Growing case for low-volatility portfolios

RogersCasey has leant its weight to the trend towards low-volatilty portfolios, however, in a white paper on the subject, the asset consultancy notes a few concerns.

The paper, written by Arman Gevorgyan, is broadly supportive of pension funds considering low-volatility portfolios in a range of conditions. Such portfolios, managed either actively or passively, can free up a significant portion of a fund’s risk budget for other uses.

The main advantages, according to RogersCasey, are:

. potentially attractive risk/reward trade-off

. operationally straightforward implementation and monitoring, and

. attractive fee schedule (especially for passive) and liquidity profile relative to alternative investments.

Sponsored Content

But low-volatility portfolios do not necessarily have to be considered ‘alternative’. The paper points out they can be used for a traditional equity program and as a LDI (liability driven investment) solution as well as a part of the alternatives allocation.

On the cautionary side, the paper notes that it is uncertain as to precisely why low-volatility stocks have offered the risk and return characteristics they appear to have. It could be because of a style bias – favouring small caps and value stocks – or because of the sub-optimal nature of traditional cap-weighted indices which are used as comparisons.

Gevorgyan notes, also, that with benchmarking becoming commonplace, most pension funds shifted their risk focus from total, or absolute, risk to active, or comparative, risk. This may create another inefficiency to exploit.

And, he says, there is a certain “glamour appeal” about volatility, which is a possible psychological bias, for those investors who are often seeking to hit home runs within their portfolios.

The major disadvantages of low-volatility portfolios, the paper says, are:

. lack of clarity whether their historical Sharpe (risk/return) ratios will persist

. increase in program-level active risk as a result of implementing low-volatility portfolios, and

. difficulty in benchmarking.

Nevertheless, the paper follows a discussion paper on global equities published by Mercer Investment Consulting last month, in which that firm also recommended consideration of low-volatility portfolios as a better defensive mechanism than other traditional forms.

The full RogersCasey white paper is accessible on: www.rogerscasey.com

Leave a Comment

GIC, Temasek eye trillions of growth in climate adaptation market

GIC, Temasek eye trillions of growth in climate adaptation market

Singapore’s two largest asset owners, GIC and Temasek, see attractive opportunities in climate adaptation solutions – a relatively underfunded area compared to decarbonisation. The former has already made selective adaptation investments and said the opportunity set across public and private debt and equity could increase to $9 trillion by 2050.

Sort content by

EDHEC award-winning paper on dynamic allocation decisions

The Institute for Quantitative Investment Research (Inquire) Europe has recognised research by Professor Lionel Martellini, scientific director of EDHEC-Risk Institute developed in conjunction with Vincent Milhau, research engineer with EDHEC-Risk Institute. The paper, Dynamic Allocation Decisions in the Presence of Funding Ratio Constraints, can be accessed here. Inquire_Europe_Autumn_2009mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Towards a better benchmark for market valuations

Taking a three-year view of recent company earnings compared with price may be a more logical benchmark for market valuations, according to a paper from Wainwright Economics in the US. Wainright.pdfmrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Global regulation: not the time to lose interest

This paper by Pantheon Ventures argues there is an excellent case for appropriate global regulatory reform, but warns it must be proportionate and non-discriminatory, and it must acknowledge that the financial system is global.mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Does Britain need a financial regulator?

Terry Arthur and Philip Booth from The Institute of Economic Affairs explore whether Britain actually needs a financial regulator, concluding among other things that the FSA “is simply the wrong model to generate appropriate rules and regulations”.mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

SuperStream could save $20 bn: Ernst & Young

The $20 billion prize, provides a blueprint for implementing the Cooper Review-proposed SuperStream concept.

Revisiting global small caps

This research insight by MSCI, shows global small caps still exhibit distinct characteristics that provide opportunities for portfolio diversification and active management. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Previous