Non-normal real estate return distributions by property type in the UK

Investment risk models with infinite variance provide a better description of distributions of individual property returns in the IPD UK database over the period 1981 to 2003 than normally distributed risk models. This finding mirrors results in the US and Australia using identical methodology. Real estate investment risk is heteroskedastic, but the characteristic exponent of the investment risk function is constant across time – yet it may vary by property type. Asset diversification is far less effective at reducing the impact of non‐systematic investment risk on real estate portfolios than in the case of assets with normally distributed investment risk. The results, therefore, indicate that multi‐risk factor portfolio allocation models based on measures of investment codependence from finite‐variance statistics are ineffective in the real estate context

Individual assets, market structure and the drivers of return

Much prior research on the structure and performance of UK real estate portfolios has relied on aggregated measures for sector and region. For these groupings to have validity, the performance of individual properties within each group should be similar. This paper analyses a sample of 1,200 properties using multiple discriminant analysis and cluster analysis techniques. It is shown that conventional property type and spatial classifications do not capture the variation in return behaviour at the individual building level. The major feature is heterogeneity - but there may be distinctions between growth and income properties and between single and multi-let properties that could help refine portfolio structures.

Judgments, forecasts and decisions: an analysis of fund managers over time

Decision theory is the study of models of judgement involved in, and leading to, deliberate and (usually) rational choice. In real estate investment there are normative models for the allocation of assets. These asset allocation models suggest an optimum allocation between the respective asset classes based on the investors’ judgements of performance and risk. Real estate is selected, as other assets, on the basis of some criteria, e.g. commonly its marginal contribution to the production of a mean variance efficient multi asset portfolio, subject to the investor’s objectives and capital rationing constraints. However, decisions are made relative to current expectations and current business constraints. Whilst a decision maker may believe in the required optimum exposure levels as dictated by an asset allocation model, the final decision may/will be influenced by factors outside the parameters of the mathematical model. This paper discusses investors' perceptions and attitudes toward real estate and highlights the important difference between theoretical exposure levels and pragmatic business considerations. It develops a model to identify “soft” parameters in decision making which will influence the optimal allocation for that asset class. This “soft” information may relate to behavioural issues such as the tendency to mirror competitors; a desire to meet weight of money objectives; a desire to retain the status quo and many other non-financial considerations. The paper aims to establish the place of property in multi asset portfolios in the UK and examine the asset allocation process in practice, with a view to understanding the decision making process and to look at investors’ perceptions based on an historic analysis of market expectation; a comparison with historic data and an analysis of actual performance.

The relative importance sector and regional factors in Italy

The benefits of sector and regional diversification have been well documented in the literature but have not previously been investigated in Italy. In addition, previous studies have used geographically defined regions, rather than economically functional areas, when performing the analysis even though most would argue that it is the economic structure of the area that will lead to differences in demand and hence property performance. This study therefore uses economically defined regions of Italy to test the relative benefits of regional diversification versus sector diversification within the Italian real estate portfolio. To examine this issue we use constrained cross-section regressions the on the sector and regional affiliation of 14 cities in Italy to extract the “pure” return effects of the different factors using annual data over the period 1989 to 2003. In contrast, to previous studies we find that regional factors effects in Italy have a much greater influence on property returns than sector-specific effects, which is probably a direct result of using the extremely diverse economic regions of Italy rather than arbitrary geographically locations. Be that as it may, the results strongly suggest that that diversification across the regions of Italy used here is likely to offer larger risk reduction benefits than a sector diversification strategy within a region. In other words, fund managers in Italy must monitor the regional composition of their portfolios more closely than its sector allocation. Additionally, the results supports that contemporary position that ‘regional areas’ based on economic function, provide greater diversification benefits rather than areas defined by geographical location.

The effect of asymmetries on stock index return value-at-risk estimates

It is widely accepted that equity return volatility increases more following negative shocks rather than positive shocks. However, much of value-at-risk (VaR) analysis relies on the assumption that returns are normally distributed (a symmetric distribution). This article considers the effect of asymmetries on the evaluation and accuracy of VaR by comparing estimates based on various models.

Non-normal real estate return distributions by property type in the U.K.

Investment risk models with infinite variance provide a better description of distributions of individual property returns in the IPD database over the period 1981 to 2003 than Normally distributed risk models, which mirrors results in the U.S. and Australia using identical methodology. Real estate investment risk is heteroscedastic, but the Characteristic Exponent of the investment risk function is constant across time yet may vary by property type. Asset diversification is far less effective at reducing the impact of non-systematic investment risk on real estate portfolios than in the case of assets with Normally distributed investment risk. Multi-risk factor portfolio allocation models based on measures of investment codependence from finite-variance statistics are ineffectual in the real estate context.

The persistence of real estate fund performance

This paper examines the short and long-term persistence of tax-exempt real estate funds in the UK through the use of winner-loser contingency table methodology. The persistence tests are applied to a database of varying numbers of funds from a low of 16 to a high of 27 using quarterly returns over the 12 years from 1990 Q1 to 2001 Q4. The overall conclusion is that the real estate funds in the UK show little evidence of persistence in the short-term (quarterly and semi-annual data) or for data over a considerable length of time (bi-annual to six yearly intervals). In contrast, the results are better for annual data with evidence of significant performance persistence. Thus at this stage, it seems that an annual evaluation period, provides the best discrimination of the winner and loser phenomenon in the real estate market. This result is different from equity and bond studies, where it seems that the repeat winner phenomenon is stronger over shorter periods of evaluation. These results require careful interpretation, however, as the results show that when only small samples are used significant adjustments must be made to correct for small sample bias and second the conclusions are sensitive to the length of the evaluation period and specific test used. Nonetheless, it seems that persistence in performance of real estate funds in the UK does exist, at least for the annual data, and it appears to be a guide to beating the pack in the long run. Furthermore, although the evidence of persistence in performance for the overall sample of funds is limited, we have found evidence that two funds were consistent winners over this period, whereas no one fund could be said to be a consistent loser.

Different risk measures: different portfolio compositions?

Traditionally, the measure of risk used in portfolio optimisation models is the variance. However, alternative measures of risk have many theoretical and practical advantages and it is peculiar therefore that they are not used more frequently. This may be because of the difficulty in deciding which measure of risk is best and any attempt to compare different risk measures may be a futile exercise until a common risk measure can be identified. To overcome this, another approach is considered, comparing the portfolio holdings produced by different risk measures, rather than the risk return trade-off. In this way we can see whether the risk measures used produce asset allocations that are essentially the same or very different. The results indicate that the portfolio compositions produced by different risk measures vary quite markedly from measure to measure. These findings have a practical consequence for the investor or fund manager because they suggest that the choice of model depends very much on the individual’s attitude to risk rather than any theoretical and/or practical advantages of one model over another.

Return of the 'Angry Woman': authenticating female physical action in contemporary cinema

In 1999, Elizabeth Hills pointed up the challenges that physically active women on film still posed, in cultural terms, and in relation to certain branches of feminist theory . Since then, a remarkable number of emphatically active female heroes have appeared on screen, from 'Charlie’s Angels' to 'Resident Evil', 'Aeon Flux', and the 'Matrix' and 'X-Men' trilogies. Nevertheless, in a contemporary Western culture frequently characterised as postfeminist, these seem to be the ‘acceptable face’ – and body – of female empowerment: predominantly white, heterosexual, often scantily clad, with the traditional hero’s toughness and resolve re-imagined in terms of gender-biased notions of decorum: grace and dignity alongside perfect hair and make-up, and a body that does not display unsightly markers of physical exertion. The homogeneity of these representations is worth investigating in relation to critical claims that valorise such air-brushed, high-kicking 'action babes' for their combination of sexiness and strength, and the feminist and postfeminist discourses that are refracted through such readings. Indeed, this arguably ‘safe’ set of depictions, dovetailing so neatly with certain postfeminist notions of ‘having it all’, suppresses particular kinds of spectacles in relation to the active female body: images of physical stress and extension, biological consequences of violence and dangerous motivations are all absent. I argue that the untidy female exertions refused in popular “action babe” representations are now erupting into view in a number of other contemporaneous movies – 'Kill Bill' Vols 1 & 2, 'Monster', and 'Hard Candy' – that mark the return of that which is repressed in the mainstream vision of female power – that is, a more viscerally realistic physicality, rage and aggression. As such, these films engage directly with the issue of how to represent violent female agency. This chapter explores what is at stake at a representational level and in terms of spectatorial processes of identification in the return of this particularly visceral rendering of the female avenger.