Skip to main content

Multi-Asset Min Volatility for choppy times


Multi-Asset Min Volatility for choppy times
  • Our Global Min Volatility multi-asset index closed up +1.52% on “Brexit Friday” in GBP terms
  • Risk, return and correlation are always unstable, and that should be reflected in optimisation models
  • Risk-based quant-driven investment strategies offer a lower cost alternative to hedge funds for investors looking to diversify their portfolio returns
A Min Volatility approach
In December 2014, we launched the Elston Strategic Beta Global Min Volatility Index, a multi-asset strategy constructed using a broad range of ETFs (Ticker ESBGMV).  The rationale for launching this strategy was to provide a low-cost “liquid alternative” to hedge funds.
Our Global Min Vol Index continues to do what it says on the tin: provide a source of differentiated returns by combining traditional asset classes to minimise portfolio variance whilst keeping potential for returns.
Once certainty about the market, as John Pierpont Morgan famously said, is that it will fluctuate.  Since launch, the strategy has coped well with market tantrums from different sources, and will continue to adapt to changing market conditions.
Notably, the index was up +1.52% (in GBP terms) on Brexit Friday.
Fig 1: ESBGMV -1 Month Performance to 24th June 2016
Source: Solactive
 Be dynamic, because markets are
The risk, return and correlations between asset classes are not stable, so portfolio construction is sub-optimal if it assumes they are.
Our adaptive approach to portfolio construction embraces the fact that risk, return and correlations are dynamic.
We select a basket of screened ETFs from a broad universe to create a minimum variance portfolio, subject to various turnover and holding constraints, using a clear, systematic rules-based approach.
Asset allocation
At the last rebalancing the allocation to equities within the strategy increased from 31.78% to 37.15%, but it’s the risk-return characteristics of the ETFs selected within that overall asset allocation that counts.
 Fig 2: ESBGMV Index Composition Weightings, June 2016
Source: Elston Consulting 
As at close on Friday 24th June, the annualised 1 year volatility of the strategy s 6.2%, compared to 18.1% for global equities, 8.9% for global bonds and 25.6% for commodities, whilst the Sharpe Ratio is 1.15. 
Paradigm shift
The growth in computing power and data availability over the last decade is changing the way portfolios can be managed.  This is furthering the role of quantitative investment strategies – whether off the shelf or designed to order – as a source of alternative returns.  One key difference is fees, as they require more data and less human resource compared to traditional hedge funds.  Furthermore, unlike hedge funds, quant strategies also have the added benefit of being systematic and behaviourally predictable.
Index transparency
By pricing our flagship strategies as indices, we obtain real-time performance transparency.  It also make it easier for those wishing to use our strategies for their own funds or ETPs.
The need for diversification and downside protection in choppy markets is not new. What’s changing is the tools available to provide this, and the diminishing cost of access.


NOTICES: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.  I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it.
This article has been written for a US and UK audience.  Tickers are shown for corresponding and/or similar ETFs prefixed by the relevant exchange code, e.g. “NYSEARCA:” (NYSE Arca Exchange) for US readers; “LON:” (London Stock Exchange) for UK readers.  For research purposes/market commentary only, does not constitute an investment recommendation or advice.  For more information see www.elstonconsulting.co.uk Photo credit: Euromoney. Chart credits: Elston Consulting, Solactive.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Market timing is a mug’s game

John Authers’ Long View article in the FT this weekend addresses market timing.  While he claims that just passive investors are such bad timers, we would go further: most are. Attempts to time the market (choosing the right moment to buy or sell into risk assets) are a mug’s game.  Great for brokerages that delight in investors’ fees levied to senselessly overtrade.  Bad for investor’s portfolio outcomes.  Despite the annual survey by Dalbar that investors’ attempts to time the market is really bad for their portfolio, people – including some portfolio managers – still try and have a go. The problem is that in timing the market, we become slaves to our behavioural biases around entry points, and the noise around market sentiment.  An investor fearing Brexit might have – out of emotion – sold everything to cash stocked up on gold sovereigns and run for the hills whilst tracing Irish ancestry.  The smart thing was to acknowledge sterling weakn...
1 comment
Read more

The cost of Marmite, and Brexit’s quiet fear gauge

UK commentators are looking for data points that vindicate the Referendum result one way or the other Sterling’s slide and the FTSE 100 Index level together or in isolation are not the best indicators for a Brexit fear gauge The potential inflationary impact of a ‘hard Brexit’ has caused UK breakeven rates to spike, creating a real challenge for the Bank of England Give me a sign Just as high priests in Roman times, after slaughtering their offering, examined its entrails to gauge the Gods’ favour,  so too have UK commentators been searching for any statistical insight or market data point to declare whether the shock Brexit result is likely to lead to economic success or failure. The data point phoney war The data that has come out since the EU Referendum on 23 rd June 2016 is meaningless as we still don’t know what Brexit looks like.  It’s been a phoney war for headlines, as stunned commentators search for a gauge to measure policymakers by. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

UK votes for Brexit

UK public votes 52% to 48% to leave the EU: the exit process could take 2 to 4 years. Regional differences will create further constitutional strain on the UK Pound plunging, and expect UK Equities to follow suit. Expect flight to safety away from risk assets as the market digests the potential for structural change. Brexit it is The UK public has voted to leave the European Union after 43 years in yesterday’s referendum. Leave has 51.7% of votes so far with 71.8% turnout (higher than pervious general election) suggests a vote for Brexit by a narrow margin. The leaving process could take a minimum of two years, and even Leave campaigners don’t expect the process to complete until 2020. Opinion polls were too close to call Polling pointed to a closer result and recent momentum for the Remain campaign which had given markets an element of (false) security: the final poll put 45% Leave, 44% Remain, 11% Don’t Know.  While the binary nature of the debate suggested...
Post a Comment
Read more