DOCSLIB.ORG

Sortino Ratio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sortino Ratio StatFACTS Sortino Ratio StatMAP CAPITAL A variation of the Sharpe ratio, the voLATILITY BENCHMARK TAIL PRESERVATION Sortino ratio is a return-versus-risk RN TU E trade-off metric that uses downside R deviation as its measure of risk. K S I R FF O - SORTINO E AD RATIO R T How Is it Useful? What Do the Graphs Show Me? The Sortino ratio addresses a shortcoming of using The two graphs below illustrate the two halves of the standard deviation as a measure of risk in a return- Sortino ratio. The numerator is identical to the numerator versus-risk trade-off ratio. Standard deviation punishes a in the Sharpe ratio. It is the rolling excess return above and manager equally for “good” risk and “bad” risk. Downside beyond the risk-free rate, as displayed in the upper graph. deviation adjusts for this by only counting the “bad” risk The lower graph illustrates how the Sortino ratio uses and ignoring “good” observations in a return series. The downside deviations, or the “bad” occurrences in a data Sortino ratio replaces standard deviation with downside stream, as its measure of volatility risk. deviation, so it is the added return per unit of “bad” risk rather than overall risk. What Is a Good Number? Rolling Three Year Return 40% Like most ratios, the higher the Sortino ratio, the better. 30% One would hope to see substantial excess return above 20% n r and beyond the risk-free rate, accompanied by little u t e 10% downside deviation. A scenario such as this would R 0% produce a large Sortino ratio. It is important to keep in -10% mind the asset class under consideration when analyzing Dec 1995 Dec 1997 Dec 1999 Dec 2001 Dec 2003 Dec 2005 Dec 2007 Dec 2009 Dec 2012 Sortino ratios. Rolling Three Year Downside Deviation ) 18% % 0 = 15% R A What Are the Limitations? M 12% ( n o i t 9% a Since the Sortino ratio uses downside deviation as its i v e D 6% measure of risk, any limitations of downside deviation e d i s n 3% carry over to the Sortino ratio. With downside deviation, w o D 0% there must be enough “bad” observations in order for the Dec 1995 Dec 1997 Dec 1999 Dec 2001 Dec 2003 Dec 2005 Dec 2007 Dec 2009 Dec 2012 calculation to be statistically significant. Created with Zephyr StyleADVISOR. Manager returns supplied by: Morningstar, Inc. 1-800-789-5323 (U.S. Toll-Free) (775) 588-0654 Email: [email protected] Visit: www.informais.com Copyright © 2016 Informa Investment Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved Informa Investment Solutions Financial intelligence | StatFACTS Sortino Ratio: 1986-2012 Sortino Ratio: 1980s 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 Sortino 1 1 0 0 Large Cap US Stocks Sortino Ratio (MAR = 0%) Sortino Ratio (MAR = 0%) Small Cap US Stocks Ratio International Stocks (Developed) Sortino Ratio: 1990s Sortino Ratio: 2000s Emerging Markets Stocks Investment Grade US Bonds 5 5 High Yield US Bonds What Are 4 4 3 Typical Values? 3 2 One would expect to see 2 Sortino ratios change 1 significantly for most asset 1 0 classes between the two 0 decades of the 1980s and -1 Sortino Ratio (MAR = 0%) Sortino Ratio (MAR = 0%) 1990s and the “lost decade” Created with Zephyr StyleADVISOR. Manager returns supplied by: Morningstar, Inc. of the 2000s. Indeed, that January 1986 - December 2012 is the case. The numerator of the Sortino ratio was reduced in the 2000s Common as many asset classes Sortino Ratio 1980s 1990s 2000s struggled to outperform 1/86 - 12/12 the risk-free cash rate. The Large Cap US Stocks 2.34 2.52 0.15 1.13 denominator was increased, Small Cap US Stocks 1.89 1.86 0.49 1.09 as markets exhibited more downside deviations short International Stocks (Developed) 2.41 1.44 0.32 1.02 of the 0.0% minimum acceptable return (MAR). Emerging Markets Stocks N/A 0.93 0.76 1.24 Investment Grade US Bonds 3.69 4.85 3.41 4.33 High Yield US Bonds 3.25 3.71 1.29 2.23 Related Metrics Math Corner 2 Downside Deviation: the amount The below calculation for the Sortino ratio is not of “bad” volatility risk complicated, as it is simply a variation of the Sharpe ratio. It is up to the user to define what the Sharpe Ratio: the trade-off of breakpoint is for minimum acceptable return (MAR) return per unit of volatility risk in the calculation of downside risk. Frequently used values for MAR are the risk-free rate or a hard- target value like 0%. 1-800-789-5323 (U.S. Toll-Free) (775) 588-0654 Email: [email protected] Visit: www.informais.com Copyright © 2016 Informa Investment Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved Informa Investment Solutions Financial intelligence | .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Documento Che Attesta La Proprietà Di Una Quota Del Cap- Itale Sociale È Il Titolo Azionario E Garantisce Una Serie Di Diritti Al Titolare
    Università degli Studi di Padova Facoltà di Scienze Statistiche Corso di Laurea Specialistica in Scienze Statistiche, Economiche, Finanziarie e Aziendali Tesi di Laurea : PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT : PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND FEATURE-BASED CLUSTRERING IN ASSET ALLOCATION Laureando: Nono Simplice Aimé Relatore: Prof. Caporin Massimiliano Anno accademico 2009-2010 1 A Luise Geouego e a tutta la mia famiglia. 2 Abstract This thesis analyses the possible effects of feature-based clustering (using information extracted from asset time series) in asset allocation. In particu- lar, at first, it considers the creation of asset clusters using a matrix of input data which contains some performance measure. Some of these are choosen between the classical measures, while others between the most sofisticated ones. Secondly, it statistically compares the asset allocation results obtained from data-driven groups (obtained by clustering) and a-priori classifications based on assets industrial sector. It also controls how these results can change over time. Sommario Questa tesi si propone di esaminare l’eventuale effetto di una classificazione dei titoli nei portafogli basata su informazioni contenute nelle loro serie storiche In particolare, si tratta di produrre inizialmente una suddivisione dei titoli in gruppi attraverso una cluster analysis, avendo come matrice di input alcune misure di performance selezionate fra quelle classiche e quelle più sofisticate e in un secondo momento, di confrontare i risultati con quelli ottenuti operando una diversificazione dei titoli in macrosettori industriali; infine di analizzare come i risultati ottenuti variano nel tempo. Indice 1 Asset Allocation 7 1.1 Introduzione . 7 1.2 Introduzione alle azioni . 8 1.3 Criterio Rischio-Rendimento .
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet 2021
    Q2 2021 GCI Select Equity TM Globescan Capital was Returns (Average Annual) Morningstar Rating (as of 3/31/21) © 2021 Morningstar founded on the principle Return Return that investing in GCI Select S&P +/- Percentile Quartile Overall Funds in high-quality companies at Equity 500TR Rank Rank Rating Category attractive prices is the best strategy to achieve long-run Year to Date 18.12 15.25 2.87 Q1 2021 Top 30% 2nd 582 risk-adjusted performance. 1-year 43.88 40.79 3.08 1 year Top 19% 1st 582 As such, our portfolio is 3-year 22.94 18.67 4.27 3 year Top 3% 1st 582 concentrated and focused solely on the long-term, Since Inception 20.94 17.82 3.12 moat-protected future free (01/01/17) cash flows of the companies we invest in. TOP 10 HOLDINGS PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICS Morningstar Performance MPT (6/30/2021) (6/30/2021) © 2021 Morningstar Core Principles Facebook Inc A 6.76% Number of Holdings 22 Return 3 yr 19.49 Microsoft Corp 6.10% Total Net Assets $44.22M Standard Deviation 3 yr 18.57 American Tower Corp 5.68% Total Firm Assets $119.32M Alpha 3 yr 3.63 EV/EBITDA (ex fincls/reits) 17.06x Upside Capture 3yr 105.46 Crown Castle International Corp 5.56% P/E FY1 (ex fincls/reits) 29.0x Downside Capture 3 yr 91.53 Charles Schwab Corp 5.53% Invest in businesses, EPS Growth (ex fincls/reits) 25.4% Sharpe Ratio 3 yr 1.04 don't trade stocks United Parcel Service Inc Class B 5.44% ROIC (ex fincls/reits) 14.1% Air Products & Chemicals Inc 5.34% Standard Deviation (3-year) 18.9% Booking Holding Inc 5.04% % of assets in top 5 holdings 29.6% Mastercard Inc A 4.74% % of assets in top 10 holdings 54.7% First American Financial Corp 4.50% Dividend Yield 0.70% Think long term, don't try to time markets Performance vs S&P 500 (Average Annual Returns) Be concentrated, 43.88 GCI Select Equity don't overdiversify 40.79 S&P 500 TR 22.94 20.94 18.12 18.67 17.82 15.25 Use the market, don't rely on it YTD 1 YR 3 YR Inception (01/01/2017) Disclosures Globescan Capital Inc., d/b/a GCI-Investors, is an investment advisor registered with the SEC.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Modern Portfolio Theory Supports Diversification in an Investment Portfolio to Measure Investment's Performance
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Rasiah, Devinaga Article Post-modern portfolio theory supports diversification in an investment portfolio to measure investment's performance Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis Provided in Cooperation with: Scienpress Ltd, London Suggested Citation: Rasiah, Devinaga (2012) : Post-modern portfolio theory supports diversification in an investment portfolio to measure investment's performance, Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, ISSN 2241-0996, International Scientific Press, Vol. 1, Iss. 1, pp. 69-91 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/58003 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend
    [Show full text]
  • 307439 Ferdig Master Thesis
    Master's Thesis Using Derivatives And Structured Products To Enhance Investment Performance In A Low-Yielding Environment - COPENHAGEN BUSINESS SCHOOL - MSc Finance And Investments Maria Gjelsvik Berg P˚al-AndreasIversen Supervisor: Søren Plesner Date Of Submission: 28.04.2017 Characters (Ink. Space): 189.349 Pages: 114 ABSTRACT This paper provides an investigation of retail investors' possibility to enhance their investment performance in a low-yielding environment by using derivatives. The current low-yielding financial market makes safe investments in traditional vehicles, such as money market funds and safe bonds, close to zero- or even negative-yielding. Some retail investors are therefore in need of alternative investment vehicles that can enhance their performance. By conducting Monte Carlo simulations and difference in mean testing, we test for enhancement in performance for investors using option strategies, relative to investors investing in the S&P 500 index. This paper contributes to previous papers by emphasizing the downside risk and asymmetry in return distributions to a larger extent. We find several option strategies to outperform the benchmark, implying that performance enhancement is achievable by trading derivatives. The result is however strongly dependent on the investors' ability to choose the right option strategy, both in terms of correctly anticipated market movements and the net premium received or paid to enter the strategy. 1 Contents Chapter 1 - Introduction4 Problem Statement................................6 Methodology...................................7 Limitations....................................7 Literature Review.................................8 Structure..................................... 12 Chapter 2 - Theory 14 Low-Yielding Environment............................ 14 How Are People Affected By A Low-Yield Environment?........ 16 Low-Yield Environment's Impact On The Stock Market........
    [Show full text]
  • Securitization & Hedge Funds
    SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: COLLATERALIZED FUND OBLIGATIONS SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: CREATING A MORE EFFICIENT MARKET BY CLARK CHENG, CFA Intangis Funds AUGUST 6, 2002 INTANGIS PAGE 1 SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: COLLATERALIZED FUND OBLIGATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 3 PROBLEM.................................................................................................................................................... 4 SOLUTION................................................................................................................................................... 5 SECURITIZATION..................................................................................................................................... 5 CASH-FLOW TRANSACTIONS............................................................................................................... 6 MARKET VALUE TRANSACTIONS.......................................................................................................8 ARBITRAGE................................................................................................................................................ 8 FINANCIAL ENGINEERING.................................................................................................................... 8 TRANSPARENCY......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Risk and Return Comparison of MBS, REIT and Non-REIT Etfs
    International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology Vol. 7, No. 3, September 2017 Risk and Return Comparison of MBS, REIT and Non-REIT Etfs Hamid Falatoon Ph.D Faculty at School of Business University of Redlands Redlands, CA 92373, USA Mohammad R. Safarzadeh Economics California State PolytechnicUniversity Pomona, CA, USA Abstract MBS has become an investment instrument ofchoice for retiring individuals and the ones who have preference for a secure stream of returns while taking lower risk relative to other vehicles of investment. As well, MBS has lately become a recommended investment strategy by financial advisers and investment bankers for safeguarding the retirement accounts of retirees from wild market fluctuations. The objective of this paper is to compare the risk and return of MBS with REIT and Non-REIT invetment opportunities. The paper uses finance ratios such as Sharpe, Sortino, and Traynor ratios as well as market risk and value at risk (VaR) analysis to compare and contrast the relative risk and return of a number equities in MBS, REIT and Non-REIT. The study extends the analysis to pre-recession of 2007-2009 to analyze the effect of the great recession on the relative risk and return of three diffrerent mediums of investment. Keywords: Risk and Return, MBS, REIT, Sharpe, Sortino, Treynor, VaR, CAPM I. Introduction Mortgage-backed securities (MBS) are debt obligations that represent claims to the cash flows from a pool of commercial and residential mortgage loans. The mortgage loans, purchased from banks, mortgage companies, and other originators are securitized by a governmental, quasi-governmental, or private entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Lapis Global Family Owned 50 Dividend Yield Index Ratios
    Lapis Global Family Owned 50 Dividend Yield Index Ratios MARKET RATIOS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 P/E Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 22,34 15,52 14,52 15,95 15,67 18,25 14,52 16,96 15,57 12,27 15,65 25,21 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 21,19 15,14 12,77 15,87 19,32 17,87 20,07 21,91 21,47 15,64 20,60 33,22 P/E Estimated Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 15,52 15,18 13,89 15,18 16,94 17,23 16,25 16,58 17,86 13,91 14,84 17,96 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 14,14 12,53 11,07 12,46 14,86 15,53 15,76 16,23 16,88 13,42 16,96 20,81 P/B Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 2,35 2,52 2,22 2,29 2,14 2,21 1,96 2,03 1,94 1,72 1,50 2,22 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 1,82 1,81 1,59 1,77 2,11 2,19 2,16 2,17 2,46 2,11 2,58 2,95 P/S Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 1,05 1,08 0,98 1,10 1,42 1,39 1,40 1,39 1,66 1,25 1,19 1,57 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 1,07 1,13 0,96 1,08 1,35 1,40 1,49 1,54 1,75 1,47 1,79 2,20 EV/EBITDA Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 10,64 9,07 7,96 10,00 11,97 11,39 10,92 11,12 11,12 9,85 10,81 14,64 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 9,80 8,76 8,03 9,19 10,34 10,42 11,68 12,27 12,19 10,39 12,60 16,79 FINANCIAL RATIOS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Debt/Equity Lapis Global Family Owned 50 DY Index 71,34 63,53 58,74 64,08 57,61 58,51 53,24 55,25 40,43 55,91 66,28 72,55 MSCI World Index (Benchmark) 183,68 166,79 171,00 157,68 144,72 139,30 135,23 140,96 135,11 130,60 136,25 147,68 PERFORMANCE MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Risk: How Diversification Amplifies Selection Skill
    PRIVATE MARKETS INSIGHTS RETHINKING RISK: HOW DIVERSIFICATION AMPLIFIES SELECTION SKILL >>Our analysis suggests that both improbably The first paper in our Rethinking Risk series demonstrated that diversified private equity portfolios yield better risk- good fund selection abilities and access to the adjusted returns than concentrated portfolios. It did not, best-performing funds are necessary for an investor however, address the potential impact of investment skill with a concentrated private equity portfolio to match upon those returns. This paper therefore looks to quantify the effect of fund selection skill on investment returns – assuming the risk-adjusted returns from a randomly selected an investor is able to access their selected funds – and diversified one. compare this effect to that of diversification. >>Our modeling shows that, irrespective of skill level, It is well established that skillful manager selection is crucial when investing in private markets, given the wide dispersion investors have been able to materially improve of returns relative to public markets. The benefits of selection risk-adjusted portfolio returns via diversification. skill increase as the dispersion of outcomes grows. In private equity, for example, where top and bottom quartile five-year In effect, diversification has been shown to amplify annual returns commonly differ by more than 20 percentage the benefits of skill. points (pp), selection skill is clearly more valuable than among mutual funds, where the spread may be much narrower (see Chart 1). This is the second in a series of papers sharing HarbourVest’s insights into portfolio construction and risk in the context of private markets. The first paper, entitled The Myth of Over-diversification, focused on the improved risk-adjusted returns provided by diversification.
    [Show full text]
  • Lapis Global Top 50 Dividend Yield Index Ratios
    Lapis Global Top 50 Dividend Yield Index Ratios MARKET RATIOS 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 P/E Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 14,45 16,07 16,71 17,83 21,06 22,51 14,81 16,96 19,08 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 15,42 16,78 17,22 19,45 20,91 20,48 14,98 19,75 31,97 P/E Estimated Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 12,75 15,01 16,34 16,29 16,50 17,48 13,18 14,88 14,72 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 12,19 14,20 14,94 15,16 15,62 16,23 13,01 16,33 19,85 P/B Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 2,52 2,85 2,76 2,52 2,59 2,92 2,28 2,74 2,43 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 1,74 2,02 2,08 2,05 2,06 2,35 2,02 2,43 2,80 P/S Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 1,49 1,70 1,72 1,65 1,71 1,93 1,44 1,65 1,60 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 1,08 1,31 1,35 1,43 1,49 1,71 1,41 1,72 2,14 EV/EBITDA Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 9,52 10,45 10,77 11,19 13,07 13,01 9,92 11,82 12,83 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 8,93 9,80 10,10 11,18 11,84 11,80 9,99 12,22 16,24 FINANCIAL RATIOS 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Debt/Equity Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 89,71 93,46 91,08 95,51 96,68 100,66 97,56 112,24 127,34 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 155,55 137,23 133,62 131,08 134,68 130,33 125,65 129,79 140,13 PERFORMANCE MEASURES 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Sharpe Ratio Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 1,48 2,26 1,05 -0,11 0,84 3,49 -1,19 2,35 -0,15 MSCI ACWI Index (Benchmark) 1,23 2,22 0,53 -0,15 0,62 3,78 -0,93 2,27 0,56 Jensen Alpha Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index 3,2 % 2,2 % 4,3 % 0,3 % 2,9 % 2,3 % -3,9 % 2,4 % -18,6 % Information Ratio Lapis Global Top 50 DY Index -0,24
    [Show full text]
  • Arbitrage Pricing Theory: Theory and Applications to Financial Data Analysis Basic Investment Equation
    Risk and Portfolio Management Spring 2010 Arbitrage Pricing Theory: Theory and Applications To Financial Data Analysis Basic investment equation = Et equity in a trading account at time t (liquidation value) = + Δ Rit return on stock i from time t to time t t (includes dividend income) = Qit dollars invested in stock i at time t r = interest rate N N = + Δ + − ⎛ ⎞ Δ ()+ Δ Et+Δt Et Et r t ∑Qit Rit ⎜∑Qit ⎟r t before rebalancing, at time t t i=1 ⎝ i=1 ⎠ N N N = + Δ + − ⎛ ⎞ Δ + ε ()+ Δ Et+Δt Et Et r t ∑Qit Rit ⎜∑Qit ⎟r t ∑| Qi(t+Δt) - Qit | after rebalancing, at time t t i=1 ⎝ i=1 ⎠ i=1 ε = transaction cost (as percentage of stock price) Leverage N N = + Δ + − ⎛ ⎞ Δ Et+Δt Et Et r t ∑Qit Rit ⎜∑Qit ⎟r t i=1 ⎝ i=1 ⎠ N ∑ Qit Ratio of (gross) investments i=1 Leverage = to equity Et ≥ Qit 0 ``Long - only position'' N ≥ = = Qit 0, ∑Qit Et Leverage 1, long only position i=1 Reg - T : Leverage ≤ 2 ()margin accounts for retail investors Day traders : Leverage ≤ 4 Professionals & institutions : Risk - based leverage Portfolio Theory Introduce dimensionless quantities and view returns as random variables Q N θ = i Leverage = θ Dimensionless ``portfolio i ∑ i weights’’ Ei i=1 ΔΠ E − E − E rΔt ΔE = t+Δt t t = − rΔt Π Et E ~ All investments financed = − Δ Ri Ri r t (at known IR) ΔΠ N ~ = θ Ri Π ∑ i i=1 ΔΠ N ~ ΔΠ N ~ ~ N ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ 2 ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ E = θ E Ri ; σ = θ θ Cov Ri , R j = θ θ σ σ ρ ⎜ Π ⎟ ∑ i ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ Π ⎟ ∑ i j ⎜ ⎟ ∑ i j i j ij ⎝ ⎠ i=1 ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ij=1 ⎝ ⎠ ij=1 Sharpe Ratio ⎛ ΔΠ ⎞ N ⎛ ~ ⎞ E θ E R ⎜ Π ⎟ ∑ i ⎜ i ⎟ s = s()θ ,...,θ = ⎝ ⎠ = i=1 ⎝ ⎠ 1 N ⎛ ΔΠ ⎞ N σ ⎜ ⎟ θ θ σ σ ρ Π ∑ i j i j ij ⎝ ⎠ i=1 Sharpe ratio is homogeneous of degree zero in the portfolio weights.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharpe Ratio
    StatFACTS Sharpe Ratio StatMAP CAPITAL The most famous return-versus- voLATILITY BENCHMARK TAIL PRESERVATION risk measurement, the Sharpe ratio, RN TU E represents the added value over the R risk-free rate per unit of volatility risk. K S I R FF O - E SHARPE AD R RATIO T How Is it Useful? What Do the Graphs Show Me? The Sharpe ratio simplifies the options facing the The graphs below illustrate the two halves of the investor by separating investments into one of two Sharpe ratio. The upper graph shows the numerator, the choices, the risk-free rate or anything else. Thus, the excess return over the risk-free rate. The blue line is the Sharpe ratio allows investors to compare very different investment. The red line is the risk-free rate on a rolling, investments by the same criteria. Anything that isn’t three-year basis. More often than not, the investment’s the risk-free investment can be compared against any return exceeds that of the risk-free rate, leading to a other investment. The Sharpe ratio allows for apples-to- positive numerator. oranges comparisons. The lower graph shows the risk metric used in the denominator, standard deviation. Standard deviation What Is a Good Number? measures how volatile an investment’s returns have been. Sharpe ratios should be high, with the larger the number, the better. This would imply significant outperformance versus the risk-free rate and/or a low standard deviation. Rolling Three Year Return However, there is no set-in-stone breakpoint above, 40% 30% which is good, and below, which is bad.
    [Show full text]
  • A Sharper Ratio: a General Measure for Correctly Ranking Non-Normal Investment Risks
    A Sharper Ratio: A General Measure for Correctly Ranking Non-Normal Investment Risks † Kent Smetters ∗ Xingtan Zhang This Version: February 3, 2014 Abstract While the Sharpe ratio is still the dominant measure for ranking risky investments, much effort has been made over the past three decades to find more robust measures that accommodate non- Normal risks (e.g., “fat tails”). But these measures have failed to map to the actual investor problem except under strong restrictions; numerous ad-hoc measures have arisen to fill the void. We derive a generalized ranking measure that correctly ranks risks relative to the original investor problem for a broad utility-and-probability space. Like the Sharpe ratio, the generalized measure maintains wealth separation for the broad HARA utility class. The generalized measure can also correctly rank risks following different probability distributions, making it a foundation for multi-asset class optimization. This paper also explores the theoretical foundations of risk ranking, including proving a key impossibility theorem: any ranking measure that is valid for non-Normal distributions cannot generically be free from investor preferences. Finally, we show that approximation measures, which have sometimes been used in the past, fail to closely approximate the generalized ratio, even if those approximations are extended to an infinite number of higher moments. Keywords: Sharpe Ratio, portfolio ranking, infinitely divisible distributions, generalized rank- ing measure, Maclaurin expansions JEL Code: G11 ∗Kent Smetters: Professor, The Wharton School at The University of Pennsylvania, Faculty Research Associate at the NBER, and affiliated faculty member of the Penn Graduate Group in Applied Mathematics and Computational Science.
    [Show full text]