Active Fixed Income Illusions

J. Brooks, Tony Gould, Scott Richardson
{"title":"Active Fixed Income Illusions","authors":"J. Brooks, Tony Gould, Scott Richardson","doi":"10.3905/jfi.2020.1.086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past 20 years, active fixed income (FI) managers have tended to deliver returns in excess of their benchmarks. This has generated a popular notion that active investing in fixed income markets is “easy.” The aim here is to assess the veracity of that notion. Across a broad set of popular active FI categories, this article finds that passive exposures to traditional risk premia (especially exposure to credit risk) explain the majority of FI manager active returns. The resulting implication is that, contrary to popular belief, traditional discretionary active FI strategies offer little in the way of true alpha and that traditional active FI strategies may significantly reduce the strategic diversification benefit of FI as an asset class. TOPICS: Fixed income and structured finance, performance measurement, fixed-income portfolio management Key Findings • Across US Aggregate, Global Aggregate, and Unconstrained categories, we find that a significant portion of fixed income manager outperformance can be explained by passive exposure to credit risk. • Credit exposure meaningfully reduces the diversification benefit of fixed income. During the worst 10 quarters for equities, active fixed income strategies have underperformed their benchmarks, at times significantly. • After allowing for persistent exposure to credit and to other traditional risk premia, active fixed income managers generate virtually no alpha. This result holds both for managers on average in each category and for individual managers.","PeriodicalId":53711,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Fixed Income","volume":"29 1","pages":"19 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Fixed Income","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/jfi.2020.1.086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Over the past 20 years, active fixed income (FI) managers have tended to deliver returns in excess of their benchmarks. This has generated a popular notion that active investing in fixed income markets is “easy.” The aim here is to assess the veracity of that notion. Across a broad set of popular active FI categories, this article finds that passive exposures to traditional risk premia (especially exposure to credit risk) explain the majority of FI manager active returns. The resulting implication is that, contrary to popular belief, traditional discretionary active FI strategies offer little in the way of true alpha and that traditional active FI strategies may significantly reduce the strategic diversification benefit of FI as an asset class. TOPICS: Fixed income and structured finance, performance measurement, fixed-income portfolio management Key Findings • Across US Aggregate, Global Aggregate, and Unconstrained categories, we find that a significant portion of fixed income manager outperformance can be explained by passive exposure to credit risk. • Credit exposure meaningfully reduces the diversification benefit of fixed income. During the worst 10 quarters for equities, active fixed income strategies have underperformed their benchmarks, at times significantly. • After allowing for persistent exposure to credit and to other traditional risk premia, active fixed income managers generate virtually no alpha. This result holds both for managers on average in each category and for individual managers.
主动固定收益幻想
在过去的20年里,主动型固定收益(FI)基金经理的回报往往高于基准。这产生了一种流行的观念,即积极投资固定收益市场是“容易的”。这里的目的是评估这种观念的真实性。在一系列流行的主动金融机构类别中,本文发现传统风险溢价的被动敞口(尤其是信用风险敞口)解释了大多数金融机构经理的主动回报。由此产生的含义是,与普遍的看法相反,传统的可自由支配的主动金融服务策略几乎没有提供真正的阿尔法,传统的主动金融服务策略可能会显著降低金融服务作为一种资产类别的战略多样化收益。主题:固定收益和结构性融资、绩效衡量、固定收益投资组合管理主要发现•在美国总体、全球总体和非约束类别中,我们发现固定收益经理的卓越表现有很大一部分可以通过被动暴露于信用风险来解释。•信贷敞口显著降低了固定收益的多元化收益。在股市表现最差的10个季度里,积极的固定收益策略表现落后于其基准,有时表现严重落后。•在考虑到信贷和其他传统风险溢价的持续风险敞口后,主动型固定收益经理几乎不会产生阿尔法。这一结果既适用于每个类别的平均经理人,也适用于个别经理人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Fixed Income
Journal of Fixed Income Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Journal of Fixed Income (JFI) provides sophisticated analytical research and case studies on bond instruments of all types – investment grade, high-yield, municipals, ABSs and MBSs, and structured products like CDOs and credit derivatives. Industry experts offer detailed models and analysis on fixed income structuring, performance tracking, and risk management. JFI keeps you on the front line of fixed income practices by: •Staying current on the cutting edge of fixed income markets •Managing your bond portfolios more efficiently •Evaluating interest rate strategies and manage interest rate risk •Gaining insights into the risk profile of structured products.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信