benchmarking money manager performance: issues & evidence louis k. c. chan university of...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
216 views
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Benchmarking money manager performance:
Issues & evidence
Louis K. C. ChanUniversity of Illinois Urbana-
Champaign
March 2006
![Page 2: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Objectives
• The evaluation and attribution of investment performance is crucial for investment research and practice– Money manager performance
– Results of investment strategies & trading rules
– Effects of managerial decisions on shareholder wealth
• Academic and practitioner research has produced a large array of methods for evaluating and attributing investment performance
![Page 3: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Objectives
• Question: are conclusions sensitive to the choice of evaluation and attribution methods? why?
• We compare the results from various methods applied to common samples– Set of active institutional money managers– Passive indexes
![Page 4: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Evaluating method performance• Many widely-used methods draw on evidence
from asset pricing studies that size, value/growth describe much of the variation in returns (notably Fama and French (1992), Fama and French (1993))
• We concentrate on benchmarking methods based on size, value/growth– Characteristic-matched control portfolios– Time-series factor model regressions– Effective asset mix regressions– Cross-sectional regressions on characteristics
• 1998 – 2000 market boom as stress test of benchmarking methods
![Page 5: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Evaluating manager performance
• Much previous work on evaluating performance of mutual and closed-end funds (e.g. Jensen (1968), Elton et al. (1993), Malkiel (1995), Gruber (1995), Carhart (1997), Daniel et al. (1997), Kothari and Warner (2001), etc.)
• Managers of pension plan equity assets are just as important, but much less previous research (see LSV 1992, Coggin et al. 1993)
![Page 6: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
A first look: characteristic-matched portfolios
vs. 3 factor model
![Page 7: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
![Page 8: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Benchmark details
• Benchmarks vary according to– Characteristics or loadings– Measuring size, value/growth style– Treating size, value/growth effects
separately– Portfolio weighting scheme– Frequency of benchmark reconstitution
![Page 9: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Benchmark details
• Characteristics versus loadings– Predict benchmark return using portfolio’s
attributes (size, book-to-market …) or predict benchmark return using portfolio’s loadings on factors
– Some evidence that attributes predict returns better than loadings (Daniel and Titman 1997)
– Data on holdings not generally accessible
![Page 10: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Building performance benchmarks
• Measuring size, value/growth style– Size: market capitalization (float?)– Value/growth orientation usually measured by
book-to-market ratio (book value of equity divided by market value of equity)
– Book value of equity does not record value of intangible assets; includes goodwill from acquisitions
![Page 11: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Building performance benchmarks
• Treating size, value/growth effects separately– E.g. independent 2-way sorts by size, BM– In one-way sorts by book-to-market equity
large stocks typically are classified as growth – Under an independent size/BM sort procedure
large-cap managers, regardless of large value/large growth style, will tend to be compared against a growth benchmark
![Page 12: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Building performance benchmarks
• Weighting scheme for stocks in benchmark– Equal-weighting– Value-weighting
• Benchmark reconstitution frequency– Over time benchmark becomes more
heterogeneous and may no longer correspond to managed portfolio’s features
![Page 13: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Data
• Holdings and returns every quarter for 199 portfolios offered by money managers to clients, 1989Q1 - 2001Q4
• Domestic U.S. equity portfolios only• Different styles (large/mid/small,
value/blend/growth)• Some selection bias
![Page 14: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Results outline• Performance relative to benchmarks based
on characteristics– Overall active manager sample– Classified by investment style– Diagnostics
• Performance relative to benchmarks based on loadings– Overall active manager sample– Classified by investment style– Diagnostics
![Page 15: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Performance measures
• Abnormal return = portfolio’s return minus return on benchmark portfolio
• Tracking error volatility = standard deviation of quarterly difference between portfolio’s return and benchmark’s return
![Page 16: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
![Page 17: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Benchmark performance
![Page 20: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Benchmark performance
![Page 21: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Benchmark comparisons
![Page 22: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
![Page 23: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
![Page 24: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Performance based on regression benchmarks
• Three factor model excess return is ( rpt – rft ) – benchmark return
• benchmark return is from fitted regression β(rmt – rft ) + s SMBt + h HMLt
![Page 25: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Regression-based benchmark details
• Exposures estimated– over full period (including the quarter when
we measure performance)– or leaving out the quarter when we measure
performance
• Measuring size, value/growth factors– High versus low book-to-market– Other indicators of value/growth orientation
![Page 26: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Building regression-based benchmarks
• 3 factor model accounts for size, value/growth separately
• E.g. benchmark return for small value manager = return for market exposure
plus return for smallness plus return for value
• Benchmark credits manager for smallness even though small stocks’ performance is because small growth does better than small value
![Page 27: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Regression-based benchmarks• Alternative: compare manager to a
selection of passive benchmarks (effective asset mix regressions)
rpt = α + w1*LGt + w2*LVt
+ w3*MCGt + w4*MCVt
+ w5*SGt + w6*SVt + υpt
w1, … ,w6 portfolio weights (between 0 and 1, add up to 1)
![Page 28: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Building regression-based benchmarks
• Another widely-used alternative: each stock’s predicted return is from a cross-sectional regression using stock characteristics, industry dummy variables rit = α + β1*X1i + β2*X2i + …
![Page 29: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
![Page 30: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
![Page 31: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
![Page 32: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Regression-based benchmark comparisons
![Page 33: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Regression-based benchmark comparisons
![Page 34: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
![Page 35: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Conclusions
• Benchmarking methods that appear similar on the surface can lead to very different conclusions about investment performance
• Popular methods (characteristic-matched reference portfolios, 3 factor time series regression models, cross-sectional regression) have disappointing ability to track managed active portfolios and passive benchmarks
![Page 36: Benchmarking money manager performance: Issues & evidence Louis K. C. Chan University of Illinois Urbana- Champaign March 2006](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022033106/56649d415503460f94a1b775/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Conclusions
• Methods based on within-size classifications, use multiple measures of value-growth orientation, improve ability to track managed and passive portfolios
• Given the fragility in reliably separating skill from style, detailed decomposition and attribution of performance should be treated with caution