LO 65.4: Describe the unsmoothing of returns and its properties.

LO 65.4: Describe the unsmoothing of returns and its properties.
In general, investors should be skeptical of reported returns in illiquid asset markets. The reason is that reported returns are generally overstated. There are reporting biases that result in inflated returns. Three main biases that impact returns of illiquid assets are:

Survivorship bias. Selection bias. Infrequent trading.
Survivorship Bias
There are no requirements for certain types of funds (e.g., private equity, hedge funds, buyout funds, and so on) to report returns to database providers. As such, poorly perform- ing funds have a tendency to stop reporting. Additionally, funds may never begin reporting because returns are not high enough to appeal to investors. This results in reporting biases. In addition, many poorly performing funds ultimately fail. Performance studies generally include only those funds that were successful enough to survive over the entire period of
2018 Kaplan, Inc.
Page 49
Topic 65 Cross Reference to GARP Assigned Reading – Ang, Chapter 13
analysis, leaving out the returns of funds that no longer exist. Both of these factors result in reported returns that are too high. This is called survivorship bias. Non-surviving funds have below average returns and surviving funds have above average returns, but it is the sur- viving fund returns that are reported. Studies show mutual fund returns are 1% to 2% low- er than reported and returns may be as much as 4% lower for illiquid asset markets. While the solution to survivorship bias seems obvious (to observe the entire universe of funds), it is impossible to do in illiquid asset markets.
Sample Selection Bias
Asset values and returns tend to be reported when they are high. For example, houses and office buildings typically are sold when values are high. Often, a seller will wait until property values recover before selling. These higher selling prices are then used to calculate returns. This results in sample selection bias.
The problem with selection bias is especially prevalent in private equity markets. Buyout funds take companies public when stock prices are high. Venture capitalists sell companies when values are high. Distressed companies are often not liquidated and left as shell companies (these are sometimes called zombie companies). It is difficult to tell, based on old data without any recent transactions, if a company is alive or whether it is a zombie.
Impacts of sample selection bias include:

Higher reported alphas relative to true alphas because only high prices are recorded. For example, one study estimates an alpha of more than 90% for venture capital log returns. However, alpha falls to 7% after correcting for sample selection bias. .Another study estimates returns are decreased 2% to 5% per m onth if you correct for the bias. Lower reported betas than true betas because there are fewer (only high) prices recorded, flattening the security market line (SML). The effect is smaller for real estate returns because volatility is lower than in private equity and studies often include downturns such as what happened in real estate in the early 1990s and the early 2000s.
Lower reported variance of returns than the true variance of returns because only high
returns are counted (i.e., underestimated risk).
In sum, sample selection bias results in overestimated expected returns and underestimated risk as measured by beta and the standard deviation of returns (i.e., volatility).
Infrequent Trading
Illiquid assets, by definition, trade infrequently. Infrequent trading results in underestimated risk. Betas, return volatilities, and correlations are too low when they are computed using the reported returns of infrequently traded assets. Returns for these infrequently traded assets are smoothed. For example, if one compares quarterly returns to the daily returns of the same asset, quarterly returns will appear (and actually be) less volatile. Prices will often be higher or lower in a given investment horizon, than it appears when examining quarterly returns. The computed standard deviation of returns often will be lower when examining quarterly returns compared to daily returns. Also, correlations with other asset classes (e.g., liquid assets such as large-cap stocks) will be artificially low because return volatility is muted by infrequent trades.
Page 50
2018 Kaplan, Inc.
Topic 65 Cross Reference to GARP Assigned Reading – Ang, Chapter 13
It is possible to unsmooth or de-smooth returns using filtering algorithms. Filtering algorithms generally remove noise from signals. However, unsmoothing adds noise back to reported returns to uncover the true, noisier returns. Unsmoothing returns affects risk and return estimates, and could have a dramatic effect on returns. For example, reported real estate returns during the 1990s downturn were 5.3%. The corresponding unsmoothed returns were 22.6%. The National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF) returns reached -8.3% in December 2008. Unsmoothed returns during the same quarter were 36.3%. The standard deviation of the raw returns was 2.25% during the same quarter compared to 6.26% for unsmoothed returns. For comparison, stock return volatility was approximately 7.5% per quarter. Correlations between the S&P 500 Index and NCREIF returns increased from 9.2% to 15.8% when returns were unsmoothed.
Il l iq u id it y Ris k P r e m iu m s