Another look at the relative importance of sectors and regions in determining property returns

This paper re-examines the relative importance of sector and regional effects in determining property returns. Using the largest property database currently available in the world, we decompose the returns on individual properties into a national effect, common to all properties, and a number of sector and regional factors. However, unlike previous studies, we categorise the individual property data into an ever-increasing number of property-types and regions, from a simple 3-by-3 classification, up to a 10 by 63 sector/region classification. In this way we can test the impact that a finer classification has on the sector and regional effects. We confirm the earlier findings of previous studies that sector-specific effects have a greater influence on property returns than regional effects. We also find that the impact of the sector effect is robust across different classifications of sectors and regions. Nonetheless, the more refined sector and regional partitions uncover some interesting sector and regional differences, which were obscured in previous studies. All of which has important implications for property portfolio construction and analysis.

Country, sector and regional factors in European property returns

For those portfolio managers who follow a top-down approach to fund management when they are trying to develop a pan-European investment strategy they need to know which are the most important factors affecting property returns, so as to concentrate their management and research efforts accordingly. In order to examine this issue this paper examines the relative importance of country, sector and regional effects in determining property returns across Europe using the largest database of individual property returns currently available. Using annual data over the period 1996 to 2002 for a sample of over 25,000 properties the results show that the country-specific effects dominate sector-specific factors, which in turn dominate the regional-specific factors. This is true even for different sub-sets of countries and sectors. In other words, real estate returns are mainly determined by local (country specific) conditions and are only mildly affected by general European factors. Thus, for those institutional investors contemplating investment into Europe the first level of analysis must be an examination of the individual countries, followed by the prospects of the property sectors within the country and then an assessment of the differences in expected performance between the main city and the rest of the country.

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.

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.

Property fund flows and returns

This study is concerned with the impacts on property returns from property fund flows, and with the possibility of a reverse transmission from property fund flows to property returns. In other words this study investigates whether property returns “cause” fund flow changes, or whether fund flow changes “cause” property returns, or causality works in both directions.

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

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.

Evaluating the effectiveness of common structures in property portfolio construction

A good portfolio structure enables an investor to diversify more effectively and understand systematic influences on their performance. However, in the property market, the choice of structure is affected by data constraints and convenience. Using individual return data, this study tests the hypothesis that some common structures in the UK do not explain a significant amount about property returns. It is found that, in the periods studied, not all the structures were effective and, for the annual returns, no structures were significant in all periods. The results suggest that the drivers represented by the structures take some time to be reflected in individual property returns. They also confirm the results of other studies in finding property type a much stronger factor in explaining returns than regions.

Serial persistence in individual real estate returns in the UK

Persistence of property returns is a topic of perennial interest to fund managers as it suggests that choosing those properties that will perform well in the future is as simple as looking at those that performed well in the past. Consequently, much effort has been expended to determine if such a rule exists in the real estate market. This paper extends earlier studies in US, Australian, and UK markets in two ways. First, this study applies the same methodology originally used in Young and Graff (1996) making the results directly comparable with those in the US and Australian property markets. Second, this study uses a much longer and larger database covering all commercial property data available from the Investment Property Databank (IPD), for the years 1981 to 2002 for as many as 216,758 individual property returns. While the performance results of this study mimic the US and Australian results of greater persistence in the extreme first and fourth quartiles, they also evidence persistence in the moderate second and third quartiles, a notable departure from previous studies. Likewise patterns across property type, location, time, and holding period are remarkably similar leading to the conjecture that behaviors in the practice of commercial real estate investment management are themselves deeply rooted and persistent and perhaps influenced for good or ill by agency effects

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.

Serial persistence in individual real estate returns in the UK

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine individual level property returns to see whether there is evidence of persistence in performance, i.e. a greater than expected probability of well (badly) performing properties continuing to perform well (badly) in subsequent periods. Design/methodology/approach – The same methodology originally used in Young and Graff is applied, making the results directly comparable with those for the US and Australian markets. However, it uses a much larger database covering all UK commercial property data available in the Investment Property Databank (IPD) for the years 1981 to 2002 – as many as 216,758 individual property returns. Findings – While the results of this study mimic the US and Australian results of greater persistence in the extreme first and fourth quartiles, they also evidence persistence in the moderate second and third quartiles, a notable departure from previous studies. Likewise patterns across property type, location, time, and holding period are remarkably similar. Research limitations/implications – The findings suggest that performance persistence is not a feature unique to particular markets, but instead may characterize most advanced real estate investment markets. Originality/value – As well as extending previous research geographically, the paper explores possible reasons for such persistence, consideration of which leads to the conjecture that behaviors in the practice of institutional-grade commercial real estate investment management may themselves be deeply rooted and persistent, and perhaps influenced for good or ill by agency effects. - See more at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1602884&show=abstract#sthash.hc2pCmC6.dpuf

Forecasting real estate returns using financial spreads

This paper examines the predictability of real estate asset returns using a number of time series techniques. A vector autoregressive model, which incorporates financial spreads, is able to improve upon the out of sample forecasting performance of univariate time series models at a short forecasting horizon. However, as the forecasting horizon increases, the explanatory power of such models is reduced, so that returns on real estate assets are best forecast using the long term mean of the series. In the case of indirect property returns, such short-term forecasts can be turned into a trading rule that can generate excess returns over a buy-and-hold strategy gross of transactions costs, although none of the trading rules developed could cover the associated transactions costs. It is therefore concluded that such forecastability is entirely consistent with stock market efficiency.

The impact of economic and financial factors on UK property performance

This paper employs a vector autoregressive model to investigate the impact of macroeconomic and financial variables on a UK real estate return series. The results indicate that unexpected inflation, and the interest rate term spread have explanatory powers for the property market. However, the most significant influence on the real estate series are the lagged values of the real estate series themselves. We conclude that identifying the factors that have determined UK property returns over the past twelve years remains a difficult task.

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.

Changes in the relative importance of sector and regional factors: 1987-2002

A stylised fact in the real estate portfolio diversification literature is that sector (property-type) effects are relatively more important than regional (geographical) factors in determining property returns. Thus, for those portfolio managers who follow a top-down approach to portfolio management, they should first choose in which sectors to invest and then select the best properties in each market. However, the question arises as to whether the dominance of the sector effects relative to regional effects is constant. If not property fund managers will need to take account of regional effects in developing their portfolio strategy. Using monthly data over the period 1987:1 to 2002:12 for a sample of over 1000 properties the results show that the sector-specific factors dominate the regional-specific factors for the vast majority of the time. Nonetheless, there are periods when the regional factors are of equal or greater importance than the sector effects. In particular, the sector effects tend to dominate during volatile periods of the real estate cycle; however, during calmer periods the sector and regional effects are of equal importance. These findings suggest that the sector effects are still the most important aspect in the development of an active portfolio strategy.