An analysis of commercial real estate returns: is there a smoothing puzzle?

In this paper we investigate the commonly used autoregressive filter method of adjusting appraisal-based real estate returns to correct for the perceived biases induced in the appraisal process. Since the early work by Geltner (1989), many papers have been written on this topic but remarkably few have considered the relationship between smoothing at the individual property level and the amount of persistence in the aggregate appraised-based index. To investigate this issue in more detail we analyse a sample of individual property level appraisal data from the Investment Property Database (IPD). We find that commonly used unsmoothing estimates overstate the extent of smoothing that takes place at the individual property level. There is also strong support for an ARFIMA representation of appraisal returns.

Depreciation and its impact on the total return of UK commercial real estate, 1994-2003

Depreciation is a key element of understanding the returns from and price of commercial real estate. Understanding its impact is important for asset allocation models and asset management decisions. It is a key input into well-constructed pricing models and its impact on indices of commercial real estate prices needs to be recognised. There have been a number of previous studies of the impact of depreciation on real estate, particularly in the UK. Law (2004) analysed all of these studies and found that the seemingly consistent results were an illusion as they all used a variety of measurement methods and data. In addition, none of these studies examined impact on total returns; they examined either rental value depreciation alone or rental and capital value depreciation. This study seeks to rectify this omission, adopting the best practice measurement framework set out by Law (2004). Using individual property data from the UK Investment Property Databank for the 10-year period between 1994 and 2003, rental and capital depreciation, capital expenditure rates, and total return series for the data sample and for a benchmark are calculated for 10 market segments. The results are complicated by the period of analysis which started in the aftermath of the major UK real estate recession of the early 1990s, but they give important insights into the impact of depreciation in different segments of the UK real estate investment market.

Capturing UK real estate volitility

Volatility, or the variability of the underlying asset, is one of the key fundamental components of property derivative pricing and in the application of real option models in development analysis. There has been relatively little work on volatility in real terms of its application to property derivatives and the real options analysis. Most research on volatility stems from investment performance (Nathakumaran & Newell (1995), Brown & Matysiak 2000, Booth & Matysiak 2001). Historic standard deviation is often used as a proxy for volatility and there has been a reliance on indices, which are subject to valuation smoothing effects. Transaction prices are considered to be more volatile than the traditional standard deviations of appraisal based indices. This could lead, arguably, to inefficiencies and mis-pricing, particularly if it is also accepted that changes evolve randomly over time and where future volatility and not an ex-post measure is the key (Sing 1998). If history does not repeat, or provides an unreliable measure, then estimating model based (implied) volatility is an alternative approach (Patel & Sing 2000). This paper is the first of two that employ alternative approaches to calculating and capturing volatility in UK real estate for the purposes of applying the measure to derivative pricing and real option models. It draws on a uniquely constructed IPD/Gerald Eve transactions database, containing over 21,000 properties over the period 1983-2005. In this first paper the magnitude of historic amplification associated with asset returns by sector and geographic spread is looked at. In the subsequent paper the focus will be upon model based (implied) volatility.

The impact of country risk on international real estate returns

Commercial real estate investors have well-established methods to assess the risks of a property investment in their home country. However, when the investment decision is overseas another dimension of uncertainty overlays the analysis. This additional dimension, typically called country risk, encompasses the uncertainty of achieving expected financial results solely due to factors relating to the investment’s location in another country. However, very little has been done to examine the effects of country risk on international real estate returns, even though in international investment decisions considerations of country risk dominate asset investment decisions. This study extends the literature on international real estate diversification by empirically estimating the impact of country risk, as measured by Euromoney, on the direct real estate returns of 15 countries over the period 1998-2004, using a pooled regression analysis approach. The results suggest that country risk data may help investor’s in their international real estate decisions since the country risk data shows a significant and consistent impact on real estate return performance.

The impact of exchanges rates on international real estate portfolio allocation

This paper, examines whether the asset holdings and weights of an international real estate portfolio using exchange rate adjusted returns are essentially the same or radically different from those based on unadjusted returns. The results indicate that the portfolio compositions produced by exchange rate adjusted returns are markedly different from those based on unadjusted returns. However following the introduction of the single currency the differences in portfolio composition are much less pronounced. The findings have a practical consequence for the investor because they suggest that following the introduction of the single currency international investors can concentrate on the real estate fundamentals when making their portfolio choices, rather than worry about the implications of exchange rate risk.

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

Decision theory and real estate development: a note on uncertainty

Real estate development appraisal is a quantification of future expectations. The appraisal model relies upon the valuer/developer having an understanding of the future in terms of the future marketability of the completed development and the future cost of development. In some cases the developer has some degree of control over the possible variation in the variables, as with the cost of construction through the choice of specification. However, other variables, such as the sale price of the final product, are totally dependent upon the vagaries of the market at the completion date. To try to address the risk of a different outcome to the one expected (modelled) the developer will often carry out a sensitivity analysis on the development. However, traditional sensitivity analysis has generally only looked at the best and worst scenarios and has focused on the anticipated or expected outcomes. This does not take into account uncertainty and the range of outcomes that can happen. A fuller analysis should include examination of the uncertainties in each of the components of the appraisal and account for the appropriate distributions of the variables. Similarly, as many of the variables in the model are not independent, the variables need to be correlated. This requires a standardised approach and we suggest that the use of a generic forecasting software package, in this case Crystal Ball, allows the analyst to work with an existing development appraisal model set up in Excel (or other spreadsheet) and to work with a predetermined set of probability distributions. Without a full knowledge of risk, developers are unable to determine the anticipated level of return that should be sought to compensate for the risk. This model allows the user a better understanding of the possible outcomes for the development. Ultimately the final decision will be made relative to current expectations and current business constraints, but by assessing the upside and downside risks more appropriately, the decision maker should be better placed to make a more informed and “better”.