Reading 17 Asset Allocation Flashcards
Strategic asset allocation and Tactical asset allocation, definition
- Strategic asset allocation is an integrative element of the planning step in portfolio management. In strategic asset allocation, an investor’s return objectives, risk tolerance, and investment constraints are integrated with long-run capital market expectations to establish exposures to IPS-permissible asset classes. The aim is to satisfy the investor’s investment objectives and constraints. Thus strategic asset allocation can be viewed as a process with certain well-defined steps. Performing those steps produces a set of portfolio weights for asset classes; we call this set of weights the strategic asset allocation (or the policy portfolio). Thus “strategic asset allocation” may refer to either a process or its end result.
- Tactical asset allocation (TAA), which involves making short-term adjustments to asset-class weights based on short-term expected relative performance among asset classes.
Key economic role of strategic asset allocation due to observations
The strategic asset allocation specifies the investor’s desired exposures to systematic risk
Strategic asset allocation vs. horse race system
- Strategic asset allocation is superior to the horse race system as a method for controlling the systematic risk exposures. Using strategic asset allocation, it is possible to maintain maximum control over the risk exposures
- In contrast, the horse race system creates incentives for the investment managers to take on a higher level of risk than is appropriate. The managers have the incentive to greatly overweight the highest-expected-return asset class in order to finish first in the race, particularly if they are lagging other managers. The resulting portfolio will tend to be less diversified and have higher risk than the policy portfolio.
Strategic versus Tactical Asset Allocation
- Strategic asset allocation sets an investor’s desired long-term exposures to systematic risk. “Long term” has different interpretations for different investors, but five years is a reasonable minimum reference point. Tactical asset allocation involves making short-term adjustments to asset-class weights based on short-term predictions of relative performance among asset classes. TAA can subsume a range of approaches, from occasional and ad hoc adjustments to frequent and model-based adjustments.
- TAA creates active risk (variability of active returns—i.e., portfolio returns minus benchmark returns). In exchange for active risk, the manager using TAA hopes to earn positive active returns that sufficiently reward the investor after deducting expenses.
- Strategic asset allocations are reviewed periodically or when an investor’s needs and circumstances change significantly. The policy portfolio should be revised only to account for changes in the investor’s long-term capital market forecasts, not to reflect short-term forecasts.
The Empirical Debate on the Importance of Asset Allocation
- Asset allocation is important as the fraction of the variation in returns over time attributable to asset allocation, based on regression analysis.
- An alternative perspective is asset allocation’s importance in explaining the cross-sectional variation of returns—that is, the proportion of the variation among funds’ performance explained by funds’ different asset allocations. In other words, to what degree do differences in asset allocation explain differences in rates of return over time for a group of investors?
- Investors need to keep in mind their own specific risk and return objectives and establish a strategic asset allocation that is expected to satisfy both. Sidestepping strategic asset allocation finds no support in the empirical or normative literature.
ALM approach and AO approach, definition
- The asset/liability management (ALM) approach involves explicitly modeling liabilities and adopting the optimal asset allocation in relationship to funding liabilities.
- In contrast to ALM, an asset-only (AO) approach to strategic asset allocation does not explicitly involve modeling liabilities. In an AO approach, any impact of the investor’s liabilities on policy portfolio selection is indirect (e.g., through the level of the return requirement). Compared with ALM, an AO approach affords much less precision in controlling risk related to the funding of liabilities.
- One example of an AO approach to strategic asset allocation is the Black–Litterman model. This model takes a global market-value-weighted asset allocation (the “market equilibrium portfolio”) as the default strategic asset allocation for investors.
Cash flow matching and Immunization, definitions
- A cash flow matching approach structures investments in bonds to match (offset) future liabilities or quasi-liabilities. When feasible, cash flow matching minimizes risk relative to funding liabilities.
- An immunization approach structures investments in bonds to match (offset) the weighted-average duration of liabilities.Because duration is a first-order approximation of interest rate risk, immunization involves more risk than does cash flow matching with respect to funding liabilities.
Dynamic approach and Static approach, definitions
- A dynamic approach recognizes that an investor’s asset allocation and actual asset returns and liabilities in a given period affect the optimal decision that will be available next period. The asset allocation is further linked to the optimal investment decisions available at all future time periods.
- In contrast, a static approach does not consider links between optimal decisions at different time periods, somewhat analogous to a driver who tries to make the best decision as she arrives at each new street without looking further ahead. This advantage of dynamic over static asset allocation applies both to AO and ALM perspectives. With the ready availability of computing power, institutional investors that adopt an ALM approach to strategic asset allocation frequently choose a dynamic rather than a static approach. A dynamic approach, however, is more complex and costly to model and implement. Nonetheless, investors with significant future liabilities often find a dynamic approach to be worth the cost.
The ALM approach tends to be favored when…
In general, the ALM approach tends to be favored when:
- the investor has below-average risk tolerance;
- the penalties for not meeting the liabilities or quasi-liabilities are very high;
- the market value of liabilities or quasi-liabilities are interest rate sensitive;
- risk taken in the investment portfolio limits the investor’s ability to profitably take risk in other activities;
- legal and regulatory requirements and incentives favor holding fixed-income securities; and
- tax incentives favor holding fixed-income securities.
Characteristic Liability Concerns of Various Investors
Type of Investor: Individual
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Taxes, mortgage payments (living expenses, wealth accumulation targets)
Penalty for Not Meeting: Varies
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: AO most common, ALM
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Pension plans (defined benefit)
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Pension benefits
Penalty for Not Meeting: High, legal and regulatory
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: ALM, AO
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Pension plans (defined contribution)
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Retirement needs
Penalty for Not Meeting: Varies
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: Integrated with individual’s asset allocation approach
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Foundations and endowments
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Spending commitments, capital project commitments
Penalty for Not Meeting: High
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: AO, ALM
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Life insurance companies
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Death proceeds, annuity payments, return guarantees on investment products
Penalty for Not Meeting: Very high, legal and regulatory
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: ALM
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Non-life insurance companies
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Property and liability claims
Penalty for Not Meeting: Very high, legal and regulatory
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: ALM
___________________________________
Type of Investor: Banks
Type of Liability (Quasi-Liability): Deposits
Penalty for Not Meeting: Very high, legal and regulatory
Asset Allocation Approach in Practice: ALM
Qualitative and quantitative return objectives of investors
Investors have both qualitative and quantitative investment objectives.
- Qualitative return objectives describe the investor’s fundamental goals, such as to achieve returns that will:
- provide an adequate retirement income (for an individual currently in the workforce);
- maintain a fund’s real purchasing power after distributions (for many endowments and foundations);
- adequately fund liabilities (for investors such as pension plans and insurance companies); or
- exceed the rate of inflation in the long term (from the prospectus of an inflation-protected bond fund).
- Because strategic asset allocation involves meeting an investor’s long-term needs, precise statements of numerical return objectives must take account of the effects of compounding.
- Careful specification of the numerical return objective should reflect the costs of earning investment returns and inflation as well as their compound effects through time.
Additive vs. compound formulation of a return objective
- An additive formulation of a return objective can serve as a starting point. Because additive formulations provide an intuitive wording of a return objective, such formulations are common in actual investment policy statements. The differences between additive and multiplicative formulations can be essentially negligible for low levels of spending rates and inflation. Nevertheless, portfolio managers should prefer the multiplicative formulation for strategic asset allocation purposes; managers should also observe the distinction between compound and arithmetic mean rates of growth.
- If an investor’s return requirement is based on the compound rate of return needed to achieve a goal, the corresponding arithmetic mean one-period return needed to achieve that goal will be higher than the return requirement stated as a compound rate of return
- If the investor states an arithmetic mean annual return objective based on a compound growth rate calculation, the investor’s return objective should reflect an appropriate upward adjustment from the compound growth rate.
Numerical risk aversion
Numerical risk aversion can be measured in an interview or questionnaire in which the investor expresses preferences among sets of choices involving risky and certain returns. Risk aversion is the inverse of risk tolerance: A lower value of risk aversion means a higher tolerance for risk. To give approximate guidelines for the scale we will use, an RA of 6 to 8 represents a high degree of risk aversion (i.e., a low risk tolerance), while an RA of 1 to 2 represents a relatively low degree of risk aversion (i.e., a high risk tolerance).
Um=E(Rm)−0.005RAσ<span>2</span><span>m</span>
where:
Um = the investor’s expected utility for asset mix m
E(Rm) = expected return for mix m
RA = the investor’s risk aversion
σ2m = variance of return for mix m
In equation, E(Rm) and σm are expressed as percentages rather than as decimals.
Shortfall risk, downside risk, Roy’s safety-first criterion
Another way for an investor to quantify risk is in terms of shortfall risk, the risk that a portfolio’s value will fall below some minimum acceptable level during a stated time horizon.
Shortfall risk is one example of the larger concept of downside risk (risk relating to losses or worse than expected outcomes only). Downside risk concepts include not only shortfall risk but concepts such as semivariance and target semivariance that also may be applied in asset allocation and are discussed in statistical textbooks (as well as defined in the glossary).
The oldest shortfall risk criterion is Roy’s safety-first criterion. Roy’s safety-first criterion states that the optimal portfolio minimizes the probability over a stated time horizon that portfolio return, RP, will fall below some threshold level RL that the investor insists on meeting or exceeding. The safety-first optimal portfolio maximizes the safety-first ratio (SFRatio):
SFRatio=(E(RP)−RL)/σP
Another shortfall risk approach. An investor could also specify a given maximum probability of not meeting a return threshold. That probability can be translated into a standard deviation test, if we assume a normal distribution of portfolio returns. For example, suppose that a 2.5 percent probability of failing to meet a return threshold is acceptable. Given a normal distribution of returns, the probability of a return that is more than two standard deviations below the expected return is approximately 2.5 percent. Therefore, if we subtract two standard deviations from a portfolio’s expected return and the resulting number is above the client’s return threshold, the resulting portfolio passes that shortfall risk test. If the resulting number falls below the client’s threshold, the portfolio does not pass that shortfall risk test. Shortfall probability levels of 5 percent and 10 percent translate into 1.65 and 1.28 standard deviations below the mean, respectively, under a normality assumption.
Behavioral Influences on Asset Allocation
- If the advisor establishes that a client is loss averse, one approach may be to incorporate an appropriate shortfall risk constraint or objective in the asset allocation decision. Managing assets with such a constraint or objective should reduce the chance that the client finds himself facing the prospect of a substantial loss.
- If the investor displays mental accounting the investor will place his total wealth into separate accounts and buckets. Each bucket is associated with a different level of risk tolerance depending on a purpose the investor associates with it.
- The money’s source may affect how an individual invests: An investor may be more likely to invest in a risky venture with cash that is drawn from a windfall gain rather than from salary.
- A multistrategy approach has greater complexity than the standard finance approach of developing one strategic asset allocation for the client, because it involves many optimizations rather than just one. Furthermore, developing a set of asset allocations for stand-alone portfolios ignores the correlations between assets across portfolios; the resulting overall asset allocation may fail to use risk efficiently.
- The fear of regret may play a role in actual asset allocation decisions in at least two ways. First, it may be a psychological factor promoting diversification. Second, regret avoidance may limit divergence from peers’ average asset allocation if the investor is sensitive to peer comparisons.
Criteria for Specifying Asset Classes
Five criteria that will help in effectively specifying asset classes:
- Assets within an asset class should be relatively homogeneous. Assets within an asset class should have similar attributes.
- Asset classes should be mutually exclusive. Overlapping asset classes will reduce the effectiveness of strategic asset allocation in controlling risk and also introduce problems in developing asset-class return expectations.
- Asset classes should be diversifying. For risk-control purposes, an included asset class should not have extremely high expected correlations with other asset classes or with a linear combination of the other asset classes.
- The asset classes as a group should make up a preponderance of world investable wealth. From the perspective of portfolio theory, selecting an asset allocation from a group of asset classes satisfying this criterion should tend to increase expected return for a given level of risk. Furthermore, including more markets expands the opportunities for applying active investment strategies, assuming the decision to invest actively has been made.
- The asset class should have the capacity to absorb a significant fraction of the investor’s portfolio without seriously affecting the portfolio’s liquidity. Practically, most investors will want to be able to reset or rebalance to a strategic asset allocation without moving asset-class prices or incurring high transaction costs.
The criticism of relying on pairwise correlations for risk-control purposes
- The criticism of relying on pairwise correlations is that an asset class may be highly correlated with some linear combination of other asset classes even when the pairwise correlations are not high.
- For each current asset class, find the linear combination of the other asset classes that minimizes tracking risk with the proposed asset class. (Tracking risk is defined as the square root of the average squared differences between the asset class’s returns and the combination’s returns.)
Traditional asset classes include…
Traditional asset classes include the following:
- Domestic common equity. Market capitalization sometimes has been used as a criterion to distinguish among large-cap, mid-cap, and small-cap domestic common equity as asset classes.
- Domestic fixed income. Maturity sometimes has been used to distinguish among intermediate-term and long-term domestic bonds as asset classes. Recently, inflation protection has been used to distinguish between nominal bonds and inflation-protected bonds as asset classes.
- Non-domestic (international) common equity. Developed market status sometimes has been used to distinguish between developed market equity and emerging market equity.
- Non-domestic fixed income. Developed market status sometimes has been used to distinguish between developed market fixed income and emerging market fixed income.
- Real estate. The term alternative investments is now frequently used to refer to all risky asset classes excluding the four listed above.
- Cash and cash equivalents.
Adding the asset class to the portfolio is optimal if….
Adding the asset class (denoted new) to the portfolio is optimal if the following condition is met:
(E(Rnew)−RF)/σnew>([E(Rp)−RF]/σp)Corr(Rnew,Rp)
This expression says that for the investor to gain by adding the asset class, that asset class’s Sharpe ratio must exceed the product of the existing portfolio’s Sharpe ratio and the correlation of the asset class’s return with the current portfolio’s return.
Risks of International Assets
- Currency risk is a distinctive issue for international investing because exchange rate fluctuations affect both the magnitude and volatility of return.
- Currency risk may not be a large concern, however, for several reasons. First, the correlation between the asset return in local-market currency terms and change in the currency value will be less than one, providing some offset to exchange rate volatility considered in isolation.
- A second reason why currency risk may not be a large concern is that in a global portfolio, the average correlation between currencies will be less than one, providing further risk reduction.
- Finally, in terms of standard deviations, currency volatility is approximately half that of stock market volatility. Compared with bond volatility, however, currency volatility is typically twice as large. As a result, exchange rate risk is often considered to be a more critical consideration for bond portfolios compared with common share portfolios.
- Political risk is a potential concern for the global investor and can come in many forms. In its most general form, political risk results when a country does not have responsible fiscal and monetary policies necessary for economic growth and/or when the country does not possess the appropriate legal and regulatory structure necessary for the growth of financial markets.
- Many researchers believe developed world investors underinvest in nondomestic markets, a phenomenon called home country bias. This bias could prevent investors from allocating assets optimally. One explanation for home country bias may be investors’ relative lack of familiarity with nondomestic markets. Investors may be less comfortable with foreign markets because of differences in language, information availability, culture, or business practices. Other reasons for home country bias include high transactions costs, low foreign asset liquidity, or foreign political risk. In addition, some institutions (e.g., insurance companies) may have domestic liabilities that should not be matched with foreign assets.
Costs of International Assets
- The costs of trading in foreign securities can be higher than that for domestic securities. If liquidity is lower abroad, trading costs such as commissions and the bid–ask spread are likely higher.
- Additionally, withholding taxes on income are frequently assessed by foreign governments.
- In addition to the higher trading costs of nondomestic investment, investors may face the problem of low free-float. Free-float refers to the proportion of stock that is publicly traded, which will be low when the government, other companies, founding families, and/or management have large equity holdings. An equity market may have large capitalizations, but a foreign investor may not be able to invest much in it. The major capitalization-weighted indices in the world have been adjusted for free-float.
Opportunities in International Assets
- A possible explanation for the reduced effectiveness of international stock diversification in mitigating portfolio risk during times of stress is that stock markets are becoming more integrated (linked) internationally
- Although country factors have become less important and industry factors more important, diversification across borders should still be a consideration for most investors for several reasons:
- First, it has been demonstrated that the relative importance of the factors varies by industry and country. For example, equity returns in some industries are more related to a country factor, whereas in other industries the industry factor dominates. The relative importance of factors also varies by country.
- Second, smaller economies may have very limited industry representation such that the residents must look outside their border for greater industry representation. For example, an agrarian economy may not have a tech industry.
- Third, the stocks within the domestic industry may not provide the greatest opportunity. The financial markets in some countries may be less efficient, providing an opportunity for active managers.
- Fourth, the finding that currency factors are important for returns indicates that diversifying across countries can provide risk reduction.
- International diversification can more generally benefit the investor in the following ways:
- First, foreign markets may offer better valuations than domestic markets.
- Second, although global markets tend to crash together in the short term, over the long term a global equity portfolio provides better protection against adverse events than a local portfolio, especially when equally weighted.
- Third, world bond markets’ correlations are usually low, often lower than that between equity markets. Diversifying with nondomestic bonds offers opportunities for a better risk–return tradeoff, especially for lower risk portfolios.
- Fourth, although particular markets may have outperformed in the past and certain economies may be poised for future growth, the past often does not forecast the future and the valuations of strong economies will reflect their prospects. No one market is always going to be the best investment and it is very difficult to predict which markets will outperform.
- The implication for asset allocation from the above discussion is that investors should diversify across countries and industries. Indexing provides an efficient means of diversification by providing global exposure to diverse economies, industries, currencies, and political regimes.