EDHEC-Risk Concept Industry Analysis Featured Analysis Latest EDHEC-Risk Surveys Research News Research Papers Books Features Interviews Indexes and Benchmarking EDHEC-Risk Efficient Equity Indices FTSE EDHEC-Risk ERAFP SRI Index Equity Index Research EDHEC-Risk Alternative Indexes Hedge Fund Index Research EDHEC-Risk IEIF Commercial Property Indices Amundi ETF "Core-Satellite and ETF Investment" Research Chair Solvency II Benchmarks Style and Performance Analysis Hedge Fund Performance EuroPerformance/EDHEC-Risk Institute Style Ratings Performance Measurement for Traditional Investment Asset Allocation and Alternative Diversification Real Assets Newedge "Advanced Modelling for Alternative Investments" Research Chair CME Group "Exploring the Commodity Futures Risk Premium: Implications for Asset Allocation and Regulation" Strategic Research Project SGCIB "Structured Equity Investment Strategies for Long-Term Asian Investors" Strategic Research Project Asset Allocation and Derivative Instruments Structured Forms of Investment Strategies FBF "Structured Products and Derivatives" Research Chair Eurex "The Benefits of Volatility Derivatives in Equity Portfolio Management" Strategic Research Project ALM and Asset Management AXA Investment Managers "Regulation and Institutional Investment" Research Chair BNP Paribas Investment Partners "ALM and Institutional Investment Management" Research Chair Deutsche Bank "Asset-Liability Management Techniques for Sovereign Wealth Fund Management" Research Chair Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan "Advanced Investment Solutions for Liability Hedging for Inflation Risk" Research Chair Rothschild & Cie "The Case for Inflation-Linked Corporate Bonds: Issuers' and Investors' Perspectives" Research Chair Russell Investments "Solvency II Benchmarks" Research Chair Operational Risks and Performance Best Execution: MiFID and TCA Mitigating Hedge Funds Operational Risks CACEIS "Risk and Regulation in the European Fund Management Industry" Research Chair EDHEC-Risk Publications Reports, Studies, Surveys and Position Papers Academic Publications All EDHEC-Risk Publications Events Events organised by EDHEC-Risk Institute Analysing Sovereign Risk for Portfolio Management Decisions Seminar, London, 12-13 June, 2012 CFA Institute/EDHEC-Risk Institute Advances in Asset Allocation Seminar, New York, 12-14 June, 2012 Advanced Commodity Investment Seminar, London, 19-20 June, 2012, New York, 16-17 July, 2012 New Frontiers in Equity Investing Seminar, Boston, 26-27 June, 2012 Events involving EDHEC-Risk Institute's participation EDHEC-Risk Institute Presentation Research Programmes Research Chairs and Strategic Research Projects Partnership IPE EDHEC-Risk Institute Research Insights International Advisory Board Team EDHEC-Risk News EDHEC-Risk Newsletter EDHEC-Risk Press Releases EDHEC-Risk in the Press Careers EDHEC Business School EDHEC-Risk Executive Education EDHEC-Risk Institute PhD in Finance EDHEC-Risk Institute Executive MSc in Risk and Investment Management Investment Management Seminars Contact Us Contact Us
Risk
Risk policies for active asset managers
Authors: Dario Brandolini, Massimiliano Pallotta, Raffaele Zenti
Source: Journal of Asset Management, vol. 4, n°6
Date: April 2004

Abstract

Risk management is a subject that is tending to be given more and more attention. Various risk indicators can be derived using an estimation of the probability distribution of portfolio returns. Risk indicators can then be used in a risk policy, in order to manage portfolios while keeping risk under control. Numerous articles are dedicated to the subject of risk indicator estimation, while little attention is paid to risk policies. In this article the authors do not consider estimation techniques, but focus instead on risk policies. They investigate whether the use of risk indicators, other than the commonly chosen tracking error, in a risk policy can improve the risk-adjusted relative performance of an actively managed portfolio of European stocks. Hence the performance of the risk policies is evaluated in the relative risk/return space. In that, their approach is different from Gupta and Kartinen's (2000) approach, which analysed some risk policies based on VaR, considering total risk and return rather than relative risk and return.

This article first describes the four different risk policies the authors have chosen to test. These risk policies are based on the following risk indicators: the tracking error (TE), the relative value at risk (ReVaR), the expected shortfall (ES) and the excess return at risk (EaR). In a second part, the authors give a description of the model used to estimate the ex-ante risk required to test the different risk policies. This model is the parallel filtered bootstrapping technique proposed by Barone-Adesi et al. (1999). It enables financial scenarios to be generated over arbitrary investment horizons using the information content of daily data about the relative or absolute risk that a portfolio might exhibit. Then the authors describe the procedure implemented to test the effectiveness of the risk policies. The testing period covers seven years from October 1995 to October 2002. During this period, 1,000 active portfolios made up of stocks from the Dow Jones Eurostoxx 50 were randomly generated each month. The ex-ante risk was estimated using the preceding two years of data and, if necessary, portfolio holdings were modified to keep their risk below the maximum amount allowed. In order to have a reference, a null policy was defined as the result of no risk control.

According to their results, only the risk policy based on EaR determines a different distribution of cumulative excess returns from the null hypothesis, as is shown by a two sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. In order to compare the risk policies, the authors computed a risk-adjusted relative performance index, which is the ratio of the upside deviation (UD) and the downside deviation (DD) of the distribution of the cumulative excess returns. This ratio allows for a comparison of the risk policies' capability to limit bad results while adding value to the process. They found that only the risk policy based on EaR had a UD/DD ratio that was significantly higher than one, while the others exhibit ratios that are slightly lower than one. They also noted that the risk policy based on TE presents a UD/DD ratio of 0.975, which is barely higher than that of the null policy, which was 0.967.

They conclude that the risk policy does not help to improve cumulative excess returns, but that it can influence the shape of the distribution of excess returns. However, only the risk policy based on EaR appears to be able to bring about some improvement, while the risk policy based on TE, which is very popular among asset managers, does not provide any significant improvement over a portfolio strategy without risk control.

References

Barone-Adesi G., Giannopoulos K., Vosper L., “VaR without Correlations for Non-Linear Portfolios”, Journal of Futures Markets, vol. 19, August 1999, p. 583-602.

Gupta F., Kartinen S., “Bound to Rebalance”, Risk, June 2000, p.71-74.

Related links

Full text