Tag Archives: author

AQR On Evaluating Defensive Long/Short Strategies

By DailyAlts Staff Heightened market volatility has many equity investors contemplating a move to defense. But in this environment, are defensive stocks too expensive to work? This is the question considered by AQR Principals Antii Ilmanen and Lars Nielsen and Vice President Swati Chandra in the November white paper Are Defensive Stocks Expensive? A Closer Look at Value Spreads . Value Spreads The paper’s authors begin by explaining the concept of value spreads: “Value” quantifies the “cheapness” of a long-only asset “relative to a fundamental anchor.” For a long/short style factor such as “defensive,” value spreads can be measured by comparing the value of the long portfolio (the most “defensive” stocks) to the value of the short portfolio (the least “defensive” stocks). When the style grows cheaper, the value spread “widens” – when the style becomes more expensive, the value spread “narrows.” Valuation and Strategies It only makes sense that a wide value spread is preferable to a narrow one, since a wide spread will (presumably) have the tendency to revert back to the mean, thereby “narrowing” and becoming more expensive (i.e., outperforming); while a historically narrow spread is more likely to “widen” and get “cheaper” (i.e., underperforming). AQR’s Cliff Asness and others have published research indicating that “over medium-term horizons, the future return on value-minus-growth stock selection strategies is higher when the value spread is wider than normal.” But Messrs, Ilmanen and Nielsen and Ms. Chandra argue that “valuations may have limited efficacy in predicting strategy returns” – strategy returns as opposed to asset returns. The authors highlight the “puzzling” case in which a defensive long/short strategy performed well during a recent two-year period when its value spread “normalized from abnormally rich levels.” They conclude that the relationship between valuation and performance – strong for most asset classes – is weaker for long/short factor portfolios. Wedging Mechanisms Buying a “rich” investment, seeing it cheapen, and yet still making money – how is this possible? Ilmanen et al. cite the following “wedge mechanisms” that allow the managers of long/short factor portfolios to loosen the “presumed strong link” between value spread changes and returns: Changing fundamentals Evolving positions Carry Beta mismatches Fundamentals May be Offsetting The efficacy of value spreads in predicting returns relies on the assumption that changes in valuations are primarily driven by prices, so that an asset or portfolio that becomes more expensive necessarily appreciates in price. This assumption, combined with the assumption that value spreads will always mean-revert, make the case that wide spreads are preferable to narrow ones. But valuation measures always compare price to a fundamental factor , and improving or deteriorating fundamentals – more than just price – can loosen the links between valuation and performance. Evolving Positions Portfolio returns are based on the price appreciation and “carry” of the portfolio’s holdings, as they evolve , but value spreads only consider the portfolio’s current holdings. Thus, the link between valuation and performance is therefore weakest for the most actively traded, fastest-evolving portfolios. Carry Returns Value spreads look entirely at prices, but portfolio returns are the sum of changes in price and portfolio income – i.e., dividends and interest. Portfolios that derive a greater-than-average percentage of their total returns from so-called “carry returns” will thus naturally have a weaker link between valuation and performance than portfolios that derive their returns more primarily through price changes alone. Misaligned Betas In AQR’s study, this final “wedge” had the most impact: Since the value spread will generally have a net non-zero beta, while a long/short portfolio may target beta-neutrality, the value spread could indicate cheapening or richening driven by its beta to the market, while a long/short portfolio designed for beta-neutrality won’t fluctuate with the market. Conclusion So are defensive stocks expensive right now? The authors give a concise answer to that question: “Yes, mildly, taking a 20-year perspective.” But as the “Tech Bubble” proved, mispricing can persist for a long time. The important thing, in the view of the paper’s authors, is for investors to be cognizant of the mechanics of value spreads and spread design choices.

From Overbought To Neutral: U.S. Index And Style ETFs

After two days of declines to start the week, just one of the U.S. equity index and style ETFs that we track in our daily ETF Trends report remains in overbought territory. One week ago, only one ETF was NOT overbought. You can see the “mean reversion” trade that has occurred in our trading range screen below. If you’ve never seen this screen from Bespoke before, please refer to the “Trading Range” description at the very bottom of this post. (click to enlarge)

How A Magic Goldfish Might Short The Stock Market

Summary US equities look wobbly. Buying downside protection is in vogue. Skew is high. Let’s put it to use. Put on your contrarian boots Market participants are wired to cheer for bull markets. Anyone even marginally attached to the finance industry knows what I mean. Every trading floor has a guy with his hair on fire. He is screaming about an imminent collapse in the stock market. He spends his days reading David Stockman’s blog and cruising Zerohedge. Sometimes he mumbles things about an electromagnetic pulse. The marketing department spends at least three hours of every day thinking up ways to get him fired. Nobody likes that guy. Not even me. (Despite my affinity for Mr. Stockman. And let’s be honest, who doesn’t like themselves some good Zerohedge?) Anyway, markets are structurally wired to be long only. Bears have been earning themselves a bad rap since 2009. Here is a fun trick that you can use to avoid ridicule while showing your bearish side. Just call it “Portfolio Protection” One reasonable way to play the trick is to buy put options. Sometimes people ask me to teach them things about options. I start by warning them about the dangers of being a goldfish. It is my adaptation of the 10th Man’s explanation for why efficient market theory is nonsense . Goldfish have crappy memories. They probably don’t spend much time thinking about the future either. When the goldfish gets to the future, it doesn’t think about how it got there. The goldfish is just living in the moment. Think about that if you are using charts like this to analyze an options trade. This is what I call a “goldfish chart.” It is a slice of what the goldfish’s wallet might look like when the option expires. On expiration date, you could ask the goldfish how it got there. It’ll shrug and say something like, “I don’t care.” Don’t be a goldfish I mean, you are probably not a goldfish. You spend a fair amount of your time thinking about your portfolio. You probably care about what your profit and loss will be tomorrow. You certainly care what it will look like when you retire. You pretty much continuously care about your portfolio performance. Goldfish charts narrow your focus onto some arbitrary date called “expiration.” That’s dumb. Much to do about skew While going through the morning routine here, I came across this little gem entitled “Who’s the Bear Driving Up the Price of U.S. Stock Options? Banks” All it really says is that the implied volatility curve is highly skewed. But that sounds like rocket science. So, the author did a really nice job breaking it down. If you want to buy a put to protect against losses in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, often you’ll pay twice as much as you would for a bullish call betting on gains. Get it? There are a lot of market participants with their hair on fire. They are bidding up high prices on out of the money put options. Portfolio protection is getting expensive. Let’s create a synthetic security! Sounds like fun, right? There is some magic math we could do to create something that looks a lot like buying a put option on the S&P 500 (NYSEARCA: SPY ). [Long Put] = [Short Put] + [Long Call] + [Short Stock] Let’s not think about it too much. Just take my word for it. To a goldfish, the combination of things on the right of the equals sign (the “Synthetic Put”) looks a lot like the thing on the left of the equals sign (just a normal put). Remember when that guy at Bloomberg said that buying puts cost twice as much as buying calls? Take another look at that synthetic put. [Short Put] + [Long Call] + [Short Stock] The goldfish wants to buy a put. But puts are expensive. So instead, the goldfish sells an expensive put and buys a cheap call. Short some stock and… Voilà! That my friends is magic math. How a magic goldfish might short the stock market Let’s do some magic goldfish math. We would like to buy an SPY put with a 204 strike and a March expiration. The market is asking $7.90 for that at the moment. Here is the goldfish chart again. We could just buy the overpriced put for $7.90, but that’s dumb. Let’s build a better mousetrap. We sell a 173 strike SPY put for $1.30. Then we buy two 210 call options for $4.58 each. Adding those things up we have paid $7.86 in net. Then we short 200 shares. Here is what the synthetic looks like compared to the at the money put. That is magic charting! At about the same price we are getting much more protection. How can this be? I have a couple of theories. Maybe three theories. One is that the market is structurally wired to trade long only. The typical market participant doesn’t have a margin account with permissions to go out selling put options and shorting stocks. But the banks do. Why don’t the banks jump in and arbitrage this? I have a theory for that too… First, this is not really “arbitrage.” The synthetic is very short skew. That doesn’t matter much to a goldfish, but it matters a lot to a hedge fund, or a bank, or someone like them. It should matter to you too! You’re not a goldfish. Second, if you are a bank, you are probably going to have a hard time explaining to Mr. Dodd or Mr. Frank what you are doing. Try telling a politician you want to add downside protection by selling a put and buying a call. It sounds a little bit like bullish speculation. The politician is not going to be interested in your magic math. The trade Anyone considering buying portfolio protection should be looking at a synthetic put. Skew is high. It could go higher. There are some other risks. Like, the market is not giving me an early Christmas present. Still, it feels like I would be sufficiently compensated for going short skew. Maybe you will feel like that too. But don’t go out creating synthetic securities just because a stupid chart looks attractive. Don’t be a goldfish.