chapter 24

26
Chapter 24 Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management

Upload: fawzia

Post on 05-Jan-2016

25 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Chapter 24. Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management. Introduction. Complicated subject Theoretically correct measures are difficult to construct Different statistics or measures are appropriate for different types of investment decisions or portfolios - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Chapter 24

Chapter 24

Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio

Management

Page 2: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Introduction• Complicated subject• Theoretically correct measures are difficult

to construct• Different statistics or measures are

appropriate for different types of investment decisions or portfolios

• Many industry and academic measures are different

• The nature of active managements leads to measurement problems

Page 3: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Abnormal Performance

What is abnormal?Abnormal performance is measured:

• Benchmark portfolio

• Market adjusted

• Market model / index model adjusted

• Reward to risk measures such as the Sharpe Measure:E (rp-rf) / p

Page 4: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Factors That Lead to Abnormal Performance

• Market timing

• Superior selection• Sectors or industries• Individual companies

Page 5: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Risk Adjusted Performance: Sharpe

1) Sharpe Index

rrpp - r - rff

rrpp = Average return on the portfolio= Average return on the portfolio

rrff = Average risk free rate= Average risk free rate

pp= Standard deviation of portfolio = Standard deviation of portfolio

returnreturn

pp

Page 6: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Risk Adjusted Performance: Treynor

2) Treynor Measure rrpp - r- rff

ßßpp

rrpp = Average return on the portfolio = Average return on the portfolio

rrff = Average risk free rate = Average risk free rate

ßßp p = Weighted average = Weighted average for portfoliofor portfolio

Page 7: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

= r= rpp - [ r - [ rff + ß + ßpp ( r ( rmm - r - rff) ]) ]

3) 3) Jensen’s MeasureJensen’s Measure

pp

p

rrpp = Average return on the portfolio = Average return on the portfolio

ßßpp = Weighted average Beta = Weighted average Beta

rrff = Average risk free rate = Average risk free rate

rrmm = Avg. return on market index port. = Avg. return on market index port.

Risk Adjusted Performance: Jensen

= = Alpha for the portfolioAlpha for the portfolio

Page 8: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

M2 Measure

• Developed by Modigliani and Modigliani

• Equates the volatility of the managed portfolio with the market by creating a hypothetical portfolio made up of T-bills and the managed portfolio

• If the risk is lower than the market, leverage is used and the hypothetical portfolio is compared to the market

Page 9: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

M2 Measure: Example

Managed Portfolio Market T-bill

Return 35% 28% 6%

Stan. Dev 42% 30% 0%

Hypothetical Portfolio: Same Risk as Market

30/42 = .714 in P (1-.714) or .286 in T-bills

(.714) (.35) + (.286) (.06) = 26.7%

Since this return is less than the market, the managed portfolio underperformed

Page 10: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

T2 (Treynor Square) Measure

• Used to convert the Treynor Measure into percentage return basis

• Makes it easier to interpret and compare• Equates the beta of the managed portfolio

with the market’s beta of 1 by creating a hypothetical portfolio made up of T-bills and the managed portfolio

• If the beta is lower than one, leverage is used and the hypothetical portfolio is compared to the market

Page 11: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

T2 Example Port. P. Market

Risk Prem. (r-rf) 18% 15%

Beta 0.80 1.0

Alpha 5% 0%

Treynor Measure 16.25 10

Risk Free rate 5%

T2P = (RP – rf)/Bp – (RM – rf) =13/.8 – 10 = 6.25%

Page 12: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Which Measure is Appropriate?

It depends on investment assumptions1) If the portfolio represents the entire

investment for an individual, Sharpe Index compared to the Sharpe Index for the market.

2) If many alternatives are possible, use the Jensen or the Treynor measureThe Treynor measure is more complete because it adjusts for risk

Page 13: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Limitations

• Assumptions underlying measures limit their usefulness

• When the portfolio is being actively managed, basic stability requirements are not met

• Practitioners often use benchmark portfolio comparisons to measure performance

Page 14: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Performance Attribution

• Decomposing overall performance into components

• Components are related to specific elements of performance

• Example components• Broad Allocation• Industry• Security Choice• Up and Down Markets

Page 15: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Process of Attributing Performance to Components

Set up a ‘Benchmark’ or ‘Bogey’ portfolio

• Use indexes for each component

• Use target weight structure

Page 16: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Appropriate Benchmark

• Unambiguous – anyone can reproduce it

• Investable

• Measurable

• Specified in Advance

Page 17: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

• Calculate the return on the ‘Bogey’ and on the managed portfolio

• Explain the difference in return based on component weights or selection

• Summarize the performance differences into appropriate categories

Process of Attributing Performance to Components

Page 18: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

See Example

Page 19: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Lure of Active Management

Are markets totally efficient?• Some managers outperform the market for

extended periods• While the abnormal performance may not be

too large, it is too large to be attributed solely to noise

• Evidence of anomalies such as the turn of the year exist

The evidence suggests that there is some role for active management

Page 20: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Market Timing

• Adjust the portfolio for movements in the market

• Shift between stocks and money market instruments or bonds

• Results: higher returns, lower risk (downside is eliminated)

• With perfect ability to forecast behaves like an option

Page 21: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Style Analysis

• Introduced by Bill Sharpe

• Explaining percentage returns by allocation to style

• Style Analysis has become popular with the industry

Page 22: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Morning Star’s Risk Adjusted Rating

• Similar to mean Standard Deviation rankings

• Companies are put into peer groups

• Stars are assigned• 1-lowest• 5-highest

• Highly correlated to Sharpe measures

Page 23: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Superior Selection Ability

• Concentrate funds in undervalued stocks or undervalued sectors or industries

• Balance funds in an active portfolio and in a passive portfolio

• Active selection will mean some unsystematic risk

Page 24: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Treynor-Black Model

• Model used to combine actively managed stocks with a passively managed portfolio

• Using a reward-to-risk measure that is similar to the the Sharpe Measure, the optimal combination of active and passive portfolios can be determined

Page 25: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Treynor-Black Model: Assumptions

• Analysts will have a limited ability to find a select number of undervalued securities

• Portfolio managers can estimate the expected return and risk, and the abnormal performance for the actively-managed portfolio

• Portfolio managers can estimate the expected risk and return parameters for a broad market (passively managed) portfolio

Page 26: Chapter 24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Appraisal Ratio =Appraisal Ratio =

AA//eAeA

AA = Alpha for the active portfolio= Alpha for the active portfolio

((eA)eA)= Unsystematic standard= Unsystematic standard deviation for activedeviation for active

Reward to Variability Measures