Investment Manager Selection Flashcards
Macro Attribution
+ Done at sponsor level
+ Measure effect of sponsor’s choice to deviate from strategic asset allocation
Micro Attribution
+ Done at manager level
+ Measure impact of portfolio managers’ allocation and selection decisions on total fund performance
Return-based Attribution
+ Use total return over a period only
+ Use for hedge fund when holding info is unavailable
+ Least informative and subject to data manipulation
Holding-based Attribution
+ Use beginning-of-period holdings of portfolio
+ More frequent data –> more accuracy
+ Not capture transaction during measurement period –> not reconcile to actual return
+ Residual (actual - holding-based return) = timing/trading effect
+ Appropriate for passive strategy (without much trading)
Transaction-based Attribution
+ Use weights and return of all transaction
+ Including transaction costs
+ Most accurate attribution analysis but difficult and time-consuming
appraisal ratio
= alpha / sigma
+ Alpha = return of portfolio - return suggest by CAPM
+ Sigma = standard deviation of the residual/unsystematic risk
+ Meaning: higher AR is generating more active return per unit of active risk
define the universe investment manager
(1) suitability
(2) Style
(3) Active & Passive
RBSA
return base style & analysis
+ Top down approach
+ Estimate portfolio’s sensitivities to Market indexes for key risk factors
Advantages:
+ Available data
+ Comparable across managers and through time
+ Timely performed
Disadvantages:
+ Limit identification of decision during period -> distort (xuyen tac) recognition of manager added
value
+ Stale price for Real Estate, PE Fund, VC fund, … –> underestimate risk
HBSA
+ Bottom-up approach
+ Estimate risk based on actual holding
Advantages: ~ RBSA
Disadvantages:
+ Increased computational requirement
+ Not appropriate for high turnover port
+ Understate risk for stale price of illiquid asset
Kich ban capture ratio
+ Long-only (100% Index) -> CR ~ 1
+ Positive Asymmetry (TT tang -> phan bo nhieu hon vao Index) -> CR > 1
+ Low beta (50% Index, 50% T-bill) -> CR =~1
+ Negative Asymetrym (TT tang -> phan bo it hon vao Index) -> CR < 1
matrix tracking risk - active share
+ Tracking risk low - active share low: Closet indexer
+ Tracking risk high - active share high: concentrated stock pickers
+ Tracking risk low - active share high: diversified stock pickers
+ Tracking risk high - active share low: sector rotation
3 types of Performance-based Fees
+ Symmetrical structure with full upside and downside exposures: Computed Fee = Base + Sharing of performance
+ Bonus with full upside and limited downside exposures: = Max (Base, Base + Sharing of positive performance)
+ Bonus with Limited upside and downside exposures = Max (Base, Base + Sharing of positive performance (within limit))
type I manager errors
Bo sot
+ hire/retain manager no skill
+ explicit cost (commission, tax, fee)
+ more painful than Type II
+ easier to measure than Type II (chi can so sanh voi benchmark la biet)
type II manager errors
Giet nham
+ Not hire/fire manager has skill
+ Oppotunity cost, the cost is not transparent
lower cost of type I and type II
+ Smaller difference in sample size
+ Smaller difference in return distribution means
+ Greater difference in return distribution dispersion
+ More efficient market