Classical and behavioral finance are often seen as being at odds, but the idea of “popularity” has been introduced as a way of reconciling the two approaches. Investors like or dislike various characteristics of securities for rational reasons (as in classical finance) or irrational reasons (as in behavioral finance), which makes the assets popular or unpopular. In the capital markets, popular (unpopular) securities trade at prices that are higher (lower) than they would be otherwise; hence, the shares may provide lower (higher) expected returns.This book builds on this idea and expands it in two major ways. First, it introduces a rigorous asset pricing model, the popularity asset pricing model (PAPM), which adds investor preferences for security characteristics other than the risk and expected return that are part of the capital asset pricing model. A major conclusion of the PAPM is that the expected return of any security is a linear function of not only its systematic risk (beta) but also of all security characteristics that investors care about. The other major contribution of the book is new empirical work that, while confirming the well-known premiums (such as size, value, and liquidity) in a popularity context, supports the popularity hypothesis on the basis of portfolios of stocks based on such characteristics as brand value, sustainable competitive advantage, and reputation. Popularity unifies the factors that affect price in classical finance with those that drive price in behavioral finance, thus creating a unifying theory or bridge between classical and behavioral finance.
Behavioral finance presented in this book is the second-generation of behavioral finance. The first generation, starting in the early 1980s, largely accepted standard finance’s notion of people’s wants as “rational” wants—restricted to the utilitarian benefits of high returns and low risk. That first generation commonly described people as “irrational”—succumbing to cognitive and emotional errors and misled on their way to their rational wants. The second generation describes people as normal. It begins by acknowledging the full range of people’s normal wants and their benefits—utilitarian, expressive, and emotional—distinguishes normal wants from errors, and offers guidance on using shortcuts and avoiding errors on the way to satisfying normal wants. People’s normal wants include financial security, nurturing children and families, gaining high social status, and staying true to values. People’s normal wants, even more than their cognitive and emotional shortcuts and errors, underlie answers to important questions of finance, including saving and spending, portfolio construction, asset pricing, and market efficiency.
Research Foundation Review 2019 presents the offerings from CFA Institute Research Foundation during 2019. We start with an overview, summarize the year's output, and end with other relevant material, such as awards and recognition.
Through detailed discussion of the central principles of behavioral finance, this enlightening Advanced Introduction provides a balanced exploration of the broad issues within the field. Chapters explain the continuous development of the discipline and provide a useful differentiation between behavioral finance and standard finance.
Governance is a word that is increasingly heard and read in modern times, be it corporate governance, global governance, or investment governance. Investment governance, the central concern of this modest volume, refers to the effective employment of resources—people, policies, processes, and systems—by an individual or governing body (the fiduciary or agent) seeking to fulfil their fiduciary duty to a principal (or beneficiary) in addressing an underlying investment challenge. Effective investment governance is an enabler of good stewardship, and for this reason it should, in our view, be of interest to all fiduciaries, no matter the size of the pool of assets or the nature of the beneficiaries. To emphasize the importance of effective investment governance and to demonstrate its flexibility across organization type, we consider our investment governance process within three contexts: defined contribution (DC) plans, defined benefit (DB) plans, and endowments and foundations (E&Fs). Since the financial crisis of 2007–2008, the financial sector’s place in the economy and its methods and ethics have (rightly, in many cases) been under scrutiny. Coupled with this theme, the task of investment governance is of increasing importance due to the sheer weight of money, the retirement savings gap, demographic trends, regulation and activism, and rising standards of behavior based on higher expectations from those fiduciaries serve. These trends are at the same time related and self-reinforcing. Having explored the why of investment governance, we dedicate the remainder of the book to the question of how to bring it to bear as an essential component of good fiduciary practice. At this point, the reader might expect investment professionals to launch into a discussion about an investment process focused on the best way to capture returns. We resist this temptation. Instead, we contend that achieving outcomes on behalf of beneficiaries is as much about managing risks as it is about capturing returns—and we mean “risks” broadly construed, not just fluctuations in asset values.
In 2001, Martin Leibowitz organized an Equity Risk Premium (ERP) Forum for CFA Institute, in which the participants discussed issues related to the ERP and made estimates for the future. This forum was repeated by Leibowitz, Brett Hammond, and Laurence Siegel in 2011, setting a precedent for a decennial forum. Siegel organized and moderated the discussion in 2021, and the proceedings from that event make up the current book. The participants in 2021 were (in alphabetical order) Robert Arnott, Clifford Asness, Mary Ida Compton, Elroy Dimson, William Goetzmann, Roger Ibbotson, Antti Ilmanen, Martin Leibowitz, Rajnish Mehra, Thomas Philips, and Jeremy Siegel. Each participant made a presentation, which was then discussed by the whole group. Finally, a roundtable discussion involving all of the participants was moderated by Laurence Siegel. Ibbotson and Dimson discussed historical returns in different countries. Ibbotson focused on the United States, while Dimson took a global industrial-country view. The history goes back almost a century (Ibbotson) or more than a century (Dimson), providing a look at how returns have evolved over a wide variety of conditions. Ibbotson also presented his method for making probabilistic forecasts of returns. Dimson, who is British, showed that “American exceptionalism” is one way to understand the results. Asness looked at the effectiveness of Robert Shiller’s CAPE (cyclically adjusted price-earnings ratio) valuation measure for forecasting. Valuations rose over the period he studied, and a lively discussion was had about why this may have occurred. Arnott focused on the growth rate of dividends, which has been very slow in per-share terms, and argued (with much debate from the other participants) that buybacks are only a partial substitute for dividends. Leibowitz, also looking at valuation as the lodestone of return forecasts, set forth a “growth adjustment” that brought his forecast in line with those made by others. Compton, a consultant to pension plans, discussed the challenges of communicating lower expected returns to clients. She also emphasized that expected returns “don’t always come true,” they’re just someone’s best forecast. Ilmanen broke up the expected return into its component parts: dividends, real growth, inflation, and so forth. Doing this, he said, allows one to debate the estimates for each part and ascertain how accurate each of the estimates is. Philips started by presenting a method for forecasting bond returns. He then turned to equities, for which he compared forecasts with subsequent realizations using a variety of forecast methods. Mehra discussed a number of issues related to the existence of premiums (equity risk, value, small cap, and so forth) and concluded that, although some of these are unstable, the ERP is highly stable. Jeremy Siegel advocated a “back to basics” approach using dividend and earnings yields, dividend and earnings growth rates, payout ratios, and price-to-earnings ratios. He emphasized that earnings can be calculated in a number of different way, and said that accounting practices have become more conservative over the years. Goetzmann concluded the session by reporting that one company, a water mill in France, had almost 600 years of historical return data and that an asset pricing model could be tested using those data. According to this model, the stock price is the present value of expected future dividends and is supported by the evidence. In sum, because of high valuations and low interest rates, the participants expect lower total returns in the future than in the past. A forward-looking ERP of 4% to 5% was the consensus of the group.
The Research Foundation Review 2018 summarizes the offerings from the CFA Institute Research Foundation over the past year—books, literature reviews, workshop presentations, and other relevant material.
Emotional behavior and biases run throughout financial markets. This is the diagnosis of behavioral finance. But it is not enough to know that investors make biased decisions. What do we do about it? How do we move beyond diagnosis, to prescription? In this groundbreaking new book, investing and behavioural finance experts Thomas Howard and Jason A. Voss plug this void and show the new way ahead for investment managers and advisors. Return of the Active Manager provides a set of tools for investment professionals to overcome and take advantage of behavioral biases. Across seven compelling chapters, Return of the Active Manager details actionable advice on topics such as behaviourally-enhanced fundamental analysis, active equity fund evaluation and selection, harnessing big data, and investment firm structure. You learn how to exploit behavioural price distortions, how to recognise and avoid behavioural biases (in both yourself and clients), how to extract behavioral insights from the executives of prospective investments, and how manager behaviour can be used to predict future fund performance. An indispensable tool, Return of the Active Manager rationalises the financial markets and prescribes actionable strategies that build on the lessons of behavioural finance.
CFA Institute Research Foundation is honored and delighted to present these insights from 25 years of Vertin Award recipients. These legends of the investment industry range in stature from Nobel Prize winners to billionaire hedge fund managers, from distinguished professors of finance who have shaped thousands of young minds to editors of prestigious academic journals and authors of some of the most popular investment books ever published. Although their backgrounds vary widely, they hold one thing in common: They all made substantial lifetime contributions to the field of investments. In this publication, these investment luminaries share: Their proudest accomplishments The most influential investment publications they have written and read The critical investment lessons they have learned Their expectations for the future Any professional regrets they may have had In a longer summary section, the Vertin Award winners discuss in more detail what has been most important to their professional and personal success and may be important to you and your career. The publication contains forewords from CFA Institute CEO Marg Franklin, CFA, Managing Director of Research, Advocacy, and Standards Paul Andrews, and Research Foundation Chair Joanne Hill. There are also testimonials about the importance of these investment legends from various charterholders, CFA candidates, and members of the Research Foundation. An introduction by the editor and Executive Director of the Research Foundation, Bud Haslett, CFA, describes how this publication evolved and why it is essential. Suggestions on how you can best learn from the Vertin Award winners’ insights are provided as a convenient index section so you can easily compare the various recipients’ responses to specific questions.
