Attribution analysis of property portfolios

This paper aims to clarify the potential confusion about the application of attribution analysis to real estate portfolios. Its three primary objectives are: · To review, and as far as possible reconcile, the varying approaches to attribution analysis evident in the literature. · To give a clear statement of the purposes of attribution analysis, and its meaning for real-world property managers. · To show, using real portfolio data from IPD's UK performance measurement service, the practical implications of applying different attribution methods.

Evidence of cycles in European commercial real estate markets and some hypotheses

In this paper, we seek to achieve four objectives. First, we provide some contextual material concerning the performance of the UK real estate market relative to stocks and bonds over a long period. Second, we provide UK – and some non-UK European - evidence of the tendency for property demand, supply, prices and returns to fluctuate around their long term trends or averages. Third, we briefly examine some hypotheses which suggest institutional contributions to property cycles in European markets. Fourth, we suggest some reasons why the future may not be as cyclical as the past.

Timing and the holding periods of institutional real estate

The literature on investors’ holding periods for equities and bonds suggest that high transaction costs are associated with longer holding periods. Return volatility, by contrast, is associated with short-term trading and hence shorter holding periods. High transaction costs and the perceived illiquidity of the real estate market leads to an expectation of longer holding periods. Further, work on depreciation and obsolescence might suggest that there is an optimal holding period. However, there is little empirical work in the area. In this paper, data from the Investment Property Databank are used to investigate sales rate and holding period for UK institutional real estate between 1981 and 1994. Sales rates are investigated using the Cox proportional hazards framework. The results show longer holding periods than those claimed by investors. There are marked differences by type of property and sales rates vary over time. Contemporaneous returns are positively associated with an increase in the rate of sale. The results shed light on investor behaviour.

Commercial real estate return distributions: a review of literature and empirical evidence

This paper review the literature on the distribution of commercial real estate returns. There is growing evidence that the assumption of normality in returns is not safe. Distributions are found to be peaked, fat-tailed and, tentatively, skewed. There is some evidence of compound distributions and non-linearity. Public traded real estate assets (such as property company or REIT shares) behave in a fashion more similar to other common stocks. However, as in equity markets, it would be unwise to assume normality uncritically. Empirical evidence for UK real estate markets is obtained by applying distribution fitting routines to IPD Monthly Index data for the aggregate index and selected sub-sectors. It is clear that normality is rejected in most cases. It is often argued that observed differences in real estate returns are a measurement issue resulting from appraiser behaviour. However, unsmoothing the series does not assist in modelling returns. A large proportion of returns are close to zero. This would be characteristic of a thinly-traded market where new information arrives infrequently. Analysis of quarterly data suggests that, over longer trading periods, return distributions may conform more closely to those found in other asset markets. These results have implications for the formulation and implementation of a multi-asset portfolio allocation strategy.

Are property prices non-linear? An investigation of the behaviour of US REITs and UK property company shares

Linear models of market performance may be misspecified if the market is subdivided into distinct regimes exhibiting different behaviour. Price movements in the US Real Estate Investment Trusts and UK Property Companies Markets are explored using a Threshold Autoregressive (TAR) model with regimes defined by the real rate of interest. In both US and UK markets, distinctive behaviour emerges, with the TAR model offering better predictive power than a more conventional linear autoregressive model. The research points to the possibility of developing trading rules to exploit the systematically different behaviour across regimes.

The relative importance of sectors v's regions in determining property returns

A number of studies have investigated the benefits of sector versus regional diversification within a real estate portfolio without explicitly quantify the relative benefits of one against the other. This paper corrects this omission by adopting the approach of Heston and Rouwenhorst (1994) and Beckers, Connor and Curds (1996) on a sample of 187 property data points using annual data over the period 1981-1995. The general conclusion of which is the sector diversification explains on average 22% of the variability of property returns compared with 8% for administratively defined regions. A result in line with previous work. Implying that sector diversification should be the first level of analysis in constructing and managing the real estate portfolio. However, unlike previous work functionally defined regions provide less of an explanation of regional diversification than administrative regions. Which may be down to the weak definition of economic regions employed in this study.

Change & flexibility: the role of serviced office space in corporate real estate portfolios and office markets

With the increasing pace of change, organisations have sought new real estate solutions which provide greater flexibility. What appears to be required is not flexibility for all uses but appropriate flexibility for the volatile, risky and temporal part of a business. This is the essence of the idea behind the split between the core and periphery portfolio. The serviced office has emerged to fill the need for absolute flexibility. This market is very diverse in terms of the product, services and target market. It has grown and gained credibility with occupiers and more recently with the property investment market. Occupiers similarly use this space in a variety of ways. Some solely occupy serviced space while others use it to complement their more permanent space. It therefore appears that the market is fulfilling the role of providing periphery space for at least some of the occupiers. In all instances the key to this space is a focus on financial and tenurial flexibility which is not provided by other types of business space offered.

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.

Asset allocation, cross-class correlation and the structure of property returns

Practical applications of portfolio optimisation tend to proceed on a “top down” basis where funds are allocated first at asset class level (between, say, bonds, cash, equities and real estate) and then, progressively, at sub-class level (within property to sectors, office, retail, industrial for example). While there are organisational benefits from such an approach, it can potentially lead to sub-optimal allocations when compared to a “global” or “side-by-side” optimisation. This will occur where there are correlations between sub-classes across the asset divide that are masked in aggregation – between, for instance, City offices and the performance of financial services stocks. This paper explores such sub-class linkages using UK monthly stock and property data. Exploratory analysis using clustering procedures and factor analysis suggests that property performance and equity performance are distinctive: there is little persuasive evidence of contemporaneous or lagged sub-class linkages. Formal tests of the equivalence of optimised portfolios using top-down and global approaches failed to demonstrate significant differences, whether or not allocations were constrained. While the results may be a function of measurement of market returns, it is those returns that are used to assess fund performance. Accordingly, the treatment of real estate as a distinct asset class with diversification potential seems justified.

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.

The future returns for property required by UK pension funds

In the 1970s Real Estate represented over 17% of the average pension funds total assets. Today such funds hold less than 4%, a figure not seen since the 1960s. This reduction in Real Estate holdings is mainly attributable to the relatively poor performance of Real Estate against other asset classes since the 1980s. Whether pension funds will increase their holding at any point in the future depends therefore on the expected return of Real Estate by comparison with that required to justify a particular asset holding. Using the technique of Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT), this paper assesses the required return that Real Estate would have to offer to justify a 15% holding in a mixed asset portfolio. This figure and the risk/return characteristics of the major asset classes is taken from survey data. Under a number of scenarios it is found that Real Estate can play a part in a mixed asset portfolio at the 15% level. In some cases however, the expected returns of Real Estate are not sufficient to justify a weight of 15% in this asset.

Required returns for real estate in UK pension fund portfolios

The position of Real Estate within a multi-asset portfolio has received considerable attention recently. Previous research has concentrated on the percentage holding property would achieve given its risk/return characteristics. Such studies have invariably used Modern Portfolio Theory and these approaches have been criticised for both the quality of the real estate data and problems with the methodology itself. The first problem is now well understood, and the second can be addressed by the use of realistic constraints on asset holdings. This paper takes a different approach. We determine the level of return that Real Estate needs to achieve to justify an allocation within the multi asset portfolio. In order to test the importance of the quality of the data we use historic appraisal based and desmoothed returns to examine the sensitivity of the results. Consideration is also given to the Holding period and the imposition of realistic constraints on the asset holdings in order to model portfolios held by pension fund investors. We conclude, using several benchmark levels of portfolio risk and return, that using appraisal based data the required level of return for Real Estate was less than that achieved over the period 1972-1993. The use of desmoothed series can reverse this result at the highest levels of desmoothing although within a restricted holding period Real Estate offered returns in excess of those required to enter the portfolio and might have a role to play in the multi-asset portfolio.

Rental depreciation and capital expenditure in the UK commercial real estate market, 1993–2009

This paper identifies the long-term rental depreciation rates for UK commercial properties and rates of capital expenditure incurred to offset depreciation over the same period. It starts by reviewing the economic depreciation literature and the rationale for adopting a longitudinal method of measurement, before discussing the data used and results. Data from 1993 to 2009 were sourced from Investment Property Databank and CB Richard Ellis real estate consultants. This is used to compare the change in values of new buildings in different locations with the change in values of individual properties in those locations. The analysis is conducted using observations on 742 assets drawn from all major segments of the commercial real estate market. Overall rental depreciation and capital expenditure rates are similar to those in other recent UK studies. Depreciation rates are 0.8% pa for offices, 0.5% pa for industrial properties and 0.3% pa for standard retail properties. These results hide interesting variations at a segment level, notably in retail where location often dominates value rather than the building. The majority of properties had little (if any) money spent on them over the last 16 years, but those subject to higher rates of expenditure were found to have lower depreciation rates.

Building communities: reducing energy use in tenanted commercial property

Reducing energy use in tenanted commercial property requires a greater understanding of ‘buildings as communities’. Tenanted commercial properties represent: (1) the divergent communities that share specific buildings; and (2) the organizational communities represented by multi-site landlord and tenant companies. In any particular tenanted space the opportunity for environmental change is mediated (hindered or enabled) through the lease. This discussion draws on theoretical and practical understandings of (1) the socio-legal relationships of landlords, tenants and their advisors; (2) the real performance of engineering building services strategies to improve energy efficiency; (3) how organizational cultures affect the ability of the sector to engage with energy-efficiency strategies; and (4) the financial and economic basis of the relationship between owners and occupiers. The transformational complexity stems from: (1) the variety of commercial building stock; (2) the number of stakeholders (solicitors, investors, developers, agents, owners, tenants and facilities managers); (3) the fragmentation within the communities of practice; and (4) leasehold structures and language. An agenda is proposed for truly interdisciplinary research that brings together both the physical and the social sciences of energy use in buildings so that technological solutions are made effective by an understanding of the way that buildings are used and communities behave.