编辑的信

IF 0.4 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Mark Adelson
{"title":"编辑的信","authors":"Mark Adelson","doi":"10.3905/jsf.26.1.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cathy Scott General Manager and Publisher Private equity (buyout and venture capital) is perhaps the most controversial asset class. Not a week goes by without academic or industry reports criticizing the PE industry, practices, and performance. The PE industry is not without faults, and some of the criticisms are warranted. Many of the PE industry’s practices that are subjects of these criticisms are directly related to the investments’ nature. For example, IRR is the common measure of performance in the industry. This measure is not easy to interpret and is not directly comparable to the performance of public benchmarks. However, developing alternative performance measures has not been easy, and very often, they create their own ambiguities. For example, while PME measures make it easier to compare PE investments’ performance to publicly traded assets, they cannot be used in portfolio optimization algorithms. A common criticism of the PE industry is that the GPs may manipulate fund NAVs to embellish their intermediate performance. There is evidence of inflated NAVs, especially when a new fund is launched. However, this is not unique to the PE industry, and the same criticism can be levied against many other entities (public traded companies have been shown to manipulate their earnings). Agency problems and agency costs arise in many parts of the financial industry. Many practices of venture capital (VC) and buyout funds do deserve to be criticized, and the industry can take steps to correct them. Lack of transparency about fees, dividend recapitalization, and too much reliance on subscription lines of credit are just a few of those practices that the industry should address. The Journal of Alternative Investments has published many articles addressing these concerns. We are happy to begin this JAI issue with four excellent articles focusing on the PE and VC industry. Brown, Hu, and Zhang provide the first large-sample analysis of buyout and VC fund values in “The Evolution of Private Equity Fund Value,” where each fund’s performance is examined over its lifetime. The article examines interim fund investment multiples, internal rates of return, and direct alphas based on the current reported NAVs at each quarter of a fund’s life. Using a sample of 1,400 mature buyout and VC funds, the authors find that the typical fund experiences a falloff in returns after seven to eight years. The remaining performance is highly variable for funds of all ages, however, and the dispersion in returns also tends to increase after funds are about eight years old. They report that several fund-specific and market-wide factors affect future performance. For example, high dry powder levels tend to harm young funds yet benefit older funds. In “LBO and VC Investments in Recent Crises,” Stark and Lauterbach investigate the impact of economic and financial crises on the investment behavior and cash flow allocations of LBO and VC funds. Using a large sample of LBO and VC deals to analyze the resilience of investments in various industries, the authors examine volatility, maximum drawdowns, and investment returns. The empirical results show that LBO and VC funds withdrew capital from the most volatile industry sectors during the market and financial crises. The article’s findings extend crisis-related research b y gu es t o n O ct ob er 2 6, 2 02 1 C op yr ig ht 2 02 1 Pa ge an t M ed ia L td .","PeriodicalId":51968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Structured Finance","volume":"26 1","pages":"1 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editor’s Letter\",\"authors\":\"Mark Adelson\",\"doi\":\"10.3905/jsf.26.1.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cathy Scott General Manager and Publisher Private equity (buyout and venture capital) is perhaps the most controversial asset class. Not a week goes by without academic or industry reports criticizing the PE industry, practices, and performance. The PE industry is not without faults, and some of the criticisms are warranted. Many of the PE industry’s practices that are subjects of these criticisms are directly related to the investments’ nature. For example, IRR is the common measure of performance in the industry. This measure is not easy to interpret and is not directly comparable to the performance of public benchmarks. However, developing alternative performance measures has not been easy, and very often, they create their own ambiguities. For example, while PME measures make it easier to compare PE investments’ performance to publicly traded assets, they cannot be used in portfolio optimization algorithms. A common criticism of the PE industry is that the GPs may manipulate fund NAVs to embellish their intermediate performance. There is evidence of inflated NAVs, especially when a new fund is launched. However, this is not unique to the PE industry, and the same criticism can be levied against many other entities (public traded companies have been shown to manipulate their earnings). Agency problems and agency costs arise in many parts of the financial industry. Many practices of venture capital (VC) and buyout funds do deserve to be criticized, and the industry can take steps to correct them. Lack of transparency about fees, dividend recapitalization, and too much reliance on subscription lines of credit are just a few of those practices that the industry should address. The Journal of Alternative Investments has published many articles addressing these concerns. We are happy to begin this JAI issue with four excellent articles focusing on the PE and VC industry. Brown, Hu, and Zhang provide the first large-sample analysis of buyout and VC fund values in “The Evolution of Private Equity Fund Value,” where each fund’s performance is examined over its lifetime. The article examines interim fund investment multiples, internal rates of return, and direct alphas based on the current reported NAVs at each quarter of a fund’s life. Using a sample of 1,400 mature buyout and VC funds, the authors find that the typical fund experiences a falloff in returns after seven to eight years. The remaining performance is highly variable for funds of all ages, however, and the dispersion in returns also tends to increase after funds are about eight years old. They report that several fund-specific and market-wide factors affect future performance. For example, high dry powder levels tend to harm young funds yet benefit older funds. In “LBO and VC Investments in Recent Crises,” Stark and Lauterbach investigate the impact of economic and financial crises on the investment behavior and cash flow allocations of LBO and VC funds. Using a large sample of LBO and VC deals to analyze the resilience of investments in various industries, the authors examine volatility, maximum drawdowns, and investment returns. The empirical results show that LBO and VC funds withdrew capital from the most volatile industry sectors during the market and financial crises. The article’s findings extend crisis-related research b y gu es t o n O ct ob er 2 6, 2 02 1 C op yr ig ht 2 02 1 Pa ge an t M ed ia L td .\",\"PeriodicalId\":51968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Structured Finance\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Structured Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.26.1.001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Structured Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.26.1.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

私募股权(收购和风险投资)可能是最具争议的资产类别。每周都有学术或行业报告批评私募股权行业、实践和表现。私募股权行业并非没有缺点,有些批评是有道理的。受到这些批评的私募股权行业的许多做法都与投资的性质直接相关。例如,内部收益率是衡量行业业绩的常用指标。这一衡量标准不容易解释,也不能直接与公共基准的表现进行比较。然而,开发可替代的性能度量并不容易,而且它们经常产生自己的模糊性。例如,虽然PME指标可以更容易地将私募股权投资的表现与公开交易的资产进行比较,但它们不能用于投资组合优化算法。对私募股权行业的一个普遍批评是,普通合伙人可能会操纵基金资产净值,以美化它们的中间业绩。有证据表明资产净值虚高,尤其是在新基金推出时。然而,这并不是私募股权行业所独有的,同样的批评也可以针对许多其他实体(上市公司已被证明操纵其收益)。代理问题和代理成本在金融行业的许多领域都存在。风险投资(VC)和收购基金的许多做法确实应该受到批评,行业可以采取措施纠正它们。收费缺乏透明度、股息资本重组、过度依赖认购信贷额度,这些都是银行业应该解决的问题。《另类投资杂志》(Journal of Alternative Investments)发表了许多文章来解决这些问题。我们很高兴以四篇专注于私募股权和风险投资行业的优秀文章开始本期JAI。Brown、Hu和Zhang在《私募股权基金价值的演变》一书中首次对收购和风险投资基金的价值进行了大样本分析,并对每只基金在其生命周期内的表现进行了考察。本文根据基金生命周期中每个季度当前报告的资产净值,研究了中期基金的投资倍数、内部收益率和直接阿尔法。通过对1400只成熟收购和风险投资基金的样本分析,作者发现,典型的基金在7到8年后的回报率会出现下降。然而,对于所有年龄的基金来说,其余的表现都是高度可变的,而且在基金大约成立8年之后,回报的分散性也趋于增加。他们报告说,一些特定基金和市场范围的因素会影响未来的表现。例如,高干粉水平往往对年轻基金不利,但对老基金有利。在“最近危机中的杠杆收购和风险投资”一文中,Stark和Lauterbach研究了经济和金融危机对杠杆收购和风险投资基金的投资行为和现金流配置的影响。通过大量的杠杆收购和风险投资交易样本来分析不同行业的投资弹性,作者考察了波动性、最大回收量和投资回报。实证结果表明,在市场危机和金融危机期间,杠杆收购和风险投资基金从最不稳定的行业部门撤出资金。本文的研究结果扩展了金融危机相关研究的范围,并将其应用于金融危机相关研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Editor’s Letter
Cathy Scott General Manager and Publisher Private equity (buyout and venture capital) is perhaps the most controversial asset class. Not a week goes by without academic or industry reports criticizing the PE industry, practices, and performance. The PE industry is not without faults, and some of the criticisms are warranted. Many of the PE industry’s practices that are subjects of these criticisms are directly related to the investments’ nature. For example, IRR is the common measure of performance in the industry. This measure is not easy to interpret and is not directly comparable to the performance of public benchmarks. However, developing alternative performance measures has not been easy, and very often, they create their own ambiguities. For example, while PME measures make it easier to compare PE investments’ performance to publicly traded assets, they cannot be used in portfolio optimization algorithms. A common criticism of the PE industry is that the GPs may manipulate fund NAVs to embellish their intermediate performance. There is evidence of inflated NAVs, especially when a new fund is launched. However, this is not unique to the PE industry, and the same criticism can be levied against many other entities (public traded companies have been shown to manipulate their earnings). Agency problems and agency costs arise in many parts of the financial industry. Many practices of venture capital (VC) and buyout funds do deserve to be criticized, and the industry can take steps to correct them. Lack of transparency about fees, dividend recapitalization, and too much reliance on subscription lines of credit are just a few of those practices that the industry should address. The Journal of Alternative Investments has published many articles addressing these concerns. We are happy to begin this JAI issue with four excellent articles focusing on the PE and VC industry. Brown, Hu, and Zhang provide the first large-sample analysis of buyout and VC fund values in “The Evolution of Private Equity Fund Value,” where each fund’s performance is examined over its lifetime. The article examines interim fund investment multiples, internal rates of return, and direct alphas based on the current reported NAVs at each quarter of a fund’s life. Using a sample of 1,400 mature buyout and VC funds, the authors find that the typical fund experiences a falloff in returns after seven to eight years. The remaining performance is highly variable for funds of all ages, however, and the dispersion in returns also tends to increase after funds are about eight years old. They report that several fund-specific and market-wide factors affect future performance. For example, high dry powder levels tend to harm young funds yet benefit older funds. In “LBO and VC Investments in Recent Crises,” Stark and Lauterbach investigate the impact of economic and financial crises on the investment behavior and cash flow allocations of LBO and VC funds. Using a large sample of LBO and VC deals to analyze the resilience of investments in various industries, the authors examine volatility, maximum drawdowns, and investment returns. The empirical results show that LBO and VC funds withdrew capital from the most volatile industry sectors during the market and financial crises. The article’s findings extend crisis-related research b y gu es t o n O ct ob er 2 6, 2 02 1 C op yr ig ht 2 02 1 Pa ge an t M ed ia L td .
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Structured Finance
Journal of Structured Finance BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Structured Finance (JSF) is the only international, peer-reviewed journal devoted to empirical analysis and practical guidance on structured finance instruments, techniques, and strategies. JSF covers a wide range of topics including credit derivatives and synthetic securitization, secondary trading in the CDO market, securitization in emerging markets, trends in major consumer loan categories, accounting, regulatory, and tax issues in the structured finance industry.
×
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