Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
INTEGRATING ALL SOURCES OF PERFORMANCE
TO CREATE MORE EFFECTIVE PORTFOLIOS
Sources of Performance and
the Value of Forecasts
Jacques Lussier, Chief Investment Officer
October 2015
2
We Can do Better
Sources of Excess Performance
Changes in Portfolio Design
Beta, Alpha & Luck
How to Structure a Product
When Performance is Not There
An Analysis using the Multi-Factor Approach
An Example of a Complete Product
Conclusion and Recommendation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WE CAN DO BETTER, BUT HOW?
3
An asset reaches its maximum weight when it is most highly overvalued.
4
It is the philosophy, not the methodology, that determines the capacity to perform.
Indexing Active
Underperforms Outperforms
Luck Expertise Unique skill - forecasting
Diversification – pricing
errors
Diversification –
effective statistics
Balance of risk premiums
Management
approaches
Market structure
Nature of performance
Skill: Portfolio Structuring
Skill: Forecasting
STRUCTURE OF MANAGERS‟ PERFORMANCES
5
𝑀𝑎𝑥.𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑛
𝑅𝑖𝑠𝑘 =
Diversifying uncompensated
risks effectively
(Volatility management
approach)
Identifying and/or
diversifying pricing error
(Naive approach)
+
Identifying and
diversifying risk factors
(Factor-based approach) +
Return = Beta + Alpha + Luck
Exposure to risk premiums Market
+
Size
Value
Trends
Quality
etc.
Unique expertise Forecasting returns
Better integration of risk
premiums
Exposure to unknown risk
premium
Diversification of pricing
error
Exposure to
uncompensated risk
Good luck – Announcement of
better profit than anticipated
Bad luck – Report indicating a
particular drug increases
cancer risk
UNDERSTANDING SOURCES OF PERFORMANCE
6
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO PORTFOLIO STRUCTURING
Equal-weight
Weight based on historical
moving average
Weight based on accounting
variables (RAFI)
Naive approach Volatility management
approach Factor-based approach
Low volatility
Maximum Diversification (TOBAM)
Sampling on risk measures
Equal weighting
Low-Beta market
Small cap
Value style
Trend/momentum style
Multi-factor approach (AQR)
7
Traditional indexes are fully exposed to market risk (β market = 1) and have no exposure to the other
factors (βs of other factors = 0).
Source: IPSOL
Performance of key factors – U.S. equities
Period Market + Size Value Momentum
72-75 -5.8% -6.6% 11.0% 11.3%
76-79 6.8% 16.6% 6.3% 14.4%
80-83 6.9% 7.9% 7.0% 10.7%
84-87 7.2% -6.4% 5.6% 7.2%
88-91 10.7% -2.0% -3.6% 12.2%
92-95 9.2% 1.3% 9.3% 10.3%
96-99 19.3% -3.2% -7.1% 15.9%
00-03 -6.5% 11.2% 16.8% 6.5%
04-07 6.3% -0.8% 4.3% 7.3%
08-11 0.7% 5.7% -1.6% -7.7%
12-15 (June) 17.2% 1.0% -0.9% 3.8%
72-15 (June) 8.2% 3.4% 3.8% 7.5%
BETA – IDENTIFYING AND DIVERSIFYING FACTORS
8
LUCK – DIVERSIFYING UNCOMPENSATED RISKS
Firm Date β S&P500 ret. Firm ret. Explanation
Microsoft 24/04/2015 0.78 0.22% 10.45% Profits better than anticipated
ResMed 24/04/2015 0.48 0.22% -10.47% Sales lower than anticipated
Market portfolios are not necessarily the most efficient at diversifying uncompensated risk.
The objective is to reduce the volatility attributed to uncompensated risks per unit of periodic return.
Lower volatility
=
Higher compounded return
The objective is to manage
volatility more efficiently
Uncompensated risks cannot be forecasted but they can be diversified. This explains why a portfolio‟s risk
is lower than the average risk of its components.
9
ALPHA – IDENTIFYING / DIVERSIFYING PRICING ERRORS
Alpha is also related to diversification
The objective is either to forecast returns (which is difficult) or to diversify pricing error more efficiently
than an index based on market capitalization.
This can be achieved using an allocation method that is not correlated with pricing error.
Traditional indexes assign too much weight to overvalued securities and
too little to undervalued securities.
Firm Period Initial index
weight Initial price Final price Return Comment
Nortel 3/27/2000 to
6/15/2001 35% 143.06 9.86 -93% Large loss on large position
Ford 3/9/2009 to
3/9/2010 0.12% 1.74 12.80 635%
Large gain on small
position
10
A combination of 3 processes:
A sampling process – which securities are authorized in the portfolio
S&P500, equal-weight: Authorized securities in the S&P500 market capitalization
RAFI US 1000: 1000 securities with the highest score based on the Fundamental Index measure on the
NYSE, the AMEX and the NASDAQ. The score is based on a combination of 5-year averages for the sales,
accounting value, cash flow and dividend variables.
An allocation process –weights allocated to the securities
S&P500, equal-weight: 1/N
RAFI US 1000: weight based on score
A rebalancing process
S&P500 – equal-weight: quarterly
RAFI US 1000: annual
An allocation process necessarily creates factor bias, whether intentional or not.
PUTTING TOGETHER A PORTFOLIO – EXAMPLE OF U.S. EQUITIES
When risks other than market risk are not compensated
11
When the impact of uncompensated risks dominates in the short term.
E.g. positive surprises regarding the profits of large growth companies such as Apple
in 2014 and Google in July 2015 and/or when large countries dominate performance,
as in the case of China in 2014 and early 2015.
WHEN DO FACTOR-BASED PRODUCTS UNDERPERFORM?
12
A FEW STRATEGIES AND PRODUCTS EXPLAINED USING THE
FACTOR-BASED APPROACH
* Five-star Morningstar rating. 0.46% and 0.80% management fees respectively have been added to returns from both Fidelity Funds to ensure that all
portfolios are comparable.
One-factor model Equal
weighting
Fundamental
Index
Maximum
Diversification
Fidelity Large Cap
Value Enhanced*
Fidelity Blue Chip
Growth*
Alpha „ 1.59% „ 2.14% „ 2.50% - 1.44% 1.16%
Beta market 1.04 0.94 0.82 0.88 1.03
Five-factor model
Alpha 0.70% - 0.23% - 0.51% - 0.99% 2.34%
Market 1.01 0.99 0.82 0.92 1.02
Size 0.01 - 0.08 0.20 - 0.22 - 0.07
Value 0.27 0.32 0.15 0.33 - 0.15
Momentum - 0.03 0.03 - 0.08 „ 0.16 - 0.04
Low Beta 0.07 0.07 0.26 0.03 - 0.05
• Highly diversified:
• U.S. and international equities – Approximately 200 positions each
• Emerging markets – Exposure to 20 countries
• Resources – Exposure to 24 contracts
• Balanced exposure to all risk premiums:
• Equities - Value, trend/momentum, size, current yield, asymmetry, etc.
• Resources, currency – Value, trend/momentum
• Managing uncompensated risks to improve geometric return
13
IMAGINE A GLOBAL PORTFOLIO THAT INTEGRATES ALL OF THESE
MANAGEMENT APPROACHES
14
PERFORMANCE (CAD)
Absolute return – Annualized Relative return (60/40) – Annualized
You cannot win all of the time, but you
can do much better in the long term.
Scatter plot – Portfolio vs 60/40
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
15
KEY MESSAGES
• The best managers do not outperform systematically.
• Only 20% to 30% of active managers beat their targets after fees. This percentage is
structural and is not affected by participant quality but instead by fees.
• Luck is always a significant factor in performance.
• Forecasting returns is not the main source of performance.
16
Three forms of diversification explain much of the long term performance.
WHICH APPROACH IS PREFERABLE – FUNDAMENTAL OR QUANTITATIVE?
17
What does matter:
The process (not necessarily the methodology) and total fees
It doesn‟t matter!
• You cannot tolerate underperformance over 3 to 5 years.
• Sources of creation of enigmatic value
• “Closet Indexing”
• If fees are unreasonable
AVOID ACTIVE MANAGEMENT IN THE FOLLOWING SCENARIOS:
The best managers share a similar philosophy even if the
implementation methodology is different.
JACQUES LUSSIER, President & Chief Investment Officer
514-842-2224, [email protected]
HUGUES LANGLOIS, Director of Research
646-583-2092, [email protected]
GUY DESROCHERS, VP & Chief Compliance Officer
514-842-2225, [email protected]
LUC GOSSELIN, Director of Operations
514-842-2022, [email protected]
18
This document has been prepared for information purpose only, and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities, products or
services and should not be construed as specific investment advice. The content of this presentation is proprietary and should not be further
distributed without prior consent of IPSOL Capital Inc.
Les informations et les opinions exprimées dans ce document sont offertes à titre informatif seulement et ne doivent pas être considérées comme une
offre ou une sollicitation visant l‟achat ou la vente d‟un titre, d‟un produit ou d‟un service quelconque, ni interprétées comme un conseil de placement
précis. Le contenu du présent document est la propriété exclusive d‟IPSOL Capital Inc. et ne doit pas être distribué sans son consentement préalable.
368 Notre-Dame West, Suite 301, Montreal, Québec, H2Y 1T9, www.IPSOLCAPITAL.com
Jacques Lussier is a former academician at HEC Montreal and has worked within the financial industry for 18 years at
Desjardins Global Asset Management (DGAM) where he was Chief Investment Strategist until March 2013. During his
career, Jacques has been involved in most segments of the asset management industry: portfolio policy and global
asset allocation for institutional clients, fund of funds management both alternatives and traditional, research leading
to product design and product management in the equity, commodity and asset allocation space and management of
high net worth platforms.
• Jacques earned a M.Sc. in Finance from HEC Montreal and a Ph.D. in International Business from the University
of South Carolina.
• He was President of the CFA Society Montreal from 2013 to 2014 and CFA Institute‟s volunteer of the year in
2015. Jacques is also one of four members of the CFA Institute‟s Research Council for America responsible for
proposing new research avenues.
• He is a board member of Régie des Rentes du Québec and a member of its investment and audit committees. He
is also a member of the advisory board of InvestorLit and the author of the book “Successful Investing Is a
Process” published by Wiley and Bloomberg Press in December 2012. Jacques is currently working on another
book to be published in 2016.
• Jacques is CEO and CIO of IPSOL CAPITAL.
19
JACQUES LUSSIER
19