TL;DR
Fama and French's investment factor (CMA) has delivered roughly 3% annualised in US data since 1963. Firms that grow assets slowly outperform aggressive empire-builders.
What the data says about empire-builders
In their 2015 five-factor paper, Eugene Fama and Kenneth French added two new factors to their earlier three-factor model. One was profitability (RMW). The other was investment, formalised as CMA — "Conservative Minus Aggressive" — measured by year-over-year change in total assets.
The premium: firms that grow their balance sheets slowly outperform firms that grow them aggressively, by roughly 3% per year in the Ken French US data 1963–2023.
CMA is the quietest of the major factors. It gets less attention than HML, SMB, momentum, or RMW. But it has one striking property: it's nearly uncorrelated with the others. Adding CMA to a multi-factor portfolio reduces overall volatility more than adding most other factors.
The mechanism
Conservative firms — those that grow their assets through retained earnings rather than capex blowouts, M&A, or share issuance — historically outperform aggressive ones. Three explanations compete:
- Capital discipline. Firms that aggressively expand often do so by accepting marginal projects with poor returns on capital. The empire grows; returns shrink. Conservative firms are pickier about new investments and earn higher returns on the capital they do deploy.
- Overconfidence and herding. Aggressive expansion correlates with management overconfidence. CEOs who do large acquisitions tend to overpay. CEOs who issue equity tend to do so when their stock is overvalued. The market eventually punishes these signals.
- Risk story. Aggressive growth firms have more execution risk — failed M&A integrations, capex projects that don't deliver. The lower expected return on aggressive firms could be partly a risk premium.
The behavioural and risk stories aren't mutually exclusive. Both probably contribute.
How it relates to other factors
CMA shares some surface DNA with value:
- A firm that issues lots of new shares tends to do so at high valuations (i.e., it's an aggressive investor that's also expensive).
- A firm that buys back shares tends to be a slow grower with stable cash flows (i.e., conservative AND value-tilted).
But the empirical overlap is modest — roughly 0.3 correlation with HML. The investment factor adds independent return to a portfolio that already has value exposure, which is why Fama and French included both in their five-factor model. For the broader picture of how all five factors interact, see our Fama-French five-factor article.
CMA also overlaps with quality. Conservative-investment firms tend to have stable earnings and modest leverage — both quality characteristics. The two factors correlate at roughly 0.4. Multi-factor funds that target quality usually pick up most of the CMA premium implicitly.
Where it has been weakest
CMA's worst stretch was the late-2010s growth-stock boom. From 2015–2020, aggressive-investment firms (Amazon, Tesla, Meta) dominated the index. The CMA portfolio underperformed conservative-minus-aggressive expectations by about 2% per year for five years.
Like every factor, CMA has cycles. The 2022 correction was particularly punishing for high-investment firms, and CMA had its strongest year in a decade. The pattern reasserts itself; it just doesn't do so on any predictable schedule.
How to actually own it
There are no major retail ETFs that isolate CMA as a single factor. Investment-factor exposure usually comes through:
- Integrated multi-factor funds. Avantis AVUV, AVDV and the broader Avantis range all include investment screens. Same for Dimensional Core funds.
- Quality funds. Indirect exposure — quality-tilted ETFs (iShares QUAL, JPMorgan JQUA) pick up conservative-investment names by accident.
- Custom factor mixes. AQR and a handful of specialist funds offer investment-factor specific products, but these are typically institutional-only.
For most FIRE planners, the practical answer is: don't try to isolate CMA. Own a good integrated multi-factor fund that incorporates investment screens alongside value, profitability and momentum. The integration captures the CMA premium as part of a smoother overall portfolio.
For more on why integration beats isolated single-factor exposures, see our combining factors article.
The bottom line
CMA is real, persistent, and quietly important. It's not a factor most retail investors think about, but it's a meaningful contributor to the long-run premium of well-built multi-factor portfolios. Don't chase it directly; just make sure your factor allocation uses funds that screen for it.
Test how a multi-factor tilt that includes investment-factor exposure changes your FIRE plan in our factor comparison tool.
Frequently asked questions
- Is CMA related to value?
- Modestly. Conservative-investment firms tend to be slightly cheaper than aggressive ones, but the overlap is small enough that CMA adds independent return.
- Which funds target the investment factor?
- Few funds isolate CMA; most multi-factor funds (DFA, Avantis) include it as one of several screens.
- Does CMA work outside the US?
- Yes — Fama and French's international data extension shows positive CMA premiums in European and Asia-Pacific markets, with magnitudes similar to or slightly smaller than the US.
Stress-test your own FIRE plan
FIRE Wealth OS runs your savings rate and expenses against every historical market starting point since 1871. Free to use, no card required.