Property funds: how much diversification is enough?

t is well known that when assets are randomly-selected and combined in equal proportions in a portfolio, the risk of the portfolio declines as the number of different assets increases without affecting returns. In other words, increasing portfolio size should improve the risk/return trade-off compared with a portfolio of asset size one. Therefore, diversifying among several property funds may be a better alternative for investors compared to holding only one property fund. Nonetheless, it also well known that with naïve diversification although risk always decreases with portfolio size, it does so at a decreasing rate so that at some point the reduction in portfolio risk, from adding another fund, becomes negligible. Based on this fact, a reasonable question to ask is how much diversification is enough, or in other words, how many property funds should be included in a portfolio to minimise return volatility.

Diversification when it hurts? The joint distributions of real estate and equity markets

Much of the literature on the construction of mixed asset portfolios and the case for property as a risk diversifier rests on correlations measured over the whole of a given time series. Recent developments in finance, however, focuses on dependence in the tails of the distribution. Does property offer diversification from equity markets when it is most needed - when equity returns are poor. The paper uses an empirical copula approach to test tail dependence between property and equity for the UK and for a global portfolio. Results show strong tail dependence: in the UK, the dependence in the lower tail is stronger than in the upper tail, casting doubt on the defensive properties of real estate stocks.

Real estate capital flows and transitional economies

reign real estate capital was a major source of financing domestic property market office construction in Central Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. During the 1990s, over 800 office buildings were either newly constructed or refurbished in Budapest, Prague and Warsaw. The primary focus of this analysis is explaining the spatial construction and redevelopment patterns of the post-1989 office buildings in these cities. Secondarily, we analyze the correlation of foreign direct investment flows to annual construction of office buildings. We seek to explain the location of new or refurbished office buildings in the central business district (CBD) or in non-CBD locations in terms of the effect of time, size of property and other variables, and test whether there is a positive correlation relationship of foreign direct investment flows and new office construction or refurbishment. Integrating relevant foreign direct investment (FDI), economic geography and property theories in the research, the authors attempt to bridge existing gaps in the literature.

The marginal benefit of diversification in commercial real estate portfolios

The number of properties to hold to achieve a well-diversified real estate property portfolio presents a puzzle, as the estimated number is considerably higher than that seen in actual portfolios. However, Statman (1987) argues that investors should only increase the number of holdings as long as the marginal benefits of diversification exceed their costs. Using this idea we find that the marginal benefits of diversification in real estate portfolios are so small that investors are probably rational in holding small portfolios, at least as far as the reduction in standard deviation is concerned.