On the Hybrid Nature of REITs

The consensus that emerges from the current research on the linkage between securitized and direct investment in real estate is that direct (private) real estate returns play a relatively minor role in the real estate investment trust (REIT) return generating process. However, this result may at least partially be due to the coarseness of the measures of direct real estate returns or the relatively short return horizons used in previous studies. This study takes a different and unique perspective. Unlike earlier studies we do not use aggregated, average appraisal based returns on direct real estate investment. Instead, we use the MIT TBI indexes, which are transaction based price indexes, available both on the aggregate and sub-index levels. We find that the relation between REIT and direct real estate returns appears to be stronger at longer horizons. More specifically, using a cointegration framework, we find robust evidence that REITs and the underlying real estate are related and that they share a long run equilibrium. Interestingly, we find that both REITs and direct real estate returns adjust towards this long run relationship. When we examine property type level data we find similar results.     

Information Uncertainty and the Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift Anomaly: Insights from REITs

This is the first study to examine the post-earnings-announcement drift anomaly in a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) context. The efficient markets hypothesis suggests that unexpected earnings should be fully incorporated into asset prices soon after being publicly announced. We hypothesize that publicly announced earnings signals may be more certain for REITs due to the presence of a parallel (private) asset market, suggesting less drift for REIT stocks. However, we find a large REIT drift component that is both statistically and economically significant. Furthermore, while the initial earnings surprise response is more muted for REITs, we find that the magnitude of the drift is significantly larger for REITs than for ordinary common stocks (NonREITs). Thus, information does not appear to move between the private and public asset markets in such a way as to render REIT earnings signals more certain than NonREIT earnings signals.     

Price Discovery in Real Estate Markets: A Dynamic Analysis

Although the correlation between the public and private market pricing of real estate has generated considerable research effort, the methods utilized in previous studies have failed to capture the dynamic nature of this correlation. This paper proposes a new statistical method to address this issue. This method, known as the dynamic conditional correlation GARCH model, enables us to study the dynamics of the correlation between the two markets over time and enrich our understanding of the public and private market pricing of real assets. We find that the correlation between NAV returns and REIT returns is dynamic for all REIT types and there is a strong degree of persistence in the series of correlation. Our Granger-causality tests show that price discovery generally takes place in the securitized public market. However, we also find significant variations across property types and individual firms within each type. Our results indicate that constructing an optimal portfolio requires firm level analysis of causality and correlation between REIT returns and NAV returns.     

Are REITs real estate? Evidence from international sector level data

The aim of this study is to examine whether securitized real estate returns reflect direct real estate returns or general stock market returns using international data for the U.S., U.K., and Australia. In contrast to previous research, which has generally relied on overall real estate market indices and neglected the potential long-term dynamics, our econometric evaluation is based on sector level data and caters for both the short-term and long-term dynamics of the assets as well as for the lack of leverage in the direct real estate indices. In addition to the real estate and stock market indices, the analysis includes a number of fundamental variables that are expected to influence real estate and stock returns significantly. We estimate vector error-correction models and investigate the forecast error variance decompositions and impulse responses of the assets. Both the variance decompositions and impulse responses suggest that the long-run REIT market performance is much more closely related to the direct real estate market than to the general stock market. Consequently, REITs and direct real estate should be relatively good substitutes in a long-horizon investment portfolio. The results are of relevance regarding the relationship between public and private markets in general, as the ‘duality’ of the real estate markets offers an opportunity to test whether and how closely securitized asset returns reflect the performance of underlying private assets. The study also includes implications concerning the recent financial crisis.     

REIT Going Private Decisions

Over the recent decade there was a wave of REITs going private, from an average of about three per year to 40 between 2005 and 2007. Standard corporate finance theory posits that firms go private when there is no longer a positive tradeoff between the expected benefits and the costs of being public, and it provides empirical evidence that going private decisions are motivated by potential gains from leverage, tax benefits, and expected improvements in corporate governance. Given the unique institutional environment for the REIT industry, this paper sheds new light on the going-private decision. Specifically, we examine the determinants of the going-private decision and document announcement wealth changes using a sample of 160 REITs from 1985 to 2009. We find firm performance and agency-related factors significantly impact the probability that a REIT announces to go private. We find that the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley and a proxy for differential performance in the private and public markets have no significant impact on the decision. The announcement day abnormal return is almost 12% and the three-day abnormal return is 15%, magnitudes that are both statistically and economically significant. Variations in the market reaction are associated with lower levels of cash and higher stock price volatility. Overall, we document a new set of going-private factors and wealth impacts for the REIT industry that are unique from those of previous corporate finance literature.     

Rushing to Overpay: Modeling and Measuring the REIT Premium

We explore the questions of why Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) pay more for real estate than non-REIT buyers and by how much. First, we develop a search model where REITs optimally pay more for property because (1) they are willing, due to cost of capital advantages and, (2) they are occasionally rushed, due to external regulatory time constraints and internal incentives to deploy capital quickly. Second, using commercial real estate transactions, we find that the extant hedonic pricing models contain an unobserved explanatory variables bias leading to inflated estimates of the REIT premium. Third, using a repeat-sales methodology that controls for unobserved property characteristics, we derive more plausible estimates of the REIT premium. Consistent with our model, we also find the REIT-buyer premium depends on the size of the REIT advantage, the rush to deploy, and the relative presence of REITs in the market.     

The Relative Importance of Stock, Bond and Real Estate Factors in Explaining REIT Returns

This paper examines the link between REIT, financial asset and real estate returns, and tests whether it changed subsequent to the “REIT boom” of the early 1990s. The main focus is on answering the question do REIT returns now better reflect the performance of underlying direct (unsecuritized) real estate? We develop and implement a variance decomposition for REIT returns that separates REIT return variability into components directly related to major stock, bond, and real estate-related return indices, as well as idiosyncratic or sector-specific effects. This is applied to aggregate REIT sector (NAREIT) returns as well as returns to size and property-type based REIT portfolios. Our results show that the REIT market went from being driven largely by the same economic factors that drive large cap stocks through the 1970s and 1980s to being more strongly related to both small cap stock and real estate-related factors in the 1990s. There is also a steady increase over time in the proportion of volatility not accounted for by stock, bond or real estate related factors. We also find that small cap REITs are “more like real estate” compared to larger cap REITs, at least over the 1993–1998 period. We argue that this could be a result of the institutionalization of the ownership of larger cap REITs that took place in the 1990s.     

Information,uncertainty, and behavioral effects: Evidence from abnormal returns around real estate investment trust earnings announcements

In this study, we examine the influence of real estate market sentiment, market-level uncertainty, and REIT-level uncertainty on cumulative abnormal earnings announcement returns over the 1995–2009 time period. We first document the relative coverage of analysts' earnings forecasts on U.S. REITs, as well as REITs from several countries (i.e., Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Hong Kong, Japan, the Netherlands, and UK). We show that coverage outside of the U.S. is limited, and we consequently focus our analysis on U.S. REITs. We find strong evidence that earnings announcements contain pricing relevant information, with positive (negative) earnings surprises relative to analysts' forecasts resulting in significantly positive (negative) abnormal returns around the announcement date. Consistent with the findings from the broader equity market literature, we find limited evidence of a pre-announcement drift in the cumulative abnormal returns. However, in sharp contrast to the existing equity literature, we find no evidence of a post-earnings announcement drift in our aggregate sample or when the sample is restricted to the largest negative surprises. We find evidence of a post-earnings announcement drift for only the largest positive earnings surprises. These results are consistent with REIT returns more quickly impounding information relative to the broader equity market, in part because of the parallel private real estate market and because of the U.S. REIT structure and information environment. Finally, in our conditional regression analysis of cumulative abnormal returns, we find that real estate investor sentiment, market-wide uncertainty, and firm-level uncertainty significantly affect the magnitude of abnormal announcement returns and also influence the effect of unexpected earnings on abnormal returns.     

Analysis of REIT IPOs Using a Market Microstructure Approach: Anomalous Behavior or Asset Structure

In this research, we examine and present new evidence on the market activity following the initial public offering (IPO) of a real estate investment trust (REIT) using microstructure data. We analyze the bid-ask spread differences for REIT securities compared to common stocks and closed-end funds for all IPOs between 1985 and 1988. Our results show that REITs, as a whole sample, experience significantly greater bid-ask spreads immediately following the IPO compared to common stocks and funds. However, this outcome is driven by the equity REIT sample, with the mortgage REIT sample having significantly smaller bid-ask spreads. This is in contrast to the evidence documented by Nelling, Mahoney, Hildebrand, and Goldstein (1995). We attribute our result to the underlying asset structure (such as equity, hybrid, and mortgage portfolios) of the various REITs. Overall, however, we find that bid-ask spreads for REITs are similar to those of common stock when both asset structure and the traditional determinants of the spread (share price, trade volume, and returns variance) are considered.     

Real Estate Risk Exposure of Equity Real Estate Investment Trusts

This study examines the linkage between equity real estate investment trust (REIT) returns and the private real estate factor. The results reveal a tighter connection between REIT and the private real estate market starting from 1993. In addition, large-cap REITs seem to behave more like real estate than do small-cap REITs. Overall, the results are consistent with three notions: (1) that institutional investors provide information-gathering services (Bradrinath et al., Rev. Financ. Stud., 8:401–430, 1995), (2) that a more sophisticated investor base improves information flow, and (3) that a high degree of participation from institutional investors strengthens the linkage between REIT returns and the underlying real estate factor (Ziering et al., The evolution of public and private market investing in the new real estate capital markets, Prudential Real Estate Investors, Parsippany, NJ, 1997).

Changes in REIT Liquidity 1988?C2007: Evidence from Daily Data

In this study, we present panel-data evidence on REIT liquidity and its determinants over the 1988?C2007 period. We focus upon liquidity measures that do not require micro-structure data (1) to facilitate use of our results as benchmarks for comparisons with results from international markets for which micro-structure data may be unavailable, (2) to provide benchmarks that do not require access to costly (and voluminous) micro-structure data. We find that REIT liquidity improved during the early and mid-1990s, deteriorated during the late 1990s, and then improved dramatically during 2000?C2006, with the notable exception of 2007. Liquidity improved the most for REITs traded on the NYSE, and was an order of magnitude better than liquidity of REITs traded on the AMEX or NASDAQ. We link the deterioration in liquidity observed in 2007 to the investment portfolio of a REIT. We find that the percentage bid-ask spread is highly correlated with the measure of price impact proposed by Amihud (2002). We provide panel-data evidence on the key determinants of the percentage bid-ask spread that largely confirms the results reported by Bhasin et al. (1997) for 1990 and 1994: the percentage spread is a positive function of the volatility of stock returns, and a negative function of dollar volume turnover, share price and market capitalization. Finally, we provide evidence that these results obtained using daily closing bid- and ask-prices are not qualitatively different from those obtained using market micro-structure data. This suggests that we can use liquidity measures based upon readily available daily return data rather than being forced to rely upon market micro-structure data.     

Do Alternative Real Estate Investment Vehicles Add Value to REITs? Evidence from German Open-ended Property Funds

Besides the more commonly used REITs, German investors can also invest in a lesser-known real estate vehicle, Open-ended Property Funds. OPFs are considered a compromise between listed and direct real estate investments. OPF fund managers generally provide daily (perfect) liquidity. However, if liquidity falls below 5%, share redemptions in these funds can be temporarily suspended for a period of up to two years. During this time, investors will only be able to sell shares on the secondary market (exchange), and are thus subject to significant liquidity risk. The objective of this paper is to analyze whether OPFs add value to investor portfolios above that provided by REITs. We show that OPFs have a diversification advantage over REITs in low-risk portfolios, despite their larger potential liquidity risk. REIT liquidity is comparable to that of ordinary common stock, but OPFs exhibit an average initial discount to funds’ NAV of about 6% when share redemptions are temporarily suspended. However, in the long-run, this potential redemption suspension does not negatively influence OPF performance (in case OPFs reopen again). This makes OPFs an attractive investment alternative to REITs for investors who have a high level of risk aversion and a long-term investment horizon, such as endowments, insurance companies, and pension funds.     

Commonality in Liquidity and Real Estate Securities

We conduct an empirical investigation of the exposure of U.S. REIT returns to commonality in liquidity. Taking advantage of the specific characteristics of REITs, we study three types of commonality in liquidity: within-asset commonality, cross-asset commonality (with the stock market), and commonality with the underlying property market. We find evidence that the three types of commonality in liquidity represent significant risk factors for REIT returns but only during bad market conditions. We also find that using a linear approach, rather than a conditional, would have underestimated the role of commonality in liquidity risk. This could explain (at least partly) the small impact of commonality on asset prices documented in the extant literature. We also analyze the economic sources of commonality in liquidity and find that demand-side factors prevail over supply-side factors.     

Extreme Risk Measures for International REIT Markets

Extreme risks associated with extraordinary market conditions are catastrophic for all investors. The ongoing financial crisis has perfectly exemplified this point. Surprisingly, there are few studies exploring this issue for REITs. This study aims to close the knowledge gap. We conduct a comprehensive study by utilizing all three methodological categories to examine their forecasting performances of VaR and ES for nine major global REIT markets. Our findings indicate that there is no universally adequate method to model extreme risks across global markets. Also, estimating risks for the stock and REIT markets may require different methods. In addition, we compare the risk profiles between the stock and REIT markets, and find that the extreme risks for REITs are generally higher than those of stock markets. The fluctuations of risk levels are well synchronized between the two types of markets. The current crisis has significantly increased the extreme risk exposure for both REIT and stock investors. In all, our results have significant implications for REIT risk management, portfolio selection, and evaluation.     

Returns transmission, value at risk, and diversification benefits in international REITs: evidence from the financial crisis

We examine daily cross-market return interactions and downside risk between a US REIT returns index and the return indexes of twelve international REIT markets. These relationships are investigated for a period of normal REIT market conditions as well as for periods of inflating and collapsing REIT prices. We find that US REIT returns are contemporaneously correlated with other REITs most strongly during the bubble and crash market conditions where the US REIT market is an almost unilateral transmitter of returns. We also find that the Value at Risk (VaR) of the least capitalized REIT markets is proportionally higher during base/normal market conditions but that the largest REIT markets have the highest VaR contribution during the crash (financial crisis) period. Overall, our evidence indicates that REIT market risk shifted to the largest REIT markets and that diversification benefits eroded considerably during turbulent market conditions.     

The Role of Correlated Trading in Setting REIT Prices

This study investigates the role of correlated trading by individuals in setting equity real estate investment trust (REIT) prices. Consistent with existing literature, this study finds that there is a common element in correlated trades that drives both traditional closed-end fund prices and REIT prices. Perhaps more important, we find evidence suggesting that (1) the effects of correlated trading on REIT prices are stronger for those REITs that are hypothesized to be preferred by individual investors, and (2) this linkage is stronger when the REIT market is hot and exuberant; i.e., when the average share turnover in the REIT market is high.     

Do REITs use cash reserves efficiently? Evidence from corporate acquisitions

We examine the combined impact of corporate governance and excess cash holdings on the propensity of firms to become bidders and engage in value destroying acquisitions. We focus on the REIT market, due to its unique characteristics caused by regulation and the nature of the industry. The lack of active real estate takeover market should lead to entrenchment and exacerbate agency costs. However, given the mandatory high cash payout for REITs, the absence of takeover market should not cause concerns to shareholders. Our analyses reveal that unlike conventional firms, cash-rich REITs are not more likely to become acquirers and acquisitions by cash-rich REITs are not value decreasing. However, similarly to industrial firms, REITs with higher excess cash and lower insider ownership are more likely to become bidders. We interpret our results to be consistent with the hypothesis that agency problems are less severe in real estate and investors are not averse to use of excess cash by REIT managers on intra-industry acquisitions.     

Asymmetric Correlation and Volatility Dynamics among Stock, Bond, and Securitized Real Estate Markets

We apply a multivariate asymmetric generalized dynamic conditional correlation GARCH model to daily index returns of S&P500, US corporate bonds, and their real estate counterparts (REITs and CMBS) from 1999 to 2008. We document, for the first time, evidence for asymmetric volatilities and correlations in CMBS and REITs. Due to their high levels of leverage, REIT returns exhibit stronger asymmetric volatilities. Also, both REIT and stock returns show strong evidence of asymmetries in their conditional correlation, suggesting reduced hedging potential of REITs against the stock market downturn during the sample period. There is also evidence that corporate bonds and CMBS may provide diversification benefits for stocks and REITs. Furthermore, we demonstrate that default spread and stock market volatility play a significant role in driving dynamics of these conditional correlations and that there is a significant structural break in the correlations caused by the recent financial crisis.     

The Performance of REIT-owned Properties and the Impact of REIT Market Power

Using a unique, detailed panel dataset of lodging properties, this paper tests whether properties owned by real estate investment trusts (REITs) perform differently than other properties and whether the concentration of real estate ownership brought about by REITs has increased market power. Our results demonstrate that REIT-owned properties, which are primarily mid-scale and high-end hotels, did not perform significantly better, on average, than other mid-scale or high-end hotels in the same geographic area. However, because of the superior overall performance of mid-scale and high-end hotels, REIT properties as a whole did perform better, on average, than non-REIT properties. From these results we conclude that the superior performance of REIT properties was due to the fact that REITs tended to acquire properties in market segments that performed well; REIT ownership in itself does not appear to have increased performance. Our results also suggest that the superior performance of the market segments in which REITs have a significant presence is not attributable to the market power of the REITs.     

REIT Characteristics and the Sensitivity of REIT Returns

Previous research on the returns to real estate investment trusts (REITs) has considered whether REITs are systematically exposed to general stock-market risk and interest-rate risk. This study examines how the sensitivity of REIT returns to these factors may be influenced by various REIT characteristics. Using a sample of publicly traded REITs, we estimate the sensitivity of REIT returns to stock market and interest-rate changes. We then propose and implement a model for testing whether differences in asset structure, financial leverage, management strategy, and degree of specialization in the REIT portfolios are related to their sensitivity to interest rate and market risk. Our results permit us to offer some inferences about how REITs can alter their risk exposure by managing these characteristics.