Joint Leverage and Maturity Choices in Real Estate Firms: The Role of the REIT Status

We explore the interdependence of leverage and debt maturity choices in Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and unregulated listed real estate investment companies in the U.S. for the period 1973-2011. We find that the leverage and maturity choices of all listed real estate firms are interdependent, but in contrast to industrial firms, they are not made simultaneously. Across the different types of real estate firms considered, we find substantial differences in the nature of the relationship between leverage and maturity. Leverage determines maturity in non-REITs, whereas maturity is a determinant of leverage in REITs. We suggest that the observed differences reflect the effects of the REIT regulation, rather than solely being a function of real estate as the underlying asset class. We also present novel evidence that the relationship between leverage and maturity in both firm types can be used to moderate the effects of other exogenous financing policies.

On the Capital Structure of Real Estate Firms

The leverage and debt maturity choices of real estate companies are interdependent, and are not made separately as is often assumed in the literature. We use three-stage least squares (3SLS) regression analysis to explore this interdependence for a sample of listed U.S. real estate companies and Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) traded between 1973 and 2006.We find substantial differences in the nature of the relationship between leverage and maturity for the two firm types. Leverage is a determinant of maturity for non-REITs, whereas maturity is a determinant of leverage for REITs. We also find that the drivers of capital structure choices in real estate companies and REITs clearly reflect the effects of the REIT regulation.

Macroeconomic Risk Factors and the Role of Mispriced Credit in the Returns from International Real Estate Securities

The benefits of diversification from international real estate securities are generally well established. However, the drivers of international real estate securities returns are insufficiently understood. We jointly examine the empirical implications of three major international asset pricing models that account for broad macroeconomic risk factors. In addition, we develop the hypothesis that an indicator of mispriced credit is significant in explaining the time series variation in international real estate securities returns. We employ the returns generated by a large sample of firms from 20 countries over the period 1999 to 2011 to test our hypothesis. We find support for the predictions of the major international asset pricing models. We also find evidence in favour of our hypothesised link between local credit conditions and the performance of international real estate securities.

REITs: Structure and Performance

[Excerpt] REITs are attractive to investors, particularly institutional investors, due to their high dividend payouts and ability to provide more liquidity to the underlying market for direct real estate investment. This chapter analyzes the performance of real estate investment trusts (REITs). It compares the returns on REITs with those on more traditional asset classes, specifically bonds and mid-cap equities, and surveys the academic literature dealing with the diverse issues related to valuation. The chapter also examines the linkages between REIT performance and the behavior of the underlying real estate market. Because the chapter takes the perspective of a U.S.-based investor, it does not directly address the broader issues of global REITs.

Agency, Financial Flexibility, and Firm Value: Evidence from REITs

We show empirically that the use of unsecured debt, whose standard covenants commit management to the preservation of debt capacity, leads to lower and more stable leverage. We then show that firm value is sensitive to leverage levels and leverage stability, decreasing in the former and increasing in the latter. Our results support a liquidity-centric version of Jensen's (1986) free cash flow argument. In this version, self-serving managerial tendencies are reigned in without raising leverage indiscriminately, so that financial flexibility is preserved.

Findings from the 2015 Institutional Real Estate Capital Allocations Monitor

Since 2013, the Baker Program in Real Estate and Hodes Weill & Associates have co-sponsored the Institutional Real Estate Capital Allocations Monitor (the “Allocations Monitor”). The Allocations Monitor was created to conduct a comprehensive annual assessment of institutional allocations to real estate investments through analyzing trends and collecting survey responses of institutional portfolios and allocations by region, type, and size of institution. The Allocations Monitor reports on the role of real estate investments in institutional portfolios, and the impact of institutional allocation trends on the investment management industry.

Living with Terminal Capitalization Rates: A Look at Real Estate Valuation Model Parameter Setting

This paper examines assumptions about future prices used in real estate applications of DCF models. We confirm both the widespread reliance on an ad hoc rule of increasing period-zero capitalization rates by 50 to 100 basis points to obtain terminal capitalization rates and the inability of the rule to project future real estate pricing. To understand how investors form expectations about future prices, we model the spread between the contemporaneously period-zero going-in and terminal capitalization rates and the spread between terminal rates assigned in period zero and going-in rates assigned in period N. Our regression results confirm statistical relationships between the terminal and next holding period going-in capitalization rate spread and the period-zero discount rate, although other economically significant variables are statistically insignificant. Linking terminal capitalization rates by assumption to going-in capitalization rates implies investors view future real estate pricing with myopic expectations. We discuss alternative specifications devoid of such linkage that align more with a rational expectations view of future real estate pricing.

2016 Real Estate Industry Leader Profile: MaryAnne Gilmartin

[Excerpt] Cornell University and the Baker Program in Real Estate are pleased to announce the 2016 Real Estate Industry Leader Award recipient: MaryAnne Gilmartin, President & CEO of Forest City Ratner Companies. MaryAnne’s leadership in the real estate industry has made a powerful and positive impact on society as a driving force behind several of the highest-profile, largest-scale additions to the urban landscape of New York City.

Real Estate Case Competitions

Real Estate is by nature a hands-on business in which real-world experience and new challenges are the best teacher. With this in mind, graduate real estate education has embraced case competitions as a way to apply education-based learning to real world project simulation. In recent years, teams from Cornell have consistently stood out in these competitions, making impressions and forming relationships that they will carry with them over their careers. In this issue of the Review, we recognize a composite of previous winners of the four major real estate-focused case competitions, and look back on what was a very successful year for case competition teams at Cornell. The case competitions draw students from all the constituent programs of Real Estate at Cornell, including the Baker Program, Johnson Graduate School of Management, City and Regional Planning, Architecture, and Landscape Architecture.

Autonomous Vehicles and Commercial Real Estate

Hardly a day goes by without the release of a handful of news stories about autonomous vehicles (or AVs for short). The proverbial “tipping point” of awareness has been reached in the public consciousness as AV technology is quickly becoming the new focus of firms from Silicon Valley to Detroit and beyond. Automation has, and will continue to have far-reaching implications for many human activities, but for driving, the technology is here. Google has been in talks with automaker Ford (1), Elon Musk has declared that Tesla will have the appropriate technology in two years (2), GM is paired-up with Lyft (3), Uber is in development-mode (4), Microsoft and Volvo have announced a partnership (5), Apple has been piloting its top-secret project “Titan” (6), Toyota is working on its own technology (7), as is BMW (8). Audi (9) made a splash by sending a driverless A7 concept car 550 miles from San Francisco to Las Vegas just in time to roll-into the 2016 Consumer Electronics Show. Clearly, the race is on.

Manipulation in U.S. REIT Investment Performance Evaluation: Empirical Evidence

We investigate whether Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) managers actively manipulate performance measures in spite of the strict regulation under the REIT regime. We provide empirical evidence that is consistent with this hypothesis. Specifically, manipulation strategies may rely on the opportunistic use of leverage. However, manipulation does not appear to be uniform across REIT sectors and seems to become more common as the level of competition in the underlying property sector increases. We employ a set of commonly used traditional performance measures and a recently developed manipulation-proof measure (MPPM, Goetzmann, Ingersoll, Spiegel, and Welch (2007)) to evaluate the performance of 147 REITs from seven different property sectors over the period 1991-2009. Our findings suggest that the existing REIT regulation may fail to mitigate a substantial agency conflict and that investors can benefit from evaluating return information carefully in order to avoid potentially manipulative funds.

REIT Capital Structure Choices: Preparation Matters

Sun, Titman, and Twite (2015) find that capital structure risks, namely high leverage and a high share of short-term debt, reduced the cumulative total return of US REITs in the 2007-2009 financial crisis. We find that mitigating capital structure risks ahead of the crisis by reducing leverage and extending debt maturity in 2006, was associated with a significantly higher cumulative total return 2007-2009, after controlling for the levels of those variables at the start of the financial crisis. We further identify two systematic cross-sectional differences between those REITs that reduced capital structure risks prior to the financial crisis and those that did not: the exposure to capital structure risks and the strength of corporate governance. On balance, our findings are consistent with the interpretation of risk-reducing adjustments to capital structure ahead of the crisis as a component of managerial skill and discipline with significant implications for firm value during the crisis.

The Consequences of REIT Index Membership for Return Patterns

We study the impact of S&P index membership on REIT stock returns. Given the hybrid nature of REITs, their returns may become more like those of other indexed stocks and less like those of their underlying properties. The existing literature does not offer clear predictions on these potential outcomes. Taking advantage of the inclusion of REITs in major S&P indexes starting in 2001, we find that shared index membership significantly increases the correlation between REIT returns after controlling for the stock characteristics that determine index membership. We also document that index membership enhances the link between REIT stock returns and the performance of the underlying real estate, consistent with improved pricing efficiency. REIT investors appear to be able to enjoy the benefits of improved visibility and liquidity associated with index membership as well as the exposure to underlying real estate markets and the related benefits of diversification.

Letter from the Editors

[Excerpt] The Editorial Team is proud to release this 2016 14th Annual Volume of the Cornell Real Estate Review. This year’s issue explores a wide range of topics, including the deployment of new technologies in multifamily properties, the effects of autonomous vehicles on real estate, and the continued ramifications of the housing crisis through the legal tactics of certain mortgage lenders. Also included, a recent repositioning project– the unique turnaround of a former casino hotel property in Reno, Nevada. Furthermore, this release includes a discussion of value-added multifamily investment strategy, an analysis of the impact of rapid transit on the residential market in Hudson County, New Jersey, and a summary of federal affordable housing incentive programs in the United States. This year’s Pathways features an interview with Toll Brothers Division President Karl Mistry (Baker ’04), and the Baker Viewpoint piece explores the concept of curtailment mortgages.

Repositioning a Multifamily Asset

Multifamily investments, particularly value-added strategies, have been of keen interest to real estate investors for years now. Successful execution of a multifamily investment offers excellent risk-adjusted returns when compared to other classes of real estate such as industrial, retail, and office. From a volatility standpoint, multifamily enjoys relatively stable long-term cash flows with less downside risk during periods of recession due to stable tenancy in most major markets. The stability during downturns is also supported by the fact that recessions tend to make renters out of owners, increasing demand for apartments.