Search results

Towers Watson (TW) has always conducted its own research into alternative approaches to market cap investing. A senior investment consultant with TW, impressed by a recent presentation by the CIO of Research Affiliates (RA) about an innovative investing concept called the “Fundamental Index methodology,” thinks it might be an important innovation in applying nonmarket cap approaches. But he has some concerns about the approach and whether or not it would be appropriate for TW's clients who depend on the firm to keep them on the cutting edge of institutional investing.

This paper aims to elaborate on the optimization of two particular cryptocurrency portfolios in a mean-variance framework. In general, cryptocurrencies can be classified to as coins and tokens where the first can be thought of as a medium of exchange and the latter accounts for security or utility tokens depending upon its design.

Against this backdrop, this empirical study distinguishes, in particular, between pure coin and token portfolios. Both portfolios are optimized by maximizing the Sharpe ratio and, subsequently, compared with alternative portfolio strategies.

The empirical findings demonstrate that the maximum utility portfolio of coins, with a risk aversion of λ = 10, outweighs alternative frameworks. The portfolios optimized by maximizing the Sharpe ratio for both coins and tokens indicate a rather poor performance. Testing the maximized utility for different levels of risk aversion confirms the findings of this empirical study and confers them more robustness.

Further investigation is strongly recommended as tokens represent a new phenomenon in the cryptocurrency universe, for which only a limited amount of data are available, which restricts the sampling. Furthermore, future study is to include more sophisticated optimization models using different constraints in portfolio creation.

In light of the persistently substantial volatility in cryptocurrency markets, the empirical findings assert that portfolio managers are advised to construct a global minimum variance portfolio. In the absence of sophisticated optimization models, private investors can invest according to the market values of cryptocurrencies. Despite minor differences in the risk and reward ratios of the portfolios tested, tokens tend to be more speculative, especially, if the Tether token is excluded, which may require enhanced supervision and investor protection by regulating authorities.

As the current literature investigates on diversification effects of blended cryptocurrency portfolios rather than making an explicit distinction, this paper reflects one of the first to explore the investability and role of diversifying coins and tokens using a classic Markowitz approach.

A well-documented pattern in the literature concerns the outperformance of small-cap stocks relative to their larger-cap counterparts. This paper aims to address the “small-cap versus large-cap” issue using for the first time data from the exchange traded funds (ETFs) industry.

Several raw return and risk-adjusted return metrics are estimated over the period 2012-2016.

Results are partially supportive of the “size effect”. In particular, small-cap ETFs outperform large-cap ETFs in overall raw return terms even though they fail the risk test. However, outperformance is not consistent on an annual basis. When risk-adjusted returns are taken into consideration, small-cap ETFs are inferior to their large-cap counterparts.

This research only covers the ETF market in the USA. However, given the tremendous growth of ETF markets worldwide, a similar examination of the “small vs large capitalization” issue could be conducted with data from other developed ETF markets in Europe and Asia. In such a case, useful comparisons could be made, so that we could conclude whether the findings of the current study are unique and US-specific or whether they could be generalized across the several international ETF markets.

A possible generalization of the findings would entail that profitable investment strategies could be based on the different performance and risk characteristics of small- and large-cap ETFs.

This is the first study to examine the performance of ETFs investing in large-cap stock indices vis-à-vis the performance of ETFs tracking indices comprised of small-cap stocks.

The authors examine the industrywise investment preferences of foreign portfolio investors (FPIs), domestic institutional investors (DIIs) and retail investors in the Indian context. They also investigate the factors influencing their preferences.

Using the quarterly shareholdings and returns data of the Indian market from March 31, 2009 to March 31, 2018, the authors employ analysis of variance to study investors' preferences and a random effect panel data model to examine the factors that influence these preferences.

FPIs hold proportionally more stocks in service-oriented industries and large-cap firms, DIIs hold proportionally large numbers of shares in paper industries and retail investors hold proportionally more shares in chemicals and textiles. FPIs prefer stocks with a high export-to-sales ratio and firms registered on a foreign stock market. Domestic investors, especially retail investors, prefer small-cap stocks and firms whose operations require local knowledge. In addition, industry heterogeneity determines investment decisions. Firm-specific and macroeconomic factors that influence investment decisions differ across industries. Finally, government policies and reforms also play a key role in attracting investors.

Policymakers can identify the key variables that influence investment, which can help direct and regulate investment in India and similar emerging markets.

This study fills a research gap by addressing how industry-level heterogeneity affects investors' preferences in terms of the industrywise preferences of different types of investors and the factors that influence their preferences.

The main purpose of this study is to use the Sharpe Ratio to test the efficient market hypothesis for different market capitalization and investment styles of mutual funds. The results of the study for the entire period of 1994‐2007 as well as the two subperiods (1994‐1999 and 2000‐2007) indicate that small cap funds have provided the highest risk‐adjusted return for the entire period whereas growth funds have exhibited lower returns. The findings, therefore, suggest that the mutual funds market is not always efficient, which makes it possible for an investor or a mutual fund manager to earn excess return on a risk‐adjusted basis.

This study aims to examine the incremental valuation implication of excess realized tax benefit under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 123R: share‐based payment (123R excess tax benefit), which is required to be reported as a component of financing cash flows by the publicly traded corporations.

The sample comprises of Standard and Poor's (S&P); large‐, mid‐ and small‐cap firms who adopted SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006. The study covers a time period of the first and second quarters of 2006.

The multivariate regression analyses indicate that the capital market evaluates the SFAS 123R excess tax benefit in presence of accruals, and operating, investing and other financing cash‐flow components at different rates in pricing equity securities.

The primary results, however, are mostly restricted to large‐ and mid‐cap S&P firms. No incremental valuation consequence of SFAS 123R excess tax benefits for small‐cap S&P firms is observed.

The findings suggest that the 123R excess tax benefit reported as a financing cash‐flow component is incrementally informative in equity valuation but the timing and extent of its market valuation is impacted by firm size, its visibility and information environment, and the magnitude of the excess realized tax benefit in dollar terms.

There is a great deal of research that has been done to investigate the investment characteristics of conventional socially responsible investment portfolios compared to their broader conventional counterparts. However, the impact of incorporating sustainability criteria into the traditional Sharia screening process has not so far been investigated. Therefore, the study aims to give empirical evidence as to whether or not incorporating sustainability socially responsible criteria in the traditional Sharia screening process has a significant impact on the investment characteristics of the Islamic investment portfolio.

The paper examines the investment characteristics of four groups of investment portfolios mainly, Dow Jones Global Index, Dow Jones Sustainability World Index, Dow Jones Islamic Market World Index and Dow Jones Islamic Market Sustainability Index. To improve the robustness of the study, the analysis was carried out at different levels. First, absolute mean return and t‐test were used to examine whether the difference between the different groups of investments is statistically significant or not. Second, risk adjusted equilibrium models, both single‐index and Fama and French multi‐index, were employed. This is to control for different risk exposure and investment style bias associated with different investment portfolios examined.

The paper finds that neither the Sharia nor the sustainability screening process seems to have an adverse impact on the performance and systematic risk of the investment portfolios compared to their unrestricted conventional counterparts. Therefore, Muslim as well as socially responsible investors can choose investments that are consistent with their value systems and beliefs without being forced to sacrifice performance or expose to higher systematic risk.

The study contributes to the existing literature by giving new evidence on the impact of incorporating sustainability criteria into the traditional Sharia screening process that has not so far been investigated.