Search results

This study seeks to examine the effectiveness of controlling the currency risk for international diversified mixed‐asset portfolios via two different hedge instruments, currency forwards and currency options. So far, currency forward has been the most common hedge tool, which will be compared here with currency options to control the foreign currency exposure risk. In this regard, several hedging strategies are evaluated and compared with one another.

Owing to the highly skewed return distributions of options, the application of the traditional mean‐variance framework for portfolio optimization is doubtful. To account for this problem, a mean lower partial moment model is employed. An in‐the‐sample as well as an out‐of‐the sample context is used. With in‐sample analyses, a block bootstrap test has been used to statistically test the existence of any significant performance improvement. Following that, to investigate the consistency of the results, the out‐of‐sample evaluation has been checked. In addition, currency trends are also taken into account to test the time‐trend dependence of currency movements and, therefore, the relative potential gains of risk‐controlling strategies.

Results show that European put‐in‐the‐money options have the potential to substitute the optimally forward‐hedged portfolios. Considering the composition of the portfolio in using in‐the‐money options and forwards shows that using any of these hedge tools brings a much more diversified selection of stock and bond markets than no hedging strategy. The optimal option weights imply that a put‐in‐the‐money option strategy is more active than at‐the‐money or out‐of‐the‐money put options, which implies the dependency of put strategies on the level of strike price. A very interesting point is that, just by dedicating a very small part of the investment in options, the same amount of currency risk exposure can be hedged as when one uses the optimal forward hedging. In the out‐of‐sample study, the optimally forward‐hedged strategy generally presents a much better performance than any types of put policies.

The research shows the risk and return implications of different currency hedging strategies. The finding could be of interest for asset managers of internationally diversified portfolios.

Considering the findings in the out‐of‐sample perspective, the optimally forward‐hedged minimum risk portfolio dominates all other strategies, while, in the depreciation of the local currency, this, together with the forward‐hedged tangency portfolio selection, would characterize the dominant portfolio strategies.

Heuristics are a less complex and more understandable way to a more straightforward, astute and brisk basic decision-making strategy. The purpose of this study is the development of a rule of thumb called the “Crocodile rule” based on downside risk.

The crocodile rule is developed and tested in two steps by using data in the form of stock portfolios of the Pakistan Stock Exchange from January 2000 to November 2017. In the first phase of the study, researchers have forecasted the probabilities, while in the second phase, the researchers have used these probabilities to test the crocodile rule.

The findings show the acceptance of the null hypothesis, forecasting error for all categories of stocks for the first phase. The results also show that the minimum recovery chance is 58%, and the maximum recovery chance is 81% with an overall average of 69% chance of recovery. All recovery probabilities are above 50% for all portfolios; this is particularly impressive for a volatile market like Pakistan.

The study also proposes another performance measure such as “value-at-risk” and compare it with present results to yield better outcomes. Furthermore, other categories of stock like profitability and growth can be tested as well.

The practical application of this rule is a choice between a “Buy-and-hold” strategy and showing myopic behavior as another extreme.

This pioneering research focuses on the development of the “Crocodile rule” by using the lower partial moments as a proxy of downside risk. This research adds value to the existing literature on performance measures. Furthermore, it also highlights and indicates which strategy should be used by the investors in case of falling trends in the market.

The authors apply their method to analyze which portfolios are capable of providing superior performance to those based on the Sharpe ratio (SR).

In this paper the authors illustrate the use of conditional copulas for identifying differences in alternative portfolio performance strategies. The authors analyze which portfolios are capable of providing superior performance to those based on the SR.

The results show that under the Gaussian copula, both expected tail ratio (ETR) and skewness-kurtosis ratio portfolios exhibit remarkably low correlations respecting the SR portfolio. This means that these two portfolios are different respecting the SR one. The authors also find that copulas which focus on either the upper tail (Gumbel) or the lower tail (Clayton) render significant differences. In short, the copula analysis is useful to understand what kind of equity-screening strategy based on its corresponding performance measure (PM) performs better in relation to the SR portfolio.

Copula methods for evaluating relative tail forecasting performance provide an alternative tool when forecast differences are very small or found non statistically significant through standard tests.

Our copula methods to evaluate models' performance differences are significant because when models' performance is rather similar, conclusions on statistical differences, can be defective as they may hinge on the subsample type or size used, leading to inefficient investment decisions. Our method based in copula is novel in this research topic.

This study aims to examine the association between predictive accounting downside risk measures and changes in credit spreads. Building upon the earnings downside risk (EDR) measure developed in prior literature, this paper introduces cash flow downside risk (CFDR).

This study modifies an existing empirical framework (root lower partial moment) to calculate CFDR and applies it to a sample of firms between 2002 and 2013 for which credit default swap data are available.

After validating the measure, this study identifies a positive association between CFDR and changes in credit spreads. This paper further shows the association between CFDR and credit spread changes is stronger than that between EDR and credit spread changes. Financial stability moderates the relationship between CFDR and credit spreads.

This study proposes a novel measure of accounting downside risk, CFDR and demonstrates a negative association between this measure and future cash flow and a positive association between this measure and future credit spreads.

This paper aims to identify and examine the determinants of downside systematic risk in Australian listed property trusts (LPTs).

Capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and lower partial moment‐CAPM (LPM‐CAPM) are employed to compute both systematic risk and downside systematic risk. The methodology of Patel and Olsen and Chaudhry et al. is adopted to examine the determinants of systematic risk and downside systematic risk.

The results confirm that systematic risk and downside systematic risk can be individually identified. There is little evidence to support the existence of linkages between systematic risk in Australian LPTs and financial/management structure determinants. On the other hand, downside systematic risk is directly related to the leverage/management structure of a LPT. The results are also robust after controlling for the LPTs' investment characteristics and varying target rates of return.

Investors and real estate analysts should conscious with the higher returns from high leverage and internally managed LPTs. Although there is no evidence that these higher returns are related to higher systematic risk, there could be the compensation for higher downside systematic risk.

This study provides invaluable insights into the management of real estate risk in Australian LPTs with implications for REITs in other countries. Unlike previous studies of systematic risk in REITs or LPTs, this is the first study to assess downside systematic risk and explore the determinants of downside systematic risk in LPTs.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the risk and return characteristics as well as the allocation of mean‐variance (MV) and downside risk (DR) optimized portfolios of international real estate stock markets and to discuss implications for portfolio management.

The analysis focuses on real estate markets only and examines the appropriateness of the Markowitz approach based on MV optimization in comparison to the DR framework suggested by Estrada. Therefore, the two frameworks are presented before the properties of the return distributions are analyzed. Afterwards, the risk and return characteristics as well as the allocation of the efficient portfolios in both frameworks and the divergences are analyzed.

Because of non‐normally distributed returns, negative skewness, and probably non‐quadratic utility functions of investors, MV optimization is not appropriate and the alternative approach by Estrada has its merit compared with other DR frameworks. Furthermore, MV‐efficient and DR‐efficient portfolio allocation differ, as shown by a similarity index. Summarizing, MV optimization is inherent with misleading results and DR optimization shows stronger out‐of‐sample performance – at least during time periods characterized by high market volatility and financial market turmoil.

This study provides some interesting and valuable insights into the DR of international securitized real estate portfolios and the limitations for portfolio management based on MV optimization.

We examine whether the hedging effectiveness of crude oil futures is affected by asymmetry in the return distribution by applying tail-specific metrics to compare the hedging effectiveness of both short and long hedgers. The hedging effectiveness metrics we use are based on lower partial moments (LPM), value at risk (VaR) and conditional value at risk (CVaR). Comparisons are applied to a number of hedging strategies including ordinary least square (OLS), and both symmetric and asymmetric GARCH models. We find that OLS provides consistently better performance across different measures of hedging effectiveness as compared with GARCH models, irrespective of the characteristics of the underlying distribution.

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.

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.

This paper aims to investigate patterns in UK stock returns related to downside risk, with particular focus on stock returns during financial crises.

First, stocks are sorted into five quintile portfolios based on the relevant beta values (classic beta, downside beta and upside beta, calculated by the moving window approach). Second, patterns of portfolio returns are examined during various sub-periods. Finally, predictive powers of beta and downside beta are examined.

The downside risk is observed to have a significant positive impact on contemporaneous stock returns and a negative impact on future returns in general. In contrast, an inverse relationship between risk and return is observed when stocks are sorted by beta, contrary to the classic literature. UK stock returns exhibit clear time sensitivity, especially during financial crises.

This paper focuses on the impact of the downside risk on UK stock returns, assessed via a comprehensive sub-period analysis. This paper fills the gap in the existing literature, in which very few studies examine the time sensitivity in relation to the downside risk and the risk-return anomaly in the UK stock market using a long sample period.