11.11.2014 Views

"Life Cycle" Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate ... - Arabictrader.com

"Life Cycle" Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate ... - Arabictrader.com

"Life Cycle" Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate ... - Arabictrader.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Risk-Adjusted Performance 295<br />

Nonetheless, it should be recognized that RAP(i) and S i provide very different<br />

measures <strong>of</strong> risk-adjusted performance. RAP gives an answer in basis points that<br />

is readily understandable by non-experts, while Sharpe produces a ratio that is<br />

difficult for the average investor to interpret.<br />

Jensen–Treynor Measures<br />

The Jensen and Treynor formulation measures risk-adjusted performance by <strong>com</strong>paring<br />

the excess returns <strong>of</strong> portfolio i with those <strong>of</strong> a market portfolio that is<br />

matched to the risk <strong>of</strong> portfolio i. The risk-matching is ac<strong>com</strong>plished by multiplying<br />

e M by the ratio <strong>of</strong> b i to the b <strong>of</strong> the market (which is the same as b i since<br />

the b <strong>of</strong> the market is one).<br />

We see two problems with this approach. First, using the ratio <strong>of</strong> the betas is<br />

fundamentally different from using the ratios <strong>of</strong> the sigmas. To the extent that the<br />

returns <strong>of</strong> portfolio i are less than perfectly correlated with the returns <strong>of</strong> the<br />

market benchmark, b i may differ appreciably from s i /s M . In short, RAP reflects<br />

the proposition that in considering which portfolio to select for investing a major<br />

portion <strong>of</strong> wealth, what matters in judging its performance is total risk, not just<br />

systematic risk.<br />

Moreover, these measures account for risk by adjusting the market portfolio to<br />

match the risk <strong>of</strong> portfolio i, instead <strong>of</strong> adjusting portfolio i to match the risk<br />

<strong>of</strong> the market, as in RAP. While these approaches are closely related, the<br />

Jensen–Treynor measure is less useful in that it may produce misleading rankings.<br />

The portfolio with the highest risk-adjusted return by the criteria <strong>of</strong> Jensen’s<br />

alpha or the Treynor ratio will not necessarily be the portfolio capable <strong>of</strong> achieving<br />

the highest return for any level <strong>of</strong> risk. This is in contrast to RAP and S, which<br />

unambiguously identify the optimal portfolio for any desired risk level.<br />

Graphical Representation <strong>of</strong> RAP<br />

Figure 12.1 illustrates RAP in graphic form. Measuring standard deviation on the<br />

x-axis and return on the y-axis, any portfolio i can be represented as a point P i ,<br />

with coordinates (s i , r i ). The point P M represents the market portfolio, with standard<br />

deviation s M and total return r M . Similarly, P 0 represents a portfolio <strong>of</strong> riskless<br />

fixed-in<strong>com</strong>e securities with sigma s 0 <strong>of</strong> zero and return r f . Drawing a straight<br />

line from point P 0 through any portfolio point P i gives us the “leverage opportunity<br />

line,” or l i , for that portfolio.<br />

For any given level <strong>of</strong> sigma, the vertical distance between l i and the x-axis<br />

represents the total return <strong>of</strong> portfolio i (similarly, the distance between l i and the<br />

horizontal line through r f represents the corresponding excess return). Levering

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!