In portfolio construction, the question is rarely about returns alone.
It is about role clarity — what part of the portfolio drives growth, what part absorbs shocks, and what part adapts when cycles change.
If every allocation is expected to do everything, something is likely being overburdened. And that burden doesn’t come only from markets. It comes from the investor.
Markets are only one variable in the equation. Real investing decisions are shaped by far more factors like — your time horizon, risk appetite, behavioural temperament, concentration comfort, financial goals, and even the stage of life you are currently in.
A long-term wealth compounding mandate looks very different from a strategy designed to manage volatility. A concentrated equity portfolio serves a different purpose than a dynamic allocation strategy that actively moves across asset classes. None of these approaches is inherently superior. But each, by design, solves for a different objective.
This blog explores what changes when ithought PMS strategies are paired thoughtfully — not as a superficial diversification exercise, but as a deliberate framework to address multiple investor dimensions simultaneously.
Start with the Risk Spectrum
Before talking about combinations, it helps to place each product on a risk spectrum. Not the usual low-medium-high labelling, but what each product is actually doing in terms of risk exposure.
TRUBLU sits at the conservative end among the PMS strategies. It is 100% bluechip — it invests in the largest, most well-established companies in India. The kind of businesses that have survived multiple downturns and continued compounding. Capital preservation with growth is the operating philosophy. Risk is low relative to the broader market. It is the strategy you would anchor a large corpus around — retirement savings, legacy capital, family office money.
SPHERE is the all-weather strategy. It dynamically allocates across equities, debt, ETFs, precious metals, and global assets. In a heated equity market, SPHERE may move into other asset classes. In a correction, it may increase equity exposure. This is not market timing in the conventional sense; it is theme-driven contrarian allocation. Risk is managed at the portfolio and stock level.
SOLITAIRE is moderately aggressive. It is a flexicap portfolio looking to capture emerging market leaders — it can go across large, mid, and small caps — but it is built on a concentrated, high-conviction and valuation discipline framework. The portfolio has low churn and a buy-and-hold philosophy. No exposure to Banking and leveraged businesses, as a design, to avoid crowded index-heavy bets and ensure the portfolio remains truly differentiated. Risk here is a function of conviction and patience, not speculation.
VRDDHI is at the high-risk, high-potential end. It invests in small caps and microcaps — businesses that are typically under-researched, under-owned, and under-covered. The expected volatility is real — small caps can correct more than 30% in bear phases — But the philosophy is clear: when you combine deep due diligence, disciplined position sizing, and valuation control, you give yourself access to early-stage compounding that larger, crowded segments cannot offer. This is a 5-year-plus strategy built for investors who understand that early-stage compounding can be generational.
In sequence from stability to growth potential: TRUBLU → SPHERE → SOLITAIRE → VRDDHI. What is remarkable is that all four operate exclusively in long-term, fundamental investing — no F&O, no trading, no chasing momentum. The risk differences are about the nature of businesses and market caps, not about speculative instruments.
Suggested Read: https://ithoughtpms.com/blog/sip-in-pms-where-discipline-meets-differentiated-investing/
One of the first questions we get when investors consider combining strategies is: Will I just end up owning the same stocks twice?
The honest answer is — it depends on the mandates. Strategies operating at opposite ends of the market-cap spectrum, such as a pure large-cap approach and a small/microcap strategy, structurally cannot overlap in a meaningful way. Their universes are inherently different.
However, between flexicap, thematic, or multi-asset strategies, there can be selective overlap — and that is not a flaw. It reflects a shared research philosophy and conviction and common quality filters across our PMS products. When multiple strategies independently arrive at the same high-quality business with strong governance and attractive valuations, it reinforces conviction rather than diluting differentiation.
Where they truly differentiate is in mandate and construction. Solitaire expresses bottom-up conviction across the cap curve with patience and valuation control. TruBlu anchors itself within proven large-cap franchises. Vrddhi deliberately moves earlier into emerging businesses where inefficiencies are greater. Sphere adds an additional layer — adjusting asset allocation dynamically while still applying bottom-up scrutiny within each allocation bucket.
So yes, there may be moments of intersection. But structurally, the opportunity sets, position sizing, capital deployment pace, and portfolio roles are different.
When combined thoughtfully, what you get is not repetition — you get depth, breadth, and balance, all built on the same disciplined philosophy.
Together, They Capture Every Engine of Compounding
Long-term wealth is not driven by one segment alone. It comes from steady large-cap compounders, valuation-led small and midcap opportunities, early-stage emerging businesses, and timely thematic or asset-allocation shifts.
Each strategy is designed to participate in a different engine. TruBlu anchors stability. Solitaire captures quality names across the market cap curve. Vrddhi enters earlier where growth is underappreciated. Sphere adds flexibility across asset classes when cycles change.
Combined thoughtfully, they ensure you are not dependent on a single driver of returns — but positioned across the full spectrum of long-term compounding.
The MF Layer: Flexibility Without Compromise
Not all capital fits cleanly into PMS. The minimum ticket size, the lock-in consideration, the liquidity needs of certain investors — these are all real constraints. This is where pairing a mutual fund allocation alongside PMS strategies adds a layer of flexibility.
Mutual funds give you immediate liquidity at any point, and access to certain thematic or sector opportunities, that PMS may not cover, at lower ticket sizes. They also allow you to maintain a “satellite” position in high-conviction themes without locking up PMS-level capital.
The combination works well in practice: PMS for the core long-term portfolio where professional management and customisation matter most, and MF for the liquidity layer and smaller thematic bets. SPHERE already uses mutual funds and ETFs within its own portfolio structure — so the philosophy of using the best vehicle for a given opportunity, rather than restricting yourself to one format, is already embedded in how we think about investing.
The Whole Is Greater Than The Sum Of It’s Parts
We have built four strategies that are intentionally distinct — in philosophy, universe, and risk profile. The objective was never to create standalone silos, but a framework that can be combined meaningfully based on your risk appetite, time horizon, financial goals, and other variable factors that shape real-world investing decisions.
Whether one strategy is enough depends entirely on what you are trying to achieve. But if the aim is comprehensive, long-term wealth creation across cycles — with stability, flexibility, and growth working together — the structure has been purpose-built to allow exactly that.
