Subscribe to Our Newsletter



Code:

Joomla : Talis Advisory Servi

Browse by Tag

free lunch jim cramer vanguard green investing finra separately managed account investment philosophy ubs debt behavioral finance return va modern portfolio theory gold whole life milton friedman barron's toxic assets custodian asset allocation new normal wall street journal value fama/french portfolio texas monthly predictions flash crash required minimum distribution wealth preservation chasing performance talis spiva buy and hold active management market timing volatility scott maxwell currency hedging deficit blaine lourd robert merton larry kudlow wealth management index insurance index funds real estate investment trust quarterly investment review brent everett real estate hedge funds survey eugene fama be your own bank finra dodd-frank erisa risk tolerance disability insurance tax fee only life insurance joel greenblatt michael lewis capm fees philanthropy exchange traded fund sustainability erisa capital markets ira morningstar small cap ken heebner dividends strategic asset allocation william sharpe david booth bill miller sec economy life settlements bonds banz fiduciary rebalancing fund flow advisor fund selection financial press d magazine s&p 500 passive management gordon murray the investment answer lost decade stocks broker diversification retirement planning infinite banking asset class benchmarks unified managed account sovereign debt dave ramsey liquidity risk wall street interest rates emerging markets 401(k) passive management dalbar ken french backtesting recession dfa circle of wealth active management efficiency fiduciary exchange traded note savings fees registered investment advisor disclosure credit risk roubini risk sharpe ratio top wealth manager charitable giving mutual funds form adv mutual funds planning inflation



Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

facebook twitter

Advisor Blog

Subscribe to feed Viewing entries tagged capm

Risk and Return - Are They Always Related?

Posted by Brent Everett
Brent Everett
Brent Everett founded Profisys, LLC, a fee-only Registered Investment Advisor, in 1998. While acting as Manag...
User is currently offline
on Thursday, October 28, 2010
in Unconventional Wisdom · 0 Comments

It is axiomatic in the world of financial economics that, in capital markets, risk and return are always related.  In fact, you will often hear that in order to create a portfolio with a higher expected rate of return, one must take additional risk.  One of my friends, who is also a client, recently told me that this seemingly obvious statement is very confusing to a lot of people.  He asked me how this could be true when a comparing a poorly diversified portfolio with a well diversified one.  And, he has a point.

The statement assumes that idiosyncratic risk in the portfolio has already been diversified away.  After that, adding to expected return requires taking more market risk.  Understanding the difference between indiosyncratic (or non-systematic) risk and market (or systematic) risk is critical to understanding this concept.  And, unless you've taken some finance courses or you're a portfolio manager (not a product salesman at a brokerage firm), you may not fully understand this.

Idiosycnratic, or non-systematic risk is risk that can be diversified away in a portfolio.  This is risk associated with individual assets.  An example would be company risk associated with an individual stock position (think Enron, for example).  If you hold just a few stocks in your portfolio, this is very signficant.  If you hold a few thousand stocks, it is so insignificant that it's close to zero.  It has been "diversified away".  The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) for which Sharpe won the Nobel Prize tells us that investors are not compensated for taking diversifiable (idiosyncratic or non-systematic) risk.  In other words, investors are only compensated for bearing market risk.

Market risk is risk that cannot be diversified away.  Rational investors eliminate all diversifiable risk for which they should not expect to be compensated.  Now, we can examine the statement that higher expected returns require taking additional risk.  The assumption is that diversifiable risk has been taken out of the equation.  Thus, tilting a portfolio toward riskier asset classes like small cap or value stocks increases the expected rate of return.  Likewise, adding less risky assets such as bonds, to the portfolio will reduce the expected rate of return.  Of course, this also reduces the overall risk in the portfolio and is used to adjust the level of portfolio risk to a level that is suitable for a client's risk tolerance, capacity, and time horizon.

The concept is better explained by the statement that, in a properly diversified portfolio, additional expected return can only be achieved by taking additional market risk.