Volatility As Alternative Risk Premia In The Age Of The Machines

stone_mountain_capital_research_perspective_vol.46_march_2017.pdf
File Size:	459 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

---

*|MC_PREVIEW_TEXT|*

RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE VOL.46 MARCH 2017  Download Research Perspective PDF Volatility As Alternative Risk Premia In The Age Of The Machines Oliver Fochler Managing Partner, CEO Tel.: +44 79224 36360 Email: oliver.fochler@stonemountain-capital.com   Alexandros Kyparissis Analyst Hedge Funds Tel.: +44 78431 44007 Email: alexandros.kyparissis@stonemountain-capital.com   Alternative asset management is a growing industry, where investors seek diversification to their traditional long only investment portfolios. According to PWC, a significant increase in the assets under management (AuM) of alternatives is anticipated over the next quinquennium, reaching the levels of $15.3tn with hedge funds expected to contribute one third to that amount, which means an increase of $2tn in their AuM. Main drivers of this increase are risks associated with the geopolitical environment of investments. Major determinants of the new risk framework are Brexit discussions, major country elections and Euroscepticism in Europe, the new U.S. government and FED’s policies incertitude in the U.S., and mixed signs for growth globally. Investors are in a quandary regarding their allocations amid the current uncertainty, and are scrutinizing investment opportunities that will allow them to navigate profitably during the new era. Risk and uncertainty are two coherent terms, but different, while investors are keen on identifying the key risks in their investments. The recent spike in the number strategies (both active and passive) seeking ‘alternative risk premium’ highlights the importance of identifying risk factors.  Figure 1. Evolution of alpha and beta, Source: Stone Mountain Capital Research   ​Figure 1 illustrates the evolution of the approach to alpha and beta as new alternative strategies and products appear. We observe alternative ways to capture beta and alpha, which is depicted in the right side of Figure 1 and we consider risk premia and hedge fund replication strategies as alternative alpha despite their systematic nature. The difference between alternative alpha and alternative beta lies in the underlying factor exposure and market directionality. There is a plethora of factors, which vary across asset classes (equities, bonds, credit, rates and commodities) and strategies. These factors are distinguished between alternative and traditional long only focusing on liquidity, volatility, style, size and other parameters with a variety of academic work around them. Most popular and widely used are the factors that were introduced by Fama and French (market, size and value) and momentum, which was introduced by Carhart. Fung and Hsieh (RFS, 2001) attempt to capture the risk of hedge fund portfolios by using a set of factors including trend following (bond, currency, commodity), equity oriented (equity market and size spread), bond oriented (bond market, credit spread) and finally emerging market risk factors. Value, carry (bonds, credit, major currency, emerging market currency) and momentum could be applied across asset classes, while style is an idiosyncratic factor for different strategies (l/s equity, equity market neutral, l/s credit, credit market neutral, relative value, macro, systematic CTA and event-driven). Figure 2 details traditional risk premia for rates (government bonds), corporate bonds, and public and private equity. Figure 2. An Overview of Traditional Risk Premia, Source: Unigestion (for illustrative purposes only) ​ This perspective is neither an attempt to classify and determine the risk premium factors nor to analyse hedge fund replication techniques, but to examine volatility effects in traditional and alternative portfolios. Volatility is a statistical measure for the dispersion of an asset’s value or performance when applied to returns. It quantifies the level of uncertainty in the size of the value’s change; consequently, it measures up to a certain extent the risk of the asset. There is a distinction in the types of volatility with the two main being historical and implied volatility and academic studies evidence that implied volatility has been historically higher than historic volatility. The new status quo of the financial markets and the new socioeconomic reality makes the use of implied volatility more relevant according to this perspective as historical volatility can be misleading. The Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE) designed VIX, known as fear gauge, an index measuring the implied volatility of 30 calendar days S&P options. As starting point, we take the close end month prices for the new VIX from CBOE for the period between February 1993 and December 2016 and then compute its natural logarithmic returns. We evidence a leptokurtic distribution with positive skewness meaning that there is a higher probability of winning and higher probability of extreme values. The volatility benchmark for Europe is VSTOXX from EUREX, measuring the 30-day implied volatility of the EURO STOXX 50, and we follow the same process as for VIX and can evidence similar statistical features, as both have leptokurtic distributions with positive skewness. Volatility is becoming an important factor or even asset class and there is already demand for volatility related products to manage risks better and profitably. VIX and VSTOXX exhibited a slightly negative correlation and we attempt to examine this correlation with factors and other major indices. Table 1. Correlation VIX with major Indices and Factors, Source: HFR, CBOE, Credit Suisse, Fama and French, Fung and Hsieh, Stone Mountain Capital Research   Data for factors can be found in: https://faculty.fuqua.duke.edu/~dah7/HFRFData.html, http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data_library.html   The majority of indices are negatively correlated with VIX, with S&P 500 being the only significantly negative correlated with VIX. VIX has very little correlation with traditional and alternative factors. The correlation table for VIX exhibits a very interesting statistic; the lowest correlation is between VIX and strategies that trade VIX, which may suggest a unique approach of ‘volatility hedge funds’ to volatility. Another interesting fact is the low correlation between volatility in U.S. Equities and European equities. VSTOXX compared to VIX appears to have stronger (either positive or negative) correlation with most hedge fund and volatility indices and weaker with traditional indices. Robeco (2016) finds, that hedge funds bet against the low volatility anomaly, and this perspective will try to investigate the effect of volatility hedge funds in different portfolios. We consider HFRX RV Volatility and CBOE Eurekahedge RV Volatility indices as a proxy for strategies that trade volatility as an asset class, and then CBOE Eurekahedge Long Volatility and CBOE Eurekahedge Short Volatility indices as proxies to examine strategies that take either long or short position on volatility.    Table 2. Correlation of volatility strategies with major Indices, Source: HFR, CBOE, Credit Suisse, Stone Mountain Capital Research ​ HFRX volatility strategies have strong positive correlation with CBOE Eurekahedge Short Volatility strategies and are slightly negatively correlated to VIX, VSTOXX, corporate bonds and long volatility strategies, while CBOE Eurekahedge RV Volatility is slightly negatively correlated with VIX, VSTOXX, S&P 500 and Credit Suisse Fixed Income Arbitrage Index. Both are considered uncorrelated with major traditional and hedge fund indices, which suggests a good diversification source for long only equities and fixed income portfolios. As we proceed with our analysis to the long and short component of volatility trading, we observe a strong positive relationship between short volatility strategies and other hedge fund strategies across asset classes, while they are strongly negatively correlated to European stock volatility. On the other side, long volatility strategies have mainly negative relationships with the other hedge fund strategies apart from macro related strategies. As next step, we create ten artificial portfolios from January 2005 to December 2016 that include equity, fixed income, hedge funds, and volatility strategies represented by S&P 500, BofA Merrill Lynch US Corp Master Total Return Index, HFRX Global Hedge Fund Index, HFRX Equity Hedge, CBOE Eurekahedge RV Volatility, CBOE Eurekahedge Long Volatility, CBOE Eurekahedge Short Volatility and VIX respectively. The portfolios are summarized in Table 3 below. Table 3. Artificial Portfolios Composition for the period of January 2005 – December 2016, Stone Mountain Capital Research Table 4. Artificial Portfolios First Four Moments for the period of January 2005 – December 2016, Stone Mountain Capital Research   Table 4 summarises key statistics for the ten artificial portfolios and we attempt to analyse the effect of adding hedge funds and volatility strategies in a traditional portfolio. The most interesting point is, that the addition of VIX to a portfolio increases the overall risk as measured by volatility. Furthermore, including VIX in a portfolio provides us with some useful conclusions regarding skewness and kurtosis. VIX improves the skewness radically, as the portfolios that include VIX exhibit positive skewness, which is highly desirable. On the other side, VIX attenuates the kurtosis of a portfolio, which in theory reduces the riskiness of the portfolio, but it contradicts the outcome of the effect on volatility. Moreover, portfolios with VIX produced the lowest Sharpe ratio. An important point to note is that VIX is not tradeable and in that sense this perspective refers to hypothetical results or to products that attempt to mimic VIX, like VIX futures and VIX exchange traded notes (ETNs). Adding relative value volatility strategies to a portfolio with hedge funds and traditional investments produced higher returns and less risk with slightly higher skewness and lower kurtosis, while it produced the second highest Sharpe ratio (portfolio 3). Then we proceeded and created purely equity focused portfolio combining traditional and alternative equity with volatility strategies. Portfolios 5-8 have a core composition of 50% traditional equity, 30% equity hedge funds and the remaining 20% is attributed to the volatility spectrum. The best performing, in terms of Sharpe ratio, is the portfolio, that includes relative value volatility strategies followed by short volatility and long volatility strategies. Finally, the best performing portfolio was portfolio 10, which is an equity focused portfolio with traditional equity, equity hedge funds and the three hedge fund volatility strategies. Overall, the inclusion of volatility strategies suggests the enhancement of performance for portfolios and volatility is not just a factor, but an asset class that is worthy exploring further for investors. Eurekahedge has recently created a set of new volatility hedge fund benchmarks underpinning the risen investor interest in volatility as alternative risk premium across asset classes and tradable asset class itself. Stone Mountain Capital is mandated from hedge fund managers pursuing different long, short, l/s and directional volatility strategies.    This perspective is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy an interest in any investment or advisory service by Stone Mountain Capital LTD. For queries please contact Alexandros Kyparissis under email: alexandros.kyparissis@stonemountain-capital.com and Tel.: +447843144007. For further information around our research and advisory services please contact Oliver Fochler under Tel.: +447922436360 and email: oliver.fochler@stonemountain-capital.com.  The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, Stone Mountain Capital LTD. Readers should refer to the Disclaimer. Share:    STONE MOUNTAIN CAPITAL Stone Mountain Capital is an advisory boutique since 2012 and we are mandated from 30+ best in class single hedge fund and fund of fund managers across equity, credit, and tactical trading (global macro and CTAs). In private equity and debt, we structure funding vehicles and are mandated with 10+ managers across the sectors real estate, infrastructure, renewable energy/cleantech and financial institutions/regulatory capital relief. As per 29th January 2016, Stone Mountain Capital is mandated on total alternative assets of US$ 44.7 billion. US$ 42.7 billion is mandated in hedge fund and fund of hedge fund AuM and US$ 2 billion in private assets (private equity/private debt) and corporate finance. Our Team   Our Solutions   Our Mandates   Our Research   Our News Contact We are able to source any specific alternative investment search and maintain relationships with dozens of best-in-class hedge fund managers, private equity and private debt general partners (GPs) and real estate and infrastructure developers. We don’t pass any costs on to our investors, since our compensation comes from our mandated managers, GPs and developers. Please contact us, should you require further information about our solutions.     Stone Mountain Capital is a limited company (LTD) registered in England & Wales with registered number 8763463. The registered address is: 31 Compayne Gardens, London NW6 3DD, England, United Kingdom. Stone Mountain Capital LTD (FRN: 729609) is an Appointed Representative of LNG Capital LLP (FRN: 454402), which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (‘FCA’). Stone Mountain Capital LTD is the Distributor of foreign collective investment schemes distributed to qualified investors in Switzerland. Certain of those foreign collective investment schemes are represented by First Independent Fund Services LTD, which is authorised and regulated by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority ('FINMA') as Swiss Representative of foreign collective investment schemes pursuant to Art 13 para 2 let. h in the Federal Act on Collective Investment Schemes (CISA). Copyright © 2017 Stone Mountain Capital LTD. All rights reserved.   Any business communication, including the content of this research perspective, sent by or on behalf of Stone Mountain Capital LTD or one of its affiliated firms or other entities (together "Stone Mountain"), is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected. This e-mail message is for information purposes only, it is not a recommendation, advice, offer or solicitation to buy or sell a product or service nor an official confirmation of any transaction. It is directed at persons who are professionals and is not intended for retail customer use. This e-mail message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Our LTD accepts no liability for the content of this email, or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided, unless that information is subsequently confirmed in writing. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the limited company. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments. By replying to this e-mail, you consent to Stone Mountain monitoring the content of any e-mails you send to or receive from Stone Mountain. Stone Mountain is not liable for any opinions expressed by the sender where this is a non-business e-mail. Emails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free. Anyone who communicates with us by email is taken to accept these risks. This message is subject to our terms at: www.stonemountain-capital.com/disclaimer.