DOCSLIB.ORG

Valufocus - ECU

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Valufocus - ECU Page 1 of 4 UI I - ValuFocus - ECU 31/03/2021 Investment Strategy The objective of the sub-fund is to seek to outperform the MSCI World Net Total Return USD (Bloomberg ticker M1WO) by investment in a diversified portfolio of stocks selected through a specific fundamental research methodology in the global equity markets excluding emerging markets. The sub-fund will aim to meet the investment objective - while respecting the principle of risk diversification - by investing primarily in equity securities denominated in EUR, CHF, GBP, USD or JPY or in other freely convertible currencies of companies listed on worldwide exchanges excluding emerging markets (long only, no shorts, no derivatives). The sub-fund will seek exposure to a portfolio of typically 35 to 50 global equities excluding emerging markets, with the potential to go outside this range depending on market conditions. These stocks will be selected using the ValuAnalysis “Modern Intrinsic Value” methodology (“MIV”), which applies fundamental intrinsic value research to stock picking; in addition, each portfolio stock is subject to a systematic Environmental Social and Governance (“ESG”) screening. Performance Performance Ratios Performance 21.40% Performance p. a. 18.04% Over-/Underperformance N/A Volatility 27.80% Sharpe Ratio 0.67 Tracking Error N/A Information Ratio N/A Correlation N/A Beta N/A Notes on the impact of fees, commissions and other charges on the performance, please refer to the disclaimer. Performance figures are based on 3 year period. Risk-Adjusted Performance Ratios Monthly Performance (in %) Calmar Ratio 0.58 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD Ex-Post VaR (99 % / 10 days) 11.65% Jensen's Alpha N/A 2020 -1.9% -7.9% -12.3% +12.0% +4.4% +3.1% +5.1% +5.1% -2.1% -2.7% +11.4% +4.0% +16.4% Maximum Drawdown 31.72% 2021 -1.8% +1.5% +4.7% +4.3% Maximum Drawdown Duration 1 Recovery Period Duration 4 Treynor Ratio N/A For a detailed explanation please refer to the disclaimer. Risk-Return-Chart F = Fund / Performance figures are based on 3 year period. Performance (in %) Performance History 1 M 1 Y 3 Y 5 Y launch CY 2018 2019 2020 date F 4.7% 53.2% 21.4% 4.3% F 18.0% p.a. F = Fund Page 2 of 4 UI I - ValuFocus - ECU 31/03/2021 Portrait P & L and Tax Data ISIN / WKN LU2079399270 / A2PU33 Fund Volume / Share Class 23,759,505.78 USD / 23,584,459.78 USD Fund Domicile Luxembourg Net Asset Value 121.40 USD Legal Form UCITS/OGAW Issue / Redemption Price 121.40 USD / 121.40 USD Fund category (BVI) Equity funds worldwide Aggr. Dividend-Equivalent Earnings 0.00 USD Launch Date (Fund) / Share 29/01/2020 / 29/01/2020 End of Financial Year 31/12/2021 CurrencyClass Fund / Share Class USD / USD Utilization of Income accumulating Conditions Portfolio structure by asset classes Currency structure incl. derivatives Effective Issuing Price Surcharge 0.00% Equities 99.54% USD 74.11% Effective Redemption Fee 0.00% Fixed Term- & Time Deposits / Loans 0.42% CHF 8.93% Max. Management Fee p.a. 0.55% Cash 0.33% EUR 6.05% Max. Advisory Fee p.a. 0.00% Dividend Claims 0.06% SEK 5.00% Max. Custodian's Fee p.a. 0.07% Other Claims / Liabilities -0.35% GBP 3.44% Ongoing Charges / TER 1.17% 100.00% JPY 1.37% Performance Related Fee No CAD 1.10% 100.00% Performance Related Fee is shown for last accounting period. Top 10 Positions Equities by Country Economic Risks Microsoft Corp. Registered Shares DL-,00000625 7.40% Accenture PLC Reg.Shares Class A DL-,0000225 5.15% Texas Instruments Inc. Registered Shares DL 1 4.71% Amazon.com Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 4.49% IQVIA Holdings Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 3.91% Medtronic PLC Registered Shares DL -,0001 3.86% Apple Inc. Registered Shares o.N. 3.83% Cisco Systems Inc. Registered Shares DL-,001 3.72% NXP Semiconductors NV Aandelen aan toonder EO -,20 3.61% Motorola Solutions Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 3.53% 44.23% Equities by Industry Sectors Top 10 Equities Microsoft Corp. Registered Shares DL-,00000625 7.40% Accenture PLC Reg.Shares Class A DL-,0000225 5.15% Texas Instruments Inc. Registered Shares DL 1 4.71% Amazon.com Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 4.49% IQVIA Holdings Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 3.91% Medtronic PLC Registered Shares DL -,0001 3.86% Apple Inc. Registered Shares o.N. 3.83% Cisco Systems Inc. Registered Shares DL-,001 3.72% NXP Semiconductors NV Aandelen aan toonder EO -,20 3.61% Motorola Solutions Inc. Registered Shares DL -,01 3.53% 44.23% Fund Partner About the Fund Partner ValuAnalysis ValuAnalysis is an independent investment boutique focusing on equities and specialising The Clubhouse, 8 St. James*s Square in valuation. The firm has developed a proprietary research model which identifies London SW1Y4JU companies whose competitive advantage is under-appreciated by market participants. United Kingdom ValuAnalysis seeks to deliver significant and stable returns in excess of the broad equity Phone: +44 203 058 2932 market over the longer term, whilst carefully controlling downside risk. http://www.valuanalysis.com Page 3 of 4 UI I - ValuFocus - ECU 31/03/2021 Investment Management Company Custodian / Depository Universal-Investment-Luxembourg S.A. Brown Brothers Harriman (Luxembourg) S.C.A. 15, rue de Flaxweiler 80, route d`Esch 6776 Grevenmacher 1470 Luxembourg Luxemburg Luxemburg Phone: +352 2615 021 Phone: +352 47 4066 1 Telefax: +352 2615 0270 http://www.bbh.com http://www.universal-investment.com Disclaimer Page 4 of 4 UI I - ValuFocus - ECU 31/03/2021 Morningstar Rating: ©2019: Morningstar Inc. All rights reserved. All information contained herein: (1) is copyright protected for Morningstar and/or its content providers; (2) may not be copied or distributed; and (3) is not guaranteed to be accurate, complete or up-to-date. Morningstar and / or its content providers assume no responsibility for any losses or damages resulting from the use of such information. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Scope Fund Rating All rights reserved. All indications without engagement. Scope does not assume any liability for the prospective performance of rated funds. Scope does not assume any liability for damage resulting from decisions taken based on any rating it produces. Fund ratings provided by Scope are neither recommendations to purchase or sell financial instruments that are the object of the fund rating, nor do they contain any judgement of the value or quality of such financial instruments. Scope cannot give any guarantee that the information contained in ratings is correct, although it is derived from sources that Scope deems to be reliable, nor can it assume any liability for the correctness, completeness, timeliness or accuracy of the information. The content of fund ratings and contained information is protected by copyright and otherwise by law. Any unauthorised use such as reproduction or dissemination is strictly forbidden. © 2019 Scope Analysis GmbH The on-going costs are based on the previous financial year, or, in the case of new funds, an estimation. The performance-related fee is based on the previous financial year. The key Fund indicators are established based on daily data. For funds with historic data of less than one year, no key indicators are provided. A risk-free interest rate of the Citigroup Euro 3 M TR (EUR) p.a. is used to establish the key indicators. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. The performance calculation is based on the BVI method (not including issuing surcharges). As an example, for an investment amount of EUR 1,000.00 over an investment period of five years with a 5 percent issuing surcharge, an issuing surcharge of EUR 50.00 and additional individual securities account fees would be deducted from the investment result in the first year. In subsequent years, additional securities account fees would also be deducted from the investment result when applicable. The performance is based on the BVI method. The BVI method is a time-weighted return method calculating the performance based on NAVs under the assumption of distributions reinvested. The BVI fund category is based on the precise categorisation methods employed by the German Investment Funds Association (BVI). The top 10 individual positions do not take derivatives into account. The cash positions contain bank accounts, fixed-term deposits, time deposits, dividend claims as well as other claims and liabilities. All calculations for the asset class "fixed income" are based on the entire fund's assets. All calculations for the asset class "Investment units" are based on the entire fund's assets. All calculations for the asset class "equities" are based on the entire fund's assets. Earnings equalisation was taken into account when determining the EU interim profit. Information on stock profits for investors according to §3 No. 40 of the German Income Tax Act (GITA) Information on stock profits for investors according to German Corporate Tax Act (GCTA). This information is for information purposes only and does not constitute an offer to buy or sell Fund units. The sales documents (key investor information, sales prospectus, annual and semi-annual reports) constitute the sole basis for the purchase of units. Sales documents for all Universal-Investment investment funds can be obtained free of charge from your advisor/broker, the relevant custodian/depositary, or from Universal-Investment at www.universal-investment.com. All data provided is subject to inspection by the auditors at each reporting date. To our knowledge, the information provided is based on current legal and tax provisions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Performance Measurement in Finance : Firms, Funds and Managers
    PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN FINANCE Butterworth-Heinemann Finance aims and objectives • books based on the work of financial market practitioners and academics • presenting cutting edge research to the professional/practitioner market • combining intellectual rigour and practical application • covering the interaction between mathematical theory and financial practice • to improve portfolio performance, risk management and trading book performance • covering quantitative techniques market Brokers/Traders; Actuaries; Consultants; Asset Managers; Fund Managers; Regulators; Central Bankers; Treasury Officials; Technical Analysts; and Academics for Masters in Finance and MBA market. series titles Return Distributions in Finance Derivative Instruments: theory, valuation, analysis Managing Downside Risk in Financial Markets: theory, practice and implementation Economics for Financial Markets Global Tactical Asset Allocation: theory and practice Performance Measurement in Finance: firms, funds and managers Real R&D Options series editor Dr Stephen Satchell Dr Satchell is Reader in Financial Econometrics at Trinity College, Cambridge; Visiting Professor at Birkbeck College, City University Business School and University of Technology, Sydney. He also works in a consultative capacity to many firms, and edits the journal Derivatives: use, trading and regulations. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT IN FINANCE Firms, Funds and Managers Edited by John Knight Stephen Satchell OXFORD AMSTERDAM BOSTON LONDON NEW YORK PARIS SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO
    [Show full text]
  • Picking the Right Risk-Adjusted Performance Metric
    WORKING PAPER: Picking the Right Risk-Adjusted Performance Metric HIGH LEVEL ANALYSIS QUANTIK.org Investors often rely on Risk-adjusted performance measures such as the Sharpe ratio to choose appropriate investments and understand past performances. The purpose of this paper is getting through a selection of indicators (i.e. Calmar ratio, Sortino ratio, Omega ratio, etc.) while stressing out the main weaknesses and strengths of those measures. 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. The Volatility-Based Metrics ..................................................................................................................... 2 2.1. Absolute-Risk Adjusted Metrics .................................................................................................................. 2 2.1.1. The Sharpe Ratio ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.1. Relative-Risk Adjusted Metrics ................................................................................................................... 2 2.1.1. The Modigliani-Modigliani Measure (“M2”) ........................................................................................................ 2 2.1.2. The Treynor Ratio .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Measurement for Traditional Investment Literature Survey
    EDHEC RISK AND ASSET MANAGEMENT RESEARCH CENTRE Performance Measurement for Traditional Investment Literature Survey January 2007 Véronique Le Sourd Senior Research Engineer at the EDHEC Risk and Asset Management Research Centre Table of contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 1. Portfolio returns calculation ............................................................................................................................... 6 1.1. Basic formula .............................................................................................................................................................................................6 1.2. Taking capital flows into account ....................................................................................................................................................6 1.3. Evaluation over several periods .......................................................................................................................................................10 1.4. Choice of frequency to evaluate performance .........................................................................................................................11 2. Absolute risk-adjusted performance measures ............................................................................................13 2.1. Sharpe ratio (1966) ...............................................................................................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Attribution from Bacon
    Performance Attribution from Bacon Matthieu Lestel February 5, 2020 Abstract This vignette gives a brief overview of the functions developed in Bacon(2008) to evaluate the performance and risk of portfolios that are included in PerformanceAn- alytics and how to use them. There are some tables at the end which give a quick overview of similar functions. The page number next to each function is the location of the function in Bacon(2008) Contents 1 Risk Measure 3 1.1 Mean absolute deviation (p.62) . 3 1.2 Frequency(p.64) ................................ 3 1.3 SharpeRatio(p.64)............................... 4 1.4 Risk-adjusted return: MSquared (p.67) . 4 1.5 MSquared Excess (p.68) . 4 2 Regression analysis 5 2.1 Regression equation (p.71) . 5 2.2 Regression alpha (p.71) . 5 2.3 Regression beta (p.71) . 5 2.4 Regression epsilon (p.71) . 6 2.5 Jensen'salpha(p.72) .............................. 6 2.6 SystematicRisk(p.75) ............................. 6 2.7 SpecificRisk(p.75)............................... 7 2.8 TotalRisk(p.75) ................................ 7 2.9 Treynorratio(p.75)............................... 7 2.10 Modified Treynor ratio (p.77) . 7 2.11 Appraisal ratio (or Treynor-Black ratio) (p.77) . 8 2.12 Modified Jensen (p.77) . 8 1 2.13 Fama decomposition (p.77) . 8 2.14 Selectivity (p.78) . 9 2.15 Net selectivity (p.78) . 9 3 Relative Risk 9 3.1 Trackingerror(p.78) .............................. 9 3.2 Information ratio (p.80) . 10 4 Return Distribution 10 4.1 Skewness (p.83) . 10 4.2 Sample skewness (p.84) . 10 4.3 Kurtosis(p.84) ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Certification Examination Detailed Content Outline
    Certification Examination Detailed Content Outline Qualification Certification Qualification Certification Certification Examination Detailed Content Outline exam exam Certification Examination Detailed Content Outline exam exam I. GOVERNANCE 4% 7% 3. Differentiate between measures of central tendency A. IMCA Code of Professional Responsibility and 4. Describe and differentiate between measures of dispersion: 2% 5% Standards of Practice • Range • Semi-variance 1. Serve the financial interests of all clients • Absolute deviation • Semi-deviation 2. Disclose fully to clients services provided and compensation received • Variance • Coefficient of variation 3. Provide to clients all material information related to the investment decision- • Standard deviation making process as well as other information they may need to make informed 5. Apply probability concepts: decisions based on realistic expectations • Probability • Variance • Expected value 4. Maintain the confidentiality of all information entrusted by the client to the fullest extent permitted by regulatory and legal entities in conjunction with the 6. Analyze and interpret hypothesis testing using probabilistic methodologies and professional’s firm/company policy models (e.g., Monte Carlo simulation) 7. Analyze correlation, regression, and multiple regression 5. Comply fully with all statutory and regulatory requirements affecting the (a) Correlation analysis: delivery of investment consulting services to clients • Scatterplots • Correlation coefficient (b) Linear regression: 6. Maintain competency in investment management consulting and financial • Independent and dependent variables services through education and training to better serve clients and enhance • Coefficient of determination investment management consulting • Standard error • Hypothesis testing 7. Maintain a high level of professional ethical conduct • Prediction intervals (c) Multiple regression analysis: B. Regulatory Considerations 2% 2% • Multiple Linear Regression Model 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring the Investment Risk of Equity Funds a Reference for Fund Directors
    Measuring the Investment Risk of Equity Funds A Reference for Fund Directors May 2018 Investment risk includes both intended or expected risk from the investment process and unintended risk that may result from investment decisions, assumptions, market movements, and other factors. While the fund’s adviser manages this risk, Introduction directors have an important oversight role. Why this Reference? This Reference provides an overview of the statistical measures that may be used to evaluate investment risk in equity funds and that may be included in reports provided to directors. It has 4 sections: • Key Factors | 4 key factors to consider when reviewing risk measures. For more background, • Common Uses | a summary of the most common uses be sure to read the of the risk measures. Mutual Fund Directors Forum February 2017 publication • Follow Up | questions that directors might ask to learn more about how the adviser measures investment risk. Role of the Mutual Fund Director in the Oversight of the Risk Management • A to Z | a glossary with definitions of common risk Function measures. Includes the arguments for and against specific measures and reviews when measures may be used. The definitions are summarized in tables at the end of the glossary. 2 Risk statistics can be divided into two categories: ex post and ex ante. Key Factor #1 • Ex post Ex Post vs. Ex Ante Ex post statistics measure risk over a period in the past. They measure historical price or return volatility. Standard deviation, the Sharpe ratio and alpha are commonly-used ex post risk statistics. Ex post measures can be computed for any period (e.g., daily, weekly or monthly), but they are generally annualized to make comparisons easier.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Comparison of Canadian Hedge Funds and Mutual Funds
    Performance Comparison of Canadian Hedge Funds and Mutual Funds by Amitesh Kapoor MBA, Institute of Management Studies, Shimla, India PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT in the Financial Risk Management Program of the Faculty of Business Administration © Amitesh Kapoor 2010 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Summer, 2010 All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced, without authorization, under the conditions for Fair Dealing. Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law, particularly if cited appropriately. APPROVAL Name: Amitesh Kapoor Degree: Master of Financial Risk Management Title of Project: Performance Comparison of Canadian Hedge Funds and Mutual Funds Supervisory Committee: ____________________________________________ Dr. Peter Klein Senior Supervisor Professor of Finance ___________________________________________ Dr. Christina Atanasova Supervisor Assistant Professor Date Approved: ______________________________________________________ ii Abstract Canadian hedge funds have outperformed the benchmark index by an average of 72 basis points monthly from January 2000 through May 2009. By comparison, Canadian mutual funds have outperformed the benchmark index by an average of 18 basis points monthly in the same period. This contrast in performance persists even after adjusting for risk, as measured by Sharpe Ratio, Treynor Ratio, and Information Ratio. It also persists on market risk adjusted basis. Using CAPM, Fama and French three Factor Model, and Carhart, the alpha is much higher for Hedge Funds than Mutual funds. I have analysed the performance in different sub periods and market environments.
    [Show full text]
  • Capture Ratios: a Popular Method of Measuring Portfolio Performance in Practice
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE EDUCATION • Volume 2 • Number • Winter 2013 Capture Ratios: A Popular Method of Measuring Portfolio Performance in Practice Don R. Cox and Delbert C. Goff 1 ABSTRACT We provide a brief introduction to a simple measure of portfolio risk and return, the capture ratio, which is widely used in practice, but rarely noted in finance textbooks or literature. We describe the ratio and provide examples of its rather widespread use in the investing profession. Finally, we show a specific example of calculating capture ratios using a computer spreadsheet. Finance professors and their students can benefit from basic knowledge of this common practical performance measurement tool. Introduction Finance and investments textbooks typically discuss multiple measures of portfolio risk and return that are also commonly used in practice. Among the most commonly noted measures are alpha, beta, the standard deviation of returns, the Sharpe ratio, the Treynor ratio, tracking error, and the information ratio. There are other measures of portfolio performance that are used in practice, but are generally not covered in textbooks. Among the most popular of these alternative measures are the “up-market capture” and “down- market capture” ratios. Through our experience serving on advisory boards for endowment funds and working with investment professionals we have had the opportunity to see the frequency with which capture ratios are used in practice. And, through our research we have discovered other evidence suggesting that capture ratios are widely used in practice by investment advisors and consultants. There is, however, a dearth of information from academic research and/or textbooks on the capture ratios.
    [Show full text]
  • Active Portfolio Management a Quantitative Approach for Providing Superior Returns and Controlling Risk
    Page iii Active Portfolio Management A Quantitative Approach for Providing Superior Returns and Controlling Risk Richard C. Grinold Ronald N. Kahn SECOND EDITION Page vii CONTENTS Preface xi Acknowledgments xv Chapter 1 1 Introduction Part One Foundations Chapter 2 11 Consensus Expected Returns: The Capital Asset Pricing Model Chapter 3 41 Risk Chapter 4 87 Exceptional Return, Benchmarks, and Value Added Chapter 5 109 Residual Risk and Return: The Information Ratio Chapter 6 147 The Fundamental Law of Active Management Part Two Expected Returns and Valuation Chapter 7 173 Expected Returns and the Arbitrage Pricing Theory Page viii Chapter 8 199 Valuation in Theory Chapter 9 225 Valuation in Practice Part Three Information Processing Chapter 10 261 Forecasting Basics Chapter 11 295 Advanced Forecasting Chapter 12 315 Information Analysis Chapter 13 347 The Information Horizon Part Four Implementation Chapter 14 377 Portfolio Construction Chapter 15 419 Long/Short Investing Chapter 16 445 Transactions Costs, Turnover, and Trading Chapter 17 477 Performance Analysis Page ix Chapter 18 517 Asset Allocation Chapter 19 541 Benchmark Timing Chapter 20 559 The Historical Record for Active Management Chapter 21 573 Open Questions Chapter 22 577 Summary Appendix A 581 Standard Notation Appendix B 583 Glossary Appendix C 587 Return and Statistics Basics Index 591 Page xi PREFACE Why a second edition? Why take time from busy lives? Why devote the energy to improving an existing text rather than writing an entirely new one? Why toy with success? The short answer is: our readers. We have been extremely gratified by Active Portfolio Management's reception in the investment community.
    [Show full text]
  • How Sharp Is the Sharpe-Ratio? - Risk-Adjusted Performance Measures Carl Bacon, Chairman, Statpro
    How sharp is the Sharpe-ratio? - Risk-adjusted Performance Measures Carl Bacon, Chairman, StatPro Carl Bacon: How sharp is the Sharpe ratio? - Risk-adjusted Performance Measures Carl Bacon Chairman, StatPro How sharp is the Sharpe-ratio? - Risk-adjusted Performance Measures “Alpha to omega, downside to drawdown, appraisal to pain” About the author: Carl Bacon CIPM, joined StatPro Group plc as Chairman in April 2000. StatPro provides sophisticated data and software solutions to the asset management industry. Carl also runs his own consultancy business providing advice to asset managers on various risk and performance measurement issues. Prior to joining StatPro Carl was Director of Risk Control and Performance at Foreign & Colonial Management Ltd, Vice President Head of Performance (Europe) for J P Morgan Investment Management Inc., and Head of Performance for Royal Insurance Asset Management. Carl holds a B.Sc. Hons. in Mathematics from Manchester University and is an executive committee member of Investment-Performance.com, and an associate tutor for 7city Learning. A founder member of both the Investment Performance Council and GIPS®, Carl is a member of the GIPS Executive Committee, chair of the Verification Sub-Committee, a member of the UK Investment Performance Committee and a member of the Advisory Board of the Journal of Performance Measurement. Carl is also the author of “Practical Portfolio Performance Measurement & Attribution” part of the Wiley Finance Series, numerous articles and papers and editor of “Advanced Portfolio
    [Show full text]
  • The “Alphabet” of Risk
    EXPERIENCED AND INDEPENDENT ADVISORS WORKING PRIMARILY WITH ACCREDITED ENGINEERS, EXECUTIVES, AND ENTREPRENEURS 9237 Ward Parkway, Suite 320 | Kansas City, MO 64114 The “Alphabet” of Risk: Peter Vrooman, CFA®, CIMA®, CRPC® Jonathan Sarver, CPWA® Partner, Wealth Advisor Partner, Wealth Advisor 17 Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) Statistics Fundamental Choice Portfolio Manager Fundamental Choice Portfolio Manager and Concepts for Understanding and 816-601-1152 816-601-1151 [email protected] [email protected] Measuring Investment Risk, Risk-Adjusted Returns, and Relative Performance #1 Modern Portfolio Theory Under modern portfolio theory, investors focus on managing risk as well as maximizing return. According to MPT, the riskiness of a portfolio depends on the covariance of its individual holdings, rather than the average riskiness of the separate investments (Dobbs, 2015). #2 Efficient Frontier The combination of assets that will maximize return for a given level of risk (Dobbs, 2015). MEASURING RISK #3 Standard Deviation Measures the variability of returns of an asset compared to its mean or expected return. Standard deviation measures total risk. The greater the dispersion of an investment’s returns around the average return, the greater the Standard deviation and the greater the risk (Dobbs, 2015). Approximately 68% of outcomes are + or - 1 standard deviation from the mean Approximately 95% of outcomes are + or - 2 standard deviations from the mean Approximately 99.7% of outcomes are + or - 3 standard deviations from the mean Steps to calculate standard deviation: 1. Difference between the observation and the average return. 2. Square the differences. 3. Total squared differences. 4. Divide the sum by one less than the number of observations.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaplan Schweser 2017 FRM Part I 10-Week Online Class Week 2
    Fixed Income Investments Kaplan Schweser 2017 FRM Part I 10-Week Online Class Week 2 Fixed Income Investments Getting Up to Speed on the Financial Crisis: A One- Weekend-Reader’s Guide Topic 8 1 Book 1, LO 8.1 Financial Crisis Overview The main trigger of the financial crisis was the prospect of losses on subprime mortgages In the first half of 2007, housing prices in the U.S. started to decline, causing several subprime mortgage lenders to file for bankruptcy These losses became amplified as they had a ripple effect that spread to the main vulnerabilities of the crisis, asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP), and repurchase agreements (repos) ©2017 Kaplan, Inc. 3 Book 1, LO 8.3 Lehman Brothers Failure The Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing in September 2008 is considered the tipping point in the financial crisis It eroded confidence and caused a run on money market mutual funds (MMFs) The lack of confidence spread across markets and countries, amplifying losses in the subprime mortgage market ©2017 Kaplan, Inc. 4 2 Book 1, LO 8.4 & 8.7 Previous Financial Crises The recent financial crisis was not unique compared to previous banking crises It followed a similar pattern of increased public and private debt, increased credit supply, and increased housing prices preceding and leading to the crises Studies showed that as the recent crisis strengthened, the demand for credit decreased ©2017 Kaplan, Inc. 5 Book 1, LO 8.5 Panic Periods The two main panic periods of the financial crisis were August 2007 and September through October 2008 1.
    [Show full text]