Did Russell 2000 Outperform S&P 500 in 2019?

        Intended for New Graduates

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Emily, a new graduate with co-concentrations (Econ & Finance), is interviewing for Equity Analyst position. 

Question # 1
Interviewer: Explain to us the basic difference between these two indices. 

Emily: While the S&P 500 index measures the performance of 500 large-cap stocks, the Russell 2000 index measures the performance of 2000 small-cap stocks. S&P 500 is the most widely followed stock market index.

Question # 2
Interviewer: Is there a market definition of large-cap stock? Also, can you name a few large caps?

Emily: Typically, a large-cap company has a market value of at least $10 Billion. Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook are examples of large-caps. 

Question # 3
Interviewer: Can S&P 500 include one such large-cap stock that is listed on Nikkei only?

Emily: No. S&P 500 comprises large-cap stocks that are listed on US Exchanges.     

Question # 4
Interviewer: The data table shows S&P 500 has higher volatility than Russell's. What "quick" metric did we use to arrive at these volatility figures? And why?

Emily: I believe the quick metric you used is the Coefficient of Variation (commonly known by its short form COV). COV is the ratio of standard deviation to mean. Since you are making inter-index comparisons, you used the "normalized" metric. 

Question # 5
Interviewer: By glossing over these two graphs, do you notice any similarity?

Emily: Yes, between August and December, they both produced linear growth. Spectacular growth, indeed!

Question # 6
Interviewer: Any striking dissimilarity, per se?

Emily: Yes, the correction in August was way more pronounced for Russell than that of S&P's. 

Question # 7
Interviewer: By looking at the data table, can you tell us how S&P outperformed Russell in terms of overall growth?

Emily: Because S&P produced 8% growth between January and August, whereas Russell remained on a slippery slope, failing to hang on to its gains. 

Question # 8
Interviewer: To take advantage of these indices, what investment vehicles would you recommend to our clients?

Emily: Index Funds, Index ETFs, S&P Futures and Options, etc.

Question # 9
Interviewer: Of these two indices, which one would you recommend to our conservative clients? Or, would you recommend both?

Emily: Russell 2000 would not be appropriate for them.

Good Luck!

-Sid Som, MBA, MIM
President, Homequant
homequant@gmail.com

                     Link to the Book

The Missing Link between Fundamental and Technical Equity Analysis

(Click on the image to enlarge)

The missing link between the fundamental and technical equity analysis is a market-based statistical Correlation Matrix.

Analysis of the above Correlation Matrix

1. The correlation among Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Facebook (FB) and Google (GOOG) is very (positively) high (> 0.80), meaning they will move in tandem. A portfolio comprising exclusively of such highly correlated stocks would be considered an 'Ultra Aggressive' portfolio.

2. Twitter (TWTR) however adds a low-to-moderate positive correlation to the aforesaid four, meaning there are days TWTR will not necessarily move in lockstep with the other four stocks. A portfolio constructed as such would, nonetheless, be 'Very Aggressive.'

3. IBM, on the other hand, shows negative correlations with all five and obviously very high negative correlations with the first four, thus providing an excellent hedge. The inclusion of the IBM hedge would lower the overall risk, paving the way for an 'Aggressive' portfolio.

Ideally, in order to capture any meaningful shifts in relationships, researchers should run this matrix in three phases: short-term (recent 30 days), medium-term (6 months) and long-term (9-12 months). 

Disclaimer - The author is not advocating any of the stocks listed here; instead, this is just a research piece  - often overlooked - connecting fundamental and technical analyses. Consult your Registered Rep, RIA or Financial Planner for an appropriate asset allocation model and the holdings therein.  

-Sid Som, MBA, MIM
President, Homequant, Inc.
homequant@gmail.com
  

Link to the Book

Crude, Gold, Treasury Yields and VIX – Which one is most Predictive of Dow Jones Industrial Average?

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Julie is interviewing for an Equity Analyst position with a Wall Street Brokerage firm.

Question # 1
Interviewer: Julie, we used 13-months (i.e., 07/01/2018 thru 07/31/2019) worth of daily closing prices to compile this correlation matrix and the regression graph. Now, by looking at them, can you tell me what our objective here is?

Julie: You are trying to see if Gold, 10 and 30-year Treasury Yields, Crude and VIX collectively can predict Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA).

Question # 2
Interviewer: Why did we use ETFs like GLD and XOP instead of the actual futures data?

Julie: Futures contracts have different expiration dates so combining such data from different contract periods would be discontinuous. ETFs, instead, would be much better proxies.

Question # 3
Interviewer: In this example, is VIX the most un-correlated with DJIA? Qualify your answer with the underlying theory.

Julie: No. It's the most correlated of the five independent variables. Correlation can be positive or negative, hence the correlation coefficient varies between +1 and -1. VIX is negatively correlated with DJIA here.

Question # 4
Interviewer: In that case, which one is the least correlated independent variable here?

Julie: It's the crude ETF, that is the XOP variable in the equation.

Question # 5
Interviewer: Based on this correlation matrix, would you use all of the five independent variables in the regression equation? Qualify your answer with the underlying theory.    

Julie: No. I would remove GLD and 30-year Treasury Yield right off the top because they are failing the test of multi-collinearity. GLD is highly correlated with three others, while the 30-year Yield is moving in lockstep with the 10-year Yield.

Question # 6
Interviewer: Why did you choose 10-year Yield over 30-year Yield? Aren't they interchangeable here?

Julie: 10-year has better predictive relationship with the DJIA and lesser correlation with the VIX, while 30-year has only one positive, that is lesser correlation with XOP. Out of three, two positives here are better than one positive. Therefore, they are not necessarily interchangeable here.

Question # 7
Interviewer: The regression line shows a r-squared of 0.7633. What r-squared would the actual regression output show?

Julie: The same 0.7633. The regression value here represents all five independent variables against the same DJIA dependent variable so the r-squared would be identical. You are basically graphing the outcome of the actual regression.

Question # 8
Interviewer: If you are asked to fine-tune the model with an improved r-squared, what would you do? Qualify your answer with the underlying theory.

Julie: I would remove some outliers systematically from both ends of the curve. Unlike weekly closing prices, daily closing prices are inherently very volatile, so removing some outliers would be reasonable.

Question # 9
Interviewer: If you are forced to run a simple regression, rather than a multiple regression comprising these five variables, which one would you choose? And, what type of regression coefficient would you expect to see?

Julie: VIX, because it has the best predictive relationship with the DJIA. The regression coefficient would be negative as well, in line with the correlation coefficient.

Disclaimer - The author is not advocating the ETFs/indices listed here. Consult your Registered Rep, RIA or Financial Planner for an appropriate asset allocation model and the suitability of stocks, indices and other holdings for your portfolio.

Good Luck!

Sid Som, MBA, MIM
President, Homequant, Inc.
homequant@gmail.com

Link to the Book

Can Sector ETFs be used to construct Funds?

(Click on the image to enlarge)

ETF Sectors:
SPY=S&P 500; XLE=Energy; XLF=Financial; XLI=Industrial; XLK=Technology; XLP=Consumer Staples: XLU=Utilities; XLV=Healthcare; XLY=Consumer Discretionary

Laura is interviewing for the Hedge Fund Analyst position.

Question # 1

Interviewer: These graphics have been compiled off Standard and Poor's Exchange Traded Funds (ETF), reflecting daily closing prices between 07/01/2018 and 07/31/2019. Are you familiar with these ETFs?

Laura: Yes, I track and analyze them quite frequently. While SPY tracks the S&P 500 stock market index, the other ones are individual sector ETFs.

Question # 2

Interviewer: Use 5 sector ETFs to construct an aggressive (long only) fund. Weighting factors can range between 10% and 30%.

Laura: I would use XLF, XLI, XLK, XLP and XLY, equally weighted at 20% each. They are all highly correlated so they would move in tandem.     

Question # 3

Interviewer: How come you didn't select a hedge component while constructing the portfolio?

Laura: Because I was asked to construct an aggressive (long only) fund. An aggressive (long only) fund generally excludes hedges or negatively correlated components. 

Question # 4

Interviewer: In continuation of the prior fund construction, develop a weighted balanced fund where the dividend yields proxy fixed income assets. 

Laura: I would select the three equally-weighted stock ETFs, i.e., XLF, XLK and XLV with low multi-collinearity and the two equally-weighted high yield ones, XLP and XLU, surrogating fixed incomes. 

Question # 5

Interviewer: Why did you skip XLE despite yielding the highest dividend?

Laura: Since it has the highest beta, it's the most volatile one in the mix. Ideally, the balanced funds should try to minimize the use of highly volatile asset classes and components.  

Question # 6

Interviewer: Now, construct an income fund, with minimum volatility and maximum income. 

Laura: In constructing the income fund, I would use variable weights. My fund would include 30% XLU, 25% XLP, 20% XLF, 15% XLV and 10% XLK, respectively.  Again, though XLE has the highest yield, it is also the most volatile, hence skipped.

Question # 7

Interviewer: Is there an alternate use of these 3 funds?

Laura: Yes, as Fund of Funds; for example, for a low risk investor, the income and balance funds could be heavily weighted while the aggressive fund could contribute marginally. Similarly, for someone without any appetite for risk, the aggressive fund could be avoided altogether.

Question # 8

Interviewer: So, what's the use of these sector ETFs when SPY can represent them all?

Laura: SPY represents all the major sectors of the economy, so it's more or less an all of all index. The fund managers cannot use it to address clients' specific investment objectives or levels of risk tolerance. The sector ETFs can help achieve those goals.    

Question # 9

Interviewer: Finally, do you think ETFs have any special advantages over the competing Mutual Funds?

Laura: Yes, ETFs provide a number of advantages over the competing Mutual Funds. Here are the three most important ones: (a) ETFs have significantly lower expense ratios, e.g., all of these sector ETFs have under 0.15% expense ratios as compared to the usual 1-3% for Mutual Funds; (b) ETFs can be self-directed, while Mutual Funds are managed by dedicated managers; and (c) ETFs have no additional sales commissions, while all actively managed funds (generally sold by brokers and private managers) carry loads, making them quite expensive.

    

Interviewer: Did you learn all these at school?

Laura: No. My mom taught me. She is a consulting Economist.

"Well, that says it all."

Disclaimer - The author is not advocating the ETFs listed here. Consult your Registered Rep, RIA or Financial Planner for an appropriate asset allocation model and the suitability of stocks, indices and other holdings for your portfolio.

Good Luck!

Sid Som, MBA, MIM
President, Homequant, Inc.
homequant@gmail.com

Link to the Book