Portfolio size and the reduction of dispersion: the case of the United Kingdom commercial real estate market

This paper investigates the potential benefits and limitations of equal and value-weighted diversification using as the example the UK institutional property market. To achieve this it uses the largest sample (392) of actual property returns that is currently available, over the period 1981 to 1996. To evaluate these issues two approaches are adopted; first, an analysis of the correlations within the sectors and regions and secondly simulations of property portfolios of increasing size constructed both naively and with value-weighting. Using these methods it is shown that the extent of possible risk reduction is limited because of the high positive correlations between assets in any portfolio, even when naively diversified. It is also shown that portfolios exhibit high levels of variability around the average risk, suggesting that previous work seriously understates the number of properties needed to achieve a satisfactory level of diversification. The results have implications for the development and maintenance of a property portfolio because they indicate that the achievable level of risk reduction depends upon the availability of assets, the weighting system used and the investor’s risk tolerance.

Risk reduction and real estate portfolio size

Despite a number of papers that discuss the advantages of increased size on risk levels in real estate portfolios there is remarkably little empirical evidence based on actual portfolios. The objective of this paper is to remedy this deficiency by examining the portfolio risk of a large sample of actual property data over the period 1981 to 1996. The results show that all that can be said is that portfolios of properties of a large size, on the average, tend to have lower risks than small sized portfolios. More importantly portfolios of a few properties can have very high or very low risk.

Is there a place for property in the multi-asset portfolio?

The case for property has typically rested on the application of modern portfolio theory (MPT), in that property has been shown to offer increased diversification benefits within a multi asset portfolio without hurting portfolio returns especially for lower risk portfolios. However this view is based upon the use of historic, usually appraisal based, data for property. Recent research suggests strongly that such data significantly underestimates the risk characteristics of property, because appraisals explicitly or implicitly smooth out much of the real volatility in property returns. This paper examines the portfolio diversification effects of including property in a multi-asset portfolio, using UK appraisal based (smoothed) data and several derived de-smoothed series. Having considered the effects of de-smoothing, we then consider the inclusion of a further low risk asset (cash) in order to investigate further whether property's place in a low risk portfolio is maintained. The conclusions of this study are that the previous supposed benefits of including property have been overstated. Although property may still have a place in a 'balanced' institutional portfolio, the case for property needs to be reassessed and not be based simplistically on the application of MPT.

Europe’s biocidal products directive: benefits and costs in urban pest management

The European Commission’s Biocidal Products Directive (Council Directive 98/8 EC), known as the BPD, is the largest regulatory exercise ever to affect the urban pest control industry. Although focussed in the European Union its impact is global because any company selling pest control products in the EU must follow its principles. All active substances, belonging to 23 different biocidal product types, come within the Directive’s scope of regulatory control. This will eventually involve re-registration of all existing products, as well as affecting any new product that comes to the market. Some active substances, such as the rodenticides and insecticides, are already highly regulated in Europe but others, such as embalming fluids, masonry preservatives, disinfectants and repellents/attractants will come under intensive regulatory scrutiny for the first time. One of the purposes of the Directive is to offer enhanced protection for human health and the environment. The potential benefit for suppliers of pest control products is mutual recognition of regulatory product dossiers across 25 Member States of the European Union. This process, requiring harmonisation of all regulatory decision-making processes, should reduce duplicated effort and, potentially, allow manufacturers speedier access to European markets. However, the cost to industry is enormous, both in terms of the regulatory resources required to assemble BPD dossiers and the development budgets required to conduct studies to meet its new standards. The cost to regulatory authorities is also tremendous, in terms of the need to upgrade staff capabilities to meet new challenges and the volume of the work expected by the Commission when they are appointed the Rapporteur Member State (RMS) for an active substance. Users of pest control products will pay a price too. The increased regulatory costs of maintaining products in the European market are likely to be passed on, at least in part, to users. Furthermore, where the costs of meeting new regulatory requirements cannot be recouped from product sales, many well-known products may leave the market. For example, it seems that in future few rodenticides that are not anticoagulants will be available within the EU. An understanding of the BPD is essential to those who intend to place urban pest control products on the European market and may be useful to those considering the harmonisation of regulatory processes elsewhere. This paper reviews the operation of the first stages of the BPD for rodenticides, examines the potential benefits and costs of the legislation to the urban pest control industry and looks forward to the next stages of implementation involving all insecticides used in urban pest management.

The impact of price promotions on producer strategies in markets with large product heterogeneity

Although current research indicates that increasing the number of options has negative effects on the cognitive ability of consumers, little understanding has been given to the consequences on producers and their strategic behavior. This article tests whether a large portfolio of products is beneficial to producers by observing UK consumer response to price promotions. The article shows that discounts induce mainly segment switching (74% of the total impact), with a limited effect on stockpiling (26%) and no impact on purchase incidence. Consequently, consumers prefer to “follow the discount” rather than purchase multiple units of the same wine. This result seems to explain the current structure of the market, and suggests that discounts may conflict with segment loyalty, a situation that disfavors producers, particularly in very populated segments. Results also casts doubts on the economic sustainability of competition based on an intense product differentiation in the wine sector.