28.01.2014 Views

Download complete issue - IndexUniverse.com

Download complete issue - IndexUniverse.com

Download complete issue - IndexUniverse.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Figure 5<br />

Five Key Issues With Equity Indexes And Their Importance To Investors<br />

What do you think are important <strong>issue</strong>s?<br />

Size biases<br />

37.3% 55.2%<br />

Overinvestment in<br />

overpriced stocks<br />

Sector biases<br />

31.3% 58.2%<br />

40.3% 32.8%<br />

Poor diversifcation<br />

38.8% 29.9%<br />

Lacking of representativity<br />

of the economy<br />

31.3% 25.4%<br />

0% 20%<br />

40% 60% 80% 100%<br />

Important Very Important<br />

Source: EDHEC<br />

Note: The above chart illustrates the percentages of respondents who think five <strong>issue</strong>s that have been discussed in academic literature in relation to equity indexes are important<br />

or very important. The figures are the result of questions that offered the following possible responses: not important; I don’t know; slightly important; important; and very<br />

important. The percentages exclude nonresponses.<br />

Moreover, Hsu [2006] and Arnott and Hsu [2008] have<br />

shown theoretically that cap-weighting automatically<br />

leads to an overinvestment in overpriced stocks; however,<br />

that theory has been shown to be based on flawed<br />

assumptions (see Perold [2007]; and Graham [2012]).<br />

Literature has also evidenced the poor diversification<br />

of cap-weighted indexes, which are often concentrated in<br />

a few large firms (Malevergne et al. [2009]). For example,<br />

Strongin et al. [2000] conclude that the S&P 500 Index<br />

mainly reflects the performance of 86 stocks and the<br />

Russell 1000 of 118. Meanwhile, Bernstein [2003] finds<br />

that the 10 largest <strong>com</strong>panies accounted for 25 percent<br />

of the S&P 500 market value, and the top 25 <strong>com</strong>panies<br />

accounted for 40 percent. In addition, Tabner [2007]<br />

finds a dramatic increase in the concentration of the top<br />

10 firm/sector holdings between 1984 and 2005 for the<br />

FTSE 100 Index. Due to the heavy weightings of the biggest<br />

<strong>com</strong>panies in the index, cap-weighted indexes are<br />

not necessarily providing the diversification-related risk<br />

reduction most investors expect from a benchmark.<br />

The results of the survey (Figure 5) show that size biases<br />

and overinvestment in overpriced stocks were perceived by<br />

the respondents as being the biggest problems with indexes,<br />

with 92.5 and 89.5 percent of respondents, respectively,<br />

finding those <strong>issue</strong>s to be very important or important. In<br />

addition to these concerns that standard cap-weighted<br />

indexes are being exposed to a performance drag, about<br />

73 percent of survey respondents think that biased exposures<br />

to sector factors may be problematic with standard<br />

equity indexes. This concern corroborates findings that the<br />

<strong>com</strong>monly used equity indexes are exposed to significant<br />

shifts in their style or sector exposures (e.g., Amenc et al.<br />

[2006]). About two-thirds of respondents find poor diversification<br />

an important to very important concern. It is<br />

worth noting that respondents do not see the potential lack<br />

of representativity of cap-weighted indexes as the major<br />

<strong>issue</strong>, as only about 57 percent of respondents mentioned<br />

it as important or very important. In conclusion, the main<br />

<strong>issue</strong>s that respondents see with cap-weighted indexes are<br />

<strong>issue</strong>s related to the risk and return properties of indexes.<br />

Bond Indexes<br />

We conducted a similar analysis with <strong>com</strong>mon criticisms<br />

of bond indexes. In fact, fixed-in<strong>com</strong>e benchmarks<br />

are of particular concern because there are several prominent<br />

problems with bond indexes long noted in academic<br />

literature, including the so-called bums problem—the<br />

overweighting of heavily indebted <strong>issue</strong>rs—as well as the<br />

problem of frequently changing characteristics, which<br />

result in fluctuating risk-factor exposures (see e.g., Siegel<br />

[2003]). A more recent study documents unstable duration<br />

and credit ratings over time in corporate bond indexes<br />

(Goltz and Campani [2011]).<br />

Respondents were queried for their opinions on specific<br />

<strong>issue</strong>s with government bond indexes, helping illustrate<br />

that a variety of concerns were held by investors<br />

ranging from practical implementation matters to riskfactor<br />

exposure and risk-factor stability. The results show<br />

that difficulty replicating the index is the main <strong>issue</strong> for<br />

respondents, as 81.6 percent of them consider it important<br />

or very important. Overinvestment in more indebted<br />

countries—an <strong>issue</strong> due to the nature of debt-weighting<br />

indexes—is also a major concern for 65.8 percent of<br />

respondents. This finding parallels those obtained for<br />

equity indexes, where a majority of respondents considered<br />

overinvestment in overpriced stocks to be a critical<br />

<strong>issue</strong>. Lack of liquidity and proprietary pricing models<br />

are also each revealed as important <strong>issue</strong>s for about 63<br />

percent of respondents. Thus, respondents recognize the<br />

<strong>issue</strong>s involved in creating an investable product based<br />

on government bond indexes (difficulties in tracking<br />

and replicability or illiquidity). Other practical concerns<br />

March / April 2013<br />

29

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!