WORKING PAPER December 2010 Fnancal Analysts Journal Volume 67, No. 4 July/August 2011, p. 42-49 arxv:1109.1256v1 [q-fn.pm] 6 Sep 2011 Dversfcaton Return, Portfolo Rebalancng, and the Commodty Return Puzzle Scott Wllenbrock 1 Department of Physcs, Unversty of Illnos at Urbana-Champagn 1110 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801 Abstract Dversfcaton return s an ncremental return earned by a rebalanced portfolo of assets. The dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo s often ncorrectly ascrbed to a reducton n varance. We argue that the underlyng source of the dversfcaton return s the rebalancng, whch forces the nvestor to sell assets that have apprecated n relatve value and buy assets that have declned n relatve value, as measured by ther weghts n the portfolo. In contrast, the ncremental return of a buy-and-hold portfolo s drven by the fact that the assets that perform the best become a greater fracton of the portfolo. We use these results to resolve two puzzles assocated wth the Gorton and Rouwenhorst ndex of commodty futures, and thereby obtan a clear understandng of the source of the return of that ndex. Dversfcaton return can be a sgnfcant source of return for any rebalanced portfolo of volatle assets. 1 Regstered Investment Advsor
1 Introducton The term dversfcaton return was coned by Booth and Fama (1992) n the context of a rebalanced portfolo, that s, a portfolo wth a constant percentage nvested n each asset. They showed that the contrbuton of each asset to the portfolo compound return, whch they dubbed the return contrbuton, exceeds the asset s compound return by an ncremental amount that they named the dversfcaton return. The portfolo s dversfcaton return s the weghted average of the assets dversfcaton returns. Snce Booth and Fama (1992) consder a rebalanced portfolo throughout ther work, one s led to wonder f there are two separate, perhaps related, aspects to the ncremental return: dversfcaton and rebalancng. Several authors, ncludng Erb and Harvey (2006), Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b), and Idzorek (2006,2007) have argued n favor of ths pont of vew, to dfferent degrees. For example, Gorton and Rouwenhorst(2006b) regard the dversfcaton return of a portfolo as the dfference between the portfolo geometrc average return and the (weghted) geometrc average returns of the ndvdual assets, regardless of whether the weghts are constant or not. In ths paper we revst the ssue of dversfcaton return and portfolo rebalancng. We show that dversfcaton return can be precsely defned n the context of a rebalanced portfolo. We argue that the reducton n varance nherent n a dversfed portfolo s a necessary, but not suffcent, condton n order to earn a dversfcaton return, n contrast wth the argument of Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b). We clarfy the underlyng source of dversfcaton return. Booth and Fama (1992) derve the dversfcaton return n terms of the dfference between the varance of an asset and ts covarance wth the portfolo. Whle ths s an elegant and useful approach, t masks the fact that the dversfcaton return stems from sellng assets that have apprecated n relatve value and buyng assets that have declned n relatve value, as measured by ther weghts n the portfolo. We also analyze a buy-and-hold portfolo. Whle there s no dversfcaton return for such a portfolo, t s possble for the portfolo to have an ncremental return relatve to the ntally-weghted average of the compound returns of the assets. Ths stems from the fact that, over tme, a buy-and-hold portfolo wll ncrease the weghts of the assets that perform the best. However, ths also changes the rsk profle of the portfolo. In contrast, an nvestor earns a dversfcaton return n a rebalanced portfolo whle mantanng a constant rsk profle. Fnally, we use these results to resolve two aspects of the commodty return puzzle stated by Idzorek (2006,2007). We argue that the excess return (above the rsk-free return) of the Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a) commodty futures ndex, whch s rebalanced monthly, can be largely accounted for by the dversfcaton return, as argued by Erb and Harvey (2006). However, f the ndex s not rebalanced, t generates a sgnfcant ncremental excess return as a buy-and-hold portfolo, because the compound returns of the underlyng commodty futures n the ndex have a wde range of values. Thus there s no contradcton; the Gorton and Rouwenhorst commodty futures ndex generates an excess return n both ts rebalanced and unrebalanced ncarnatons, but for totally dfferent and unrelated reasons. 1
The paper s organzed as follows. In Secton 2 we present a smple dervaton of an approxmate formula for the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo, hghlghtng that the arthmetc average return of an asset s a useful ntermedate quantty only f the asset weghts are held constant. In Secton 3 we dentfy the source of the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo, and provde a precse defnton of the dversfcaton return. We also dscuss several examples. In Secton 4 we argue that a buy-and-hold portfolo does not have a dversfcaton return, but that t may stll have an ncremental return from a dfferent source. In Secton 5 we apply these results to solve two aspects of the commodty return puzzle. We summarze our results n Secton 6, and dscuss the relevance of these fndngs to nvestors. 2 Geometrc and arthmetc average returns The begnnng pont of our dscusson s the relatonshp between the arthmetc average return and the geometrc average return, vald for an ndvdual asset as well as for a portfolo. Followng Booth and Fama (1992), we derve n the Appendx the approxmate relaton g r 1 2 σ2 (1) where g s the geometrc average return, r s the arthmetc average of the smple returns r, and σ 2 s the varance of the smple returns. Whle Booth and Fama (1992) framed the dscusson n terms of compound return, we wll fnd t advantageous to work wth the geometrc average return, as n Erb and Harvey (2006) and Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b). Equaton (1) s smple, but n general t s not useful. Let us recall that the arthmetc average return s a msleadng measure of an asset s or portfolo s performance. An asset or portfolo wth smple returns of 50% and 50% has an arthmetc average return of zero, yet the nvestor has a loss of 25%. In contrast, the geometrc average return s a precse measure of the return of an asset or portfolo. Gven an asset s or portfolo s geometrc average return over T holdng perods, the rato of the fnal value of the asset or portfolo to ts ntal value s (1 + g) T. No such relaton exsts for the arthmetc average return; t s mpossble to calculate the relaton between fnal and ntal asset or portfolo values based on the arthmetc average return alone. Equaton (1) may be regarded as a remnder of the dependence of the arthmetc average return on the volatlty of the asset or portfolo. Gven the msleadng nature of the arthmetc average return, t cannot n general be used by tself to judge an asset s or portfolo s performance. There s an excepton to ths statement, and that s for a rebalanced portfolo, that s, a portfolo that rebalances to constant weghts at the end of each holdng perod. To see ths, consder the relaton between the smple return of a portfolo, r p, and the smple returns of the assets, r, r p = w r (2) where w s the weght of the asset n the portfolo ( w = 1). If we take the average of ths equaton, we fnd a useful relaton between the arthmetc average return of the portfolo, r p, 2
and the arthmetc average returns of the assets, r, r p = w r (3) f and only f the weghts, w, are held constant. Ths s the key relaton that allows us to derve the dversfcaton return. Usng Eq. (1) on both sdes of ths equaton, we obtan g p + 1 2 σ2 p w (g + 1 2 σ2 ). (4) We now use the relaton between a portfolo s varance and the covarance of each asset s smple returns wth the portfolo s smple returns, σ 2 p, w σp 2 = σp 2 (5) whch, lke Eq. (3), s only true f the weghts are held constant. Ths yelds the desred result g p w (g + 1 ) 2 (σ2 σp) 2. (6) The dversfcaton return of an asset s thus approxmately half the dfference between the asset s varance and the asset s covarance wth the portfolo. The dversfcaton return of the portfolo s the weghted average of the dversfcaton returns of the assets, Dversfcaton Return 1 w (σ 2 2 σ2 p ). (7) Let us underscore once agan that t s essental to mantan (nearly) constant weghts n order to obtan a dversfcaton return. It s only n ths case that the arthmetc average return, a generally msleadng measure of an asset s or portfolo s performance, becomes a useful ntermedate quantty va Eq. (3). In more general settngs, one cannot nfer anythng drectly from Eq. (1). It s faulty logc to clam that a portfolo s geometrc average return s ncreased solely by the decrease n varance that s nherent n a dversfed portfolo, as argued by Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b). 3 The source of dversfcaton return The result for the dversfcaton return, Eq. (7), s both elegant and useful. Although t apples only to a rebalanced portfolo, that s, a portfolo wth a constant percentage nvested n each asset, t does not depend on the detals of the rebalancng. All that matters s the varances of the assets and ther covarances wth the portfolo. Nevertheless, the underlyng source of the dversfcaton return s contaned n the rebalancng. Rebalancng a portfolo nvolves sellng assets that have apprecated n relatve value and buyng assets that have declned n relatve value, as measured by ther weghts n the portfolo. Ths contraran actvty generates ncremental returns as the assets fluctuate n value. 3
Consder a portfolo n whch each asset has vanshng geometrc average return, that s, has the same value as at the begnnng of the T holdng perods. If the portfolo s not rebalanced, t has a geometrc average return of zero. However, rebalancng the portfolo wll generate ncremental returns. Thus the entre return of the portfolo s generated by rebalancng. Ths s the dversfcaton return. Now consder a portfolo n whch each asset has the dentcal, nonvanshng, geometrc average return. If the portfolo s not rebalanced, t has the same geometrc average return as ts consttuents. Rebalancng the portfolo wll generate ncremental returns. Thus the return of the portfolo s the sum of the geometrc average return of the assets and an ncremental return due to rebalancng. Comparng wth Eq. (6), the frst term on the rght-hand sde s the geometrc average return of the assets. Thus the second term, whch s the dversfcaton return, s the ncremental return due to rebalancng. Fnally, consder the general case of a portfolo n whch each asset has a dfferent nonvanshng geometrc average return. The geometrc average return of the portfolo s gven approxmately by Eq. (6). The frst term depends only on the geometrc average returns of the assets that compose the portfolo, and not at all on the volatlty of the assets. The second term, whch s the dversfcaton return, depends on the volatlty of the assets. If the assets had zero volatlty, that s, f ther varances vanshed, then ther covarances wth the portfolo would also vansh, and the dversfcaton return would be zero. Hence the dversfcaton return s drven by the volatlty of the assets. The underlyng source of the dversfcaton return s thus the sellng of assets that have apprecated n relatve value and the buyng of assets that have declned n relatve value. An alternatve name for dversfcaton return mght be volatlty return. A smple example demonstrates the process. Consder a portfolo consstng of two assets that are ntally equally weghted. The smple returns of the frst asset are +25%, 20%, whle the smple returns of the second asset are the reverse, 20%,+25%. Each asset has a vanshng geometrc average return over the two holdng perods. However, f the portfolo s rebalanced to equal weghts after the frst holdng perod, the portfolo has a gan of 5.06%, correspondng to a geometrc average return of 2.5%. Ths s a dversfcaton return. The separaton of the portfolo geometrc average return nto two separate peces s approxmate, smply because Eq. (6) s approxmate. However, the above dscusson suggests a precse defnton of the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo. The dversfcaton return s the dfference between the geometrc average returns of a rebalanced portfolo of volatle assets, and a rebalanced portfolo of hypothetcal assets wth the same weghts and geometrc average returns as the true assets, but zero volatlty. An approprate name for the geometrc average return of the hypothetcal portfolo mght be the strategc return, because t depends only on the geometrc average returns of the assets and ther weghts n the portfolo. Thus, for a rebalanced portfolo, Dversfcaton return Geometrc average return Strategc return. (8) If an asset has zero volatlty, then ts geometrc average return s dentcal to ts arthmetc average return. Thus, usng Eq. (3), we see that the strategc return of a portfolo s gven exactly by Strategc return w g. (9) 4
It s ths equaton that motvates our use of the geometrc average return nstead of the compound return used by Booth and Fama(1992). The dversfcaton return s gven exactly by Eq. (8) and approxmately by Eq. (7). A detaled example of strategc return and dversfcaton return n the context of a smple portfolo s gven n Table 1. The portfolo has 50% nvested n the S&P 500 Index (Total Return) and 50% nvested n the Barclays US Long Treasury Index(Total Return) on January 1, 2000. The portfolo s rebalanced at the end of each year. The geometrc average return of the portfolo s 4.44%, whle the strategc return s 3.32%. The dversfcaton return, 1.12%, s the dfference. Ths represents an ncremental return stemmng from the volatlty of the assets. The dversfcaton return s qute sgnfcant n ths example, accountng for 25% of the return of the portfolo. The dversfcaton return calculated from the approxmate expresson n Eq. (7) s 1.04%, n rough agreement wth the exact value. Table 1: A portfolo wth 50% nvested n the S&P 500 Index (Total Return) and 50% nvested n the Barclays US Long Treasury Index (Total Return) on January 1, 2000. Return data from the Vanguard Group. Year Ended S&P 500 (%) Long Treasures (%) 50/50 Portfolo (%) 2000 (9.10) 20.27 5.58 2001 (11.89) 4.21 (3.84) 2002 (22.10) 16.79 (2.65) 2003 28.68 2.48 15.58 2004 10.88 7.70 9.29 2005 4.91 6.50 5.71 2006 15.79 1.85 8.82 2007 5.49 9.81 7.65 2008 (37.00) 24.03 (6.48) 2009 26.46 (12.92) 6.77 r (%) 1.21 8.07 4.64 g (%) (0.95) 7.59 4.44 σ (%) 20.03 10.05 6.51 σp 2 (10 4 ) 117.33 (32.69) Strategc return 1 (g 2 1 +g 2 ) = 3.32% Dversfcaton return g p 1 (g 2 1 +g 2 ) = 1.12% 1 4 (σ2 1 +σ2 2 σ2 1p σ2 2p ) = 1.04% Another approxmate expresson for the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo s obtaned drectly from Eq. (4): Dversfcaton Return 1 ( ) w σ 2 2 σ2 p. (10) Ths equaton s nterpreted by Erb and Harvey (2006) to mean that the dversfcaton return s the result of the reducton of the portfolo varance wth respect to the weghted- 5
average varance of the assets. However, the true source of the dversfcaton return s the rebalancng; the reducton of the portfolo varance s smply a consequence of dversfcaton. We wll show n the next secton that a dversfed portfolo that does not rebalance, whle t generally has a reduced varance, does not generate a dversfcaton return. Followng Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b), we derve yet another alternatve approxmate expresson for the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo. Usng Eqs. (2) and (3), one can show that σp 2 = w j σj 2 (11) where σj 2 s the covarance of assets and j (wth σ 2 σ). 2 Ths s related to the correlaton of the assets, ρ j, by σj 2 = ρ j σ σ j. (12) Puttng ths together wth Eq. (7), we obtan Dversfcaton Return 1 2 w σ 2 w w j ρ j σ σ j (13) j Consderthecasewheretheassetsareallperfectlycorrelated, ρ j = 1forall,j. Equaton (13) reduces to Dversfcaton Return 1 ( ) 2 w σ 2 2 w σ (for ρ j = 1) (14) that s, the dversfcaton return s the dfference between the weghted-average varance and the square of the weghted-average standard devaton of the assets. Ths does not vansh n general, so even a portfolo that s composed of assets that are perfectly correlated generates a dversfcaton return. Ths s not a dversfed portfolo n the usual sense, where one combnes assets that are not perfectly correlated wth each other. Thus even a portfolo that s not dversfed n the usual sense generates a dversfcaton return. As an example of ths last pont, consder an equally-weghted portfolo of two assets wth smple returns of +25%, 10% and +50%, 20% over two holdng perods. The smple returns of the two assets are perfectly correlated. The strategc return of ths portfolo, defned by Eq. (9), s +7.80%. The geometrc average return of the portfolo, rebalanced to equal weghts after the frst holdng perod, s +8.11%. The dfference, +0.31%, s the dversfcaton return generated by the rebalancng. If, n addton to beng perfectly correlated, the assets had dentcal standard devatons, then the dversfcaton return gven by Eq.(14) would vansh. Ths corresponds to a portfolo n whch all the assets have dentcal returns, n whch case there s no need to rebalance, and hence no opportunty to earn a dversfcaton return. Erb and Harvey (2006) and Idzorek (2006,2007) quote the formula Dversfcaton Return 1 2 ( 1 1 N ) σ 2 (1 ρ) (15) for an equally-weghted portfolo of N assets, where σ 2 s the average varance of the N assets and ρ s the average correlaton of the N(N 1) pars of assets. 2 Ths equaton 2 Idzorek (2006,2007) has the square of the average standard devaton n place of the average varance. 6
does not follow mathematcally from Eq. (13), and should not be trusted. In partcular, the dversfcaton return does not vansh n general f ρ = 1, as we showed n Eq. (14). Booth and Fama (1992) gve many examples of dversfcaton returns from rebalanced portfolos of stock and bond ndces. Erb and Harvey (2006) gve examples of dversfcaton returns from rebalanced portfolos constructed from collateralzed commodty futures, as well as n combnaton wth the S&P 500 ndex. They also quote the results of a smulaton nvolvng 40 uncorrelated assets, each of whch has a geometrc average return of zero and a standard devaton of 30%. They fnd that an equally-weghted, rebalanced portfolo has an average return of 4.3% by runnng 10,000 smulatons over a 45 year perod. They dub ths turnng water nto wne, snce each asset has a vanshng geometrc average return. The entre return of the portfolo s a dversfcaton return. We can estmate the dversfcaton return of the Erb and Harvey smulaton as follows. The geometrc average return of each asset s zero, and ts varance s (30%) 2 = 0.09. Usng Eq. (13), together wth the fact that the assets are uncorrelated and w = 1/40 yelds Dversfcaton Return 1 w (1 w )σ 2 2 4.4% (for ρ j = δ j ) (16) n rough agreement wth the results of the smulaton. Swensen (2005,2009) provdes examples of the ncremental return generated by daly rebalancng of the Yale Unversty nvestment portfolo. He refers to ths as a rebalancng bonus, snce the prmary reason for rebalancng s to mantan a constant rsk profle. The ncremental return generated from ths actvty s thus regarded as an auxlary beneft. The rebalancng bonus s a dversfcaton return. 4 Buy-and-hold portfolo We now turn our attenton to a very dfferent type of portfolo, n whch there s no rebalancng. We consder a buy-and-hold portfolo, n whch the ntal asset weghts, f, are fxed ( f = 1). If the assets have geometrc average returns g over T holdng perods, then the portfolo geometrc average return s gven by (1+g p ) T = f (1+g ) T. (17) Ths equaton makes explct that the portfolo geometrc average return s smply a functon of the geometrc average returns of the assets. It has the same qualtes as the strategc return of a rebalanced portfolo, gven by Eq. (9). There s no dependence on the varances of the assets or ther covarances wth the portfolo. The portfolo has a smaller varance than the ntally-weghted-average of the assets varances, but that alone does not mply a dversfcaton return. For g T 1, Eq. (17) may be approxmated by g p = f g. (18) There s no ncremental return. In contrast, for a rebalanced portfolo, there s a dversfcaton return, Eq. (6), even f g 1. 7
Consder a buy-and-hold portfolo n whch the assets have dentcal geometrc average returns. The geometrc average return of the portfolo s the same as the geometrc average return of the assets, despte the fact that the varance of the portfolo s less than the ntally-weghted-average varance of the assets. Ths demonstrates that there s more to dversfcaton return than just the decrease of the portfolo s varance wth respect to the weghted-average varance of the assets. The dversfcaton return s collected only through the buyng and sellng of assets that occurs upon rebalancng. Dversfcaton s a necessary, but not suffcent, condton for a dversfcaton return. Nevertheless, t s possble for a buy-and-hold portfolo to generate ncremental returns wth respect to the ntally-weghted-average asset returns gven by the rght-hand sde of Eq. (18). Ths can occur because the assets that perform the best wll have an ncreased weght n the portfolo over tme, whle those that underperform wll have a decreased weght. Ths s not a dversfcaton return, but rather an ncremental return assocated wth a tradng strategy, namely a strategy not to trade. Lettng the asset weghts drft wth the performance of the assets changes the rsk profle of the portfolo, n contrast wth a rebalanced portfolo, whch mantans a constant rsk profle. A smple example demonstrates the prncple. Consder a portfolo consstng of two assets that are ntally equally weghted. One asset has a geometrc average return of +10%, the other 10%. After ten holdng perods the portfolo has ganed 47.12%, correspondng to a geometrc average return of 3.94%. At the end of the holdng perod the weghts of the assets have drfted from 50/50 to 88/12. If each asset hasageometrc average returnofzero, then Eq. (17) shows that theportfolo has a vanshng geometrc average return. Ths s n contrast to a rebalanced portfolo, whch may generate a nonvanshng geometrc average return even f t s composed of assets wth vanshng geometrc average returns. Ths s a dversfcaton return. An explct example of a two-asset portfolo was gven n the prevous secton. We also mentoned the turnng water nto wne smulaton of Erb and Harvey (2006), where an equally-weghted, rebalanced portfolo of uncorrelated assets wth vanshng geometrc average returns yelds a nonvanshng dversfcaton return of 4.3%. However, t s a mystery how ths same smulaton, but wth an ntally-equally-weghted buy-and-hold portfolo, could yeld a nonvanshng return of 3.8%, as clamed. Based on Eq. (17), the return of the buy-and-hold verson of ths portfolo should be zero. Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b) regard the dversfcaton return of a portfolo as the dfference between the portfolo geometrc average return and the (weghted) geometrc average returns of the ndvdual assets, regardless of whether the weghts are constant or not. Ths s the defnton of dversfcaton return for a rebalanced portfolo, as evdenced by Eq. (8). They are proposng to generalze ths defnton to a portfolo n whch the weghts are not held constant. They do not specfy how to calculate the (weghted) geometrc average returns of the ndvdual assets f the weghts are not held constant. Regardless of how one calculates ths weghted average, ths defnton of dversfcaton return appled to a buy-and-hold portfolo s not an approprate generalzaton of the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo, because the two types of ncremental returns have completely dfferent sources. As dscussed above, the ncremental return of a buy-and-hold portfolo stems from the fact that the assets that perform the best wll become a larger fracton of the portfolo. Ths s completely dfferent from the dversfcaton return of a 8
rebalanced portfolo, whch s drven by sellng hgh and buyng low. It s more natural to regard the return of a buy-and-hold portfolo, Eq. (17), as a generalzaton of the strategc return of a rebalanced portfolo, Eq. (9). Erb and Harvey(2006) take a dfferent approach to a buy-and-hold portfolo. Lke Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b), they defne the dversfcaton return as the dfference between the geometrc average return of the portfolo and the (weghted) geometrc average returns of the ndvdual assets, where they specfy that the weghts are the average weghts of the assets over the sum of the holdng perods. They break ths dversfcaton return nto two peces: a varance reducton beneft, and an mpact of not rebalancng. The varance reducton beneft s calculated from Eq. (7), that s, t s the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo. The mpact of not rebalancng, whch they also refer to as a covarance drag, takes nto account the effect of the varaton of the asset weghts. The dversfcaton return s the sum of these two peces. Ths approach s mathematcally correct, as evdenced by a detaled example of a 50/50 portfolo consstng of the S&P 500 ndex and heatng ol futures. However, we have argued that the dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo, Eq. (7), s earned by rebalancng, and s not due solely to a reducton n varance. Hence t s msleadng to refer to the result of Eq. (7) as a varance reducton beneft. In the example of a 50/50 buy-and-hold portfolo consstng of the S&P 500 ndex and heatng ol futures, Erb and Harvey (2006) fnd a very small ncremental return above that gvenbytherght-handsdeofeq.(18). Thssbecausethetwoassets havesmlargeometrc average returns, +6.76% and +8.21%, respectvely. The large ncremental return of the buy-and-hold verson of the Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a) commodty futures ndex stems from the fact that the assets have wdely dfferent geometrc average returns. Ths s dscussed n the next secton. 5 The commodty return puzzle Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a) construct an equally-weghted collateralzed commodty futures ndex and show that t has a sgnfcant excess return (above the rsk-free rate). Erb and Harvey (2006) show that the average excess return of the commodty futures n the ndex s close to zero. They argue that the excess return of the ndex s mostly a dversfcaton return, as the ndex rebalances monthly. Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006b) counter that ther ndex produces an even hgher excess return f t s not rebalanced. Idzorek (2006,2007) refers to the dramatc dfference between the average ndvdual commodty return and an equally-weghted portfolo of commodtes, and the dsagreement over the mportance of the dfferent sources of return between Erb and Harvey (2006) and Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a,2006b), as two aspects of the commodty return puzzle. The dscusson n ths paper suggests a resoluton to these two puzzles. Frst consder the rebalanced ndex. It s plausble that the excess return of 4.52% found by Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a) s ndeed mostly a dversfcaton return. The sze of the excess return s consstent wth ths explanaton. The average standard devaton of the commodty futures n the ndex s 30%, the same as the standard devaton of the ndvdual assets used n the Erb and Harvey (2006) turnng water nto wne smulaton dscussed above, whch yelded 9
a return of 4.3%. That smulaton used uncorrelated assets, whle Idzorek (2006,2007) states that the average par-wse correlaton of the commodtes n the ndex s 0.1, whch may reduce the dversfcaton return slghtly. Even takng ths nto account, most of the excess return of the Gorton and Rouwenhorst ndex appears to be a dversfcaton return, and s large because the assets from whch the ndex s constructed are so volatle. Ths s the concluson reached by Erb and Harvey (2006). Now consder the unrebalanced ndex, whch s a buy-and-hold portfolo. As we dscussed n Secton 4, a buy-and-hold portfolo can generate an ncremental return wth respect to the ntally-weghted-average return of the assets f the assets have wdely dfferent geometrc average returns. Ths s ndeed the case for the commodty futures n the Gorton and Rouwenhorst ndex (although t s not the case for the Erb and Harvey turnng water nto wne smulaton, where each asset has a vanshng geometrc average return.). Although the equally-weghted geometrc average return of the commodty futures s close to zero, the geometrc average returns of the ndvdual commodty futures are wdely varyng, and yeld a sgnfcant ncremental return. We argued n Secton 4 that ths should not be regarded as a dversfcaton return, but rather as a generalzaton of a strategc return. Thus there s no contradcton. Both the rebalanced ndex and the unrebalanced ndex yeld a sgnfcant excess return, but for totally dfferent reasons. The excess return of the rebalanced ndex s mostly a dversfcaton return, whch s drven by the sellng of assets that have apprecated n relatve value and the buyng of assets that have declned n relatve value, as dscussed n Secton 3. In contrast, the excess return of the unrebalanced ndex s drven by the fact that the assets that perform the best wll become a larger fracton of the portfolo, whle those that perform poorly wll become a smaller fracton, as dscussed n Secton 4. Ths changes the rsk profle of the portfolo, unlke the rebalanced portfolo, whch mantans a constant rsk profle. The Gorton and Rouwenhorst ndex s not strctly an equally-weghted, monthly rebalanced ndex because the ndex begns wth 9 commodty futures n 1959 and ends up wth 36 commodty futures by 2003. However, the commodty futures are added one by one to the ndex, 3 and each month that one s added the ndex s rebalanced to equal weghts, just as t s n all other months. Ths s the natural generalzaton of an equally-weghted, monthly rebalanced ndex when securtes are gradually added to the ndex. The monthly rebalancng actvty generates a dversfcaton return, as dscussed n Secton 3. In the buy-and-hold verson of the ndex, when the N th commodty future becomes avalable to add to the ndex, a fracton 1/N of the ndex s sold and the proceeds are renvested n the N th commodty future, wthout rebalancng the relatve weghts of the other N 1 commodty futures. Ths s the natural generalzaton of a buy-and-hold portfolo when securtes are gradually added to the portfolo. The commodty futures that perform the best wll become a larger fracton of the portfolo, whle those that perform poorly wll become a smaller fracton. Ths generates an ncremental return n the same way as n the case of a true buy-and-hold portfolo, as dscussed n Secton 4. 3 The only exceptons are Palladum and Znc, whch are added to the ndex smultaneously. 10
6 Conclusons The dversfcaton return of a rebalanced portfolo s often ascrbed to a reducton n varance. We have argued that the underlyng source of the dversfcaton return s the rebalancng, whch forces the nvestor to sell assets that have apprecated n relatve value and buy assets that have declned n relatve value, as measured by ther weghts n the portfolo. A buyand-hold portfolo, whle t generally has a lower varance than the weghted-average varance of ts consttuents, does not earn a dversfcaton return. However, a buy-and-hold portfolo can beneft from the fact that the assets that perform the best become a larger fracton of the portfolo over tme. Ths changes the rsk profle of the portfolo, unlke a rebalanced portfolo, whch mantans a constant rsk profle. These results resolve two of the three aspects of the commodty return puzzle, artculated by Idzorek (2006,2007). The commodty futures ndex of Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a), whch s rebalanced monthly, earns a sgnfcant dversfcaton return because the underlyng commodty futures are so volatle, as argued by Erb and Harvey (2006). In contrast, the buy-and-hold verson of ths same ndex earns a sgnfcant return because the underlyng commodty futures have a wde range of geometrc average returns. Thus we are able to explan the source of the return for both the rebalanced and the buy-and-hold versons of the ndex, and also to explan why there s no contradcton between the returns of these two versons of the ndex. The thrd aspect of the commodty return puzzle, the unexplaned hstorcal return premum of ndvdual commodty futures, s not addressed n ths paper. Dversfcaton s often descrbed as the only free lunch n fnance, as t allows for the reducton of rsk for a gven expected return. Dversfcaton return mght be descrbed as the free dessert, as t s an ncremental return earned whle mantanng a constant rsk profle. However, t s necessary to perform the contraran actvty of rebalancng n order to earn the dversfcaton return; dversfcaton s a necessary, but not suffcent, condton. Whle an unrebalanced portfolo generally has reduced rsk, t does not earn a dversfcaton return, and also suffers from a varyng rsk profle. The control of rsk, n combnaton wth the dversfcaton return, s a powerful argument n favor of rebalanced portfolos. The excess return (over the rsk-free rate) of the Gorton and Rouwenhorst (2006a) commodty futures ndex s consstent wth a dversfcaton return. By extenson, the excess return of other rebalanced commodty futures ndces may be largely due to a dversfcaton return. The buy-and-hold verson of the Gorton and Rouwenhorst ndex also earns an excess return, but for a totally dfferent reason: some commodty futures have produced such large gans that they more than compensate for the commodty futures that have done poorly. Ths approach to nvestng s smlar to that of venture captal, where a few bg wnners more than compensate for the many losers. Acknowledgements I am grateful for correspondence wth Tom Idzorek and for assstance from Carssa Holler. 11
Appendx By Taylor expandng the relaton between the compound return and the smple return, r, about the arthmetc average return, r, and then averagng, Booth and Fama (1992) derve the relaton σ 2 C = ln(1+ r) 1 + (19) 2(1+ r) 2 where C s the (average) compound return and σ 2 s the varance of the smple returns. Replacng the compound return wth the geometrc average return, g, va C = ln(1+g), and exponentatng both sdes of the equaton yelds 1+g (1+ r)e 1 2 σ 2 (1+ r) 2 (20) where we have dropped the hgher terms n the expanson. Expandng the exponental and keepng the leadng terms n powers of r yelds Eq. (1). 12
References Booth, Davd G., and Eugene F. Fama. 1992. Dversfcaton Returns and Asset Contrbutons. Fnancal Analysts Journal, vol. 48, no. 3 (May/June): 26-32. Erb, Claude B., and Campbell R. Harvey. 2006. The Tactcal and Strategc Value of Commodty Futures. Fnancal Analysts Journal, vol. 62, no. 2 (March/Aprl): 69-97. Gorton, Gary B., and Rouwenhorst, K. Geert. 2006a. Facts and Fantases About Commodty Futures. Fnancal Analysts Journal, vol. 62, no. 2 (March/Aprl): 47-68. Gorton, Gary B., and Rouwenhorst, K. Geert. 2006b. A Note on Erb and Harvey (2005). Yale ICF Workng Paper No. 06-02. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract d=869064. Idzorek, Thomas M. 2006. Strategc Asset Allocaton and Commodtes, Ibbotson Assocates. Idzorek, Thomas M. 2007. Commodtes and Strategc Asset Allocaton, n Intellgent Commodty Investng, edted by Hlary Tll and Joseph Eagleeye. London: Rsk Books. Swensen, Davd F. 2005. Unconventonal Success. New York: Free Press. p. 197. Swensen, Davd F. 2009. Poneerng Portfolo Management. New York: Free Press. p. 135. 13