1 / 48

International Investment 2005-2006

International Investment 2005-2006. Professor André Farber Solvay Business School Université Libre de Bruxelles. Notions of Market Efficiency. An Efficient market is one in which: Arbitrage is disallowed: rules out free lunches

keelingj
Download Presentation

International Investment 2005-2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International Investment 2005-2006 Professor André Farber Solvay Business School Université Libre de Bruxelles

  2. Notions of Market Efficiency • An Efficient market is one in which: • Arbitrage is disallowed: rules out free lunches • Purchase or sale of a security at the prevailing market price is never a positive NPV transaction. • Prices reveal information • Three forms of Market Efficiency • (a) Weak Form Efficiency • Prices reflect all information in the past record of stock prices • (b) Semi-strong Form Efficiency • Prices reflect all publicly available information • (c) Strong-form Efficiency • Price reflect all information PhD 01-1

  3. Realization Expectation Efficient markets: intuition Price Price change is unexpected Time PhD 01-1

  4. Weak Form Efficiency • Random-walk model: • Pt -Pt-1 = Pt-1 * (Expected return) + Random error • Expected value (Random error) = 0 • Random error of period t unrelated to random component of any past period • Implication: • Expected value (Pt) = Pt-1 * (1 + Expected return) • Technical analysis: useless • Empirical evidence: serial correlation • Correlation coefficient between current return and some past return • Serial correlation = Cor (Rt, Rt-s) PhD 01-1

  5. S&P500 Daily returns PhD 01-1

  6. Semi-strong Form Efficiency • Prices reflect all publicly available information • Empirical evidence: Event studies • Test whether the release of information influences returns and when this influence takes place. • Abnormal return AR : ARt = Rt - Rmt • Cumulative abnormal return: • CARt = ARt0 + ARt0+1 + ARt0+2 +... + ARt0+1 PhD 01-1

  7. Efficient Market Theory Announcement Date PhD 01-1

  8. Example: How stock splits affect value -29 0 30 Source: Fama, Fisher, Jensen & Roll

  9. Event Studies: Dividend Omissions Efficient market response to “bad news” S.H. Szewczyk, G.P. Tsetsekos, and Z. Santout “Do Dividend Omissions Signal Future Earnings or Past Earnings?” Journal of Investing (Spring 1997) PhD 01-1

  10. Strong-form Efficiency • How do professional portfolio managers perform? • Jensen 1969: Mutual funds do not generate abnormal returns • Rfund - Rf =  + (RM - Rf) • Insider trading • Insiders do seem to generate abnormal returns • (should cover their information acquisition activities) PhD 01-1

  11. What moves the market • Who knows? • Lot of noise: • 1985-1990: 120 days with | DJ| > 5% • 28 cases (1/4) identified with specific event (Siegel Stocks for the Long Run Irwin 1994 p 184) • Orange juice futures (Roll 1984) • 90% of the day-to-day variability cannot explained by fundamentals • Pity financial journalists! PhD 01-1

  12. Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth(Barber and Odean Journal of Finance April 2000) • Sample: trading activity of 78,000 households 1991-1997 • Main conclusions: 1. Average household underperforms benchmark by 1.1% annually 2. Trading reduces net annualized mean returns Infrequent traders: 18.5% Frequent traders: 11.4% 3. Households trade frequently (75% annual turnover) 4. Trading costs are high: for average round-trip trade 4% (Commissions 3%, bid-ask spread 1%) PhD 01-1

  13. US Equity Mutual Funds 1982-1991(Malkiel, Journal of Finance June 1995) • Average Annual Return • Capital appreciation funds 16.32% • Growth funds 15.81% • Small company growth funds 13.46% • Growth and income funds 15.97% • Equity income funds 15.66% • S&P 500 Index 17.52% • Average deviation from benchmark -3.20% (risk adjusted) PhD 01-1

  14.  : Excess Return • Excess return = Average return - Risk adjusted expected return Return Expected return Average return  Risk Risk PhD 01-1

  15. Jensen 1968 - Distribution of “t” values for “”115 mutual funds 1955-1964 Not significantly different from 0 PhD 01-1

  16. US Mutual FundsConsistency of Investment Result Successive Period Performance Initial Period Performance Top Half Bottom Half Goetzmann and Ibbotson (1976-1985) Top Half 62.0% 38.0% Bottom Half 36.6% 63.4% Malkiel, (1970s) Top Half 65.1% 34.9% Bottom Half 35.5% 64.5% Malkiel, (1980s) Top Half 51.7% 48.3% Bottom Half 47.5% 52.5% Source: Bodie, Kane, Marcus Investments 4th ed. McGraw Hill 1999 (p.118) PhD 01-1

  17. Decomposition of Mutual Fund Returns(Wermers Journal of Finance August 2000) • Sample: 1,758 funds 1976-1994 • Benchmark 14.8% +1% • Gross return 15.8% • Expense ratio 0.8% • Transaction costs 0.8% • Non stock holdings 0.4% • Net Return 13.8% Funds outperform benchmark Stock picking +0.75% No timing ability Deviation from benchmark +0.55% Not enough to cover costs PhD 01-1

  18. Passive Portfolio Management Professor André Farber Solvay Business School Université Libre de Bruxelles

  19. Academic Foundations of Passive Investment • Portfolio Theory (Markowitz 1952) • Benefits of diversification • Capital Asset Pricing Model (Sharpe, Lintner) • Relationship between expected return and risk • Market Efficiency (Fama 1970) • Stock prices reflect all available information. • Mutual Fund Performance (Jensen 1968) • Professionally managed portfolio seem unable to make consistent abnormal returns PhD 01-1

  20. Portfolio characteristics expected return risk (standard deviation) Risk determined by covariances Efficient frontier If riskless asset: one optimal portfolio Expected return Portfolio Theory Risk PhD 01-1

  21. Capital Asset Pricing Model • Equilibrium model, optimal portfolio = market portfolio • Risk of individual security = beta (systematic risk) • Risk - expected return relationship E(r) = Risk-free rate + Market risk premium x Beta Expected return E(rmarket) Beta 1 PhD 01-1

  22. Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) • Strong version: “Security prices fully reflect all available information” • Weaker version: “Prices reflect information to the point where the marginal benefit of acting on information (the profit to be made) do not exceed the marginal costs” (Fama 1991) PhD 01-1

  23. EMH (continued) • A theoretical result: • Bachelier (1900) Théorie de la spéculation • Samuelson (1965) Proof that properly anticipated prices fluctuate randomly. • A vast empirical litterature • “weak-form tests”: do past returns provide information? • “semistrong-form”: is public information reflected in stock prices? • “strong-form tests”: do stock prices reflect private information? PhD 01-1

  24. Implications of the EMH for Investment Policy • Technical Analysis • Fundamental Analysis • Active Portfolio Management • market timing • stock selection PhD 01-1

  25. Mutual Fund Performances • Malkiel (Journal of Finance June 1995) • 239 equity funds 1982-1991 • Average excess return Benchmark Portfolio: Wilshire 5000 S&P500 Net returns -0.93% -3.20% Gross returns 0.18% -2.03% • Persistence of Fund Performance: • Winner: rate of return > median • Percent Repeat Winners: 51.7% PhD 01-1

  26. Mutual Fund Performances (cont.) • Otten and Barms, WP 2000 • 506 European equity funds 1991-1998 No Mean Market Funds Return Return France 99 10.9 12.7 Germany 57 13.9 15.3 Italy 37 15.2 14.9 Netherland 9 22.0 21.0 United Kingdom 304 12.3 14.2 PhD 01-1

  27. EMH: faith or fact? • All empirical tests based on asset pricing model: Excess return = Realized return - Expected return • Any test of the EMH is a joined test • Still looking for the Capital Asset pricing model • anomalies (calendar, size) • missing factors (book-to-market, value vs growth) • time variation of market risk premium • international diversification PhD 01-1

  28. From Theory to Practice • First index fund: 1971 launched by Wells Fargo (Samsonite pension fund) and American National Bank • Fidelity vs Vanguard • Benchmarking • Asset classes • Expense ratio • Outliers: talent or luck? PhD 01-1

  29. Capital asset pricing model (CAPM) • Sharpe (1964) Lintner (1965) • Assumptions • Perfect capital markets • Homogeneous expectations • Main conclusions: Everyone picks the same optimal portfolio • Main implications: • 1. M is the market portfolio : a market value weighted portfolio of all stocks • 2. The risk of a security is the beta of the security: • Beta measures the sensitivity of the return of an individual security to the return of the market portfolio • The average beta across all securities, weighted by the proportion of each security's market value to that of the market is 1 PhD 01-1

  30. Market equilibrium: illustration PhD 01-1

  31. Capital Asset Pricing Model Expected return RM Rj Risk free interest rate βj 1 Beta PhD 01-1

  32. Arbitrage Pricing Theory • Starts from statistical characterization of returns • Consider one factor model for stock returns: • Rj = realized return on stock j • E(Rj) = expected return on stock j • F = factor – a random variable E(F) = 0 • εj = unexpected return on stock j – a random variable • E(εj) = 0 Mean 0 • cov(εj ,F) = 0 Uncorrelated with common factor • cov(εj ,εk) = 0 Not correlated with other stocks (=key assumption) PhD 01-1

  33. Diversification • Suppose there exist many stocks with the same βj. • Build a diversified portfolio of such stocks. • The only remaining source of risk is the common factor. PhD 01-1

  34. Created riskless portfolio • Combine two diversified portfolio i and j. • Weights: xiand xjwith xi+xj =1 • Return: • Eliminate the impact of common factor  riskless portfolio • Solution: PhD 01-1

  35. Equilibrium • No arbitrage condition: • The expected return on a riskless portfolio is equal to the risk-free rate. At equilibrium: PhD 01-1

  36. Risk – expected return relation Linear relation between expected return and beta For market portfolio, β= 1 Back to CAPM formula: PhD 01-1

  37. The approach can easily be generalized to several factors Generalization PhD 01-1

  38. Empirical challenges • Explaining the cross section of returns • Explaining changes in expected returns PhD 01-1

  39. Beta PhD 01-1

  40. PhD 01-1

  41. Size and B/M PhD 01-1

  42. Based on monthly data 192607 200411 File: 25_Portfolios_5x5_monthly.xls PhD 01-1

  43. Fama French PhD 01-1

  44. Predictability: Interest Rates and Expected Inflation Schwert, W., Anomalies and Market Efficiency,WP October 2002 http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=338080 PhD 01-1

  45. Predictability: D/P PhD 01-1

  46. Predictability PhD 01-1

  47. PhD 01-1

  48. Econometrician wanted… PhD 01-1

More Related