صفحه 1:
صفحه 2:
multi-index models and averaging
techniques
= Multi-index models are an attempt to capture some of the
nonmarket influences that cause securities to move together. The
search for nonmarket influences is a search for a set of economic
factors or structural groups (industries) that account for common
movement in stock prices beyond that accounted for by the market
index itself. Although it is easy to find a set of indexes that is
associated with nonmarket effects over any period of time, as we
will see, it is quite another matter to find a set that is successful in
predicting covariances that are not market related.
Averaging techniques are at the opposite end of the spectrum from
multi-index models. Multi-index models introduce extra indexes in
the hope of capturing additional information. The cost of ۱
introducing additional indexes is the chance that they are picking
up random noise rather than real influences. Averaging techniques
smooth the entries in the historical correlation matrix in an attempt
to 0 out” random noise and so produce better forecasts. The
potential disadvantage of averaging models is that real information
may be lost in the averaging process
صفحه 3:
General Multi-index Models
Any additional sources of covariance among securities can
be introduced into the equations for risk and return simply
by adding these additional influences to the general return
equation. Let us hypothesize that the return on any stock
is a function of the return on the market, changes in the
level of interest rates, and a set of industry indexes.
صفحه 4:
This model can also be used if analysts supply estimates of the expected return for
each stock, the variance of each stock’s returns, each index loading (bik between each
stock i and each index k), and the means and variances of each index. This is the same
number of inputs (2N 2L LN). However, the inputs are in more familiar terms. As
discussed at several points in this book, the inputs needed to perform portfolio analysis
are expected returns, variances, and correlation coefficients. By having the analysts
estimate means and variances directly, it is clear that the only input derived from the
estimates of the multiindex models is correlation coefficients. We stress this point
because later in this chapter, we evaluate the ability of a multi-index model to aid in
the selection of securities by examining its ability to forecast correlation coefficients.
There is a certain type of multi-index model that has received a large amount of
attention. This class of models restricts attention to market and industry influences.
Alternative industry index models result from different assumptions about the behavior
of returns and, hence, differ in the type and amount of input data needed. We now
examine these models
صفحه 5:
Industry Index Models
Several authors have dealt with multi-index models that start with
the basic single-index model and add indexes to capture industry
effects. The early precedent for this work can be found in King
(1966), who measured effects of common movement between
securities beyond market effects and found that this extra market
covariance was associated with industries. For example, two steel
stocks had positive correlation between their returns, even after the
effects of the market had been removed
صفحه 6:
The assumption behind this model is that a firm’s return can be affected by the market
plus several industries. For some companies this seems appropriate as their lines of
business span several traditional industries. However, some companies gain the bulk of
their return from activities in one industry and, perhaps of more importance, are viewed
by investors as members of a particular industry. In this case, the effects on the firm’s
return of indexes for industries to which they do not belong are likely to be small, and
their inclusion may introduce more random noise into the process than the information
they supply. This has prompted some authors to advocate a simpler form of the multi-
index model: one that assumes that returns of each firm are affected only by a market
index and one industry index. Furthermore, the model assumes that each industry
index has been constructed to be uncorrelated with the market and with all other
industry indexes
صفحه 7:
AVERAGE CORRELATION MODELS
The idea of averaging (smoothing) some of the data in the historical
correlation matrix as a forecast of the future has been tested by
Elton and Gruber (1973) and Elton, Gruber, and Urich (1978). The
most aggregate type of averaging that can be done is to use the
average of all pairwise correlation coefficients over some past
period as a forecast of each pairwise correlation coefficient for the
future. This is equivalent to the assumption that the past correlation
matrix contains information about what the average correlation will
be in the future but no information about individual differences from
this average. This model can be thought of as a naive model against
which more elaborate models should be judged. We refer to this
model as the overall mean model
صفحه 8:
A more disaggregate averaging model would be to assume that there was a common
mean correlation within and among groups of stocks. For example, if we were to
employ the idea of traditional industries as a method of grouping, we would assume
that the correlation between any two steel stocks was the same as the correlation
between any other two steel stocks and was equal to the average historical correlation
among steel stocks. The averaging is done across all pairwise correlations among steel
stocks in a historical period. Similarly, the correlation among any steel stocks and any
chemical stocks is assumed to be equal to the correlation between any other steel
stock and any other chemical stock and is set equal to the average of the correlations
between each chemical and each steel stock. When this is done, with respect to
traditional industry classifications, it will be referred to as the traditional mean model.
The same technique has been used by Elton and Gruber (1973) with respect to pseudo-
industries.
صفحه 9:
FUNDAMENTAL MULTI-INDEX MODELS
Two types of fundamental multi-index models have received a great
deal of attention in the academic and practitioner literature. One set
of models stems from the work of Fama and French (1993). The
other stems from the work of Chen, Roll, and Ross (1986).
صفحه 10:
Reasoning that both are proxies for risk, they found
(in multivariate tests) that a cross section of
average returns is negatively related to size and
positively related to book to market ratios. In heen
simple terms, small firms and firms with low book ی
to market are riskier than other firms, do they
incorporate these variables into a multi-index time
series model of returns? Components of the series,
such as the book value of equity, are reported at
most four times a year. For time series tests, we
need at least monthly observations. Fama and
French formulated three indexes to explain the
difference between the return on any stock and the
riskless rate of interest (30-day Treasury bill rate).
The concept behind the size and book to market
indexes is to form portfolios that will have returns
that mimic the impact of the variables. By forming
portfolios that have observable monthly returns,
Fama and French convert a set of variables that ی
cannot be observed at frequent intervals into a set ی نوی
of traded assets that have prices and returns that
can be observed at any moment of time and over
any interval.
صفحه 11:
Chen, Roll, and Ross hypothesized a broad set of
influences that could affect security returns. Their
work is based on two concepts. The first is that the
value of a share of stock is equal to the present heen
value of future cash flows to the equity holder. Tanta ne
Thus an influence that affects either the size of
future cash flows or the function (discount rates)
used to value cash flows impacts price. Once a set
of variables that affects prices is identified, their
second concept comes into play. They argue that
because current beliefs about these variables are
incorporated in price, only innovations or
unexpected changes in these variables can affect
return. In a series of articles, Burmeister, McElroy, Chen Roll and
and others (1986, 1987, 1988) have continued the ۳ i
development of a multi-index model building on Ross Model
the work of Chen, Roll, and Ross. They find that
five variables are sufficient to describe security
returns. They employ two variables that are related gee 4
to the discount rate used to find the present value و8 laid the groundwork for many
of cash flows, one related to both the size of the
cash flows and discount rates, one related only to
cash flows, and a remaining variable that captures
صفحه 12:
CONCLUSION
THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF SUCH MODELS. THUS WE CANNOT
eee aa eee CM Mala See UL oa es
TO SINGLE-INDEX MODELS. MANY OF THE RESULTS ARE PROMISING. THIS
PROBABLY DOES NOT SURPRISE THE READER. WHAT SURPRISES MOST
STUDENTS IS THE ABILITY OF SIMPLE MODELS, SUCH AS THE SINGLE-
INDEX MODEL AND OVERALL MEAN, TO OUTPERFORM MORE COMPLEX
MODELS IN MANY TESTS. ALTHOUGH COMPLEX MODELS BETTER
DESCRIBE THE HISTORICAL CORRELATION, THEY OFTEN CONTAIN MORE
NOISE THAN INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO PREDICTION. THERE IS
STILL A GREAT DEAL OF WORK TO BE DONE BEFORE COMPLICATED
MODELS CONSISTENTLY OUTPERFORM SIMPLER ONES.
The Correlation
Structure of
Security
Returns—MultiIndex
Models and
Grouping
Techniques
multi-index models and averaging
techniques
▪ Multi-index models are an attempt to capture some of the
nonmarket influences that cause securities to move together. The
search for nonmarket influences is a search for a set of economic
factors or structural groups (industries) that account for common
movement in stock prices beyond that accounted for by the market
index itself. Although it is easy to find a set of indexes that is
associated with nonmarket effects over any period of time, as we
will see, it is quite another matter to find a set that is successful in
predicting covariances that are not market related.
▪ Averaging techniques are at the opposite end of the spectrum from
multi-index models. Multi-index models introduce extra indexes in
the hope of capturing additional information. The cost of
introducing additional indexes is the chance that they are picking
up random noise rather than real influences. Averaging techniques
smooth the entries in the historical correlation matrix in an attempt
to “damp out” random noise and so produce better forecasts. The
potential disadvantage of averaging models is that real information
may be lost in the averaging process
General Multi-index Models
Any additional sources of covariance among securities can
be introduced into the equations for risk and return simply
by adding these additional influences to the general return
equation. Let us hypothesize that the return on any stock
is a function of the return on the market, changes in the
level of interest rates, and a set of industry indexes.
This model can also be used if analysts supply estimates of the expected return for
each stock, the variance of each stock’s returns, each index loading (bik between each
stock i and each index k), and the means and variances of each index. This is the same
number of inputs (2N 2L LN). However, the inputs are in more familiar terms. As
discussed at several points in this book, the inputs needed to perform portfolio analysis
are expected returns, variances, and correlation coefficients. By having the analysts
estimate means and variances directly, it is clear that the only input derived from the
estimates of the multiindex models is correlation coefficients. We stress this point
because later in this chapter, we evaluate the ability of a multi-index model to aid in
the selection of securities by examining its ability to forecast correlation coefficients.
There is a certain type of multi-index model that has received a large amount of
attention. This class of models restricts attention to market and industry influences.
Alternative industry index models result from different assumptions about the behavior
of returns and, hence, differ in the type and amount of input data needed. We now
examine these models
Industry Index Models
Several authors have dealt with multi-index models that start with
the basic single-index model and add indexes to capture industry
effects. The early precedent for this work can be found in King
(1966), who measured effects of common movement between
securities beyond market effects and found that this extra market
covariance was associated with industries. For example, two steel
stocks had positive correlation between their returns, even after the
effects of the market had been removed
The assumption behind this model is that a firm’s return can be affected by the market
plus several industries. For some companies this seems appropriate as their lines of
business span several traditional industries. However, some companies gain the bulk of
their return from activities in one industry and, perhaps of more importance, are viewed
by investors as members of a particular industry. In this case, the effects on the firm’s
return of indexes for industries to which they do not belong are likely to be small, and
their inclusion may introduce more random noise into the process than the information
they supply. This has prompted some authors to advocate a simpler form of the multiindex model: one that assumes that returns of each firm are affected only by a market
index and one industry index. Furthermore, the model assumes that each industry
index has been constructed to be uncorrelated with the market and with all other
industry indexes
AVERAGE CORRELATION MODELS
The idea of averaging (smoothing) some of the data in the historical
correlation matrix as a forecast of the future has been tested by
Elton and Gruber (1973) and Elton, Gruber, and Urich (1978). The
most aggregate type of averaging that can be done is to use the
average of all pairwise correlation coefficients over some past
period as a forecast of each pairwise correlation coefficient for the
future. This is equivalent to the assumption that the past correlation
matrix contains information about what the average correlation will
be in the future but no information about individual differences from
this average. This model can be thought of as a naive model against
which more elaborate models should be judged. We refer to this
model as the overall mean model
A more disaggregate averaging model would be to assume that there was a common
mean correlation within and among groups of stocks. For example, if we were to
employ the idea of traditional industries as a method of grouping, we would assume
that the correlation between any two steel stocks was the same as the correlation
between any other two steel stocks and was equal to the average historical correlation
among steel stocks. The averaging is done across all pairwise correlations among steel
stocks in a historical period. Similarly, the correlation among any steel stocks and any
chemical stocks is assumed to be equal to the correlation between any other steel
stock and any other chemical stock and is set equal to the average of the correlations
between each chemical and each steel stock. When this is done, with respect to
traditional industry classifications, it will be referred to as the traditional mean model.
The same technique has been used by Elton and Gruber (1973) with respect to pseudoindustries.
FUNDAMENTAL MULTI-INDEX MODELS
Two types of fundamental multi-index models have received a great
deal of attention in the academic and practitioner literature. One set
of models stems from the work of Fama and French (1993). The
other stems from the work of Chen, Roll, and Ross (1986).
Reasoning that both are proxies for risk, they found
(in multivariate tests) that a cross section of
average returns is negatively related to size and
positively related to book to market ratios. In
simple terms, small firms and firms with low book
to market are riskier than other firms, do they
incorporate these variables into a multi-index time
series model of returns? Components of the series,
such as the book value of equity, are reported at
most four times a year. For time series tests, we
need at least monthly observations. Fama and
French formulated three indexes to explain the
difference between the return on any stock and the
riskless rate of interest (30-day Treasury bill rate).
The concept behind the size and book to market
indexes is to form portfolios that will have returns
that mimic the impact of the variables. By forming
portfolios that have observable monthly returns,
Fama and French convert a set of variables that
cannot be observed at frequent intervals into a set
of traded assets that have prices and returns that
can be observed at any moment of time and over
any interval.
Fama–French
Models
Fama and French laid the basis for a multi-index
model based on firm characteristics in a series
of articles published in the early 1990s. They
found that both size (market capitalization) and
the ratio of book value of equity to the market
value of equity have a strong role in determining
the cross section of average return on common
stocks
Chen, Roll, and Ross hypothesized a broad set of
influences that could affect security returns. Their
work is based on two concepts. The first is that the
value of a share of stock is equal to the present
value of future cash flows to the equity holder.
Thus an influence that affects either the size of
future cash flows or the function (discount rates)
used to value cash flows impacts price. Once a set
of variables that affects prices is identified, their
second concept comes into play. They argue that
because current beliefs about these variables are
incorporated in price, only innovations or
unexpected changes in these variables can affect
return. In a series of articles, Burmeister, McElroy,
and others (1986, 1987, 1988) have continued the
development of a multi-index model building on
the work of Chen, Roll, and Ross. They find that
five variables are sufficient to describe security
returns. They employ two variables that are related
to the discount rate used to find the present value
of cash flows, one related to both the size of the
cash flows and discount rates, one related only to
cash flows, and a remaining variable that captures
Chen, Roll, and
Ross Model
The second group of fundamental multi-index
models of stock returns was published by Chen,
Roll, and Ross (1986). Although the purpose of
their article was to explain equilibrium returns (a
subject we discuss at great length in Chapter
16), their analysis laid the groundwork for many
of the models that were to follow
CONCLUSION
THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF SUCH MODELS. THUS WE CANNOT
GIVE DEFINITIVE ANSWERS CONCERNING THEIR PERFORMANCE RELATIVE
TO SINGLE-INDEX MODELS. MANY OF THE RESULTS ARE PROMISING. THIS
PROBABLY DOES NOT SURPRISE THE READER. WHAT SURPRISES MOST
STUDENTS IS THE ABILITY OF SIMPLE MODELS, SUCH AS THE SINGLEINDEX MODEL AND OVERALL MEAN, TO OUTPERFORM MORE COMPLEX
MODELS IN MANY TESTS. ALTHOUGH COMPLEX MODELS BETTER
DESCRIBE THE HISTORICAL CORRELATION, THEY OFTEN CONTAIN MORE
NOISE THAN INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO PREDICTION. THERE IS
STILL A GREAT DEAL OF WORK TO BE DONE BEFORE COMPLICATED
MODELS CONSISTENTLY OUTPERFORM SIMPLER ONES.