McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management CHAPTER 18.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management
Advertisements

Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management
6 Efficient Diversification Bodie, Kane, and Marcus
 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1999 INVESTMENTS Fourth Edition Bodie Kane Marcus Irwin/McGraw-Hill 24-1 Portfolio Performance Evaluation.
Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Portfolio Performance Evaluation 18 Bodie, Kane, and Marcus.
Stern School of Business
1 Fin 2802, Spring 10 - Tang Chapter 24: Performance Evaluation Fin2802: Investments Spring, 2010 Dragon Tang Lectures 21&22 Performance Evaluation April.
Asset Management Lecture 14. Outline for today Evaluating hedge funds Marking timing: are mutual funds successful or not? Style analysis for mutual funds.
Asset Management Lecture 22. Review class Asset management process Planning with the client Investor objectives, constraints and preferences Execution.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2001 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved The Theory of Active Portfolio Management Chapter 27.
 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1999 INVESTMENTS Fourth Edition Bodie Kane Marcus Irwin/McGraw-Hill 28-1 The Theory of Active Portfolio Management.
Asset Management Lecture 12. Outline of today’s lecture Dollar- and Time-Weighted Returns Universe comparison Adjusting Returns for Risk Sharpe measure.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6.
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
Portfolio Evaluation Outline Investment return measurement conventional measurement theory Evaluation with changing portfolio composition Evaluation with.
Chapter 20 EVALUATION OF PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT. Chapter 20 Questions What are some methods used to evaluate portfolio performance? What are the differences.
Evaluation of portfolio performance
Active Portfolio Management Theory of Active Portfolio Management –Market timing –portfolio construction Portfolio Evaluation –Conventional Theory of evaluation.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 24 Portfolio Performance Evaluation.
INVESTMENTS | BODIE, KANE, MARCUS Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin CHAPTER 27 The Theory of Active.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Fundamentals of Investment Management Hirt Block 1 1 Portfolio Management and Capital Market Theory- Learning Objectives 1. Understand.
Bodie Kane Marcus Perrakis RyanINVESTMENTS, Fourth Canadian Edition Copyright © McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited, 2003 Slide 21-1 Chapter 21.
Chapter #4All Rights Reserved1 Chapter 4 Evaluating Portfolio Performance.
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
OPTIMAL RISKY PORTFOLIOS- ASSET ALLOCATIONS BKM Ch 7.
Performance Evaluation
0 Portfolio Management Albert Lee Chun Evaluation of Portfolio Performance Lecture 11 2 Dec 2008.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6.
The Portfolio Management Process 1. Policy statement –specifies investment goals and acceptable risk levels –should be reviewed periodically –guides all.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6.
Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6. Diversification and Portfolio Risk Market risk –Systematic or Nondiversifiable Firm-specific risk –Diversifiable.
Evaluation of Portfolio Performance Chapter 25. Composite Portfolio Performance Measures Portfolio evaluation before 1960 Portfolio evaluation before.
INVESTMENTS | BODIE, KANE, MARCUS Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin CHAPTER 8 Index Models.
Portfolio Performance Evaluation 03/09/09. 2 Evaluation of Portfolio Performance What are the components of portfolio performance evaluation? What are.
Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin 24-1 Portfolio Performance Evaluation.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 10 Index Models.
Investments, 8 th edition Bodie, Kane and Marcus Slides by Susan Hine McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights.
Efficient Diversification II Efficient Frontier with Risk-Free Asset Optimal Capital Allocation Line Single Factor Model.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6.
Evaluation of Investment Performance Chapter 22 Jones, Investments: Analysis and Management.
Optimal portfolios and index model.  Suppose your portfolio has only 1 stock, how many sources of risk can affect your portfolio? ◦ Uncertainty at the.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Efficient Diversification CHAPTER 6.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management CHAPTER 17.
1 Personal Finance: Another Perspective Classroom Slides: Investments 9: Portfolio Rebalancing and Reporting Updated
Performance Evaluation. Introduction Complicated subject Theoretically correct measures are difficult to construct Different statistics or measures are.
Chapter 18 Portfolio Performance Evaluation. Types of management revisited Passive management 1.Capital allocation between cash and the risky portfolio.
 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1999 INVESTMENTS Fourth Edition Bodie Kane Marcus Irwin/McGraw-Hill 24-1 Portfolio Performance Evaluation Chapter.
18 Portfolio Performance Evaluation Bodie, Kane and Marcus
Chapter 6 Efficient Diversification Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO Evaluation of Investment Performance CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO Evaluation of Investment Performance Cleary / Jones Investments: Analysis and.
Chapter 6 Efficient Diversification. McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. r p = W 1 r 1 + W 2 r 2 W 1 = Proportion.
Chapter 26 - Evaluation of Portfolio Performance What is the Jensen portfolio performance measure, and how does it relate to the Treynor measure? What.
Bodie Kane Marcus Perrakis RyanINVESTMENTS, Fourth Canadian Edition Copyright © McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited, 2003 Slide 20-1 Chapter 20.
Investments, 8 th edition Bodie, Kane and Marcus Slides by Susan Hine McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights.
Investments, 8 th edition Bodie, Kane and Marcus Slides by Susan Hine McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights.
INVESTMENTS | BODIE, KANE, MARCUS Copyright © 2014 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written.
Essentials of Investments © 2001 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Fourth Edition Irwin / McGraw-Hill Bodie Kane Marcus 1 Chapter 19.
EQUITY-PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
Efficient Diversification
6 Efficient Diversification Bodie, Kane and Marcus
CHAPTER 8 Index Models Investments Cover image Slides by
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
Portfolio Performance Evaluation
The Theory of Active Portfolio Management
Figure 6.1 Risk as Function of Number of Stocks in Portfolio
Presentation transcript:

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Performance Evaluation and Active Portfolio Management CHAPTER 18

RISK-ADJUSTED RETURNS

18-3 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

18-4 Abnormal Performance What is abnormal Abnormal performance is measured: –Comparison groups –Market adjusted –Market model / index model adjusted –Reward to risk measures such as the Sharpe Measure: E (r p -r f ) /  p E (r p -r f ) /  p

18-5 Factors That Lead to Abnormal Performance Market timing Superior selection –Sectors or industries –Individual companies

18-6 Comparison Groups Simplest method Most popular Compare returns to other funds with similar investment objectives

18-7 Figure 18.1 Universe Comparison Periods Ending December 31, 2008

18-8 Risk Adjusted Performance: Sharpe 1) Sharpe Index 1) Sharpe Index r p - r f r p = Average return on the portfolio r f = Average risk free rate p = Standard deviation of portfolio return p  

18-9 Risk Adjusted Performance: Treynor 2) Treynor Measure 2) Treynor Measure r p - r f ß p r p = Average return on the portfolio r f = Average risk free rate ß p = Weighted average  for portfolio

18-10 = r p - [ r f + ß p ( r m - r f ) ] = r p - [ r f + ß p ( r m - r f ) ] 3) Jensen’s Measure 3) Jensen’s Measure p p r p = Average return on the portfolio ß p = Weighted average Beta r f = Average risk free rate r m = Avg. return on market index port. Risk Adjusted Performance: Jensen = Alpha for the portfolio  

18-11 M 2 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

18-12 M 2 Measure: Example Managed Portfolio Market T-bill Return35% 28% 6% Stan. Dev42% 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

18-13 Figure 18.2 The M 2 of Portfolio P

18-14 T 2 (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

18-15 T 2 Example Port. P.Market Risk Prem. (r-r f ) 13.00% 10.00% Beta Alpha 5.00% 0.00% Treynor Measure Weight to match Market w =  M /  P = 1.0 / 0.8 Adjusted Return R P * = w (R P ) = 16.25% T 2 P = R P * - R M = 16.25% - 10% = 6.25%

18-16 Figure 18.3 Treynor Square Measure

18-17 Which Measure is Appropriate It depends on investment assumptions 1) 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 measure The Treynor measure is more complete because it adjusts for risk

18-18 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

18-19 Figure 18.4 Portfolio Returns

STYLE ANALYSIS

18-21 Style Analysis Introduced by Bill Sharpe Explaining percentage returns by allocation to style Style Analysis has become popular with the industry

18-22 Figure 18.5 Fidelity Magellan Fund Difference: Fund versus Style Benchmark

18-23 Figure 18.6 Fidelity Magellan Fund Difference: Fund versus S&P 500

MORNINGSTAR’S RISK-ADJUSTED RATING

18-25 Morningstar Premier source of information on mutual funds Risk Adjusted Rating (RAR) among most widely used performance measures

18-26 Figure 18.7 Average Tracking Error of 636 Mutual Funds,

18-27 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

18-28 Figure 18.8 Rankings Based on Morningstar’s RARs and Excess Return Sharpe Ratios

PERFORMANCE ATTRIBUTION PROCEDURES

18-30 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

18-31 Process of Attributing Performance to Components Set up a ‘Benchmark’ or ‘Bogey’ portfolio –Use indexes for each component –Use target weight structure

18-32 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

18-33 Table 18.5 Performance Attribution

18-34 Table 18.6 Sector Allocation Within the Equity Market

18-35 Table 18.7 Portfolio Attribution Summary

THE LURE OF ACTIVE MANAGEMENT

18-37 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

MARKET TIMING

18-39 Market Timing Adjust the portfolio for movements in the market Shift between stocks and money market instruments or bonds With perfect ability to forecast behaves like an option Little evidence of market timing ability

18-40 Figure 18.9 Rate of Return of a Perfect Market Timer

18-41 With Imperfect Ability to Forecast Long horizon to judge the ability Judge proportions of correct calls Bull markets and bear market calls

18-42 Market Timing & Performance Measurement Adjusting portfolio for up and down movements in the market –Low Market Return - low ßeta –High Market Return - high ßeta

18-43 Figure Characteristic Lines

SECURITY SELECTION: THE TREYNOR-BLACK MODEL

18-45 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 nonsystematic risk

18-46 Treynor-Black Model Security analysts can analyze in depth only a small number of stocks Market index portfolio is the baseline portfolio Macro forecasting unit provides forecasts of expected rate of return

18-47 Treynor-Black Model: Characteristics Objective of security analysis is to form an active portfolio –Estimate the SCL –Determine the expected return –Use estimates for alpha, beta, and residual risk to determine optimal weight of each security Macroeconomic forecasts for passive index portfolio and composite forecast for the active portfolio are used to determine the optimal risky portfolio

18-48 Treynor-Black Model: Characteristics Analysis performed using the model can add value The model is easy to implement Lends itself to use with decentralized decision making

18-49 Portfolio Construction Rate of return on security i, where e i is the firm specific component

18-50 Portfolio Construction Subset of available securities are researched and that portfolio will be mixed with the index portfolio to improve diversification For each security k, where α represents abnormal expected return

18-51 Estimating Parameters For each security analyzed, the following parameters would be estimated: Active portfolio would have the following parameters: Total variance would be:

18-52 Sharpe Measurement Sharpe measurement of the risky portfolio is: Position in active portfolio relative to the market portfolio depends on the ratio of the active portfolio’s abnormal return relative to its weakness: appraisal ratio

18-53 Appraisal Ratio Appraisal Ratio A = Alpha for the active portfolio (eA)(eA)(eA)(eA) = Nonsystematic risk Sharpe Measurement  

18-54 Summary Points: Treynor-Black Model Sharpe Measure will increase with added ability to pick stocks Slope of CAL>CML (r p -r f )/  p > (r m -r f )/  p P is the portfolio that combines the passively managed portfolio with the actively managed portfolio The combined efficient frontier has a higher return for the same level of risk

18-55 Figure The Optimization Process with Active and Passive Portfolios