REIT Stock Price Volatility and the Effects of Leverage

This article sheds light on several puzzling empirical observations. We examine the volatility implications of equity Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) stock returns over the sample period from January 1985 through October 2012. We find a negative “leverage effect” in the pre‐ and post‐Greenspan era, but not during the Greenspan era (circa 1994–2006). We argue that the positive elasticity of variance with respect to the value of equity during the Greenspan era can be explained by a decline in the spread between the yield on commercial mortgages and 10‐year Treasuries, which triggered a wealth transfer from REIT equity holders to REIT debt holders. We also argue that the declining commercial‐mortgage‐10‐year‐Treasury yield spread during the Greenspan era allowed REITs to take on far more risk than most people realized. We then document that average REIT stock return volatility increased significantly in the 2007–2010 period in the midst of a historic decline in REIT stock prices. The results have significant implications for the good deal of interest and debate in the media over the status of REITs and whether equity REITs have become excessively risky relative to the returns they generate.     

Returns and Information Transmission Dynamics in Public and Private Real Estate Markets

This paper examines U.S. public and private commercial real estate returns at the aggregate level and by the four major property types over the 1994–2012 time period. Returns are carefully adjusted for differences between public and private markets in financial leverage, property type focus and management fees. Unconditionally, we find that passive portfolios of unlevered core real estate investment trusts (REITs) outperformed their private market benchmark by 49 basis points (annualized) over the 1994–2012 sample period. Our baseline vector autoregression results suggest that REIT returns do not embed additional commercial real‐estate‐specific information useful in predicting private market returns. These results strongly suggest that equity REIT returns react to fundamental (latent) asset pricing information more quickly than private market returns given their greater liquidity and price revelation. REITs therefore serve as a fundamental information transmission channel to private market returns when asset pricing variables are omitted.     

REIT Capital Structure Choices: Preparation Matters

Sun, Titman and Twite find that capital structure risks, namely, high leverage and a high share of short‐term debt, reduced the cumulative total return of U.S. REITs in the 2007–2009 financial crisis. We find that mitigating capital structure risks ahead of the crisis by reducing leverage and extending debt maturity in 2006 was associated with a significantly higher cumulative total return 2007–2009, after controlling for the levels of those variables at the start of the financial crisis. We further identify two systematic cross‐sectional differences between those REITs that reduced capital structure risks prior to the financial crisis and those that did not: the exposure to capital structure risks and the strength of corporate governance. On balance, our findings are consistent with the interpretation of risk‐reducing adjustments to capital structure ahead of the crisis as a component of managerial skill and discipline with significant implications for firm value during the crisis.     

Banking Relationships and REIT Capital Structure

This article examines the evolution of real estate investment trust (REIT) capital structure in the new REIT era with a focus on the effects of banking relationships on REIT capital structure. Using a unique sample of REITs from 1992 to 2003, we find that, after controlling for firm characteristics, REITs with banking relationships are more likely to obtain long‐term debt ratings and subsequently issue public debt. Moreover, REITs with banking relationships tend to use less secured debt and have lower leverage. These findings support the notion that banking relationships facilitate REITs' access to the public debt markets and help explain why REITs shift from traditional mortgage financing to bank debt and public capital market financing. The results also support the proposition that firm leverage should be positively related to the amount of a firm's secured debt.     

REIT Dividend Policies and Dividend Announcement Effects During the 2008–2009 Liquidity Crisis

Real estate investment trust (REIT) dividend policies and dividend announcement effects during the 2008–2009 liquidity crisis are examined. Multinomial logit results indicate that REITs with higher market leverage or lower market‐to‐book ratios are more likely to cut dividends, suspend dividends or pay elective stock dividends. These results imply that mitigating going‐concern risk is an important motive for REITs adjusting dividend policies during the crisis and support dividend catering theory where investor demand for dividends impacts corporate dividend policies. Moreover, REITs that cut or suspend dividends experience positive cumulative abnormal returns during the post‐announcement period after controlling for the potential influence from simultaneous funds from operation announcements. The positive market response over the post‐announcement period supports the notion that dividend decisions convey information to investors and is also consistent with the broad catering theory of dividend policy.     

An Analysis of REIT Security Issuance Decisions

This article tests the ability of traditional capital structure theories to explain the issuance decisions of real estate investment trusts (REITs). For issuances made between 1997 and 2006, we find strong support for the market timing theory of capital structure. Controlling for past returns and growth, a REIT is more likely to issue equity when its price-to–net asset value ratio is high. This suggests that REITs issue equity in public markets when the cost of equity capital is lower in the public market than in the private market. Consistent with traditional market timing, REITs are more likely to issue equity after experiencing large price increases. We also find some support for REITs following the trade-off theory of capital structure. REITs are less likely to issue debt when proxies for expected bankruptcy costs are high.     

REIT Dividend Determinants: Excess Dividends and Capital Markets

The determinants of excess dividend payments above mandatory requirements in real estate investment trusts (REITs) are evaluated. Payment of excess dividends is related to factors associated with reduced agency costs, strong operating performance, the implementation of a stock repurchase plan and an ability to access short-term bank debt. Recognizing that access to external capital is essential for long-term growth, REITs manage dividend policy to allow for capital acquisition in the form of both equity and debt. The acquisition and use of short-term bank debt provides REIT management flexibility in determining dividend policy.     

REIT Leverage and Return Performance: Keep Your Eye on the Target

This article examines U.S. REIT leverage decisions and their effects on risk and return. We find that the speed at which REITs close the gap between current debt levels and target leverage levels is 17% annually. REITs that are highly levered relative to the average REIT tend to underperform REITs with less debt in their capital structure. However, REITs that are highly levered relative to their target leverage tend to perform better on a risk‐adjusted basis than under‐levered REITs. Taken together, our results show that REIT leverage has significant return performance effects conditional on deviations from target leverage.     

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.     

Explaining the Variation in REIT Capital Structure: The Role of Asset Liquidation Value

We test the Shleifer-Vishny hypothesis that asset liquidation values influence both firm leverage and the choice of debt maturity. Using panel data on real estate investment trusts, we estimate a simultaneous equation model and find that firms specializing in the most (least) liquid assets use more (less) leverage and longer (shorter) maturities. The evidence also suggests that, for REITs, debt maturity and leverage are substitutes, consistent with the theory and predictions of Barclay, Marx and Smith.     

Call Options and Liquidation in Commercial Mortgage Financing

This paper models a commercial real estate project where a wealth-constrained manager uses outside debt financing to purchase a project who's return depends on future economic conditions and the manager's investment in the project. It is shown that it is inefficient to finance the project with callable debt. This prediction is consistent with observed real estate financing practice. I also model the outcome of financial distress allowing for (1) debt forgiveness, (2) equity in exchange for debt forgiveness, and (3) foreclosure. The model motivates (1) why commercial real estate loans are often foreclosed, and (2) why lenders foreclose assets at fire-sale prices.     

Changes in REIT Liquidity 1990–1994: Evidence from Intra-day Transactions

This study uses data on intra-day transactions to analyze whether real estate investment (REIT) liquidity as measured by the bid-ask spread changed from 1990 to 1994, a period during which the industry's market capitalization increased from $8.7 billion to $45 billion. REIT percentage spreads (spread as percentage of share price) narrowed significantly, primarily attributable to higher share prices rather than narrower dollar-value spreads. An empirical model is used to analyze the determinants of percentage spreads. Return variance and share price, not market capitalization are found to be the primary determinants of percentage spreads in both periods. This suggests that the liquidity of REIT securities is similar to that of non-REIT securities with similar prices and return variance. In addition, percentage spreads are wider for REITs trading on the NASDAQ.     

Further Evidence on the Capital Structure of REITs

This study examines the determinants of real estate investment trust (REIT) capital structure decisions from 1990 to 2008. Using a broad sample of 2,409 firm‐year observations, we find that asset tangibility is positively related to leverage, whereas profitability and market‐to‐book ratios are negatively related. Additional evidence suggests that firm debt capacity varies systematically with the unique operating and financing mechanisms employed by REITs. These results are robust across both aggregate firm debt levels and marginal security issuance decisions. Finally, our results provide further insight into competing capital structure theories, generally supporting empirical predictions derived from the market timing and trade‐off theories, although failing to support pecking order theory predictions.     

An Empirical Study of Derivatives use in the REIT Industry

We examine the use of derivatives in the real estate investment trust (REIT) industry. Tax considerations and speculative motives should not be important factors here, as REITs pay no corporate income tax and their speculative activities are limited by regulations. We find that 41 % of REITs use interest-rate derivatives, although the amount of derivatives on average is not high. Our principal results are that larger REITs and mortgage REITs are more likely to use derivatives. However, in terms of the amount of derivatives, REITs that are smaller and have a larger amount of debt tend to use more derivatives. We interpret the results as evidence supportive of substantial entry costs for hedging and financial-distress costs being a major consideration for the level of hedging. REITs with greater ratio of market to book value of assets also tend to use more derivatives. However, this result is not robust across different sample sets. We therefore view this as weak evidence supporting the agency-cost explanation for hedging. Additional analysis on interest-rate risk and hedging activities finds that mortgage REITs tend to increase their hedging activities when interest rates decrease, while the opposite is true for equity REITs. We interpret this as evidence consistent with prepayment risk being a major factor for mortgage REITs, while equity REITs primarily hedge to control funding costs.     

Dividend Pricing Models and REITs

Dividend pricing/present value models relate current stock prices to expectations of future dividends. In this study we apply the West and Campbell–Shiller tests of the dividend pricing relation to an index of real estate investment trusts (REITs). REITs provide a unique test of these models since, during our study period, REITs were mandated to pay out at least 95% of taxable income as dividends. While our results complement previous research which finds that the dividend pricing model cannot be rejected if share repurchase is included as part of dividends, our data contain a much less significant amount of share repurchase, so that our approach to the issue of the viability of dividend pricing models offers an alternative insight. Our research suggests that, for our REIT population, dividend pricing models cannot be rejected.     

Financing Choice and Liability Structure of Real Estate Investment Trusts

We conduct an analysis of public financial offerings of equity Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), with a focus on liability structure effects and whether or not firms target longer-run debt ratios. Our major findings are that (1) proceeds from equity offers are more likely to fund investment, whereas public debt offer proceeds are typically used to reconfigure the liability structure of the firm; (2) public debt issuers are often capital constrained and target total leverage ratios to retain an investment grade credit rating; and (3) the preoffer liability structure affects the issuance choice decision, in that firms with higher preoffer levels of secured (unsecured) debt tend to issue equity (public debt). Other notable findings are that the market for public REIT debt is integrated with the broader debt markets and that higher credit quality firms issue longer-maturing bonds.     

REIT Capital Budgeting and Equity Marginal q

Equity marginal  q  is the change in the market value of a company's equity in response to a one-unit unexpected change in its asset base. Hence, it is a profitability index that evaluates a firm's capital budgeting decisions at the margin. We estimate the equity marginal  q  for real estate–managing public corporations, namely, real estate investment trusts (REITs), in an attempt to understand how the various costs and benefits of being a public corporation play a role in managing this important asset class. Using the universe of equity REITs for the period from 1993 to 2005, we find that REITs with greater idiosyncratic volatility, higher stock turnover and smaller bid-ask spread have a higher equity marginal  q . In addition, both the holdings of institutional investors and their investment horizons are respectively positively related to equity marginal  q.  With these firm characteristics taken into account, firm size is found to be negatively related to equity marginal  q . Our findings are economically important as well, because the equity marginal  q  ratio alone accounts for approximately one-third of the total REIT shareholder wealth change during the study period.     

A Comparative Anatomy of Residential REITs and Private Real Estate Markets: Returns,Risks and Distributional Characteristics

Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) are the only truly liquid assets related to residential real estate investments. We study the behavior of U.S. Residential REITs over the past three decades and document their return characteristics. REITs have somewhat less market risk than equity; their betas against a broad market index average about 0.58. Decomposing their covariances into principal components reveals several strong factors. Residential REIT characteristics differ to some extent from those of the S&P/Case‐Shiller (SCS) private real estate markets. This is partly attributable to methods of index construction. Our examination of REITs suggests that investment in residential real estate is far more risky than what might be inferred from the widely followed SCS series. Although the SCS and REITs indicate little support for being able to predict each other, there is strong evidence of self‐predictability for the series.     

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.     

Option Trading and REIT Returns

This article examines the relation between option trading volume and real estate investment trust (REIT) market performance. Specifically, we find that option volume increases are followed by decreases in returns. Furthermore, the portion of option volume that is orthogonal to REIT characteristics drives the observed return predictability relation, thereby suggesting that the return predictability of option trading is (at least partially) attributable to information‐based explanations. Finally, consistent with informed traders favoring option market activities due to short‐sale costs and/or constraints, we find option based return predictability is more evident within REITs than non‐REITs, even though firms within this industry are generally viewed as informationally transparent.