International portfolio diversification is better than you think

Using aggregate data on bilateral cross-border equity holdings, we investigate whether investors correctly hedge their over-exposure to domestic risk (the well-known equity home bias) by investing in foreign stock markets that have low correlation with their home stock market. To deal with the endogeneity of stock return correlations, we instrument current correlations with past correlations. Controlling for many determinants of international portfolios, we find that, all else equal, investors do tilt their foreign holdings towards countries, which offer better diversification opportunities. The diversification motive that we uncover is stronger for source countries exhibiting a higher level of home bias.     

Long-term international diversification of equities

Equity investors exhibit home bias although they can reduce risk with diversified global portfolios. We studied 118 years of data for 21 developed markets to investigate international diversification benefits for long-horizon equity investors. Investing equal proportions in all the markets would have increased Sharpe ratios only for investors in countries with low domestic ratios. Optimal global portfolios would have significantly increased Sharpe ratios for investors in all the countries. Allocating equal proportions to five optimal countries would have provided most of the maximum potential benefits of international diversification. Investors in countries with lower domestic Sharpe ratios would have benefited more from international diversification, primarily through risk reduction.     

Immigration and equity home bias

Why do investors hold such large positions in domestic equity when there are gains to be made from international diversification? This equity home bias puzzle has received considerable attention in the literature, with asymmetric information on domestic and foreign assets (whether by individual choice or by market imperfection) emerging as the most plausible explanation. What happens when we consider a subset of investors whose information sets are closer to investors in foreign countries? I assess the relationship between immigration and equity home bias and find that inward migration is positively correlated with increased foreign equity positions and reduced home bias. Looking across income groups, outward migration reduces home bias for relatively rich countries, but may actually increase home bias when migration occurs to or from a developing country. These results suggest that immigration generates a positive externality of increased information flows for developed countries, but not for developing nations. The effects of immigration on investment are strongest within the Euro-Zone, suggesting that this positive externality of immigration is largest when barriers to portfolio diversification (such as currency risk) are lowest.     

Equity Home‐Bias: A Suboptimal Choice for UK investors?

In spite of the popularity of international portfolio diversification theory, extant empirical literature shows that investors prefer domestic assets and as a result, many studies argue that investors' portfolios are largely suboptimal. This paper examines whether British investors need to diversify their portfolios internationally to gain performance benefits from international markets or can they obtain these benefits by mimicking the portfolios with domestically traded assets. The results confirm that it is possible to mimic the performance of foreign equity with domestic equity. Indeed, the pay‐offs from homemade portfolios outperform those from international portfolios regardless of the periodic variation in the overall performance of the UK market vis‐à‐vis foreign markets. The superiority of homemade portfolio is more prominent in recent years and is enhanced by the increased internationalisation of developed capital markets. Therefore, investors' home bias is not suboptimal.     

Gravity and culture in foreign portfolio investment

Using panel regression estimates from the IMF’s CPIS survey of foreign debt and equity portfolios across 174 originating and 50 destination countries from 2001 to 2007, we clarify the role of culture and extend the set of cultural variables that have been investigated in gravity models of foreign portfolio investment (FPI). Incorporating Hofstede’s cultural dimensions of individualism, masculinity, power distance and uncertainty avoidance, we show how cultural traits in both originating and destination countries, as well as the cultural distances that separate them, interact with geographic distance and other gravity variables to determine global FPI patterns. We find hitherto unreported effects and show that while gravity always deters FPI, aspects of culture and cultural distance can offset this by supporting FPI.     

International diversification with securitized real estate and the veiling glare from currency risk

This paper analyzes diversification benefits from international securitized real estate in a mixed-asset context. We apply regression-based mean-variance efficiency tests, conditional on currency-unhedged and fully hedged portfolios to account for systematic foreign exchange movements. From the perspective of a US investor, it is shown that, first, international diversification is superior to a US mixed-asset portfolio, second, adding international real estate to an already internationally diversified stock and bond portfolio results in a further significant improvement of the risk-return trade-off and, third, considering unhedged international assets could lead to biased asset allocation decisions not realizing the true diversification benefits from international assets.     

Information immobility,industry concentration,and institutional investors’ performance

This paper examines foreign institutional investors’ portfolio allocation and performance in US securities. We test how information immobility, proxied by information barriers between the investors’ home markets and the US, influences portfolio strategies. Consistent with theoretical predictions, foreign institutional investors’ total investment in the US is negatively related to information immobility. Similarly, information immobility is a significant driver of portfolio under-diversification across industries. Industry concentration has declined over time, consistent with declining search costs. Industry-concentrated portfolios outperform more diversified portfolios for both foreign and US institutional investors. Concentration especially helps institutional investors with the easiest access to information.     

Do ETFs provide effective international diversification?

Global investments have been a hot issue for years. Investors can diversify risks and obtain benefits from foreign markets by investing directly in the foreign security market or indirectly in Exchange-Trade Funds (ETFs). Because direct investments are not always feasible, we investigate whether indirect investments can replace direct investments. We create different regional optimal portfolios containing ETFs and ensure optimal asset portfolio allocation. In addition to mean-variance approach, the Sharpe index, we also adopt the Campbell et al. (2001) method to have the efficient frontier under control risks, the Value at Risk. We apply both normal and non-normal distributions for comparisons and find that different assumptions of return distributions affect the results of efficient frontier. The results show that international diversification is a reasonable strategy. In addition, when comparing ETFs and target market index portfolios, ETFs have higher Sharpe measures than target market indices especially in the emerging markets. However, there are no significant performance differences between direct and indirect methods even if we use different performance measures. We also find that the diversification benefits are the same before and after the Subprime crisis. We conclude that it is effective for investors to use indirect methods to create internationally diversified portfolios.     

Loss aversion,asymmetric market comovements,and the home bias

Loss aversion has been used to explain why a high equity premium might be consistent with plausible levels of risk aversion. The intuition is that the first-order-different utility impact of wealth gains and losses leads loss-averse investors to behave similarly to investors with high risk aversion. But if so, should those agents not perceive larger gains from international diversification than standard expected-utility investors with plausible levels of risk aversion? They might not, because comovements in international stock markets are asymmetric: correlations are higher in market downturns than in upturns. This asymmetry dampens the gains from diversification relatively more for loss-averse investors. We analyze the portfolio problem of such an investor who has to choose between home and foreign equities in the presence of asymmetric comovement in returns. Perhaps surprisingly, in the context of the home bias puzzle we find that loss-averse investors behave similarly to those with standard expected-utility preferences and plausible levels of risk aversion. We argue that preference specifications that appear to perform well with respect to the equity premium puzzle should be subjected to this “test”.     

Are investors really home-biased when investing at home?

Investors who only invest in their domestic market are typically referred to as being home-biased. We refer to firm-level internationalization and call into question whether investing in domestic stock indices actually leads to home bias. We use three measures of firm-level internationalization based on percentages of foreign sales, employees in foreign countries, and foreign tax payments. We aggregate firm-level results to determine the degree of internationalization of German, French, UK and US stock indices. French and UK stock indices exhibit the largest degree of internationalization. The German index provides slightly less internationalization, whereas internationalization of the US index is lowest but nonetheless considerable. This means that investors who invest in their domestic market do not necessarily suffer from home bias. Instead, investing in domestic stock indices more likely prevents investors from a home bias instead of entrapping them to insufficient portfolios.     

Diversification and systemic risk

Portfolio diversification makes investors individually safer but creates connections between them through common asset holdings. Such connections create “endogenous covariances” between assets and investors, and enhance systemic risk by propagating shocks swiftly through the system. We provide a theoretical model in which shocks spread through constrained selling from N diversified portfolio investors in a network of asset holdings with home bias, and study the desirability of diversification by comparing the multivariate distribution of implied losses for every level of diversification. There may be a region on the parameter set for which the propagation effect dominates the individually safer one. We derive analytically the general element of the covariance between two assets i and j. We find agents may minimize their exposure to endogenous risk by spreading their wealth across more and more distant assets. The resulting network enhances systemic stability.     

Is local bias a cross-border phenomenon? Evidence from individual investors’ international asset allocation

Extant literature consistently documents that investors tilt their domestic equity portfolios towards regionally close stocks (local bias). We hypothesize that individual investors’ local bias is not limited to the domestic sphere but instead also determines their international investment decisions. Our results confirm the presence of a cross-border local bias. Specifically, we show (i) that the stockholdings of individual investors living within regional proximity to a foreign country display a significantly lower foreign investment bias towards investment opportunities in that country and (ii) that this drop in foreign investment bias levels is disproportionately driven by investments in regionally close neighbor-country companies. The impact of cross-border local bias on investors’ bilateral foreign equity investments is economically significant and holds even after controlling for previously identified explanations of international asset allocation.     

A return-based approach to identify home bias of European equity funds

This paper introduces a return-based approach to studying a possible home bias of European equity funds by estimating their exposures to their domestic markets. We first confirm the robustness of our approach using simulated portfolios with different proportions of domestic and foreign stocks. The empirical analysis examines equity funds domiciled in 15 European countries that invest in European stocks. We examine individual funds as well as portfolios comprising funds that are all domiciled in a particular country. Our findings reveal that the portfolios of four domiciles show a significant home bias. Moreover, we observe that in seven domiciles more than a quarter of the individual funds are home-biased. These results are robust when controlling for fund-specific benchmarks or for the average country exposures of all funds in our final sample. Finally, a home bias of individual funds is not related to superior performance, but actually results in higher investment risk consistent with underdiversification.     

Home sweet home: Home bias and international diversification among individual investors

A striking feature of international portfolio investment is the extent to which equity portfolios are concentrated in the domestic market of the investor. We investigate differences in home bias on an individual level by studying portfolios formed as a part of the new defined contribution pension plan in Sweden. We estimate the likelihood of home bias and use individuals’ demographic and socioeconomic features as explanatory variables. Our findings indicate that the likelihood of home bias is caused by both rational and irrational factors. Moreover, we relate home bias to investors’ desire to hedge against inflation, sophistication and overconfidence.     

Equity fund ownership and the cross-regional diversification of household risk

We explore the link between portfolio home bias and consumption risk sharing among Italian regions using household-level information on consumption, income and portfolio holdings. Since equity funds are typically diversified at the national or international level, we use data on equity fund ownership to proxy for regional home bias. Cross-regional patterns of equity fund ownership are qualitatively consistent with simple portfolio theory: regions with more asymmetric business cycles are more diversified because they have higher fund participation rates (the extensive margin of diversification) and higher average holdings of equity funds (diversification’s intensive margin). Also, fund holdings increase with the exposure of non-tradable income components (such as labor or entrepreneurial income) to regional shocks. Finally, interregional consumption risk sharing increases with fund holdings and this effect seems strongest when participation is widespread. Increased equity market participation could substantially improve interregional risk sharing.     

Australia's home bias and cross border taxation

The paper examines the impact of cross border taxation on Australia's free float home bias. The paper controls for various sources of home bias including familiarity, explicit cost, diversification motives and governance issues when examining the impact of cross border tax variables. In our sample of 44 foreign countries where Australia invests over the period 2001 to 2009, about 66% (82%) withhold taxes on realized capital gains (dividends) of foreign investors. A tax credit variable for foreign taxes paid on dividends is constructed and found to be statistically significant in reducing home bias.     

Home bias and Dutch pension funds’ investment behavior

Using a panel data set of more than 600 Dutch pension funds (PFs) between 1992 and 2006, we investigate asset allocation behavior of Dutch PFs across multiple asset classes. We find that domestic investments, also known as home bias, in portfolio choices of Dutch institutional investors have fallen. We also find that the introduction of the euro, the dot-com crisis (1999–2001) and individual PF's characteristics are significant determinants of home bias. Overall, mature PFs’ portfolios are diversified internationally, whereas large PFs seem to prefer to only scale up their foreign, less-risky positions at the expense of domestic fixed-income positions. The effect of the dot-com crisis is more pronounced for domestic bonds, whereas the introduction of the euro was more important for domestic equities.     

The determinants of domestic and foreign bond bias

This paper studies the determinants of the domestic and the foreign bond biases and their evolution over time using aggregate bond allocation data from CPIS. Our results show that the home bias is prevalent across all countries, despite the decreasing of the domestic bias in most countries in the 1997–2009 period. We find that the domestic bond bias is lower in countries with higher economic development, higher restrictions on foreign capital transactions, more developed bond markets, higher familiarity, and higher efficiency of the judicial system. When investing overseas, investors also prefer to allocate their investments in countries with higher economic development, lower restrictions on capital flows, more developed bond markets, stronger judicial systems, and higher past returns. Additionally, we find that familiarity (i.e. geographic proximity, common language, and bilateral trade) is a major determinant to decrease the foreign bias. Finally, there is no evidence that investors’ bond allocations are explained by diversification opportunities as proxied by bond markets correlations.     

Individual home bias,portfolio churning and performance

This study investigates economic consequences of individual investors’ home bias and portfolio churning in their personal pension accounts. The empirical analysis is carried out within a Heckman style two-stage framework to account for selection bias with respect to individuals’ investment activity, and to allow for an endogenously determined home bias, portfolio churning and performance. Results indicate that home bias induces a worse risk-adjusted performance. Home-biased individuals’ relatively bad performance originates in insufficient risk-reduction, due to a lack of international diversification. A higher degree of portfolio churning also deteriorates performance, despite the fact that churning is not associated with any direct transaction costs. However, home-biased individuals do not churn portfolios as often as individuals with a larger share of international asset holdings, which diminishes the negative effects of home bias on performance. Overconfidence is driven by a return-chasing behavior, where overconfident individuals favor international assets with high historical returns. Individuals with actual skill are more often men than women, are not tempted by high historical returns, and use international assets for the right reason – diversification.     

Using Four‐Moment Tail Risk to Examine Financial and Commodity Instrument Diversification

We consider the effect of higher moments on diversification, since most assets possess a potential for tail losses. In particular, we examine higher‐moment Value‐at‐Risk measures for individual instruments and diversified portfolios. We find that a naïve futures portfolio is consistently superior to common stock indexes. As few as ten randomly chosen instruments diversify away 85% of the unsystematic four‐moment tail risk. We also compare the two‐ and four‐moment tail risks for different size portfolios. Finally, the tail risk for naïve portfolios varies much less over time than other portfolios.