Ibbotson says Brinson ‘not quite right’ on returns

Portfolio specific asset allocation policy and portfolio security selection, timing and fees contribute equally to the variation of portfolio returns according to new research by Professor Roger Ibbotson of Yale School of Management, progressing earlier work by Brinson et al which attributed more than 90 per cent to asset allocation.

 

The paper, “The equal importance of asset allocation and active management”, co-authored by James Xiong, Thomas Idzorek and Peng Chen, analysed equity, balanced and international US mutual fund data from May 1999 to April 2009. It will be published in the March/April issue of the Financial Analysts Journal.

It found that 70 per cent of the sources of variation of portfolio returns could be attributed to market movement from the universe asset allocation, or what Ibbotson calls “just being in the market”.

But significantly the paper attributes a roughly equal weighting to portfolio specific asset allocation policy (16 per cent) and portfolio security selection, timing and fees (14 per cent).

Sponsored Content

He says market movement causes most of the variation in returns, and portfolio asset allocation and security selection are about equally important in explaining the differences between portfolios.

The much-quoted 1986 study by Brinson, Hood, and Beebower, “Determinants of Portfolio Performance”, found that the mix of stocks, bonds, and cash determines the volatility of the portfolio, concluding that asset allocation explained 93.6 per cent of the variation in a portfolio’s quarterly returns.

Ibbotson says his article demonstrates “that’s not quite right”.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

The cost of bad asset allocation

A study of 300 US pension funds by CEM Benchmarking reinforces the importance of asset allocation, highlighting the performance of asset classes, as well as new evidence on correlations between asset classes. Alex Beath, author of the study, discusses the implications for asset allocation with Amanda White. A CEM Benchmarking study “Asset Allocation and Fund

The OECD’s plan for long-term investment

G20 financial ministers and central bank governors welcomed the findings of the G20/OECD roundtable on institutional investors and long-term investment last month, which included clear plans to incentivise institutional investors to undertake more long-term investments. The roundtable, “From solutions to actions: implementing measures to encourage institutional long-term investment financing”, held in Singapore recognised that long-term

Why long-horizon investors should adopt factor-based asset allocation

Long-horizon investors can withstand macro-economic volatility and so should tilt towards strategies that are exposed to that, including value, small cap and momentum. Oleg Ruban, vice president in the applied research team at MSCI says this validates factor-investing and factor-based asset allocation for these investors.   Appropriate asset allocation requires explicit attention be paid to

The case for long-termism

Keith Ambachtsheer’s lead article in the Fall 2014 edition of the Rotman International Journal of Pension Management, takes readers through an historical and logical journey that supports the case for long-termism. Importantly he validates this with four high-profile investor case studies which demonstrate that a long-term view benefits society but also the investors, willing to

Investors alter allocations because of climate risks

A number of large institutional investors, including AP1, the Environment Agency and AustralianSuper, made changes to their strategic asset allocation as a result of Mercer’s 2011 study on climate risks, and now the consultant is working with a new raft of investors to assess forward-looking climate change scenarios against their current allocations. Meanwhile one of

Real estate sector continues to lead on sustainability: GRESB

This year’s Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB) reveals that sustainability reporting has improved in coverage and quality of data, with the average overall score increasing due to increasing implementation and measurement. The average score is now 47 (out of 100) which is up nine points this year. The benchmark collects data from 637 listed

Previous