Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Greeks (finance) wikipedia , lookup
Present value wikipedia , lookup
Systemic risk wikipedia , lookup
Beta (finance) wikipedia , lookup
Stock trader wikipedia , lookup
Public finance wikipedia , lookup
Modified Dietz method wikipedia , lookup
Mark-to-market accounting wikipedia , lookup
Gunduz Caginalp wikipedia , lookup
Investment management wikipedia , lookup
Business valuation wikipedia , lookup
Risk / Return of Equity Portfolio Construction Strategies Practitioner Demand Driven Academic Research Initiative (PDDARI) Drafted by the CFA Society of Chicago Request for Research Abstract Measure and compare the risk / returns of major equity portfolio construction strategies currently in use by the practitioner community. Include free float cap weighted indexation, fundamental indexation, multi-factor, and DCF. Develop mental models of the market to reflect empirically observed behavioral finance anomalies and market inefficiency within a range of bounded rationality. The primary Society practitioner “thought partners” have performed relevant research and illustrative data analysis on stock selection, portfolio construction, and risk measurement. Consequently, please study those practitioner citations and disclosures, as well as the traditional academic literature. As a starting point, these qualified “thought partners” have suggested research designs and measurement methodologies as one possible approach. Please revise, modify, or replace the suggested research designs and measurement methodologies based on the primary objectives of the study if better ones exist. We seek the best approaches and the most qualified academics to perform the research. The academics selected may publish wherever they wish. We seek no influence over the results. 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -1- 875097044 Risk / Return of Equity Portfolio Construction Strategies Practitioner Demand Driven Academic Research Initiative (PDDARI) Drafted Primarily by Rawley Thomas, 1 Mike Lindh,2 Amit Dugar,3 and Ralph Goldsticker4 For the CFA Society of Chicago Request for Research Goal. To measure the risk / returns of major equity portfolio construction strategies currently in use by the practitioner community. Introduction. Much academic research for the past half century has been dedicated to proving the efficient market hypothesis (EMH). Over the last one to two decades, behavioral finance professionals have begun to offer evidence of anomalies which conflict with EMH. Consequently, this paper offers an economic rationale that market inefficiencies may exist. That rationale bases itself on the violation of the assumption of homogeneous expectations due to market segmentation by risk and return. Investors seek the highest rates of return on their investment with the least risk. They hire portfolio managers if they feel that they personally lack the professional expertise or the time to achieve their risk/return objectives. Portfolio management organizations develop products to fill the risk/return needs of investor segments. Four Strategies. Perhaps four major classes5 of strategies of portfolio construction and stock selection exist, depending on investor beliefs surrounding efficient markets: 1. Free float cap weighted indexation (including Exchange Traded Funds) with minimum management costs for those who believe beating the efficient market is impossible. (Passive strategy) 2. Fundamental indexation based on non-cap weights (sales, assets, employment, dividends, etc.) with small management costs for those who believe that the market experiences some inefficiencies without knowing precisely what they are, but wishing to avoid overweighting over valued stocks and underweighting under valued stocks. (Passive strategy) 3. Multi-Factor models for those who believe the market is sufficiently inefficient that out-performance can be achieved by regressing stock price returns against a series of factors. (Active strategy) 4. Discounted Cash Flow models for those who believe the market is sufficiently inefficient that out-performance can be achieved by estimating the stock’s intrinsic value and assuming that the market will migrate toward that intrinsic value over some time period. (Active strategy) President and Co-Founder of LifeCycle Returns. Responsible for structure of this Research Request for Proposal and the DCF section. For clarification, e-mail [email protected] (preferable) or call 630-3770761. 2 President of the CFA Society of Chicago; Director of Richards and Tierney. Responsible for fundamental indexation. For clarification e-mail [email protected] (preferable) or call (312) 461-1100. 3 Performs research for the Schwab equity ratings department. The Schwab equity ratings model is a multi-factor model consisting of 15 factors. Responsible for multi-factor models. For clarification e-mail [email protected] (preferable) or call (312) 931-1522. 4 Managing Director of Research of Mellon Capital Management in San Francisco, CA. For clarification, please e-mail [email protected] (preferred) or call (415) 975-2383. 5 A variety of less disciplined strategies exist: for example, simple stock pickers. Hybrids also exist. 1 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -2- 875097044 Mental Market Model: The four classes of investment strategies above represent a concrete expression of the non-homogeneous behavior institutionalized into the fund management industry. First, this non-homogeneous behavior explains trading. People trade because they possess different expectations about the security, are rebalancing their portfolio for risk/diversification purposes, following price trends, or for liquidity. Excess trading on the buy side or the sell side causes prices to move. Second, non-homogeneous behavior contributes to market inefficiency. As more funds become indexed, the market likely becomes less efficient. Momentum traders may speed price adjustments, often overreacting to news.6 Active management keeps the market within a range of bounded rationality. The range defines where the securities become too under or too over valued, so active investors enter the market to reverse the price trend, thereby producing an inflection point. The balance of passive indexation and active management determines the dispersion of prices around intrinsic values.7 Request for Proposals 1. Mental Models. Comment on the mental model above and recommend additional mental models of the market. Describe the prior beliefs and biases of the researcher.8 2. Portfolio Construction. To add independent, unbiased empirical evidence, the CFA Society of Chicago requests the Financial Management Association to ask its academic members to empirically compare the risk / return of the four classes of portfolio construction strategies. The FMA Practitioner Research Committee will very likely approve multiple proposals for academic research due to the scope of this effort. The approved proposals will likely include opposing views. We are also interested in estimates of the proportion of funds employing each strategy or hybrid to develop conceptually sound, empirical models of price dispersion and formation. a. Indexation. b. Fundamental indexation. Consider including factors like book value, operating income, revenue, assets, employment, dividends, and other Narasimhan Jegadeesh and Sheridan Titman, “”Returns on Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency,” Journal of Finance, 1993, 48, pp. 65-91. Narasimhan Jegadeesh and Sheridan Titman, “Profitability of Momentum Strategies: An Evaluation of Alternative Explanations,” Journal of Finance, 2001, vol. 56, pp. 699-720. 7 Robert Shiller, “Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends,” American Economic Review, January 1981, pp. 421-436. 8 For example, does the researcher believe in perfect instantaneous market efficiency or market inefficiency within a range of bounded rationality? Does he or she believe in return distributions which are normal, lognormal, fat tailed with finite upper moments, or fat tailed with indeterminate upper moments? Does the researcher believe in models based on estimating the price change (multi-factor) or price level (price formation)? Does he or she believe in cash as the best driver of DCF valuation in modeling or is earnings a good enough proxy? Does the researcher believe the balance sheet and operating return measures derived from the operating assets are crucial to a valid DCF valuation model or are operating earnings or cash flow sufficient? Does she or he believe in placing leverage and size “risk” in the discount rate or in the certainty equivalent cash flows? Does she or he believe in separating the valuation effects of the historical baseline from the analyst forecasts? Does the researcher believe in separating the reaction of price to financial disclosures from trading, weighting, and rebalancing strategies? The authors of this request for proposal assume that the researcher will let the research design and data lead to the appropriate conclusions. 6 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -3- 875097044 fundamental factors. Please replicate & extend the Rob Arnott empirical work9 with back tests and actual portfolios. c. Multi-factor models. Employ the best factors and model structures with non-linear functions if necessary. Please effectively address the serious problem of multicollinearity of the “independent” variables. Univariate analysis should precede the multi-variate analysis. Academics should explain how multi-factor models provide guidance to the business unit manager or the owner of a privately held firm on what internal metrics he should employ to create shareholder wealth. 10 Consider whether there ought to be one Framework that investors can use to beat the market and the identical Framework that corporations can use to create value for their shareholders. d. Discounted Cash Flow. Determine the most accurate and predictive models. Please include intrinsic valuations based on the security analyst DCF forecasts of brokerage firms. The Society encourages academics to recommend additional important segmentations of strategies. 3. Hybrid Models. A critical question relates to the feasibility of combining active approaches. Should results of a multi-factor model feed into a DCF or viceversa? Are classification and regression trees (CART) a more appropriate way to combine models? Are there other construction techniques which provide superior risk-return characteristics? For example, where do long-short strategies fit the continuum? Another critical question relates to applying active approaches to a fundamental index, as opposed to the traditional free float cap weighted index. Can these active approaches add similar value to fundamental indexes? Should these active approaches be modified when they are applied to fundamental indexes? Alternatively, do fundamental indexes add value to value-oriented active approaches? 4. Measurement Methodologies. a. Risk. Please consider employing the risk measurements outlined in two separate requests for proposal: for time series: “Risk-Adjusted Ranking in a Non Mean Variance World;” for cross sectional: “Cross Sectional Risk / Return Measurement of Portfolio Results over an Interval of Time in a Non Mean-Variance World.” b. Regression Analysis used in Multi-Factor Models. Since Mandelbrot suggests that much financial data and most prices follow Stable Paretian distributions with infinite variances, the residuals from the regressions should be tested for normality and finite upper moments.11 Robert Arnott, Jason Hsu, Phil Moore, “Redefining Indexation,” Patent Pending, © 2004 Research Affiliates. 10 Bartley J. Madden, “For Better Corporate Governance, A Shareholder Value Review,“ www.LearningWhatWorks.com 11 See for example, John Neter, Michael H. Kutner, Christopher J. Nachsheim, and William Wasserman, Applied Linear Statistical Models, McGraw-Hill, 1996, pp. 106-108. 9 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -4- 875097044 McCulloch12 recommends a quantile method for estimating the four parameters of the Stable distribution. McCulloch includes significance tests to measure how distant from Gaussian Normal the distributions lie. Consider fat tailed distributions of the residuals with finite upper moments. If the statistical tests on the residuals confirm nonnormality with infinite variances, then Blattberg and Sargent state: 13 The central limit theorem is important because it establishes a foundation for hypothesis testing. It states that the sum of a large number of independently distributed variables, each of which follows a distribution of finite variance, will tend to be normally distributed. … If the omitted variables whose impacts are summarized by the [residuals] have infinite variances, the assumptions of the central limit theorem fail to hold and the [residuals] will not be normally distributed. Blattberg and Sargent go on to recommend using least absolute deviations14 instead of ordinary least squares in cases of variables with infinite variances. This approach significantly reduces biases in the regression coefficients or the factor weights. c. DCF Model Accuracy. Consider measuring DCF model accuracy with value charts and price level tracking errors (see citation #4 below). d. Back Testing Predictive Methods. Propose traditional methods of back testing with periodic trading and portfolio re-balancing. Consider determining portfolio returns with price formation models which track performance from disclosure dates with panel and other data (see citation #5 below). 5. Productization. The academics should include an appendix to their papers with an outline of productization for rapid practitioner decisions in real time with available data. The outline should show data sources, information flow, frequency, resulting reports, and describe how practitioners make the decisions from the reports. Citations and Disclosures 1. Fundamental Indexation. The September/October 2006 Journal of Indexation (pages 8, 10-21, 22-24) contains articles and arguments on both sides of the fundamental indexation issue.15 Much of the discussion revolves around the theme of whether the market is efficient or not. J. Huston McCulloch, “Simple Consistent Estimators of Stable Distribution Parameters,” Commun. Statist. – Simula., 15(4), 1986, pp. 1109-1136. 13 Robert Blattberg and Thomas Sargent, “Regression with Non-Gaussian Stable Disturbances: Some Sampling Results, Econometrica, Vol. 39, No. 3, (May 1971), pp. 501-511. 14 SPSS may implement a procedure to minimize absolute deviations instead of least squares as the loss function. 15 For a recent academic article on fundamental indexation, see Javier Estrada, “Fundamental Indexation and International Diversification” for a current discussion and citation list. 12 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -5- 875097044 2. Multi-Factor Models. Multi-factor models are regression models which began as an outgrowth of traditional screening of stocks. They use multiple criteria to find stocks likely to out-perform the market. Multi-Factor models seek the best factors and parameters applied to those factors. Using historical data, model architects regress price changes against the factors. Chen, Roll and Ross applied the technique to macro economic factors. 16 Fama and French related returns to size and book/equity market multiples. 17 Haugen and Baker tried multiple factors, listed in their article.18 Grinold and Kahn tried factors listed in their book.19 Joel Greenblatt published the book with two key factors – return on capital and earnings yield.20, 21 Besides the variables suggested by the authors above, consider the best sites recommended by the American Association of Individual Investors for stock screening: www.Morningstar.com www.moneycentral.msn.com www.investor.reuters.com and www.smartmoney.com . 3. Creating Multi-Factor Models.22 Different reasons exist for the creation of multi-factor models: a. Quantify and capitalize on market inefficiencies. b. Quantify the factors which analysts and portfolio managers use to generate ideas for their security and portfolio recommendations. c. Run enhanced index funds. d. Expand product lines in areas where the firm lacks fundamental expertise. Success in outperforming the market arises if the multifactor model is created properly. Different methods exist to create multi-factor models: a. On the one end of the spectrum, the fundamental analyst or portfolio manager simply places multiple factors together to produce a relative ranking of all stocks on his coverage list or selection universe with little or no back tests. b. The other end of the spectrum incorporates data mining, testing all factor levels and changes in factor levels over several different N. Chen, R. Roll, and S.A. Ross, “Economic Factors and the Stock Market,” Journal of Business, Vol. 59, 1986, pp. 383-404. 17 E.F. Fama and K.R. French, “The Cross Section of Returns,” Journal of Finance, 47, 1992, pp. 427-466. 18 Robert A. Haugen and Nardin L. Baker, “Commonality in the Determinants of Expected Stock Returns,” Journal of Financial Economics, Summer 1996. 19 Richard C. Grinold and Ronald N. Kahn, Active Portfolio Management, McGraw-Hill, 2000, pages 501502. 20 Joel Greenblatt, The Little Book that Beats the Market, Wiley, 2006, pp. 138-143. 21 Ralph Goldsticker. Insert links to relevant published and unpublished articles. Goldsticker has a bias toward a belief in inefficient markets and multi-factor models as a means to capitalize on that inefficiency. Based on the results of this academic research, Mellon Capital may refine or expand its product offerings. 22 Amit Dugar of Schwab. For a description of the Schwab equity model, see Vito Racanelli, “The Schwab Advantage,” Barron’s, November 27, 2006, pp. 22-23. For a comparison of brokerages’ top share recommendations, see Vito J. Racanelli, Barron’s On-Line, September 25, 2006. Insert links to relevant published and unpublished articles. Dugar has a bias toward a belief in inefficient markets and multifactor models as a means to capitalize on that inefficiency. Based on the results of this academic research, Schwab may refine or expand its product offerings. 16 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -6- 875097044 intervals to produce one or more models to capitalize on any market inefficiencies that can be found. c. Most reasonable approaches only examine factors that reflect the fundamental operating condition of the company or other factors cited in the academic literature. 4. Discounted Cash Flow Models. On the one hand, Multi-Factor models try to find the best factors and associated parameters by regressing price changes against the factors with historical data. On the other hand, DCF models try to estimate intrinsic values as levels for individual stocks, with the view that price likely migrates toward those intrinsic value levels. Fundamental indexation also assumes a migration of price toward intrinsic values for the portfolio as a whole, which is better accomplished with fundamental weights instead of cap weights. Traditional DCF forecasts cash flows for several years and places a terminal value on the final year. The concept relies on forecasting the number of years necessary for the business to achieve stability in cash flows on which to place a terminal value. The terminal value is often a perpetuity. The forecast is a multi-period one, while the perpetuity is a single period capitalization method to reflect the present value of the cash flows beyond the forecasting time horizon. This forecasting procedure represents the traditional security analyst process, where the analyst remains responsible for defining both the cash flow forecast and the structure of the single period terminal value model. In contrast to this multi-period security analysis forecast process, commercial firms, like Stern Stewart, McKinsey, and off-shoots of Callard-Madden Associates, have developed single period capitalization models for determining intrinsic value. Single period capitalization models may rely on a single year’s23 worth of historical data without analyst intervention to forecast future cash flows for 40-50 years. The Callard-Madden offshoots rely on a CFROI®24 relative to a real market derived cost of capital, while Stern Stewart25 and McKinsey rely on a residual income or EVA®26 using a CAPM cost of capital. Little academic literature has addressed these methodologies, because most of them were developed within the practitioner community for portfolio and corporate value based planning applications.27 For example, Sometimes the method smoothes 2-3 years of data. CFROI® is a world-wide registered trademark of CSFB HOLT. 25 Stern Stewart offers the ProveIt portfolio management product. 26 EVA® is a registered trademark of Stern Stewart. 27 Bartley J. Madden, Cash Flow Return on Investment: A Total System Approach to Valuing the Firm, Butterworth Heinemann, 1999. G. Bennett Stewart, The Quest for Value: A Guide for Senior Managers, Harper Collins, 1991. Tom Copeland, Tim Koller, and Jack Murrin, Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies, Wiley, 2000. Gary C. Biddle, Robert M. Bower, and James S. Wallace, “Does EVA® beat earnings? Evidence on association with stock returns and firm values,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24 (1997), pp. 301336. Thomas G. Lewis, Steigerung des Unternehmens-wertes (Total Value Management), Verlag Moderne Industrie, 1994. Steffen Lehmann, Neue Wege in der Bewertung borsennotierter Aktiengesellschaften Ein-Cash-floworientiertest Ertragswertmodell, DeutscherUniversitatsVerlag, 1993. John D. Martin and J. William Petty, Value Based Management, Harvard Business School Press, 2000. 23 24 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -7- 875097044 Thomas and Schostag published an article describing the single period fading Cash Economic Return discounted cash flow intrinsic valuation methodology. 28 Some DCF methodologies empirically separate the intrinsic valuations based (A) purely on history without analyst intervention from (B) those intrinsic valuations based on history with analysts’ forecasts. In this former case (A), the intrinsic values based purely on history form a baseline, which can be illustrated with a value chart. The value chart overlays the intrinsic value against the high-low-closing prices, often for ten years of history. In the latter case (B), the value chart extends into the forecast time period based on the analyst forecast. In addition to CFROI® and residual income based models, Feltham-Ohlson,29 Diliddo of Vector Vest, 30 and ValuTrac31 have created models of intrinsic valuation. 5. DCF model accuracy methodologies and back tests of price formation models. Callard-Madden offshoots created value charts with price level tracking errors32 and the back testing methods for determining portfolio returns with price formation models which track performance from disclosure dates with panel and other data.33 6. Hybrid Approaches. For one example, the Center for Research and Analysis (CFRA) offers a service to identify abnormal accruals. Howard Schilit wrote the book34 describing the forensic accounting process. Richardson et. al. provided the methodology for the calculations. The methodology displayed an average 18% excess annual rate of return between the top and bottom deciles.35 Are these decile results best placed into a multi-factor model or the abnormal accrual reversed between the income statement and balance sheet 28 Rawley Thomas and Randy Schostag, “Discounted Cash Flow Method: Using New Modeling to Test Reasonableness,” Valuation Strategies, September/October 2006, pp. 24-41. http://www.LCRT.com/Updates/NACVA PAPER LCRT & DCF.pdf . Thomas serves as VP Practitioner Director of the Financial Management Association and heads the FMA’s Practitioner Research Committee. Under the Committee’s Policies and Procedures, Thomas must disclose his commercial interest as selling products, consulting services, and IT integration related to advanced DCF and risk measurement. Any involvement of Thomas or his company, LifeCycle Returns, in the Practitioner Demand Driven Academic Research Initiative requires full disclosure and approval of the Executive Committee of the FMA. Based on the empirical evidence produced so far, Thomas has a bias toward DCF models and Stable Distributions with infinite variances. 29 Jing Liu and James A. Ohlson, “The Feltham-Ohlson (1995) Model: Empirical Implications,” Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 2000. Kim Lo and Thomas Lys, “The Ohlson Model: Contribution to Valuation Theory, Limitations and Empirical Applications,” Journal of Accounting, Auditing, and Finance, 2000. 30 Bart Diliddo, Stocks, Strategies & Common Sense, HSC Publishers, 1995-1998, pp. 22-23. 31 http://www.valu-trac.com/ based on ROE. 32 Exhibits 2-4, 11-12 of Rawley Thomas and Randy Schostag, “Discounted Cash Flow Method,” Valuation Strategies, September/October 2006, pp. 24-41. Pages 7-10 and 26-28 of http://www.LCRT.com/Updates/NACVA PAPER LCRT & DCF.pdf . “Advanced DCF Valuation Measurement Methodology: Predictive Capability, Accuracy, and Robustness,” presented to the Midwest Finance Association, March 23, 2006 by Rawley Thomas, slides 45-47, www.lcrt.com/Updates/MidwestFinance3-24-06.pps . 34 Howard Schilit, Financial Shenanigans: How to Detect Accounting Gimmicks & Fraud in Financial Reports, McGraw-Hill, 2002. 35 Scott Richardson, Mark Soliman and Irem Tuna, “Implications of Accounting Distortions and Growth for Accruals and Profitability,” November 2005 version. 33 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -8- 875097044 to incorporate those results into a valuation model? Should security analysts explicitly estimate how much of the abnormal accruals reflect the changing economics of the business and how much represent fraudulent management reporting? Firms Who May Be Willing to Donate Data 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Northern Trust (fundamental indexation) Harris Bank (fundamental indexation) Richards and Tierney (fundamental indexation) Schwab (multi-factor) Mellon Capital Management (multi-factor) LifeCycle Returns36 (DCF – definitely willing) Standard & Poors (various strategies) Morningstar (various strategies) Subject to the approval of the FMA Executive Committee, LCRT will offer not only data, but also access to the LCRT Research Platform for testing the accuracy and predictive capability of DCF valuation models, along with technical support. This access requires that the academic(s) and its institution execute a license agreement / non-disclosure agreement with LCRT at no cost. 36 7/13/2017 9:02 PM -9- 875097044