IN THIS LIST

FAQ: S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices

Low Volatility: A Practitioner's Guide

Introducing the S&P U.S. Preferred Stock Low Volatility High Dividend Index

Accounting for Carbon: Sovereign Bonds

TalkingPoints: The S&P/ASX Bank Bill Index – Measuring the Australian Bank Bill Market for Short-Term Cash Solutions

FAQ: S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices

INDEX DESIGN

1. What are the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices? The S&P/TAIFEX RMB Index Series comprises the S&P/TAIFEX RTF RMB Index (USD) and the S&P/TAIFEX RHF RMB Index (USD).  These indices seek to track the performance of the inverse of the nearest quarterly month RTF or RHF futures contract traded on the Taiwan Futures Exchange (TAIFEX), reflecting the number of U.S. dollars per offshore Chinese renminbi (RMB) for Taiwan and Hong Kong.  For the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices, 1x inverse and 2x leverage versions are available and are designed to generate the inverse of and twice the daily excess return of the underlying indices. 

2. Why were the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices created? There has been increasing demand for RMB-denominated assets and a growing trend of internationalization of the RMB.  In collaboration with the TAIFEX, S&P Dow Jones Indices (S&P DJI) has created this index series that enables more effective management of exposure to Chinese yuan currency risk and speculation of the yuan through investment products tracking the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices, as well as their inverse and leverage counterparts.

3. What are the differences between the RTF and RHF futures contracts? There are two key differences in terms of contract size and final settlement prices.  The RTF and RHF have contract sizes of USD 20,000 and USD 100,000, respectively.  For the final settlement price, the RTF uses the spot USD/CNY(TW) fixing published by the Taipei Foreign Exchange Market Development Foundation, while the RHF uses the spot USD/CNY(HK) fixing of the Treasury Markets Association of Hong Kong.

INDEX CONSTRUCTION

1. How are the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices designed? The S&P/TAIFEX RTF RMB Index and the S&P/TAIFEX RHF RMB Index seek to measure the return from a long position in the inverse of the first quarterly month futures contract.  By using the inverse of the futures contract price, the S&P/TAIFEX RMB Indices are denominated in U.S. dollars, although the RTF and RHF futures contracts are quoted in Chinese renminbi per U.S. dollar.  In this way, the indices’ levels rise when the renminbi appreciates (reflected by the respective futures price movement) and vice versa.

2. How are the futures contracts rolled? To improve the capacity of the index, a five-day staggered rolling is implemented.  Specifically, over a five-day rolling period every quarter, starting 10 trading days and ending 6 trading days prior to the futures last trade day (including the last trade day), the index rolls to the second quarterly month contract, with 20% of the portfolio being rolled each day.  Exhibit 1 provides an example roll period, showing the mechanics of the roll period based on the last trade dates of the underlying futures contracts.

pdf-icon PD F Download Full Article

Low Volatility: A Practitioner's Guide

Contributor Image
Tim Edwards

Managing Director and Global Head of Index Investment Strategy

S&P Dow Jones Indices

Contributor Image
Craig Lazzara

Managing Director, Index Investment Strategy

S&P Dow Jones Indices

Contributor Image
Hamish Preston

Head of U.S. Equities

S&P Dow Jones Indices

S&P Dow Jones Indices (S&P DJI) produces a range of low volatility indices, covering various single-country and international markets.  These indices offer a perspective on the returns of lower volatility equities and provide a basis for index-linked products and benchmarks globally.  This practitioner’s guide:  

  • Explains the construction of low volatility indices;
  • Identifies the role of broader market trends, valuations, interest rates, and sector exposures in determining their performance;
  • Highlights the potential applications of low volatility strategies; and
  • Summarizes the evidence for the existence and potential persistence of the so-called “low volatility anomaly.”

Exhibit 1 illustrates an important aspect of low volatility indices: their potential to offer higher risk-adjusted returns than the market benchmark from which they were derived.

INTRODUCTION

Basic financial theory is predicated on the idea that higher-risk investments should be priced to offer commensurately higher returns.  Unfortunately for the theory, a growing body of empirical evidence—accumulated since the 1970s[1]—suggests that, across a wide range of time horizons, geographies, and market segments,[2] stocks with lower volatility have displayed higher risk-adjusted returns.

Meeting the need for low volatility benchmarks, S&P DJI’s low volatility indices track the performance of a portfolio of the least volatile stocks selected from a given benchmark universe, such as the S&P 500.  Indeed, the first-ever low volatility index was the S&P 500 Low VolatilityIndex, launched in April 2011.  Many more have been produced since.[3] 

The performance and risk/return characteristics of these indices, both over hypothetical back tests and subsequent to their launch dates, provide further confirmation that lower-risk stocks can offer superior performance characteristics.  Exhibit 1 provides a summary for a selection of low volatility indices based on various benchmarks over the last 15 years, displaying the improved risk/return ratios of each low volatility index in comparison to its corresponding parent benchmark. 

In light of the growing popularity of products (such as ETFs) offering access to low volatility strategies, a growing body of research identifying and quantifying the drivers of low volatility performance has emerged. These include the role of sectoral allocations, interest rate sensitivities, and equity valuations.  In what follows, we shall briefly summarize the salient points that emerge from this research.

More directly to practitioners’ interests, we shall also examine the portfolio applications of low volatility strategies, in either a multi-factor or multiasset context.  We conclude by addressing the question of whether or not the so-called “low volatility anomaly” of higher risk-adjusted returns might continue.  

Note that while our results extend in spirit to many similar equity strategies, our focus will be restricted to the indices produced by S&P DJI.  Accordingly, we begin with a summary of the methodology used to construct our low volatility indices, and a brief examination of the practical consequences of using historical volatility rankings to form equity portfolios.

pdf-icon PD F Download Full Article

Introducing the S&P U.S. Preferred Stock Low Volatility High Dividend Index

Contributor Image
Phillip Brzenk

Managing Director, Global Head of Multi-Asset Indices

S&P Dow Jones Indices

INTRODUCTION TO PREFERRED STOCKS

What Are Preferred Stocks?

Preferred stocks are hybrid securities, blending characteristics of stocks and bonds.  They sit between common stocks and bonds in a company’s capital structure, thus having a higher claim on a company’s assets and earnings than common stocks, while having a lower claim than bonds (see Exhibit 1).

Like common stocks, preferred stocks represent ownership in a company and are listed as equity in a company’s balance sheet.  However, certain characteristics differentiate preferred stocks from common stocks.  First, preferred stocks provide income to investors in the form of dividend payments, typically providing higher yields than common stocks.  Second, preferred shareholders lack voting rights, resulting in less influence on corporate policy.  While common stock shares offer investors the potential for share price and dividend increases, investors generally look to preferred stocks for their high-yielding, stable dividend payments.

Preferred stocks are issued at a fixed par value, similar to bonds, with most paying a scheduled fixed dividend.  Preferred stocks are rated by independent credit rating agencies.  The rating is generally lower than bonds since preferred stocks offer fewer guarantees and have a lower claim on assets.  While a company risks defaulting if it misses a bondcoupon payment, it can withhold a preferred dividend payment without facing default risk.[1]

pdf-icon PD F Download Full Article

Accounting for Carbon: Sovereign Bonds

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Paris Agreement was signed, committing 195 signatory nation-states to limiting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to well below 2 degrees  Celsius above pre-industrial levels.[1]  This recognized the clear role of governments around the globe in curtailing potentially catastrophic levels of global warming, which could have widespread and systemic impacts on the global economy, capital markets, and the quality of human life.  Sovereign bonds, the issuance of debt by a country to finance its activities, is one of the largest asset classes in the world, with over USD 20 trillion of central government debt securities outstanding in 2016[2] and general government debt exceeding USD 62 trillion in 2016.[3]  As such, it is a key mode of financing for governments, is one of the largest asset allocations by pension funds, and should be a focus of examination for climate risk analysis.

Portfolio carbon footprinting as a tool to support climate reporting and risk assessment has grown in popularity over recent years, so much so that it has become incorporated into best practice reporting guidelines for investors.  These include those outlined by the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), which is backed by the central banks of the G20 countries and is legislated as part of France’s Article 173 regulation.  While it is now becoming common practice for asset owners and managers to report the footprint of their listed equity holdings and corporate fixed income portfolios, sovereign bonds have remained largely unexamined from a carbon risk and reporting perspective due to lack of appropriate metrics and actionable insight.  However, climate change affects all asset classes, so investors would need to measure, understand, and manage the climate change risks embedded in their sovereign bond portfolios as well.

In this paper, Trucost outlines a number of approaches to sovereign bond evaluation and the metrics available.  Scope and breadth of emissions are key considerations, as is the denominator chosen to normalize emissions to facilitate comparison between entities of different size.  The most appropriate metric may differ depending on the question(s) that investors intend to answer.

pdf-icon PD F Download Full Article

TalkingPoints: The S&P/ASX Bank Bill Index – Measuring the Australian Bank Bill Market for Short-Term Cash Solutions

The S&P/ASX Bank Bill Index seeks to measure the performance of the Australian bank bill market, with maturities of up to 91 days. The series is designed for use by institutional investment managers, mutual fund managers, professional advisors, insurance companies, and custodians.

  1. How does the Australian bank bill market satisfy short-term cash balance investments?

Many financial institutions have cash balances that can be invested in short-term money market instruments.

Insurance companies have cash balances derived from:
- A general account to support future claims;
- An operating account used to receive premiums and pay claims; and
- A collateral or hedging account to manage funds.

Asset or fund managers and custodians need short-term investment solutions for omnibus accounts that represent cash-swept balances of client holdings. They can maximize their cash balances by investing in liquid products based on Australian bank bills. 

  1. How is the S&P/ASX Bank Bill Index constructed?

The index is based on the benchmark bank bill rates published by the ASX Benchmarks Pty Limited (ASXB). The S&P/ASX Bank Bill Index is rules based for transparency and follows a select set of eligibility criteria.

The index comprises four benchmarks and nine interpolated rates that are differentiated by the range of maturities of its constituents as follows.

The index is constructed synthetically through interpolated Bank Bill Swap (BBSW) rates, which are administered through procedures set forth by the ASXB. Detailed information on BBSW procedures can be

pdf-icon PD F Download Full Article
Processing ...