Skip to main content

2016 in review: Quant strategies are cheaper and smarter than opaque hedge funds


  • 2016 outcomes for our multi-asset Max Sharpe and Min Volatility did what they say on the tin.
  • Dynamic risk-based strategies can provide low correlation differentiated returns to provide a low-cost, liquid alternative to traditional "Alternatives"
  • A quant-based approach to alternative investing is likely to be cheaper and smarter than hedge funds which are vulnerable to manager's behavioural and emotional biases

Smart beta strategies are “smart” because they take a scientific, quantitative and objective approach to investing by combining a range of index-tracking ETFs with different market risk or “beta” exposures.

In contrast to the opacity of hedge funds, dynamic allocation “smart beta” investment strategies should do what they say on the tin.

Elston runs a number of diversified multi-asset investment strategies, two of which have been offered as indices for asset owners and investment managers to benchmark against or track.

Chart 1: Risk and Return 2016

Source: Elston, Bloomberg, all in GBP

Looking at outcomes
Our  multi-asset Global Max Sharpe index (Bloomberg: ESBGMS) did what it said on the tin delivering a Sharpe ratio (our primary measure of success for this strategy) of 2.06 for 2016, compared to 1.94 for Equities, 1.90 for Bonds and 1.45 for Commodities.  On a returns basis (our secondary measure of success) the strategy returned 23.58% for the year, compared to 28.35% for equities, but with volatility of 10.35% compared to 15.45% for equities.  Put differently, the strategy captured 83% of equity returns with just 67% of equity risk. 

Chart 2: Elston Multi-Asset Max Sharpe (ESBGMS) 2016 Outcome

Source: Elston, Bloomberg, all in GBP

Our multi-asset Global Min Volatility index (Bloomberg: ESBGMV) also did what it said on the tin whilst maintaining exposure to a broad set of return-seeking asset classes.  The realised volatility (our primary measure of success for this strategy) for 2016 was 7.08%, compared to 15.45% for equities, 13.64% for bonds and 25.28% for commodities.  Our dynamic asset allocation approach minimised portfolio variance whilst harvesting returns. On a returns basis (our secondary measure of success), the strategy returned 18.62% for the year, compared to 28.35% for equities, but with volatility of 7.08% compared to 15.45% for equities.  Put differently, the strategy captured 66% of equity returns with just 46% of equity risk.

Chart 3: Elston Multi-Asset Min Volatility (ESBGMV) 2016 Outcome

Source: Elston, Bloomberg, all in GBP

Theory and practice
Our strategies constituent parts are ETFs representing a broad range of asset classes and geographies.  The Sharpe of our Global Max Sharpe strategy’s whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts.  The Volatility of our Global Min Volatility strategy’s whole is less than the sum of its constituent parts.  And that’s the intention. 

A low cost more consistent alternative to hedge funds?
Hedge funds were popular because they provided differentiated returns and mitigated risk.  In 2016, Hedge Funds returned 1.35% with volatility of 3.56%.  Put differently, on average they captured just 5% equity returns, despite taking on 23% of equity risk.

We plot out equity return capture (return relative to global equity return) and risk outlay (volatility relative to global equity volatility) for the main asset classes, our strategies and HFRX (all in GBP) in the summary matrix below.

Chart 4: 2016 Return Capture vs Risk Outlay

Source: Elston, Bloomberg

The problem with many hedge funds is that they are not doing what they say on the tin.  They aim to provide diversified differentiated returns – but their process, statistically, amounts to trial and error, fraught with subjective bias.  We seek to achieve similar outcomes, but using a clinically quantitative approach.  To paraphrase a famous composer: “At the end of the day, it’s just maths.”

What next?
The Elston Strategic Beta multi-asset indexes were launched in December 2014. They are priced daily with index values available for free, factsheets are published daily.  Our research strategies and indices are available for licensing.


If you are an asset manager or financial adviser and would like to follow or track our strategies, using ETPs or ETF Portfolios please get in touch.

Elston Research Team
www.elstonconsulting.co.uk
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