Search results

In Australia, the A$2.2 trillion managed funds industry including the large pension funds (known locally as superannuation funds) are the dominant institutional property investors. While statistical information on the level of Australian managed fund investments in property assets is widely available, comprehensive practical evidence on property asset allocation decision-making process is underdeveloped. The purpose of this research is to identify Australian fund manager's property asset allocation strategies and decision-making frameworks at strategic level.

The research was undertaken in May-August 2011 using an in-depth semi-structured questionnaire administered by mail. The survey was targeted at 130 leading managed funds and asset consultants within Australia.

The evaluation of the 79 survey respondents indicated that Australian fund manager's property allocation decision-making process is an interactive, sequential and continuous process involving multiple decision-makers (internal and external) complete with feedback loops. It involves a combination of quantitative analysis (mainly mean-variance analysis) and qualitative overlay (mainly judgement, or “gut-feeling”, and experience). In addition, the research provided evidence that the property allocation decision-making process varies depending on the size and type of managed fund.

This research makes important contributions to both practical and academic fields. Information on strategic property allocation models and variables is not widely available, and there is little guiding theory related to the subject. Therefore, the conceptual frameworks developed from the research will help enhance academic theory and understanding in the area of property allocation decision making. Furthermore, the research provides small fund managers and industry practitioners with a platform from which to improve their own property allocation processes.

In contrast to previous property decision-making research in Australia which has mainly focused on strategies at the property fund investment level, this research investigates the institutional property allocation decision-making process from a strategic position involving all major groups in the Australian managed funds industry.

The main aim of this paper is to investigate the specific factors that influence fund managers' decisions to dispose of property.

This study explores the reasons behind the decision‐making processes associated with the disposal of real estate within a portfolio, and the information sources utilised by fund managers. A behavioural finance approach is adopted with the field research carried out as a survey‐based analysis of the disposal decisions made by fund managers in the UK property fund market.

The main reason for disposal of an investment is due, in part, to re‐structuring the portfolio. This is also linked to under‐performance of the asset involved, and current market expectations. The implications for the study are that it identifies that there are links between rational and irrational behaviour in the selection of assets, not only for disposal, but also in terms of investment as a whole. This can be based on the inefficiency of the property market, and the lack of accurately available information.

The study is unique as it provides a comprehensive commentary on the disposal behaviour of fund managers at the individual property and portfolio‐wide levels.

Since the mid‐1990s, in a generally strongly performing property market, there has been huge growth in the aggregate size and number of global property funds in both listed and unlisted formats. Managers have been able to raise significant capital, which potentially rewards them with performance fees without necessarily being able to provide clear evidence of out‐performance against defined market benchmarks or performance targets. In a more challenging, mature and increasingly transparent market this is unlikely to continue to be the case as it will be increasingly possible to assemble performance records. The purpose of this paper is to describe the sources of risk and return within property funds and set out a more holistic performance attribution framework encompassing the concepts of alpha (out‐performance) and beta (risk), which traditional attribution frameworks in property fund management do not.

A four component risk and return attribution framework is put forward. The first two components are portfolio structure which measures the impact of allocations to more or less risky markets, and stock selection which considers more or less risky assets. Fund structure, measures the impact of financial leverage and fees and finally the return impact of timing is attributed to the movement of capital into and out of the fund.

A case study of a single unlisted fund has been used to compare traditional attribution results with an examination of alpha and beta return attribution. In this instance fund structure, which is largely the financial leverage impact, is found to be significant. This simply reflects extra risk taking and there is no clear evidence of manager out‐performance, yet significant performance fees are paid to the manager.

The paper provides a complete framework for the performance measurement and attribution of property funds, which enables investors to gain a fuller understanding of these increasingly used investment conduits.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether anchoring and adjustment as heuristic-driven bias and herding behaviour influences listed property fund managers in South Africa’s property investment decisions. The study contributes to the understanding of the influence of heuristic-driven bias and herding behaviour on property investment decisions made in a highly volatile environment.

This study is focused on the subject field of behavioural finance and follows a survey-based design. A questionnaire was finalised after completion of the pilot study and was sent via e-mail to fund managers of all South African-based property funds listed on the Johannesburg Securities Exchange. Non-parametric statistical measures were used.

Consistency with other studies suggests that anchoring and adjustment may exist in the decisions made by listed property fund managers. However, fund managers tend to not adjust to new information due to the current socio-political environment in South Africa rather than a lack of understanding of the new information.

It is recommended that investors form developed and emerging economies take notice of the highly volatile circumstances in which property fund managers in an emerging economy such as South Africa have to make investment decisions. The probability of missed gains as a result of conservative investment strategies may have an impact on future returns.

This study enhanced the understanding of the role that heuristic-driven bias plays in the South African property industry and more importantly, it went some way towards enhancing understanding of behavioural aspects and their influence on property investment decision making in an emerging market.

There are three basic approaches to style analysis: (i) an examination of the portfolio and security selection procedures used by the fund managers, (ii) a factor model approach, and (iii) return‐based approaches, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. Of the return‐based methods the effective asset mix approach, as devised and popularised by Sharpe, offers the investor the simplest route to style analysis. This study applies this approach to a sample of 37 property funds in the UK and shows that style analysis can make an important contribution to the analysis of portfolio performance. Results that should prove of considerable interest to fund managers and property professionals alike.

In a bid to broaden the understanding of the real estate investment decision-making framework, the purpose of this paper is to examine the real estate asset allocation decision-making practices of real estate funds in Nigeria, a developing economy. This is with a view to providing information toward enhancing real estate investment decisions.

A mixed-methods approach comprising a combination of literature review, expert interviews and semi-structured questionnaire survey is adopted for this study. Through literature review and expert interviews, the asset allocation decision-making process of institutional real estate funds was identified. Based on the literature review and expert discussions, a semi-structured questionnaire was developed and self-administered on fund/portfolio managers of 59 institutional real estate funds in Nigeria to investigate their asset allocation decision-making practice. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics for the closed-ended questions while the open-ended questions were content analyzed.

The findings revealed that the asset allocation decision-making process utilized by public and private real estate funds follows an opportunistic asset accumulation approach. The decision-making process also varies depending on the nature of the fund. Further findings showed that government policies, political uncertainties and regulatory mechanism motivate asset allocation decisions. Moreover, majority of the sampled real estate funds employed a combination of in-house personnel and external consultants (hybrid), while mean/standard deviation and cash flow analysis (DCF, NPV) were mostly utilized by the funds in making property investment decisions.

The findings implied that the real estate asset allocation decision-making process of institutional property investors in Nigeria deviates from the normative model of the asset allocation process prescribed in the literature and varies depending on the nature of the real estate funds. As such, familiarization of institutional investors with government policies, political climate and other regulatory mechanism (barriers to entry) guiding the ownership and operation of real estate assets in the country could improve their real estate investment decisions.

The study complements and extends existing literature on real estate asset allocation decision-making process of institutional investors from the viewpoint of the actors involved in a developing African economy.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the property investment decision-making process of Australian unlisted property funds.

Drawing on previous research into property investment decision making by Australian REITs, a normative model of the unlisted property fund investment decision-making process is proposed. Based on exploratory investigation through semi-structured interviews with senior Australian unlisted property fund decision makers, a descriptive model of the property investment decision-making process by Australian unlisted property funds is developed. The normative model and descriptive model are compared and a prescriptive model of the Australian unlisted property fund investment decision-making process proposed.

A four-stage, 20-step process proposed in the normative model was found to be generally supported by the descriptive model developed, potentially comprising a possible prescriptive model for the Australian unlisted property fund investment decision-making process.

Further research is required to investigate risk-return issues, whether the prescriptive model is generalisable across other property investment decision-making groups or over time and whether it may lead to “good” decisions.

The prescriptive model proposed may contribute consistency and transparency to the decision-making process, if adopted by Australian unlisted property funds, potentially leading to better decisions.

Greater consistency and transparency in property investment decision making by Australian unlisted property funds may lead to the optimal allocation of capital and greater investor confidence in the sector.

The findings comprise the first possible prescriptive model of the Australian unlisted property fund investment decision-making process, forming a basis for comparative investigation of that process adopted by other property investment decision-making groups such as Australian REITs and Australian retail property funds.

Referring to “behavioural finance” and “normative model” theories, this study explores the relative significance of behavioural heuristic biases in the investment decisions of real estate investment trusts (REITs) when compared with the conventional normative decision factors, with an ultimate aim to identify the significant behavioural factors that should be avoided to ensure rational asset acquisitions and market efficiency.

A triangulation approach was adopted. Qualitative multiple case studies were conducted, with four cases selected from Australian and New Zealand REITs across the industry, to identify what normative and behavioural finance factors are involved in investment decisions. This formed the basis for the subsequent expert review survey to explore how significant the behavioural factors were manifested in the judgement when compared with the normative factors.

Three out of four theoretical behavioural factors manifested themselves in the investment decisions: investor sentiment, anchoring factors and overconfidence. The overall impact of these three behavioural factors was that they were as significant as normative factors in investment decisions. The heuristic availability of information was found to have no significant effect on experienced REIT fund managers.

The findings were based on four multiple cases and an expert review survey of six frontline fund managers, which form a baseline upon which further research can be conducted to widen the scope of research to cover all REITs in Australasia so that the results can become more robust to benefit the entire market in the region.

As behavioural factors are significant in the decision-making process, REIT fund managers should raise awareness to avoid the significant behavioural factors identified, in particular investor sentiment, which was found to be the most significant one.

This study confirms the relative significance of behavioural factors in property investment decisions within the context of Australasian REITs and alerts fund managers to the ways they should follow to ensure rational investments and market efficiency. It also extends the scale of existing studies to cover not only Australia but also New Zealand for the benefit of the entire Australasian market.

Looks at the nature of property unit trusts and their attractiveness to different types of investors. Considers the prospects for a successful launch of property funds. Outlines the main features of authorized property funds (APFs) and implications of these proposals for the property market and operators in the market with particular reference to the Australian experience. Concludes on the likely impact of APFs and highlights the lessons to learned by the UK from the Australian experience.

Real estate is the last major asset class without liquid derivatives markets. The reasons for that are not fully known or understood. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to better understand the main factors that influence the propensity of commercial real estate investors in the UK to employ property derivatives.

The research methodology that was chosen for this research is grounded theory which, in its original form, goes back to Glaser and Strauss (1967). A total of 43 interviews were conducted with 46 real estate professionals in the UK from property investment management firms (investing directly or indirectly in real estate), multi-asset management firms, real estate investment trusts, banks, and brokerage and advisory firms, among others.

The research results show 29 factors that influence the propensity of direct and indirect real estate investors in the UK to employ property derivatives. Out of the 29 factors, the current research identified 12 factors with high-explanatory power, 6 with a contributing role and 11 with low explanatory power. Moreover, factors previously discussed in the literature are tested and assessed as to their explanatory power. The focus of this paper is on those factors with high-explanatory power. From the research data, three main reasons have been identified as the sources of investor reluctance to trade in property derivatives. The first and main reason is related to a mismatch between motivations of property investment managers and what can be achieved with the instruments. The second reason, which ties in with the first one, is a general misunderstanding as to the right pricing technique of property derivatives. Finally, the third reason is a general lack of hedging demand from the investor base owing to the long investment horizons through market cycles.

The research contributes to the literature on property derivatives in various ways. First, it extends the literature on market hurdles in property derivatives markets by testing and extending the hurdles that were proposed previously. Second, the research shows that the existing pricing models need to be extended in order to account for the risk perception of practitioners and their concerns with regard to liquidity levels.

For both theory and practice, the research has shown some limitations in using property derivatives for purposes such as creating index exposure or hedging. Another contribution, in this case to practice, is that this study provides a clearer picture as to the reasons that keep property investment managers away from using property derivatives.

The research results indicate that liquidity per se is not a universal remedy for the problems in the market. In addition to the need for improving the understanding of the pricing mechanism, practitioners should give more thought to the notion of real estate market risk and the commensurate returns that can reasonably be expected when they take or reduce it. This implies that property index futures currently do not price like those on any other investable asset class.