Non-Gaussian diversification: When size matters

Classical portfolio theory informs investors that they should have a large number of assets in their portfolios in order to diversify risk. We show that the non-Gaussian features of stock return distribution may not allow for this risk protection in times of crisis. Moreover, we demonstrate empirically that, if investors are risk-averse and consider higher order moments, they have numerous incentives not to diversify their portfolios fully. This is caused by the evolution of both large losses and asymmetry of returns when the numbers of assets in a portfolio change.     

Hedge fund liquidity and performance: Evidence from the financial crisis

We investigate how share restrictions affect hedge fund performance in crisis and non-crisis periods. Consistent with prior research, we find that in the pre-crisis period more illiquid funds generate a share illiquidity premium compensating investors for limited liquidity. In the crisis period, this share illiquidity premium turns into an illiquidity discount. Hedge funds with more stringent share restrictions invest more heavily in illiquid assets. While share restrictions enable funds to manage illiquid assets effectively in the pre-crisis period, they seem insufficient to ensure effective management of illiquid portfolios in the crisis. In a crisis period, funds holding illiquid portfolios experience lower returns and alphas, also when share restrictions are controlled for. Funds with an asset–liability mismatch perform particularly poorly and experience the strongest outflows. Share restrictions are also a proxy for incentives as investors cannot immediately withdraw their money after poor performance. We show that higher incentive fees can offset the share illiquidity discount in the crisis period.     

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.     

Do IPO index portfolios improve the investment opportunities for mean–variance investors?

We set out in this study to examine whether investors can improve their investment opportunity sets through the addition of an IPO index portfolio into various sets of benchmark portfolios. Using the IPOX indices from the years 1980–2006, we find that adding an IPO index portfolio does lead to a statistically significant enlargement of the investment opportunity set for investors. Our empirical findings are robust, demonstrating that there is scope for the further development of financial products relating to IPO stocks, since investors can gain diversification benefits through investing in such IPO-related products.     

Myopic loss aversion and stock investments: An empirical study of private investors

Myopic loss aversion was suggested by Benartzi and Thaler (1995) as an explanation for the equity premium puzzle. Its main prediction is that loss averse investors, who evaluate their investment performance too frequently and therefore often observe small losses on their stock portfolios, would invest too little in equity. We investigate the link between myopic loss aversion and actual investment decisions of individual investors, using survey data. Our results are consistent with the predictions of Benartzi and Thaler. Higher myopic loss aversion is associated with lower stock investment as a share of total assets. Investors tend to evaluate their stock portfolio performance too often, which contributes to the prevalence of myopic loss aversion. The effect of myopia is most apparent when investors both evaluate their portfolios frequently and trade stocks regularly.     

Disagreement,tastes, and asset prices

Standard asset pricing models assume that: (i) there is complete agreement among investors about probability distributions of future payoffs on assets; and (ii) investors choose asset holdings based solely on anticipated payoffs; that is, investment assets are not also consumption goods. Both assumptions are unrealistic. We provide a simple framework for studying how disagreement and tastes for assets as consumption goods can affect asset prices.     

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.     

The Diversification Effects of Initial Public Offerings

Abstract:  A firm's stock becomes publicly tradable through an initial public offering (IPO). This study suggests a portfolio diversification perspective to explore IPOs. We examine whether investors can gain diversification benefits by adding an IPO portfolio to a set of benchmark portfolios sorted by firm size and book-to-market ratio. Using US IPOs from 1980-2002, we find that adding a value-weighted IPO portfolio does lead to a statistically and economically significant enlargement of the investment opportunity set for investors relative to investing solely in a set of benchmark portfolios. Specifically, the Sharpe ratio of the tangency portfolio increases by 5.50% on average after including IPO stocks. Furthermore, IPOs associated with prestigious lead underwriters are the main source of this augmentation of the mean-variance investment opportunity set. Finally, our study implies that issuing IPO exchange traded funds or similar products can provide diversification gains to investors.     

Performance of mutual funds before and after closing to new investors

This study examines the decision to close mutual funds to new investors due to the growth of the funds' assets. The evidence indicates that funds perform better three years prior to closing to new investors than they do afterwards. Furthermore, the evidence indicates that the closed funds outperform the control portfolios of funds with similar investment objectives and asset size during the one- and three-year periods prior to closing. However, there is no significant difference in the performance of closed funds and their matched control portfolios during the one- and three-year periods after closing. Although the primary reason given for closing the funds is the desire to maintain performance in the face of growing assets, the strategy does not appear successful in accomplishing this objective.     

Saving and investing for early retirement: A theoretical analysis

We study optimal consumption and portfolio choice in a framework where investors adjust their labor supply through an irreversible choice of their retirement time. We show that investing for early retirement tends to increase savings and reduce an agent's effective relative risk aversion, thus increasing her stock market exposure. Contrary to common intuition, an investor might find it optimal to increase the proportion of financial wealth held in stocks as she ages and accumulates assets, even when her income and the investment opportunity set are constant. The model predicts a decrease in risk aversion following strong market gains like those observed in the nineties.     

Portfolio selection with mental accounts and delegation

Das et al. (2010) develop an elegant framework where an investor selects portfolios within mental accounts but ends up holding an aggregate portfolio on the mean-variance frontier. This investor directly allocates the wealth in each account among available assets. In practice, however, investors often delegate the task of allocating wealth among assets to portfolio managers who seek to beat certain benchmarks. Accordingly, we extend their framework to the case where the investor allocates the wealth in each account among portfolio managers. Our contribution is threefold. First, we provide an analytical characterization of the existence and composition of the optimal portfolios within accounts and the aggregate portfolio. Second, we present conditions under which such portfolios are not on the mean-variance frontier, and conditions under which they are. Third, we show that the aforementioned analytical characterization is also applicable within the framework of Das et al. and thus improves upon their numerical approach.     

Harmful diversification: Evidence from alternative investments

Alternative assets have become as important as equities and fixed income in the portfolios of major investors, and so their diversification properties are also important. However, adding five alternative assets (real estate, commodities, hedge funds, emerging markets and private equity) to equity and bond portfolios is shown to be harmful for US investors. We use 19 portfolio models, in conjunction with dummy variable regression, to demonstrate this harm over the 1997–2015 period. This finding is robust to different estimation periods, risk aversion levels, and the use of two regimes. Harmful diversification into alternatives is not primarily due to transactions costs or non-normality, but to estimation risk. This is larger for alternative assets, particularly during the credit crisis which accounts for the harmful diversification of real estate, private equity and emerging markets. Diversification into commodities, and to a lesser extent hedge funds, remains harmful even when the credit crisis is excluded.     

Performance Attribution of US Institutional Investors

Institutional investors play a prominent role in today's markets. Quarterly reported portfolio holdings make it possible to evaluate the risk-adjusted equity investment performance of all institutional investors in the United States during 1981–2002. The results indicate that institutional investors have been successful in managing client assets; they have added significant value by generating excess returns after controlling for underlying portfolio risk factors. Style choice is the main factor in determining overall portfolio performance, but institutional investors also displayed significant stock selection skills during the period. The stocks they choose for their portfolios have outperformed the stocks they exclude.     

Optimal asset allocation under linear loss aversion

We study the asset allocation of a linear loss-averse (LA) investor and compare it to the more traditional mean-variance (MV) and conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) investors. First we derive conditions under which the LA problem is equivalent to the MV and CVaR problems and solve analytically the two-asset problem of the LA investor for a risk-free and a risky asset. Then we run simulation experiments to study properties of the optimal LA and MV portfolios under more realistic assumptions. We find that under asymmetric dependence LA portfolios outperform MV portfolios, provided investors are sufficiently loss-averse and dependence is large. Finally, using 13 EU and US assets, we implement the trading strategy of a linear LA investor who reallocates his/her portfolio on a monthly basis. We find that LA portfolios clearly outperform MV and CVaR portfolios and that incorporating a dynamic update of the LA parameters significantly improves the performance of LA portfolios.     

Equilibrium with investors using a diversity of deviation measures

It has been argued that investors who optimize their portfolios with attention paid only to mean and standard deviation will all end up choosing some multiple of a certain master fund portfolio. Justification for the capital asset pricing model of classical portfolio theory, which relates individual assets to such a master fund, has come from this direction in particular. Attempts have been made to provide solid mathematical support by showing that the imputed behavior of investors is a consequence of price equilibrium in a market in which assets are traded subject to budget constraints, and optimization is carried out with respect to utility functions that depend only on mean and standard deviation.     

A Note on the Analytics and Geometry of Limiting Mean—Variance Investment Opportunity Sets

This paper extends the mathematics developed by Merton (1972) to the limiting investment opportunity set as smaller risk assets are added. Investment opportunity sets of risky assets are well-known to be described by hyperbolae in mean-standard deviation space. In practice, the asset classes in portfolios may vary from high risk common stocks to near cash assets. Low variability assets change the appearance of the investment opportunity set to the extent that a unique optimum risky asset portfolio disappears. The limiting result is similar to the investment opportunity set that arises when two assets are perfectly correlated. The location of the IOS is shown to mathematically depend upon the level of the riskless interest rate and one slope parameter. The slope parameter is estimable, using a finite number of assets, and represents a bound on market Sharpe ratios.     

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.     

A General Equilibrium Model of International Portfolio Choice

We investigate, in a two-country general equilibrium model, whether a bias in consumption towards domestic goods will necessarily lead to a preference for domestic securities. We develop a model where investors are constrained to consume only from their domestic capital stock and where it is costly to transfer capital across countries. In this model, investors less risk averse than an investor with log utility bias their portfolios towards domestic assets. Investors more risk averse than log, however, prefer foreign assets. Thus, this model suggests that it is unlikely that the portfolios observed empirically can be explained by the high proportion of domestic goods in total consumption.     

Why does junior put all his eggs in one basket? A potential rational explanation for holding concentrated portfolios

Empirical studies of household portfolios show that young households, with little financial wealth, hold underdiversified portfolios that are concentrated in a small number of assets, a fact often attributed to behavioral biases. We present a potential rational alternative: we show that investors with little financial wealth, who receive labor income, rationally limit the number of assets they invest in when faced with financial constraints such as margin requirements and restrictions on borrowing. We provide theoretical and numerical support for our results and identify the ratio of financial wealth to labor income as a useful control variable for household portfolio studies.     

The Effect of Socially Responsible Investing on Portfolio Performance

More and more investors apply socially responsible screens when building their stock portfolios. This raises the question whether these investors can increase their performance by incorporating such screens into their investment process. To answer this question we implement a simple trading strategy based on socially responsible ratings from the KLD Research & Analytics: Buy stocks with high socially responsible ratings and sell stocks with low socially responsible ratings. We find that this strategy leads to high abnormal returns of up to 8.7% per year. The maximum abnormal returns are reached when investors employ the best‐in‐class screening approach, use a combination of several socially responsible screens at the same time, and restrict themselves to stocks with extreme socially responsible ratings. The abnormal returns remain significant even after taking into account reasonable transaction costs.