Search results

Traditionally, the measure of risk used in portfolio optimisation models is the variance. However, alternative measures of risk have many theoretical and practical advantages and it is peculiar therefore that they are not used more frequently. This may be because of the difficulty in deciding which measure of risk is best and any attempt to compare different risk measures may be a futile exercise until a common risk measure can be identified. To overcome this, another approach is considered, comparing the portfolio holdings produced by different risk measures, rather than the risk return trade‐off. In this way we can see whether the risk measures used produce asset allocations that are essentially the same or very different. The results indicate that the portfolio compositions produced by different risk measures vary quite markedly from measure to measure. These findings have a practical consequence for the investor or fund manager because they suggest that the choice of model depends very much on the individual's attitude to risk rather than any theoretical and/or practical advantages of one model over another.

It is shown that the widely used risk measures standard deviation and value at risk do not always reflect risk preferences accurately. To overcome these problems in risk measurement a class of coherent risk measures has been proposed. We introduce the idea behind these measures and provide an overview of suggested coherent risk measures. Finally it is shown where the limitations of such measures in practical applications are and how regulatory bodies responded to their introduction in the literature. We find that most contributions on coherent risk measurement come from the actuarial sciences and propagate a widening of the discussion among researchers and practitioners in other industries.

Conventional measures of risk aversion based on first and second derivatives of utility are strictly local instruments, valid only for infinitesimally small changes in wealth. This paper to develop a global index suitable for assessing attitudes toward large‐scale risks.

Integral calculus is used to measure the geometric area between an individual's actual utility function and a linear function displaying risk neutrality, over the entire range of potential wealth outcomes for a given risk. The area is then converted to an index number.

Local and global measures of risk aversion yield similar interpersonal comparisons only for small risks; with larger risks, local measures distort interpersonal differences. The analysis also shows that individuals having exponential utility functions evaluate risk exclusively on the basis of wealth dispersion, whereas those with logarithmic or square‐root utilities consider both the mean and variance of wealth.

The global index is quantifiable if the functional form of utility is known; further research is needed to approximate the index when information about utility is limited.

The most important risks encountered in practice, such as the possibility of unemployment or disability, involve variations in wealth far larger than differential calculus is designed to accommodate. The integral index therefore provides a more appropriate basis for measuring and comparing risk preferences.

The paper provides an innovative geometric interpretation of global risk aversion, and in contrast to local measures, the integral index captures differences in the intensity of an individual's aversion toward risks of various magnitudes.

The purpose of this paper is to measure the risk perception of the employees in respect of equity shares, from the perspective of elements of marketing mix and to ascertain the degree of influence of elements of marketing mix on equity‐related risk perception.

Primary data based on the interview schedule were collected from the employees of Oil India Limited and various tables prepared. For analysis of data, Cronbach's alpha and Friedman test analysis were employed.

Out of the four elements of marketing mix considered in the study, the degree of influence of price driven measure of risk perception is highest and others in order are product, promotion and place driven measure of risk perception, respectively.

The paper is the first of its kind and hence original in nature.

Many studies have shown that from a theoretical and empirical point of view, downside risk-based measures of risk are better than the traditional ones. Despite academic appeal and practical implications, downside risk has not been thoroughly examined in markets outside developed country markets. Using downside beta as a measure of downside risk, this study examines the relationship between downside beta and stock returns in Indian equity market, an emerging market with unique investor, asset and market characteristics.

This is an empirical study done by using ranked portfolio return analysis and regression analysis methodologies.

The study results show that downside risk, as measured by downside beta, is distinctly priced in the Indian equity market. There is a direct positive relationship between downside beta and contemporaneous realized returns, indicating a premium for downside risk. Downside risk carries a higher weightage than upside potential in the aggregate return of the stock portfolios. Downside beta is a better measure of systematic risk than conventional market beta and downside coskewness.

The empirical results support the adoption of downside beta in practice and provide a case for replacing traditional beta with downside beta in asset pricing applications, trading and investment strategies, and capital allocation decision-making.

This is one of the first in-depth studies examining downside beta in Indian equity markets using a broad sample of individual stock returns covering a wide time range of 22 years. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first one to compare downside beta and downside coskewness using individual stock data from the Indian equity market.

The paper seeks to outline the limitations and constraints in measuring operational safety in an aviation environment and provide an overview of the work being done at British Airways to overcome them.

The paper looks at the limitations and problems of trying to measure safety and operational risk. These limitations are then discussed along with methodologies to overcome them. The paper then describes some of the methods being tried within British Airways to provide useful measures of risk whilst trying to avoid the problems identified previously.

The findings of the work are that there are potential ways to generate useful safety metrics from incident reporting data and that the best use of risk data is to focus attention within the organisation onto areas of risk that need to be addressed.

The paper is based on practical work being undertaken at British Airways, and therefore, is demonstrated to be practical in an aviation environment.

The drive for operational efficiency in aviation means that aircraft operations are increasingly run against a backdrop of measures and targets. This in turn generates an increasing need and desire to include safety as a metric that can be tracked and monitored. This paper is focussed on meeting that desire and ensuring that any metrics developed avoid, as far as practical, the problems of measuring safety and using it to drive operational performance.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new way to measure risk in real estate investment, which departs from traditional statistical methodology borrowed from finance.

An argument is advanced for the use of so‐called coherent risk measures for real estate investment decisions. Central to this class of measure is the computation of spectral risk, a measure that covers the spectrum of an individual's risk aversion function. Intuition being hard to observe, empirical data from two large databases are presented as support.

At the heart of the controversy is a discussion of the nature of risk and how it should be measured. This paper seeks common ground where peace may be made between these two warring factions. Scenarios are tested wherein different risk aversion functions are used to compute spectral risk for different sectors. Ex‐post analysis shows that reasoning of this nature can lead to improved risk‐adjusted investment results.

The route to finding an appropriate risk measure for real estate investment has been tortuous. It is not certain that the destination has been reached. Complicating the task is a considerable gap between academic and practitioner methodology, the former relying on the mathematics of objective probability, the latter dwelling quite successfully in a habitat of subjective risk measures.

It is widely accepted that risk represents a cost to society. Real estate, as a repository of roughly half the world's wealth, can be viewed as having risk of a structurally different nature. The better understanding of this risk reduces the cost to society.

For practitioners, spectral measures offer formal support for something they have been doing their entire careers: evaluating risk subjectively. The simple dot product of weights and ordered outcomes is an extension of the widely used “Best case – Worse case – Most likely” methodology that has served professionals well for decades. Perhaps a by‐product of spectral measures is to bring academics and field gladiators closer together. If there is merit to a new way of thinking about risk independent of its implementation, real estate investment could benefit from that thinking. Among those who doubt that everything is “normal” are those who believe that previous attempts to explain risk in real estate have fallen far short of the mark. The challenge to those still not satisfied by the spectral approach is to offer an alternative that represents both a departure from and an improvement of the old methods.

This paper seeks to evaluate the risk‐adjusted performance of the largest US‐based equity mutual funds using rigorous analysis grounded in modern portfolio theory and present the results in a manner which is comprehensible to a lay investor.

This study evaluates the performance of the 20 largest US‐based mutual funds using risk‐adjusted returns during 1995‐2004. In particular, a relatively new risk‐adjusted performance measure by Modigliani and Modigliani is used to evaluate these equity funds. This study also utilizes a variation of the Sortino Ratio to account for downside risk.

The results show that the funds with the highest returns may lose their attractiveness once the degree of risk had been factored into the analysis. Conversely, some funds may look very attractive once their low risk is factored into their performance.

Future researchers may want to investigate the effects of factors, such as fund manager, compensation, service fees, corporate governance metrics, and overweighting in risky industries on the performance of mutual funds.

The empirical evidence presented in this study can be used as input in decision making by investors who are exploring the possibility of participating in the stock market via large mutual funds, but are not sure of what selection criteria to employ.

The paper is one of the first studies that apply the new M² measure to evaluate the performance of mutual funds. Various other performance metrics are also utilized including the Sharpe, Sortino, Treynor measures and Jensen's α.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of bank consolidation and foreign ownership on bank risk taking in the Egyptian banking sector.

Following prior studies (e.g. Yeyati and Micco, 2007; Barry et al., 2011), this study uses pooled Ordinary Least Squares regression models under two main analyses to test the relation between concentration and foreign ownership on one hand and bank risk-taking behavior on the other hand, where observations are pooled across banks and years for the 2000-2011 period. The reform plan was launched in 2004 and resulted in various restructuring activities in the banking system. Thus, to control for the effect of implementing the financial sector reform plan on bank insolvency and credit risk, this study includes a reform dummy variable (RFM) for the post-reform period in models testing the association between consolidation, foreign ownership and bank risk. Therefore, this categorical variable identifies whether bank risk is related to the reform activities that have been observed during the post-restructuring period, 2005-2011. Moreover, to accommodate the possibility that effects of bank concentration and foreign ownership on bank risk differ due to the implementation of the reform plan, the author create two interaction terms: one uses the product of the reform dummy variable and concentration measures, while the other uses the product of the reform dummy and foreign ownership variables to capture interactions. These interaction terms and the dummy variable provide ample room to capture the effect of bank concentration and foreign ownership on bank risks during the post-reform period.

This study provides empirical evidence that bank concentration is associated with low insolvency risk and credit risk as measured by loan loss provisions (LLP) in the post-reform period. These results are consistent with the “concentration-stability” view, suggesting that concentration of the banking sector will enhance stability. Moreover, evidence shows that while a higher presence of foreign banks reduces bank credit risk in the post-reform period, it appears to increase insolvency risk. These results are robust to using alternative measures. These findings imply that regulators in emerging countries should support foreign investments in banks to transfer better managerial skills and systems. However, government-owned banks are found to be more prone to insolvency and credit risks; thus, their ownership should not be encouraged. Finally, policy makers should reinforce bank consolidation, be prudent in determining the capital adequacy ratio (CAR) and monitor intensively less profitable, well-capitalized and small-sized banks.

Consolidation of the banking sector decreases insolvency risk and credit risk, as measured by LLP in the post-reform period. This study proposes that bank supervisors implement prudent polices in determining the bank CAR, and monitor intensively less profitable, well-capitalized and smaller banks, as they have incentives to increase risk. In addition, regulators should encourage foreign investment in the banking sector and facilitate their operations in Egypt.

Bank supervisors should intensely monitor banks with high-CARs that exceed mandatory requirements because they may be more likely to engage in more risk-taking activities.

It provides empirical evidence from a country-specific, emerging market perspective, in which restructuring events affect the national economy. Egypt, similar to other emerging countries in Africa, pursues an institutionally based (bank-based) system of corporate governance, where banks are the primary sources of finance for firms. Therefore, restructuring banks and other financial institutions and supervising their operations ensure the soundness and stability of these institutions, which represent the nerve of emerging economies. Because emerging countries tend to share common characteristics and economic conditions, and the reform of their financial systems is significant for economic development, the Egyptian banking reform and restructuring program should be of interest to other emerging countries to capitalize on this experiment. While international studies on these relationships are mostly cross-country or focus on US banks, firm-specific studies are scant. Furthermore, the findings of this study should be of interest to Egyptian regulators, bank supervisors and policy makers studying the implications of bank reforms.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the existing literature on the relationship between firm-level risk and returns and to explore other ways of measuring firm risk-taking. Literature overwhelmingly shows a negative relationship between firm-level risk and returns based on accounting data, which is counter-intuitive from the rational perspective of risk-aversion. This paper revisits this so-called Bowman’s paradox by examining the wealth of literature on the topic and empirically tests alternative measures of firm risk-taking that could provide a counter-argument on the existence of the paradox.

After formulating the criteria for such a measure, potential measures of firm risk-taking were developed based on variability of some key financial ratios and empirically tested using US listed companies’ data for several time periods from 1992 to 2016. Literature has explored the use of these financial ratios (e.g. R&D expenses as percentage of sales) based only on their magnitude. This paper is novel in that it examines the variability and not just the magnitude of these parameters.

Results showed the same counter-intuitive negative relationship between firm risk-taking and returns but the paper was able to identify an area for future theory development that hopefully will lead to a firm risk-taking measure that would exhibit the elusive positive relationship with returns.

The literature review of this paper brought together and provided a succinct classification of the various explanations for Bowman’s paradox that allowed the identification of a potentially rich area of research. It identified a gap in the literature which is the formulation of suitable measures of firm risk-taking and made investigations in this area.