A. There answer is NO.
In the chart below, you can see the performance of the seven-asset portfolio where each asset class was equally weighted with an allocation of 14.29%. One version of the portfolio was never rebalanced and the other version was rebalanced at the end of each year. It shows 20-year rolling period performances for both versions.
The big question: should we "let winners run" therefore not to rebalance portfolios?
1) The problem comes when the outperforming asset class suffers a correction (which they all do) and their large losses are experienced by a larger-than-originally-specified portion of the portfolio.
2) Moreover, how is anyone capable of knowing how long an asset classes will continue on a hot streak?
For these two reasons, rebalancing each year is advisable.