The relationship between size, diversification and risk

Property portfolio diversification takes many forms, most of which can be associated with asset size. In other words larger property portfolios are assumed to have greater diversification potential than small portfolios. In addition, since greater diversification is generally associated with lower risk it is assumed that larger property portfolios will also have reduced return variability compared with smaller portfolios. If large property portfolios can simply be regarded as scaled-up, better-diversified versions of small property portfolios, then the greater a portfolio’s asset size, the lower its risk. This suggests a negative relationship between asset size and risk. However, if large property portfolios are not simply scaled-up versions of small portfolios, the relationship between asset size and risk may be unclear. For instance, if large portfolios hold riskier assets or pursue more volatile investment strategies, it may be that a positive relationship between asset size and risk would be observed, even if large property portfolios are more diversified. This paper tests the empirical relationship between property portfolio size, diversification and risk, in Institutional portfolios in the UK, during the period from 1989 to 1999 to determine which of these two characterisations is more appropriate

Portfolio size and the reduction of dispersion: the case of the United Kingdom commercial real estate market

This paper investigates the potential benefits and limitations of equal and value-weighted diversification using as the example the UK institutional property market. To achieve this it uses the largest sample (392) of actual property returns that is currently available, over the period 1981 to 1996. To evaluate these issues two approaches are adopted; first, an analysis of the correlations within the sectors and regions and secondly simulations of property portfolios of increasing size constructed both naively and with value-weighting. Using these methods it is shown that the extent of possible risk reduction is limited because of the high positive correlations between assets in any portfolio, even when naively diversified. It is also shown that portfolios exhibit high levels of variability around the average risk, suggesting that previous work seriously understates the number of properties needed to achieve a satisfactory level of diversification. The results have implications for the development and maintenance of a property portfolio because they indicate that the achievable level of risk reduction depends upon the availability of assets, the weighting system used and the investor’s risk tolerance

Spatial concentration in institutional industrial real estate investment in the England and Wales

In two recent papers Byrne and Lee (2006, 2007) examined the geographical concentration of institutional office and retail investment in England and Wales at two points in time; 1998 and 2003. The findings indicate that commercial office portfolios are concentrated in a very few urban areas, whereas retail holdings correlate more closely with the urban hierarchy of England and Wales and consequently are essentially ubiquitous. Research into the industrial sector is very much less developed, and this paper therefore makes a significant contribution to understanding the structure of industrial property investment in the UK. It shows that industrial investment concentration is between that of retail and office and is focussed on LAs with high levels of manual workers in areas with smaller industrial units. It also shows that during the period studied the structure of the sector changed, with greater emphasis on the distributional element, for which location is a principal consideration

Spatial Concentration in Institutional Industrial Real Estate Investment in the England and Wales

In two recent papers Byrne and Lee (2006, 2007) examined the geographical concentration of institutional office and retail investment in England and Wales at two points in time; 1998 and 2003. The findings indicate that commercial office portfolios are concentrated in a very few urban areas, whereas retail holdings correlate more closely with the urban hierarchy of England and Wales and consequently are essentially ubiquitous. Research into the industrial sector is very much less developed, and this paper therefore makes a significant contribution to understanding the structure of industrial property investment in the UK. It shows that industrial investment concentration is between that of retail and office and is focussed on LAs with high levels of manual workers in areas with smaller industrial units. It also shows that during the period studied the structure of the sector changed, with greater emphasis on the distributional element, for which location is a principal consideration.industrial, institutional investment, spatial concentration

The impact of real estate on the terminal wealth of the UK mixed-asset portfolio

The argument for the inclusion of real estate in the mixed-asset portfolio has concentrated on examining its effect in reducing the portfolio risk - the time series standard deviation (TSSD), mainly using ex-post time series data. However, the past as such is not really relevant to the long-term institutional investors, such as the insurance companies and pension funds, who are more concerned the terminal wealth (TW) of their investments and the variability of this wealth, the terminal wealth standard deviation (TWSD), since it is from the TW of their investment portfolio that policyholders and pensioners will derive their benefits. These kinds of investors with particular holding period requirements will be less concerned about the within period volatility of their portfolios and more by the possibility that their portfolio returns will fail to finance their liabilities. This variability in TW will be closely linked to the risk of shortfall in the quantity of assets needed to match the institution’s liabilities. The question remains therefore can real estate enhance the TW of the mixed-asset portfolio and/or reduce the variability of the TW. This paper uses annual data from the United Kingdom (UK) for the period 1972-2001 to test whether real estate is an asset class that not only reduces ex-post portfolio risk but also enhances portfolio TW and/or reduces the variability of TW

Spatial Concentration in Institutional Investment in the UK: Some comparisons between the Retail and Office Sectors

Geographic diversity is a fundamental tenet in portfolio management.  Yet there is evidence from the US that institutional investors prefer to concentrate their real estate investments in favoured and specific areas as primary locations for the properties that occupy their portfolios.  The little work done in the UK draws similar conclusions, but has so far focused only on the office sector; no work has examined this issue for the retail sector.  This paper therefore examines the extent of real estate investment concentration in institutional Retail portfolios in the UK at two points in time; 1998 and 2003, and presents some comparisons with equivalent concentrations in the office sector.  The findings indicate that retail investment correlates more closely with the UK urban hierarchy than that for offices when measured against employment, and is focused on urban areas with high populations and large population densities which have larger numbers of retail units in which to invest.Retail, Institutional Investment, Spatial Concentration

Different Risk Measures: Different Portfolio Compositions?

Traditionally, the measure of risk used in portfolio optimisation models is the variance. However, alternative measures of risk have many theoretical and practical advantages and it is peculiar therefore that they are not used more frequently. This may be because of the difficulty in deciding which measure of risk is best and any attempt to compare different risk measures may be a futile exercise until a common risk measure can be identified. To overcome this, another approach is considered, comparing the portfolio holdings produced by different risk measures, rather than the risk return trade-off. In this way we can see whether the risk measures used produce asset allocations that are essentially the same or very different. The results indicate that the portfolio compositions produced by different risk measures vary quite markedly from measure to measure. These findings have a practical consequence for the investor or fund manager because they suggest that the choice of model depends very much on the individual’s attitude to risk rather than any theoretical and/or practical advantages of one model over another.alternative risk models, portfolio compositions, simalarity indices