Search results

The traditional approach and methodology can no longer cope effectively with the complexities and problems associated with large scale property investment. The level of sophistication of the analysis of property investments is still much lower than the analysis of investments in other media. There is a need to establish an analytical framework which could facilitate the management of the complex decision making and management problems associated with large property investment portfolios. The principal aim of this paper is to identify and rationalise the property portfolio problem in order to pave the way for the applications of recent developments in investment and portfolio theory. The definition of the general portfolio problem is followed by a comparison of the nature and characteristics of property portfolios and stock market security portfolios. The property portfolio problem is defined as a complex decision making problem requiring effective decision making in three stages: investment policy, selection and portfolio assembly, and finally management and portfolio rationalisation.

This study aims to investigate whether the zero-investment portfolio strategy generates higher excess returns for all listed companies in the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) or ESG100 stocks. The study period is from January 2016 to December 2020, a total of 60 months. The dividend yield is employed for categorizing the stock into value and growth stocks. The strategy of buying value stocks and short-selling growth stocks is then applied. The results show that investing using the zero-investment portfolio strategy can generate higher returns in an investment portfolio that consists of ESG100 stocks than in an investment portfolio that consists of all stocks in the SET. The optimal holding periods for investing in portfolios that consist of stocks in the SET are 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months, and the optimal holding periods for a portfolio that consists of ESG100 stocks is 6 months. To explain excess returns of stocks in the SET, the Fama and French (2015) five-factor model is employed. There is no relation between risk factors and excess returns for the holding period of 6 months and 12 months. However, excess return is found to have a negative relation with the market risk premium factor for a 9-month holding period. The excess returns of ESG100 stocks are also inversely correlated with investment factors for a holding period of 6 months.

The investment behaviour of individuals has been a major area of interest for several researchers and policymakers due to its great impact on the economy. This study aimed to assess the investment behaviour of individuals in light of their risk appetite and how financial literacy regulates this relationship.

A self-administered structured questionnaire was used to collect responses from individuals using purposive and convenience sampling techniques. Individuals were presented with 16 investment avenues widely offered by the Indian financial market to choose from to construct a hypothetical portfolio. The association between risk appetite, financial literacy and the composition of the hypothetical portfolio was analysed using a gologit model.

Increased risk appetite increased the probability of respondents creating a portfolio with a greater proportion of risky assets and less diversification. Lower levels of financial literacy pointed towards portfolios with traditional and low-risk avenues. The results also revealed a significant moderating impact of financial literacy on risk appetite and the creation of the type of a hypothetical portfolio.

Even though the intended behaviour is a close estimate of actual behaviour, there is a possibility of deviation that cannot be ignored.

The present study provides insights into how individuals make portfolio choices by incorporating risk appetite and diversification factors whilst making investment decisions, thereby expanding the literature from an emerging economy perspective. The role of financial literacy as a moderator has not been studied in the domain of hypothetical portfolio creation in India, which has been empirically explored in the current study.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

As the prolonged effect of the COVID-19 pandemic has materially impacted investment returns significantly, it is more crucial than ever for institutional investors to redefine their property portfolios using assets with better investment management potential and meaningful diversification benefits. The “alternative asset revolution” is gaining traction in the property investment space internationally among institutional investors due to the shifting investment attitudes towards the alternative property sectors. Australia's $205bn healthcare property sector is at the forefront of this revolution due to its societal significance, as well as its attractive investment qualities. This paper investigates the institutional investor management of the Australian healthcare property sector via both the direct and listed channels and empirically analyses its investment attributes.

Using the unique Morgan Stanley Capital International/Property Council of Australia quarterly data set for Australian direct healthcare property over 2006–2020, the risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification potential direct healthcare property and listed healthcare were assessed. A constrained mean-variance portfolio optimisation framework was used to develop a six-asset portfolio scenario to analyse the portfolio added-value benefits of both direct healthcare property and listed healthcare in a mixed-asset investment strategy. A similar set of analysis was performed using the post-global financial crisis (GFC) quarterly time series of 2009–2020 to investigate the healthcare asset class' performance dynamics in the post-GFC investment timeframe.

The results indicate that direct healthcare property and listed healthcare offer two key advantages for institutional investors in managing their property portfolios: (1) a stable yet superior risk-adjusted performance and (2) significant portfolio diversification potential in managing their property portfolios. Importantly, both direct healthcare property and listed healthcare provided valuable contributions in strengthening an investment portfolio's performance. The post-GFC sub-period analysis revealed a consistent conclusion regarding the healthcare asset class's performance attributes.

This is the first research that provides an independent empirical examination of the strategic importance of Australian healthcare property as a maturing alternative property sector that can serve both investment and environmental, social and governance goals of investors. This research presents a positive investment prognosis for the Australian healthcare property sector to achieve its institutionalised status as a mainstream asset class of the future.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

This paper aims to examine the performance of UK-listed infrastructure over a unique investment period covering the global financial crisis and investigates the significance of UK infrastructure in a multi-asset portfolio. The analysis reveals the level of correlation of UK infrastructure with other major assets classes and substantiates the potential diversification benefits of including UK infrastructure within a mixed-asset portfolio.

The study uses monthly investment return indices obtained from Thomson Reuters DataStream over a ten-year period (2001-2010). The paper analyzed the UK-listed infrastructure investment return characteristics including average annual return, annual risk, Sharpe indices, mean variance portfolio and maximum return portfolio and computes the efficient portfolio frontiers using the risk-solver optimization tool.

The performance results show that UK infrastructure produced better risk-return trade-offs than those of UK property, private equity, hedge funds and UK stocks over 2001-2010. Overall, for the ten-year period, UK Water was the best performing asset class, outperforming all other asset classes having the highest Sharpe ratio of 0.75.

Using the monthly return indices over the ten-year period, UK-listed infrastructure investment was found to play a consistently significant role in the optimality of mixed-asset portfolios. However, the diversification benefits were more return enhancing than risk reducing, offering investors a platform for matching investment objectives with expectations resulting from a better understanding of the characteristics of UK-listed infrastructure investments.

As investors seek better understanding of the performance of infrastructure across the globe, with most previous studies focusing on Australia, USA and China, the paper makes significant contribution to the body of knowledge by focusing on UK, a promising investment space for infrastructure industry. Also, given the debate surrounding the emergence of infrastructure as a separate asset class, the paper particularly projects the potential benefits of investing in UK-listed infrastructure, offering investors a distinctive platform to launch into a vibrant asset class.

Residential property in a multi‐asset portfolio context has been considered from two substantially different perspectives: institutional investor's and the household's perspective. This paper constitutes the first of two related surveys on the role of residential property in a multi‐asset portfolio. The paper provides an introduction to housing property investment at a macro level and reviews the main empirical issues related to housing investment in an institutional portfolio context. The literature in this regard generally supports the evidence that residential property is a more effective hedge against inflation than both shares and bonds. Additionally, the reviewed studies generally report that unsecuritised housing investment not only generates risk‐adjusted returns comparable to those of bonds and shares, but also exhibits low levels of correlation with classic asset groups of institutional portfolios.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Describes the means by which the performance of property investments can be measured and analysed. Reports on the results of a questionnaire survey looking into the practice of UK independent property portfolio managers. Suggests that a survey of financial institutions, namely insurance companies and pension funds, would reveal more about the objectives of performance measurement.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between risks and the expected return of financial investment because the relationship between them is negative; if the investors agree to the higher level of risk, they have the greater the expected return; therefore, investors always require a degree of proportionality between the risks and returns.

This study applied the standard deviation, variance, coefficient of variation methods and matrix function to measure risks. Besides, the dataset is a return on equity ROE, which is collected in three companies at time series from 2005 to 2020.

When the variance or the standard deviation is higher, the return on the securities is higher, but the securities are a higher risk and vice versa. The results showed risk levels of stocks that are 2.509%, 0.367%, 3.666% and the corresponding return mean of 38.68%, 23.99% and 14.02%.

The results support the portfolio management policy appropriately. This study identifies issues for managers, investors and readers to consider: have a comprehensive solution among microcosmic policies, finance policy, investment policy and other policies to control and balance the relationship between risks and returns; have appropriate policies to regulate funds to stimulate investment in the long term.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) provided funds to 25 universities in its service region for the establishment of student-managed investment funds (SMIF). The purpose of this paper is to examine the TVA Investment Challenge Program and its implementation at The University of Tennessee at Martin (UTM).

Each university has the freedom to structure the process for students to manage its investment fund as it chooses. This paper provides a description of the overall Investment Challenge Program and the specific Program at UTM.

The Investment Challenge Program is a valuable experiential learning opportunity for finance majors at UTM. Participating students enhance their portfolio management knowledge, their written and oral communication skills, and their employment opportunities.

The paper is limited to TVA Portfolio guidelines and managerial style.

Faculty who supervise similar programs at other universities may be able to replicate some aspects of the program’s design.

The paper describes the TVA Investment Challenge, a unique program of SMIF. TVA provided funds to 25 universities with the stipulation that the student managers adhere to the same guidelines as TVA’s professional money managers. The university is a participant in the Program.

The purpose of this paper is to implement a genetic algorithmic geared toward building an optimized investment portfolio exploring data set from stocks of firms listed on the Nigerian exchange market. To provide a research-driven guide toward portfolio business assessment and implementation for optimal risk-return.

The approach was to formulate the portfolio selection problem as a mathematical programming problem to optimize returns of portfolio; calculated by a Sharpe ratio. A genetic algorithm (GA) is then applied to solve the formulated model. The GA lead to an optimized portfolio, suggesting an effective asset allocation to achieve the optimized returns.

The approach enables an investor to take a calculated risk in selecting and investing in an investment portfolio best minimizes the risks and maximizes returns. The investor can make a sound investment decision based on expected returns suggested from the optimal portfolio.

The data used for the GA model building and implementation GA was limited to stock market prices. Thus, portfolio investment that which to combines another capital market instrument was used.

Investment managers can implement this GA method to solve the usual bottleneck in selecting or determining which stock to advise potential investors to invest in, and also advise on which capital sharing ratio to reduce risk and attain optimal portfolio-mix targeted at achieving an optimal return on investment.

The value proposition of this paper is due to its exhaustiveness in considering the very important measures in the selection of an optimal portfolio such as risk, liquidity ratio, returns, diversification and asset allocation.

This paper investigates how a firm's status moderates the performance of its investment portfolio diversification strategy. We combine the investment diversification literature with the organizational status theory, arguing that status would weaken the benefits of a specialist strategy in their niche industry of investments while strengthening the positive consequences of a generalist strategy across various industries.

We collected our data using the Securities Data Company (SDC) Platinum VentureXpert database. A fixed-effects spline regression analysis for 2,201 US venture capital firms between 1969 and 2016 was used to test for a nonlinear relationship between the level of portfolio diversification and firm performance.

We found that status differences exist in the performance of a specialist strategy but not in that of a generalist strategy. Our results indicate that portfolio specialization in fewer number of industries has little impact on low-status firms, whereas high-status firms suffer significantly lower IPO success rates. In contrast, above-median portfolio diversification was found to be beneficial to both high- and low-status firms.

We specifically identify the impact of status on the performance of investment diversification strategies, an area of research which has received little attention. Further, our findings provide some practical implications for managers making investment decisions between specialist and generalist investment strategies, given their status within the market. Implications for understanding the roles of firm status in portfolio diversification strategies are discussed.

Infrastructure investment is one of the few high-calibre real alternative assets with a strong prominence in the portfolios of institutional investors, especially those with a liability-driven investment strategy. This has seen increased institutional investor interest in infrastructure for reasons such as diversification benefits and inflation hedging abilities, resulting in the substantial growth in non-listed and listed investment products offering access to the infrastructure asset class, and complementing the existing route via direct investment. This paper aims to assess the investment attributes of non-listed infrastructure over Q3:2008–Q2:2019, compared with other global listed assets of infrastructure, property, stocks and bonds.

Quarterly total returns were derived from the valuation-based MSCI global non-listed quarterly infrastructure asset index over Q2:2008–Q:2019, which were then filtered to decrease the valuation smoothing effects. A similar set of returns data was also collected for the other global asset classes. The average annual return, annual risk, risk-adjusted performance and portfolio diversification benefits for non-listed infrastructure and other asset investment classes were then computed and compared. Lastly, a constrained optimal asset allocation analysis was performed to validate the performance enhancement role of global non-listed infrastructure in a mixed-asset investment framework.

Global non-listed infrastructure delivered the strongest average annual total return performance, outperforming the other asset classes and provided investors with total returns that linked strongly with inflation. Global non-listed infrastructure also provided investors with one of the least volatile investment returns because of its ability to ensure predictable total returns delivery. This means that on the Sharpe ratio risk-adjusted return basis, non-listed infrastructure was also the strongest performing asset. This performance was also delivered with significant portfolio diversification benefits with all assets, resulting in non-listed infrastructure contributing to the mixed-asset portfolios across the entire portfolio risk spectrum.

Aside from better risk-return trade-offs, institutional investors are getting more secular with their portfolios for alternative assets that are able to provide other investment benefits such as predictable long-term performance and inflation-linked returns. A further improvement in performance and diversification benefits could be achieved by enriching existing investment portfolios with real alternative assets, one of which is the infrastructure asset class. For institutional investors, having exposure to and being part of the development, delivery and management of infrastructure assets are important, as they are one of the few real assets having considerable significance in the context of society, economy and investment needs.

This is the first research paper that empirically investigates the investment attributes of the non-listed infrastructure at a global level. This research enables empirically validated, more informed and practical decision-making by institutional investors in the infrastructure asset class, especially via the non-listed pathway. The ultimate aim of this paper is to empirically validate the strategic role of non-listed infrastructure as an important alternative asset in the institutional real asset investment space, as well as in the overall portfolio context.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

This paper aims to examine the relation between the proportion of direct investment to US total – direct and portfolio – investment abroad and their country‐specific determinants in developed and developing countries between 1997 and 2005, emphasizing the role of high‐quality accounting standards and corporate governance.

The study covers 46 developed and emerging market countries that are classified into four groups: Advanced, Asian, Central and Eastern European and Latin American. In order to eliminate the adverse effects of possible outliers in some observations on regression results, fixed effect robust regression (RR) techniques were conducted, in addition to fixed effect ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation using panel data.

It was found that the proportion of direct investment to US total investment abroad is strongly and negatively related to both high‐quality accounting standards and effective corporate governance, even after controlling for a number of variables found in previous research to be important: inflation, stock market capitalization, per capita gross domestic product, openness of destination countries’ economies and tax rates.

One major problem in international accounting research is the difficulty in obtaining of data. This problem was encountered in this study, too. Therefore, some emerging market countries are necessarily excluded from the sample.

The main focus is the contributions of accounting standards and corporate governance to explaining tradeoffs between US direct and portfolio investment in developed and developing countries. In this sense, this is – to the authors’ knowledge – the first study in this area.