Portfolio Considerations in the Valuation of Real Estate

When a real asset rises in price faster than inflation (as real estate did in the late 1970s) and rises significantly in price over an extended period (as real estate has done for the last decade and one-half), it concerns valuation and investment professionals who fear about it being over-valued. One of the reasons for such price performance may be an increase in demand due to the portfolio characteristics of the asset during the period of time in question. For real estate this means the proportion included in optimal portfolios should be significant and increasing as individual tax rates increase in an environment of increasing average tax rates.
This study uses six tax brackets (0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%) and portfolios consisting of three traditional assets (NYSE common stocks, corporate bonds and small stocks) plus three types of real estate (residential, business and farmland) to demonstrate that this is what has transpired in the real estate markets. Optimal portfolio weights are derived for each asset for after-tax portfolios. Real estate in general and residential real estate especially increased as a proportion of the optimal after-tax portfolio as individual tax rates increased. Other studies are used to demonstrate an environment of increasing average tax rates.     

Institutional Portfolios: Diversification through Farmland Investment

This article demonstrates that farmland can enhance the overall performance of institutional portfolios which are currently dominated by stocks, bonds, and business real estate. Unlike previous articles on farmland returns, this article addresses the issue of "smoothing bias" associated with appraisal-based farmland returns. Improved measures of income returns to farmland are also used in developing the estimates of optimal portfolios. Parametric testing revealed that farmland continues to enter the optimal portfolios even for large increases in the variance or for large reductions in the annual returns to farmland.     

The Investment Performance of Real Estate Limited Partnerships

Real estate limited partnerships have become an increasingly popular form of investment over the past decade. Many investors have been drawn to these investment vehicles because of the high claimed rates of return earned by investors in previous partnerships. However, there has been little analysis of the historical rates of return on these investments other than that provided by the syndicators in offering prospectuses. This paper examines the returns earned by investors in real estate limited partnerships over the past decade. These results are compared with previous studies of the investment performance of real estate. Because of the importance of the tax shield aspects of these investments, we calculate the after-tax rate of return for investors in several marginal tax brackets.     

Do Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds Explain Returns on REITs?

The monthly returns on equity and mortgage real estate investment trusts (REITs) are analyzed over the period July 1976 to December 1992. The results indicate that risk premiums on equity REITs are significantly related to risk premiums on a market portfolio of stocks as well as to the returns on mimicking portfolios for size and book-to-market equity factors in common stock returns. Mortgage REIT risk premiums are significantly related to the three stock market factors and two bond market factors in returns. Also, mortgage REIT shares underperform by an average of 6.8% per year.     

Gains From Diversifying Into Real Estate: Three Decades of Portfolio Returns Based on the Dynamic Investment Model

This paper compares the investment policies and returns for portfolios of stocks and bonds with and without up to three categories of real estate. Both domestic and global settings are examined, with and without the possibility of leverage. The portfolios were generated via the dynamic investment model based on the empirical probability assessment approach applied to past (joint) realizations of returns, both with and without correction for "smoothing" in the real estate data series. Our principal findings are: (1) the gains from adding real estate, on a semi-passive (equal-weighted) basis, to portfolios of either U.S. or global financial assets were relatively modest; in contrast, (2) the gains from adding real estate to the universe of U.S. financial assets under an active strategy were rather large (in some cases highly statistically significant), especially for the very risk-averse strategies; (3) the gains from adding U.S. real estate to a universe of global financial assets under an active strategy were mixed, although generally favorable for the highly risk-averse strategies; (4) correcting for second-moment smoothing in the real estate returns series had a relatively small impact for the more risk-tolerant strategies; and (5) there was some evidence that desmoothing resulted in improved probability estimates.     

Transactions-Driven Commercial Real Estate Returns: The Panacea to Asset Allocation Models?

A transactions-driven commercial real estate return series is generated in this study to determine whether the reliance on appraised values in the estimation of real estate returns is the source of the reported underpricing of real estate relative to stocks, bonds, and bills when analyzed in a traditional mean-variance setting. The reported underpricing of commercial real estate would be rational if transactions-driven returns exhibit more variance than appraisal-driven returns. While we find that transactions-driven real estate returns have greater variance than appraisal-driven returns for individual properties, most of the individual property risk is idiosyncratic and diversified away at the portfolio level. Real estate continues to be a dominate asset class in mean-variance allocation models even when represented with transactions-driven indices.¹     

Real Estate Returns: A Comparison with Other Investments

Real estate returns, measured unleveraged, have been between those of stocks and bonds over 1960–1982. Due to appraisal smoothing and imperfect marketability, one must be careful about directly comparing measured real estate returns with those on other assets. It is likely, however, that low correlations with stocks and bonds make real estate a diversification opportunity for traditional portfolio managers. In addition, the issue of how various assets are priced is addressed. While stocks are priced primarily on market or beta risk, and bonds are priced primarily on interest rate and default risk, the real estate pricing mechanism includes residual risk and non-risk factors such as taxes, marketability costs and information costs.     

Another Take on Real Estate's Role in Mixed‐Asset Portfolio Allocations

This article examines real estate's role in institutional mixed‐asset portfolios using both private‐ and public‐real estate indices, as a means of examining varying real estate‐related risk/return opportunities. In so doing, this article also examines the effects of: (1) increasing the investment horizon, (2) placing constraints on the maximum allocation to any one asset class, and (3) varying the risk preferences of investors. The empirical results suggest—using infinite‐horizon returns and all of the caveats that accompany such a perspective—that real estate allocations of approximately 10–15% of the mixed‐asset portfolio represent an upper bound for most investors. For those investors preferring low‐risk portfolios, (unlevered) private real estate is the vehicle serving this allocation preference; for those investors preferring high‐risk portfolios, public real estate (with its embedded leverage of 40–50%) is the vehicle serving this allocation preference—with such vehicles serving as substitutes for a variety of noncore real estate strategies. In some sense, the distinction between private and public real estate is more about the use of leverage. For those investors preferring moderate‐risk portfolios, an intermediate‐leverage approach seems optimal.     

Price Signaling and Return Chasing: International Evidence from Maturing REIT Markets

This article examines the liquidity of international real estate securities across 10 markets over the period 1990–2015. We apply and compare results for four different measures of liquidity, and find that while liquidity has increased consistently, wide variations still exist across markets, with the United States and Japan in the lead. Our results also suggest that the introduction of local REIT regimes did not have any pervasive effects on stock liquidity. When we study the relationship between liquidity and returns, we document new and consistent evidence for international return chasing behavior, whose pattern is a function of local market efficiency, listed real estate market maturity and stock ownership dispersion. The introduction of REIT regimes seems to weaken the importance of extra performance over and above general equity returns as investors tend to allocate funds to real estate securities within real estate rather than equity portfolios.     

A Different Look at Commercial Real Estate Returns

Commercial real estate makes up a relatively small percentage of most institutional portfolios, even though the existing literature has consistently reported attractive risk-return characteristics that would suggest much larger allocations. This discrepancy has been explained by a perceived lack of comparability between return series calculated for real estate and those calculated for other asset classes. Just as investors actively involved in the futures markets do not consider individual common stocks to be traded continuously, those active in the stock market do not consider real estate to be traded continuously. In both cases, adjustments to reported returns are necessary to achieve a degree of comparability. This study makes such adjustments, using sales data from properties that help comprise the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries / Frank Russell Company (NCREIF/FRC) Index to generate a "transaction-driven" commercial real estate return series. Examination of the risk-return characteristics of this series shows that it is quite different from traditionally reported real estate return series and far more consistent with risk-return characteristics that have been reported for other asset classes.     

The Predictability of International Real Estate Markets, Exchange Rate Risks and Diversification Consequences

International real estate related securities are investigated to see whether they offer any incremental diversification benefits over foreign stocks using mean-variance analysis together with a multifactor latent variable model. Diversification benefits are found to be primarily driven by unanticipated returns which are partially driven by changes in exchange rate risk. Although exchange rate risk accounts for a larger portion of the return fluctuation in real estate related securities relative to common stocks, international real estate securities provide some incremental diversification benefits over common stocks even if currency risks are hedged.     

Real Estate in a Mixed‐Asset Portfolio: The Role of the Investment Horizon

In this article, three oft‐mentioned special characteristics of the real estate asset market—high transaction costs, marketing period risk and return predictability—are addressed in analyzing the role of U.K. commercial real estate investments in a mixed‐asset portfolio. Due to favorable horizon effects in risk and return, the allocation to real estate in a portfolio with stocks, bonds and cash increases strongly with the investment horizon. Examining the relative importance of return predictability, transaction costs and marketing period risk for the optimal allocation to real estate, the article finds that the consideration of return predictability is very important, except for short‐term horizons. Accounting for transaction costs is crucial for short‐ and medium‐term investors. Marketing period risk appears to be negligible. Traditional mean‐variance analysis—that is, ignoring return predictability, transaction costs and marketing period risk—can be very misleading.     

Real Estate Investment Funds: Performance and Portfolio Considerations

This paper presents the results of a study dealing with a number of issues regarding real estate investment. Utilizing a data set consisting of returns from two of the oldest, continuously operating commingled real estate funds (CREFs), questions relative to investment performance, inflation hedging attributes and diversification benefits are addressed. The methodology used in exploring these issues are variants of the traditional capital asset pricing model (CAPM), extended to consider uncertain inflation (CAPMUI) and an arbitrage pricing model in which real estate performance is judged relative to a more inclusive market index representing larger numbers of substitute investments. Finally, issues relative to portfolio performance are considered by constructing portfolios containing all possible combinations of real estate, stocks and bonds to assess the potential for diversification benefits and portfolio performance.     

Risk and Return on Real Estate: Evidence from Equity REITs

We analyze monthly returns on an equally weighted index of eighteen to twenty-three equity (real property) real estate investment trusts (REITs) that were traded on major stock exchanges over the 1973–87 period. We employ a multifactor Arbitrage Pricing Model using prespecified macroeconomic factors. We also test whether equity REIT returns are related to changes in the discount on closed-end stock funds, which seems plausible given the closed-end nature of REITs.
Three factors, and the percentage change in the discount on closed-end stock funds, consistently drive equity REIT returns: unexpected inflation and changes in the risk and term structures of interest rates. The impacts of these variables on equity REIT returns is around 60% of the impacts on corporate stock returns generally. As expected, the impacts are greater for more heavily levered REITs than for less levered REITs. Real estate, at least as measured by the return performance of equity REITs, is less risky than stocks generally, but does not offer a superior risk-adjusted return and is not a hedge against unexpected inflation.     

A Test of a Buying Rule for "Underpriced" Apartment Buildings

Apartment-building repeat-sales data are used to test a trading rule. Property values are estimated through regression; if the actual price is less than the estimated value, the property may be "undervalued." Returns are calculated for these "undervalued" properties and adjusted for risk using the Sharpe ratio. A test is done of whether these ratios are significantly different for different portfolios. The "undervalued" properties have higher appreciation returns, but once these are adjusted for risk, the differences in returns are not significant. The paper contributes to the real estate efficiency literature and suggests a workable method for comparing the performance of real estate portfolios on a risk-adjusted basis.     

What Does the Stock Market Tell Us About Real Estate Returns?

This paper analyzes the risks and returns of different types of real estate-related firms traded on the New York and American stock exchanges (NYSE and AMEX). We examine the relation between real estate stock portfolio returns and returns on a standard appraisal-based index, and find that lagged values of traded real estate portfolio returns can predict returns on the appraisal-based index after controlling for persistence in the appraisal series. The stock market reflects information about real estate markets that is later imbedded in infrequent property appraisals. Additional analysis suggests that the differences in the return and risk characteristics across different types of traded real estate firms can be explained in part by appealing to real estate market fundamentals relating to the degree of dependence of the real estate firm upon rental cash flows from existing buildings. These findings highlight the heterogeneity of securitized real estate-related firms.     

Historic Returns and Institutional Real Estate Portfolios

This study employs a sample of equity REIT portfolios from 1972–78 to investigate various aspects of real estate returns. Return estimates are derived for the unlevered cash yields by property size, type and location. Based on these data, the effects of certain kinds of diversification on risk-adjusted returns are examined. Finally, historic REIT portfolios are compared to current commingled fund portfolios and suggestions made concerning the benefits of restructuring.     

Markov Switching Dynamics in REIT Returns: Univariate and Multivariate Evidence on Forecasting Performance

We document the presence of Markov switching regimes in expected returns, variances and the implied reward‐to‐risk ratio of real estate investment trust (REIT) returns and compare them to properties of stocks and bonds. Our evidence suggests that regime switching techniques are more successful over the period 1972–2008 than other time‐series models are. When the analysis is extended to a multivariate setting in which REIT, stock and bond returns are modeled jointly, we find that the data call for the specification of four separate regimes. These result from the absence of synchronicity among the regimes that characterize univariate REIT, stock and bond returns.     

Yet Another View on Why a Home Is One's Castle

We compute equity-based real after-tax rates of return for homeowners and landlords in the United States for 1952–2005. The study confirms that a combined aggregate for residential housing provides a high average net return and low volatility, has low correlation with financial assets and can provide hedge against inflation. The efficient frontier analysis shows that the optimal portfolio for a household with a coefficient of relative risk aversion of four to five is one which contains a bit larger amount of housing than stocks, close to what one observes in the real world.     

Real Estate in an ALM Framework: The Case of Fair Value Accounting

This study examines the liability hedging characteristics of both direct and indirect real estate with the advent of fair value accounting obligations for pension funds. We explicitly model pension obligations as being subject to interest and inflation risk to analyze the ability of real estate investments in hedging the fair value of pension liabilities and to quantify its role in an asset liability management (ALM) portfolio. We find that the portfolio composition differs depending on the definition of liability return. When liability returns solely follow actuarial changes, the mean‐variance efficient portfolio allocations toward direct real estate and fixed income decrease compared to the asset‐only optimization. When accounting for nominal liability obligations, real estate offers hedging benefits against interest rates for short holding periods but not for long‐term institutional portfolios. The inclusion of inflation risk renders a limited role for direct real estate in an ALM portfolio, while indirect real estate obtains no allocation. Inflation is at the heart of the discrepancy between reported and predicted pension plan allocations. Once accounting for inflation, the projected allocations come close to reported ones.