In the culminating project, you will develop new trading strategies, evaluate them using the tools learned in the course, integrate them with the existing portfolio and also develop a plan to start a hedge fund.

Loading...

來自 Indian School of Business 的課程

Design your own trading strategy – Culminating Project

21 個評分

In the culminating project, you will develop new trading strategies, evaluate them using the tools learned in the course, integrate them with the existing portfolio and also develop a plan to start a hedge fund.

從本節課中

Week 5 - Strategy Evaluation

In this module, you will evaluate the strategy that you had designed. For this purpose you will make use of various performance measures discussed in the course.

- Ramabhadran ThirumalaiAssistant Professor

Indian School of Business

Learning Outcomes.

After watching this video, you will be able to discuss the need for

risk-adjusted performance measures.

List and calculate various risk-adjusted performance measures.

List the circumstances under which you will use the various risk adjusted

performance measures.

Benchmarks for portfolio performance evaluation.

Investors should compare the returns of their investments to what they would have

obtained from investing in an alternative portfolio with an identity risk.

Performance must always be evaluated on a relative basis and

not on a absolute basis.

However, it may be difficult to identify portfolios with identical risk and

so it is better to use risk registered measures of performance.

In this video,

we will look at some commonly used risk registered performance measures.

The Sharpe ratio is one of the more widely used measures.

It is similar to the Sharpe ratio we saw earlier.

The Sharpe measure of a portfolio is the difference between it's average

return over the sample period, minus the risk fee rate divided by

the standard deviation of it's returns over the sample period.

It measures the return to total variability trade-off.

If we believe that CAPM holds, then we know that returns compensate

only systematic risk while the Sharpe measure is based on total risk.

The Treynor measure uses the CAPM beta as a measure of risk.

It is the difference between the portfolio's average return over the sample

period, minus the risk free rate, divided by it's beta.

A drawback of both sharp and trainer measures is that they don't quantify

how much additional value the portfolio manager is adding.

All they say is how much excess are done the portfolio has earned for

each unit of risk.

Hence, they can largely be used as a ranking criterion only.

A measure that addresses this drawback is the Jensen measure or portfolio alpha.

It quantifies the portfolio's average return

in excess of that predicted by the CAPM.

It tells us how far away from the security market line the asset is.

Jensen's measure, denoted by alpha sub p,

is the difference between the average portfolio returns minus within square

brackets the risk free rate plus the portfolio's beta times

the differences between the average market returns and the risk free rate.

The term within the square brackets is CAPM's prediction of portfolio's returns.

A fourth risk adjusted performance measure is the appraisal or information ratio.

It is defined as the portfolio alpha or

Jensen's measure divided by the diversifiable risk of the portfolio.

This ratio gives us the abnormal return per unit of diversifiable risk.

Let's look at an example that illustrates the use of these

four risk-adjusted performance measures.

We have two portfolios, P and Q.

P has an average return of 35%, a beta of 1.2,

standard deviation of returns of 42% and diversifiable risk of 18%.

Q as an average return of 28% of beta of 1,

standard deviation of returns of 30% and diversifiable risk of 0%.

The risk-free rate is 6%.

We can say that Q is the market portfolio, why is that?

It has a beta of 1 and 0 diversifiable risk.

Let's start off by calculating the Sharpe measure of P.

It is 35% minus 6% divided by 42%, which is 0.69.

Q has a Sharpe measure of 28% minus 6% divided by 30%,

which comes out to 0.73.

P's Treynor measure is 35%- 6% divided by 1.2,

which is 24.17%.

Q standard measure is 28% minus 6% divided by 1 which is 22%.

P's alpha is 35% minus

within square brackets 6% plus 1.2 times 28%

minus 6% which comes out to 2.6%.

Since Q is a market portfolio, its alpha will be zero.

Finally, P is the operational ratio with its alpha 2.6%

divided by its diversifiable risk of 18% which gives us 0.14.

Since Q's alpha is zero, its appraisal ratio is also zero.

Looking at these values,

the Sharpe measures say that P performed worse than Q.

But the other measures say that it has performed better than Q.

So which measure should we use to decide whether portfolio P

has performed better or worse?

The rule of thumb is as follows.

If you have to decide on the portfolio manager's compensation,

then use the Jensen measure.

It tells us how much value the manager has actually added.

If you have to decide an optimal portfolio choices,

use the Sharpe measure if the portfolio represents your entire investment.

Use the Treynor measure if the portfolio

is one of many portfolios combined into a large fund.

Use the appraisal ratio for actively managed funds that are held in combination

with passively-managed portfolios.

There are still some drawbacks of using these risk-adjusted performance measures.

One, they rely on the validity of the CAPM.

Two, they use a proxy for

true market portfolio rather than the true market portfolio itself.

Three, they still cannot statistically distinguish skill from luck.

We found that portfolio P shop measure was 0.04 lower than that of portfolio Q's.

But we can't say if that is statistically a large difference or

not as this number is not the rate of return.

Next time, we will look at a measure that helps address this last drawback.