides depth, triangulation and contextual explanation. Findings The research finds that, while most landlords hold assets beyond the PRS, less than half view these as forming a portfolio, and few apply the structured asset allocation and diversification strategies suggested by normative theory. Instead, many rely on intuitive accumulation, gradually acquiring assets as opportunity and circumstance allow. Portfolio neglect is common, with landlords holding multiple assets but failing to manage them as a unified portfolio. However, older, male and university-educated landlords with larger portfolios demonstrated greater portfolio awareness and diversification tendencies. Originality/value The paper provides the first empirical examination of the asset allocation practices of private landlords in the PRS, viewed through the lenses of normative investment and behavioural finance theory, as well as real estate and housing studies perspectives. It also introduces the concept of “intuitive accumulation” to explain how landlords build investment portfolios over time.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.