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

Academics and industry unite

The gargantuan impact of systemic risk in global financial markets has been corroborated by a consortium of industry and academics collaborating to provide independent quantitative research, insight and leadership on systemic risk. Driven by director of MIT’s Laboratory for Financial Engineering,  Andrew Lo, senior managing director at State Street Global Markets, Jessica Donohue, and managing

Rethink remuneration

Institutional investors around the world have been lobbying for the right to have a say on pay, a right to have an input into the remuneration of the executives in the companies they invest in. In June the UK’s business secretary, Vince Cable, laid out new plans that will give shareholders three-yearly votes on executive

Endowments fall
from grace

US college and university endowments have gone from pioneers in the adoption of socially responsible investing (SRI) to markedly trailing the rest of the investment industry in integrating environmental social and corporate governance (ESG), new research reveals. The Boston-based Tellus Institute, an independent not-for-profit think-tank, looked at 464 endowments and was damning in its findings,

Kay Review recommendations tackle short-termism

Co-head of responsible investment at the £32 billion Universities Superannuation Scheme, David Russell, says asset manager engagement with companies should move away from its “almost myopic focus on remuneration” to other issues that impact value and strategy. His comments come on the back of the final report of the Kay Review of the UK equity

POLL: Which strategy within emerging markets debt do you find the most compelling?

mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS: “opaquely transparent”

A Columbia Business School case study on CalPERS has criticised the fund for being “opaquely transparent”, with a computation of investment expenses revealing the fund pays three-to-four times its peers in fees. Written by Columbia professor of business Andrew Ang and Columbia CaseWorks fellow, Jeremy Abrams, Californian dreamin’: The mess at CalPERS examines the political,

Previous