You are on page 1of 274

“Risk and Return Relashionship in securities Market.

A report submitted to IIMT, Greater Noida on partial fulfillment of full time


Postgraduate Diploma in Business Management.

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:


Director Raman Chugh
IIMT ENR No. 11105
Greater Noida Batch: 11th

ISHAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGY


2, KNOWLEDGE PARK-1, GREATER NOIDA
Website-www.ishanfamily.com
E-mail: ishan_corporate@yahoo.com
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Here I take the opportuinity to express my gratitude to all


of them, who in some or the other way helped me to accomplish this
project. The project study cannot be completed without their
guidance, assistance, inspiration & cooperation.
For successful accomplishment of task apart from hard
work the most requisite is the right direction & guidance. And for a
student these become the major part for the study. In Sharekhan
this right direction and guidance is provided by my guide and all the
executives of the concerned department, in the form of necessary
information & exhibits that gave me a great help in completing my
work.
First of all I would like to thanks Dr. D.K.Garg, Chairman
Ishan Institute of Management & Technology and Mr. G.K.Sinha
Director and Head of Training & Placement Cell, Ishan Institute of
Management & Technology for giving me this opportuinity of doing
the summer training project in Sharekhan ltd.
A special thanks to Deepak Gupta (Asistannt Manager)
under whom I conducted this study, for his able guidance in getting
my project completed.

I am indebted to my parents because of whose help I have


been able to carry out this work successfully. I am also thankful to
my friends who directly or indirectly helped me lot.
The study has indeed helped me to explore more
knowledgeable avenues related to my topic and I am sure it will help
me in my future.

Raman Chugh
PGDBM (Finance)
Enr. No. 11105
IIMT, Greater Noida.
DECLARATION

I, Raman Chugh student of PGDBM 2nd Semester in Ishan


Institute of Management & Technology, ENR. NO. – 11105, hereby
declare that, this Project Report under the title “Risk and Return
Relashionship in Securities Market” is the record of my original work
under the guidance of Mr. Deepak Gupta(Assistant Manager), Sharekhan
ltd. This report has never been submitted anywhere else for award of any
degree or diploma.

Place: Greater Noida Raman Chugh


Date PGDBM (Finance)
Enr. No. 11105
IIMT, Greater Noida.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Risk and Return in Securities market are two sides of one coin. Securities market is

totally based on this concept of risk and return, without risk returns can not be there,

because the share market is a type of speculation and speculation always carry risk with

it. It depends upon investors how they diversify the risk, how they minimize the risk by

creating an optimum portfolio of securities. RISK IN SECURITIES management

process is to maximize earnings in the context of an acceptable level of risk. With risk

defined as uncertainty, a key component of this process is delineating the possible range

of outcomes and their root causes. As new circumstances arise, a securities lender is

prompted to study existing data in order to achieve a greater comprehension of potential

situations a client may face.

The risks inherent in any securities lending program — including market, credit,

liquidity, operational, legal, and regulatory — are all relevant to the principal common

objectives shared by participants, namely stability of income and preservation of

principal. Of these, market and credit risk most readily lend themselves to quantification

and modeling due to the greater frequency and depth of the data available. The following

narrative focuses on the cash-collateralized securities lending transaction. The risks to

participants who accept non-cash collateral will be addressed in a later article that will

deal, at length, with credit risk modeling efforts.

The relationship of market value to purchase price is captured by its net


Asset value (NAV). The first Digest article noted that a security with a yield exceeding

the current market rate of interest for an investment with a similar maturity structure and

credit quality will be valued in excess of par, while a security with a yield lower than the

current market rate of interest for a similar investment will be valued below par. In the

latter scenario, an investment might have seemed attractive at the inception of the

transaction, but with an increase in interest rates, the original investment is now trading

at a value below the purchase price.

In effect, if the security is not sold prior to maturity, it will only incur an opportunity cost

or a foregone opportunity to earn the current yield. As such, NAV is an indicator of how

the portfolio will perform relative to the market going forward, and increased volatility of

this measure is suggestive of a build-up of risk.


Table of Contents

A. Company Profile

 Chapter 1 About Sharekhan

Background of ShareKhan

 4Ps in Sharekhan:
• Product
• Price
• Place
• Promotion

 Marketing Strategy of Sharekhan

 Competitors of Sharekhan:
• History of Company
• Financial Summary
• Balance Sheet
• Shareholding of company
• Top 5 mutual funds that own the company
• Management of the company
• Product of the company

 Government policy

 Taxation Aspect

 National & International Image

 Share Market Position

 Management Theory in Sharekhan

 Major Problems

 Achievements

 Future Prospects
B. Project Work
 Chapter 2 Risk and Returns in Securities Market
 Risk in Securities Market

 Returns in Securities Market

 Chapter 3 Diversification of Risk

 Risk an Return- Portfolio Theory & Asset Pricing Model

 Fixed Income – An Evolution in Risk and Return

 Chapter 4 Related Concepts

 Exploration Risk and Return in Global Equity Markets.

 SEBI group on Securities Market Risk Management

 Chapter 5

 Calculation of Risk Beta

• Nestle (I) Ltd.


• Jindal Steel Ltd.
• Sh. Cements

 Findings and conclusion

 Recommendation

 Bibliography

 Annexure
CHAPTER. 1
SHAREKHAN DEMAT

Dematerialisation and trading in the demat mode is the safer and faster alternative to the

physical existence of securities. Demat as a parallel solution offers freedom from

delays,thefts, forgeries, settlement risks and paper work. This system works through

depository participants (DPs) who offer demat services and the securities are held in the

electronic form for the investor directly by the

Depository. Sharekhan Depository Services offers dematerialisation services to


individual and corporate investors. Sharekhan have a team of professionals and the latest

technological expertise dedicatedexclusively to our demat department, apart from a

national networkof franchisee, making our services quick, convenient and efficient.At

Sharekhan, ourcommitment is to provide a complete demat solution which is simple,

Safe andsecure. Demat as a parallel solution offers freedom from delays, thefts,

forgeries,settlement risks and paper work. This system works through depository

participants (DPs) who offer demat services and the securities are held in the electronic

form. As per the guidelines of SEBI the trading through different stock exchanges can

bedone only when the shares are in DMat form. DMAT shares means the shares are notin

material form they are converted into electronic form. The transfer of shares in trading by

stock exchanges is done with the help of only DMAT accounts of the clients where the

shares of the clients are entered as in DMAT form. So with so much relevance of

DMATaccounts sharekhan also provide DMAT services to the clients

SHAREKHAN PRODUT OFFERING

The product offered by sharekhan ltd. is its DMAT Account and its services.

Sharekhan offers two types of DMAT accounts.

These are:

1. Speed Trade

2. Classic.

SPEED TRADE
The speed trade account is DMAT account which is mainly for the large scale share

trading Those persons whose main business is only of share trading, who are the dealers

in the share market and the the share trading is not for investments instead of that it is for

their operational activities.

Speed trade customers are different customers, so the services provided to them also

different as they are large clients for the company they are also provided many facilities,

they purchase and sell their shares in bulk and hence pay big amounts of brokerage to the

company so their brokerage charges are very less,

The company also take margin money cheques from these clients.Speed Trade clients are

different as per their sale and purchase of securities in market in bulk. The company

provide special research reports and assistance to the speed trade clients.

Speed trade clients can also access the relevant information regarding the trading from

the branch offices of the company relevant for them.

They can ask for the minimum brokerage charges, transaction charges to the company.

The major services available to them with the d mat account are as follows

Online share trading

Off line share trading

Researh Reports of the company.

Depositary services

Exposure

Portfolio services

Back up services
Derivatives investments.

Mutual Funds Services

Company information

Market inquiry

Price quoting

Major news affecting the market.

IPO Services

Technichal Services

Newsletters

Discussions

Fundamentals

Alerts

Commodities

Commodities Futures

Credit etc.

CLASSIC ACCOUNT

Classic is one of the major product offering by Sharekhan ltd. The company’s main

clients are of Classic DMAT account. These clients are mainly Individuals, HUFs ,

Corporates and others trade in shares just for investment and speculation apart from their

operating activities, i.e. whose main business and area of operations are not share trading.

The persons who want to open Classic Account in the share khan requires the following :
1. Two passport size photographs.

2. One photocopy of PAN card.

3. The Bank Pass Book First page photocopy

4. An agreement book containing agreement with Sharekhan, NSE, BSE and other

regulatory bodies as in prescribed format with stamp papers of Rs.20.

5. The adequate fees.

The companies mainly clients are classic account holders, the company provide best

services to them. The company also take margin money cheques from these clients.The

brokerage etc. are charged by the company from the client are according to agreement

done with the client and hence it depends upon negotiating with the clients, the company

often charges minimum brokerage from the clients who trade in bulk.

The main services available to the cutomers of the classic account are

Online share trading

Off line share trading

Researh Reports of the company.

Depositary services

Exposure

Portfolio services

Back up services

Derivatives investments.

Mutual Funds Services


Company information

Market inquiry

Price quoting

Major news affecting the market.

IPO Services

Technichal Services

Newsletters

Discussions

Fundamentals

Alerts

Commodities

Commodities Futures

Credit etc.

The above are discussed as follows:

Sharekhan ltd. does its business mainly with the help of the online and so it does its

business mainy through the its website. www. Sharekhan.com . The company provide all

above services through the links available in the website the main links available there

are:

My sharekhan

Services

Trade now

Research

News
Market Corner

Derivatives

Knowledge centre

All above links have further links explaining one by one as:

MY SHAREKHAN

Under the link my sharekhan different links are abailable there these links are mainly

My portfolio

Discussion board

My alerts

My preferences

My newsletters

Sharekhan Seminars

My portfolio

My potfplio contains the information regarding the pms ie portfolio management

services, share khan provide the main services of portfolio and under that share khan

provide the information to the respective clients about the securities in therir portfolio,

their services, their prices, their reports about future position in market, their up an low of

the day, closing etc .


The information abailable in the potfolio link is regarding the combination of securities

purchased by the company in behalf of the client of a specific amount given by the client

for such portfolio and the link contains the main information of

no. of securities in the demat account of the client,

name of the company of the securities,

price of purchasing,

current position in the market

Profit /sales till date

Total amount invested

Balance

Broketage charges

All these informations are available to the client of the company by inserting a user name

and password provided by the company.

My alerts

My alert link is provided to the customer for the alerts to customer from time to time so

that customer can never remain uninformed regarding any thing before its occurrence,

under the link my alerts customers are informed about their requirements of

documentation for the clearance of trading, their securities buy and sale information,

expectation of the shares held by them in the market, any fees or charges due by them

like
Brokerage charges

Annual maintainence charges

Cheques dishonoured

Amount payable for the funding of purchase

Amount paid for selling of shares etc.

My Newsletters

My newsletters link contains the newsletters abailable to the clients about their

information necessary and impotant to them regarding the market positions of their

shares held by them and other important news, new guidelines , necessary documents

required by the regulatory bodies,

Changes in the brokerage charges, annual maintainance charges and other important and

relevant information.

ShareKhan Seminars
Sharekhan organizes seminars across the country from time to time in order to educate

investors in various subjects related to the stock, derivatives and commodities market.

This exclusive Seminars are organized by Sharekhan for its Online Trading Customers

for FREE.

These Seminar will equip and help you take an informed investment decision. If you

wish

to built a healthy investment portfolio, ensure that you do attend our Seminar, which are
designed keeping in mind your requirements and organized by porfessionals.

All these Seminars are held by sharekhan from time to time as this is the part of its

services apart from one of its services, by seminars sharekhan can attract more new

Customers and can hold the existing customers, this is also the marketing strategy

Of the company.This can be taken as one medium of advertisement by the company

SERVICES

The another major link available in the website of the company is services.

Under the link services the major links available are

Online services

PMS

Commodity

DEMAT

Share shops

Mutual Funds

These all are discussed as one by one here

Online services
The major work by Sharekhan is done online. The online services are the reason of the

fast, fair and transperant services by the company, the online services mainly is online

share trading this is elaborated as

The client is provided with a unique customer id and a password made by himself and

after registering with the id and password he can get anytime access to the trading link of

the site, aby entering the password and id. After that he can take market watch BSE,

NSE, can place order for sale , purchase, modify the order for sale, purchase of shares

and can trade in any security listed on the stock exchange whether in Equity and whether

in futures and options of shares equity. The funds transfer take place from the saving

account of the customer.

This was regarding online trading of shares only but sharekhan also provide

online trading of commodities, in the same manner the clients can trade through different

commodity exchanges like national commodity exchange etc. They can place order

according to pre defined lot of commodity in the market through the exchange.

Apart from online trading services other online services are also available in sharekhan as

the IPO service are done online, research reports are provided online to the clients.

PMS

PMS is Portfolio management services as this is also one of the main services provided

by the sharekhan .The company charges different fees from the client for the PMS. As

many people are not able to decide which shares, equities are beneficial and they don’t

want to take risk so they hire the PMS of the company under that the experts employed

by the company make a portfolio of the securities of the amount given by the investor
and risk preference. My potfplio contains the information regarding the pms ie portfolio

management services, share khan provide the main services of portfolio and under that

share khan provide the information to the respective clients about the securities in therir

portfolio, their services, their prices, their reports about future position in market, their up

an low of the day, closing etc .

The information abailable in the potfolio link is regarding the combination of securities

purchased by the company in behalf of the client of a specific amount given by the client

for such portfolio and the link contains the main information of

no. of securities in the demat account of the client,

name of the company of the securities,

price of purchasing,

current position in the market

Profit /sales till date

Total amount invested

Balance

Brokerage charges

All these informations are available to the client of the company by inserting a user

name.

DMAT:

As per the guidelines of SEBI the trading through different stock exchanges can be done

only when the shares are in DMat form. DMAT shares means the shares are not in

material form they are converted into electronic form. The transfer of shares in trading by
stock exchanges is done with the help of only DMAT accounts of the clients where the

shares of the clients are entered as in DMAT form.

So with so much relevance of DMAT accounts sharekhan also provide DMAT services

to the clients .Dematerialisation and trading in the demat mode is the safer and faster

alternative to the physical existence of securities. Demat as a parallel solution offers

freedom from delays, thefts, forgeries, settlement risks and paper work. This system

works through depository participants (DPs) who offer demat services and the securities

are held in the electronic form for the investor directly by the Depository.

Sharekhan Depository Services offers dematerialisation services to individual and

corporate investors. Sharekhan have a team of professionals and the latest technological

expertise dedicated exclusively to our demat department, apart from a national network

of franchisee, making our services quick, convenient and efficient.

At Sharekhan, commitment is to provide a complete demat solution which is simple Safe

and secure. Demat as a parallel solution offers freedom from delays, thefts, forgeries,

settlement risks and paper work. This system works through depository participants

(DPs) who offer demat services and the securities are held in the electronic form .

Commodity:
Commodity market in India is today developing very fast, the commodity market deals

with the actual commodity sale purchase through different stock exchanges available for

only commodity exchange, the system of commodity market is almost the same as to the

stock market.

Sharekhan securities provide the services to commodity as its different market segment

so its charges are different from of the share market.

In commodity also the same types of services like portfolio, research reports, futures,

exposure, credit, online trading, offline trading is also available as in equity.

Mutual Funds
Share khan also provide the services of mutual funds to the client on the payment of

prescribed fees, Mutual funds are the most selling securities today in the share market

and it is attracting people very much.

A mutual fund pools together sums from individual investors and invests it in various

financial instruments. Each mutual fund has its own investment objective, which broadly

falls into two categories: capital appreciation and current income.

Suppose a mutual fund sells one million units or shares (used as synonyms in this

context) at Rs 10 a share and collects a total Rs 10 million. If the fund objective stated

investment in blue-chip stocks, the fund manager would invest the entire proceeds (less

any commissions and management fee) of that sale in buying equity shares of companies

like Hindustan Lever, Reliance Industries, Hero Honda and so on. And each individual

who bought shares of the fund would own a percentage of the total portfolio only to the

extent of money invested. The value of the fund's portfolio would depend on how the

shares of these companies perform on the stock market (given their financial prospects).

If the total market value of these companies (as reflected in the fund) increases to Rs 12

million, then each original share of the fund would be worth Rs 12 (Rs 12 million

divided by one million shares). This per share value is what is known as the net asset

value (NAV) of the mutual fund. It equals the market value of all its assets (after

adjusting for commissions, expenses, and liabilities, if any) by the number of such units

or shares outstanding.
Mutual funds over direct investment in equities

As financial intermediaries, they do not come without risk. Also when defined in terms

of our chances of losing money, the risk in mutual funds is no different than that present

in other financial instruments. Still they are relatively safer and a more convenient way

on investing. They offer quick liquidity. Most private mutual funds can be redeemed in

three to four working days, unlike a fixed deposit that is more likely to be received a

month after its maturity, or an equity share after the end of its settlement period (or

depending up on our broker). This too cuts the overall risk associated with investing,

often not so visible and hence not accounted by many investors. But the market risk or

the risk that exists due to economy-wide factors remains. And there is always the

possibility that a fund fails to stick to its pre-determined objectives or invests in securities

that alter its risk profile. In which case, the blame goes straight to the fund manager and

the Asset Management Company (AMC), which manages the mutual fund. All said and

done mutual funds still have following advantage over direct investment in equities.

• Affordable

Almost everyone can buy mutual funds. Even for a sum of Rs 1,000 an investor can

invest in a mutual fund.

• Professional Management
This is the biggest advantage mutual fund have over direct investment over equity. For an

average investor, it is a difficult task to decide what securities to buy, how much to buy

and when to sell. By buying a mutual fund, we acquire a professional fund manager who

manages our money. This is the person who decides what to buy for us, when to buy it

and when to sell. The fund manager takes these decisions after doing adequate research

on the economy, industries and companies, before buying stocks or bonds. Most mutual

fund companies charge a small fee for providing this service which is called the

management fee.

• Diversification

According to finance theory, when our investments are spread across several

securities, our risk reduces substantially. A mutual fund is able to diversify more

easily than an average investor across several companies, which an ordinary investor

may not be able to do. With an investment of Rs 5000, you can buy stocks in some of

the top Indian companies through a mutual fund, which may not be possible to do as

an individual investor.

• Liquidity

Unlike several other forms of savings like the public provident fund or National Savings

Scheme or real assets, you can withdraw your money from a mutual fund on immediate

basis.

• Transparency
Regulations for mutual funds have made the industry very transparent. We can track the

investments that have been made on our behalf and the specific investments made by the

mutual fund scheme to see where our money is going. In addition to this, we get regular

information on the value of our investment.

• Tax Benefits

Mutual funds have historically been more efficient from the tax point of view. A debt

fund pays a dividend distribution tax of 12.5 per cent before distributing dividend to an

individual investor or an HUF, whereas it is 20 per cent for all other entities. There is no

dividend tax on dividends from an equity fund for individual investor.

MUTUAL FUND INVESTING - RISK VS REWARDS

Having understood the basics of mutual funds the next step is to build a successful

investment portfolio. Before we can begin to build a portfolio, one should understand

some other elements of mutual fund investing and how they can affect the potential value

of our investments over the years. The first thing that has to be kept in mind is that when

we invest in mutual funds, there is no guarantee that we will end up with more money

when we withdraw our investment than what we started out with. That is the potential of
loss is always there. The loss of value in our investment is what is considered risk in

investing.

Even so, the opportunity for investment growth that is possible through investments in

mutual funds far exceeds that concern for most investors. Here’s why.

At the cornerstone of investing is the basic principal that the greater the risk we take, the

greater the potential reward. Or stated in another way, we get what we pay for and we get

paid a higher return only when we're willing to accept more volatility.

Risk then, refers to the volatility -- the up and down activity in the markets and individual

issues that occurs constantly over time. This volatility can be caused by a number of

factors -- interest rate changes, inflation or general economic conditions. It is this

variability, uncertainty and potential for loss, that causes investors to worry. We all fear

the possibility that a stock we invest in will fall substantially. But it is this very volatility
that is the exact reason that we can expect to earn a higher long-term return from these

investments than from a savings account.

Different types of mutual funds have different levels of volatility or potential price

change, and those with the greater chance of losing value are also the funds that can

produce the greater returns for we over time. So risk has two sides: it causes the value of

our investments to fluctuate, but it is precisely the reason we can expect to earn higher

returns.

We might find it helpful to remember that all financial investments will fluctuate. There

are very few perfectly safe havens and those simply don't pay enough to beat inflation

over the long run.

Investing in mutual fund – choosing the right scheme/option

Choosing a mutual fund is not an easy task with so many funds. Rarely do investors-

normal investors, who do something else for a living-have a systematic checklist of

things that they should evaluate about a fund, which they are considering buying. Here's

my blueprint for a structured approach to fund selection. There are four basic areas that

one must evaluate in a fund to decide whether it's a good investment.

Performance:
Performance comparisons must be used only to compare the same type of fund. They are

meaningless otherwise. Only when used within the same category of funds performance

numbers tell anything at all..

Risk:

Almost all investing is risky, at least those investments that get any meaningful returns.

In general it is said that the riskier a fund, the more its potential for earning high returns,

at least most of the time. However, this is a simplified view that implies that a given

amount of risk always gets the same returns. This is simply not true because not all funds

are equally well-run.

The true measure of risk is whether a fund is able to give the kind of returns that justify

the kind of risk it is taking. Evidently, this is not as easy to measure as returns. There are

a wide variety of statistical techniques that can be used to measure this. When someone

says that a fund has a good performance, it means that the fund, compared to similar

funds, performed better, given its risk level.

Portfolio:

Unlike performance and risk, portfolio is one of the 'internals' of a fund. It is internal in

the sense that the result of good, bad or ugly portfolios is already reflected in the first two

measures and it's perfectly OK to choose funds on the basis of those two measures alone

without actually bothering about what they own. My basic analysis of portfolios

measures whether a fund (I am talking about equity funds here) holds mostly large,
medium or small companies. It also looks at whether a fund prefers companies that may

be overpriced but which are growing fast or whether it prefers low-priced stocks

belonging to companies that are growing at a more gentle pace. For fixed income funds,

an analogous analysis tells one whether a fund prefers volatile but potentially high return

long-duration securities or stable and low return short-duration securities. Also, one can

analyze whether a fund prefers safer (lower returns) securities or riskier (higher returns)

securities.

Management:

Fund management is a fairly creative and personality-oriented activity. This may not be

true of some types of funds like shorter-term fixed-income funds and, of course, index

funds, but equity investment is more of an art than a science. When we are buying a fund

because we like its track record (and unless we can foresee the future, that's the only way

to buy a fund), what we are actually buying is a fund manager's (or sometimes a fund

management team's) track record. What we need to make sure is that the fund manager

who was responsible for the part of the fund's track record that we are buying into is still

there. A high-performance equity fund with a new manager is a like a new fund.

Cost:

Funds are not run for free and nor are they run at an identical cost. While the difference

in different funds' cost is not large, these can compound to significant variations,

especially for fixed income funds where the performance differential between funds is

quite small to begin with. Even for equity funds, it may not be worth buying a higher cost
fund that appears to be only slightly better than a lower cost one. There is no reason for

one AMC to have much higher costs than others, apart from the fact that it wants to have

a higher margin, or that it wants to spend more on things like marketing, which are of no

relevance to you. If an AMC wants higher returns from its business, then it must justify it

by giving you higher returns on your investments.

Cost of investing in mutual funds

In addition to loads a mutual fund also charges asset management fees, and certain other

expenses. These charges imposed by mutual funds are meant to compensate the fund for

the expenses it incurs in managing assets, processing transactions and paying brokerages.

For instance every redemption request involves not only administrative processing costs

but also other costs associated with raising money to pay off the outgoing investor.

Mutual Funds cannot, however, be arbitrary in the imposition of these charges. For

instance, regulations stipulate that the difference between the repurchase and the resale

price cannot exceed 7 per cent of sale price, and that recurring expenses cannot exceed

2.5 per cent of average weekly net assets.

Loads:

• Entry Load/Sale Load


It is the charge imposed on the investor at the time his entry into the fund. Thus, the

investor has to pay for the value of the units plus an additional charge. This additional

charge is called the entry/sale load.

• Exit Load/Repurchase Load

It is the charge imposed on the investor at the time of his exit from the scheme.

Operationally, therefore, the mutual fund will pay back to the investor the value of the

units reduced by the charge levied on exit.

• Contingent Deferred Sales Charge

A mutual fund may not want to charge an exit load in all the cases. In such a case the

mutual fund may impose charges based on the time of withdrawal. Thus, a fund desirous

of long-term investors may stipulate that the exit charge will keep reducing with duration

of investment. Such a charge is called Contingent Deferred Sales Charge. The asset

management company is entitled to levy a contingent deferred sales charge for

redemption during the first four years after purchase, not exceeding 4% of the

redemption proceeds in the first year, 3% in the second year, 2% in the third year and 1%

in the fourth year. In order to charge a CDSC the scheme has to be a no load scheme as

per the regulation laid down by SEBI. The idea behind charging CDSC is the recovery of

expenses incurred on promotion or distribution of the scheme

• Switchover/Exchange Fee
It is the fees charged by a fund when the investor decides to switch his investment from

one scheme of the fund to another scheme from the same fund family.

• Recurring Expenses:

Apart from loads, mutual funds also charge some other expenses. Even here regulations

stipulate the ceiling on each head. Some of the fees charged by the fund are:

o Investment Management & Advisory Fees - As the name explains this is

meant to remunerate the asset management company for managing the

investor's money.

o Trustee Fees - is the fees payable to the trustees for managing the trust.

o Custodian Fees - is the fees paid by the fund to its custodians, the

organization which handles the possession of the securities invested in by

the fund.

o Registrar and Transfer Agents Charges - is the fees payable to the registrar

and the transfer agents for handling the formalities related to the transfer

of units and other related operations.

TRADE NOW

Trade now is one of major and important link in the website of the sharekhan. By this

link the customer who have a genuine ID and password can sale and purchase their
securities through online.

There are mainly two segments of Trade now:

1. Fast Trade

2. Classic

RESEARCH

Sharekhan ltd. also provide research reports to its clients about the postion of market

For example which securities can fall and which can be up in the market , at what time

Which security should sale or purchase etc.Sharekhan understand that every investors

needs and goals are different. Hence it provide a comprehensive set of research reports,

so that customers can make the right investment decisions regardless of their investing

preferences.Its research mainly includes:

1. Fundamental

2. Technichal

3. Mutual funds

NEWS
This is the important service of Sharekhan limited , as when the customer logon to the

website of the company he don’t require to go another site for the news section,

Sharekhan’s experts edit the whole day news update the section for the whole day and

Present in simpler form in front of the investors. The major sections of news link are as

follows:

Top Stories

Sectoral news

Economy

Finance

Press Digest

Mutual Fund

IPO

Market Today

MARKET CORNER

In the link market corner all information regarding

Charting, Announcements,FIs activities, Reseults, Price Watch,Company information,

IPO, Mutual Fund etc.


DERIVATIVES

Derivatives services by sharekhan limited includes the following

Equity Futures and Options

Commodity Futures

KNOWLEDGE CENTRE

The link knowledge centre includes the following further links which are provided for

Increase in knowledge of the clients and prospective clients of the organsiation. The

Main links are here as follows;

School

Stock Trivia

Opinion polls

Book Reviews

FAQs

PRICE

The price is very important for any organization specially which there is tough

competition in the market. The prices charged by sharekhan are not so low so that
thebrand image in mind of customers and potential clients do not fall , and it is not so

Much high that it can be easily beatable by the competitors.

DMAT OPENING CHARGES

Online and Offline Services

The maximum charges under this are Rs. 750 [including the fees payable to NSE, BSE

and other regulatory bodies]The minimum charges under this are Rs. 375 [including the

fees payable to NSE, BSE and other regulatory bodies] this is in case of corporate deal.

With the cheque of Rs. 5000 as margin money the fees for this is charged as Rs. 500.

These are for life time.

Offline Services Only

For the offline services only the charges are cheque of Rs. 460. These are for life time.

BROKERAGE CHARGES

Maximum Brokerage Charges are on intra day 10 paisa.

Minimum Brokerage Charges are on intra day 5 paisa.

Maximum Brokerage Charges are on delievery 50 paisa.

Minimum Brokerage Charges are on delievery 25 paisa.

MAINTENANCE CHARGES

No maintenance charges for first year, from 2nd year it is Rs. 300 p.a.

PLACE
Share Shops
Get everything you need at a Sharekhan
outlet!
Customers have to do is walk into any of Sharekhan 588 share shops across 213 cities in

India to get a host of trading related services – the friendly customer service staff will

also help them with any account related queries they have.

Share Khan ltd. has many branches all over the India through where the company

operates in different areas and The company has a long chain of frenchisee also so the

network of sharekhan ltd has spread across all over the country. Share khan shops are

available many places in India and customer can take assistance from any of these for the

product and service availing.


Sharekhan outlet offers the following services:

Online BSE and NSE executions (through BOLT and NEAT terminals)

Free access to investment advice from Sharekhan's research team

Sharekhan ValueLine (a fortnightly publication with reviews of recommendations, stocks


to watch out for etc

Daily research reports and market review (High Noon, Eagle Eye)

Pre-market Report (Morning Cuppa)

Daily trading calls based on technical analysis

Cool trading products (Daring Derivatives, Trading Ring and Market Strategy)

Personalised advice
Live market information

Depository services: Demat and Remat transactions

Derivatives trading (Futures and Options)

Internet-based online trading: SpeedTrade, SpeedTradePlus

The places where Shops of sharekhan are mainly

Agra

Ahmedabad

Allahbad

Ambala

Amritsar

Anand

Banda

Bangalore

Baroda

Belgaum

Bhopal

Bhubneshvar

Bijapur

Bhopal

Bhubnshvar

Calcutta

Chennai
Coimbtore

Cuttack

Dadri

Dehradun

Dispur

Faridabad

Gandhinagar

Gangtok

Gurgaon

Gwalior

Habra

Hubli

Hyderabad

Indore

Itarsi

Jaipur

Jammu

Jalandhar

Kanpur

Kochi

Lucknow

Ludhiana

Mumbai
Mysore

Nagpur

Nasik

New Delhi

Noida

Pathankot

Patna

Pondicherry

Pune

Sagar

Solapur

Surat

Thiruvanantpuram

Ujjain

and many more……

Branch - Head Office

A-206, Phoenix House, 2nd Floor, Senapati


Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400
013.

Telephone No: 022-24989000

PROMOTION
Sharekhan limited is one of the leading broketage house in India , as it is 85 years old it

is has become a brand name in India. For attracting more customers sharekhan also do

some

other activities for its promotion. The punchline of the company in it advertisement is “

YOUR GUIDE TO FINANCIAL JUNGLE” as the logo of the company is the lion so

this combination itself suggest Sharekhan to be a king of the financial jungle or share

market.Company advertise itself through print media most, The ECONOMIC TIMES,

BUSNESS WORLD etc. mostly contain its advertisement. Apart from the print

Advertisements, company also advertise itself by way of Canopies etc. Other than way of

advertisement the company promote itself by presales and post sale services as by

arranging first step seminars and by customer care department. The company provide

free of cost research repots 3 times a day to the clients for which mostly other companies

charges heavy fees. The company provide yearly magazines to the clients named Value

line. Thus by the adoption of the different means the company is promoting itself.
MARKETING STRATEGIES

PRODUCT STRATEGY

The product strategy of the company is very good to compete with competitors the

company operate in different field of the financial services which provide the different

kind of variety in the services the major services it provide are

Equity Trading

Futures and options in Equity

Commodity

Futures in Commodity

Mutual Funds

IPO

Depository

PRICE STRATEGY

The price strategy of the Sharekhan is also better. The following are its features:

It have a different range of prices for different type of customersIt have very less

maintenance charges.It have different range of brokerage charges that depends upon the

order of the client.It do not charge any hidden charges like many other competitors which

is helpful in building its clean image.


It do not charge on research reports provided to the clients for which many other

competitors charge very high amount.

PLACE STRATEGY

Share khan have 588 share shops in 213 cities across the India. That provide a large

network of its services. That is easily accessible to the customer.

PROMOTIONAL STRATEGY

Sharekhan adopt different promotional activities for the growth of the organization. The

following are some ways adopted by sharekhan to promote itself.

Advertising:

Print advertising as magazines, newspapers, Hoardings etc.

Awareness:

Sharekhan also promote itself by awaring people about itself and share market, its

product and services. These modes are

Seminars

Canopies.

Surveys.
TIE UP

As its strategies Sharekhan have also tie up with the following Banks. These banks are

Union Bank Of India

HDFC Bank.

Oriental Bank of Commerce

ING Vysya Bank.


INDIA BULLS

Introduction of the company.

Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd (Indiabulls) is one of the leading integrated retail

financial services company in India which was incorporated in the year 2000. It offers a

full range of financial services and products ranging from Equities to Insurance.

Indiabulls provides full access to all the products and services through multi-channels. As

on 31st March 2005,the company operates through its head office in New Delhi and 148

offices in 76 cities. The company completed its Initial Public Offering in September 2004

by issuing 27,187,519 equity shares of par value of Rs.2 per share at a premium of Rs.17

per share. The company has raised Rs.51.6 crores and has used the proceeds to

consoildate its market leadership and enter new businesses. Indiabulls Securities Ltd,

Indiabulls Insurance Advisors Pvt Ltd, Indiabulls Commodities Pvt Ltd, Indiabulls Credit

Services Ltd and Indiabulls Finance Company Pvt Ltd are the subisidiaries of the

company. Indiabulls Professional Network is a flagship product which offers real-time

prices, detailed data and news, intelligent analytics and electronic trading capabilities.
Management of the Company

Whole-time Director Sameer Gehlaut

President & CFO Rajiv Rattan

Director Saurabh K Mittal

Director Aishwarya Katoch

Director Shamsher Singh

Director

Director Kartar Singh Gulia

Whole time director Gagan Banga

Company Secretary Amit Jain.


Product Details of the company.

Un Installed Production Sales Sales


Product Name
it Capacity Quantity Quantity Value

Commission Rs. 0 0 0 0

Interest Rs. 0 0 0 51.89

License Fees Rs. 0 0 0 0.06

Profit on sale of
Rs. 0 0 0 0
Investment
Financial Summary

FigureHeads DataType Months Months


Date - 200603 200512
For Months - 3 9
Net Sales/Income Rs 66.52 140.57
Other Income Rs 4.85 0
OPBDIT Rs 58.72 115.12
DEP Rs 0.2 0.1
Tax Rs 9.99 24.52
PAT Rs 22.12 52.58
Equity Rs 32.05 32.41
EPS Rs 1.77 1.77
BV Rs 26.3 26.3
P/E % 55.3587

The Top 5 mutual Funds that own the company

Scheme Name No.Of Shares % Portfolio

JM FMP - Yrly SA2 (G) 0 26.33


JM FMP - Yrly SA2 (D) 0 26.33
JM FMP - Yrly SA2 (G) 0 26.32
JM FMP - Yrly SA2 (D) 0 26.32
JM FMP - Yrly SA2 (G) 0 26.31
Top 3 Share holding of the company

Shareholding Top 3

Total Foreign 58.22


Total Promoters 30.34
Total Public & Others 4.71
Quarterly Results of the Company

Name Mar-2006 Dec-2005 Sep-2005 Jun-2005

Sales Turnover 66.52 42.16 54.42 43.12


Other Income 4.85 0.28 0.11 0.47
Total Income 71.37 42.44 54.53 43.59
Total Expenditure 12.65 8.65 9.29 7.51
Operating Profit 58.72 33.79 45.24 36.08
Interest 26.41 13.32 16.49 8.1
Gross profit 32.31 20.47 28.75 27.98
Depreciation 0.2 0.07 0.03 0.01
Tax 9.99 5.47 9.48 9.56
Reported Profit After
22.12 14.93 19.24 18.41
Tax
Extra-ordinary Items 0 0 0 0
Adjusted Profit After
22.12 14.93 19.24 18.41
Extra-ordinary item
EPS (Unit Curr.) 1.38 0.92 1.35 1.37
Book Value (Unit Curr.) 0 0 0 0
Dividend (%) 0 25 0 0
Equity 32.05 32.41 32.41 26.89

PBIDTM(%) 88.2742 80.1471 83.1312 83.6735


PBDTM(%) 48.5719 48.5531 52.8298 64.8887
PATM(%) 33.2532 35.4127 35.3546 42.6948

Price Status of the company as on the july 3,2006


BSE 265.55 +10.90
NSE 265.80 +11.80
52 Week High 368.70
52 Week Low 22.05

AdditionalCompanyProfileDetails

Chairman/BoardMembers:

Whole-timeDirector : SameerGehlaut
FaceValue:2

MarketLot:1

Industry:Finance & Invest

Fortis financial Services ltd.

Introduction of the company

Promoted by Ranbaxy Laboratories, Fortis Financial Services (FFSL) was incorporated

in Mar.'94. FFSL, together with its associates, have acquired 16.52 lac fully paid-up

equity shares of Rs 10 each of the Empire Finance Company (EFCL) at a price of Rs

48.75 per share, representing 43.95% of the voting capital of EFCL, later in Jul' 95 it was

amalgamated with the company. The company is engaged in the business of leasing, hire
purchase and other related financial services. FFSL went public in Feb.'95 to augment

resources to meet the needs of its planned growth. The company obtained its category-I

merchant banking registration from SEBI in Apr.'95. The company has been trying hard

to recover money from various clients through legal procedures and various other

measures and accordingly written off Rs 37.14 cr during the year 1999-2000 in cases

where there are no changes of any recovery.

BIO DATA OF THE COMPANY

Industry Name: Finance & Invest


House Name: BQ
Year Of Incorporation: 1994
Regd.Office
Address: 55 Hanuman Road,Connaught Place
District: New Delhi
State: New Delhi
Pin Code: 110001
Telephone No.: 91-011-51512000
Fax: 91-011-23354944
Email Id: WebSite:
Auditors
Auditors: R V Shah & Co Company Status: A
Registrars
Name: Intime Spectrum Registry Ltd Address: 3rd Flr Phase I A-31,Naraina Indl

Area,Near Payal Cinema,New Delhi - 110 028


Tel No.: 91-11-51410592-94 Fax: 91-11-25896530
Management of the Company

Name

Chairman Harpal Singh


Managing Director Sunil Godhwani
Director Malvinder Mohan Singh
Director Shivinder Mohan Singh
Director Vinay Kumar Kaul
Director V M Bhutani
Director Umesh Kumar Khaitan
Company Secretary Sunil Kumar Garg
Product of the Company

Installed Production
Product Name Unit Sales Quantity Sales Value
Capacity Quantity

Commission Rs. 0 0 0 0.21


Consultancy Rs. 0 0 0 0.69
Dividend Rs. 0 0 0 0.05
Interest Rs. 0 0 0 0.63
Lease Rentals Rs. 0 0 0 0.12
Sale Of Shares Rs. 0 0 0 4.56
Services Charges Rs. 0 0 0 0.22

Financial Summary of the Company


FigureHeads DataType Months Months
Date - 200603 200512
For Months - 3 9
Net Sales/Income Rs 0.06 26.03
Other Income Rs 12.22 0
OPBDIT Rs -9.35 25.27
DEP Rs 0.24 0.74
Tax Rs 0.07 0.01
PAT Rs -9.7 24.07
Equity Rs 25.86 25.86
EPS Rs 0.16 0.16
BV Rs -4.17 -4.17
P/E % 6.52948

Major share holding of the Company

Shareholding Top 3
Total Promoters 78.71
Total Public & Others 13.49
Total Foreign 4.16
Price status of the company as on july 3, 2006

BSE 55.80 +2.65


NSE 0 0
52 Week High 66.00
52 Week Low 12.90
AdditionalCompanyProfileDetails

Chairman/BoardMembers:

Chairman : HarpalSingh

FaceValue:10

MarketLot:1

Industry:Finance&investments
History of the company

The KVB had commenced its banking business in 1916 at Karur Town (Tamilnadu).

Over the years the bank has graduated to become one of the top banks in the private

sector with strong and healthy fundamentals. The Bank has been changing its style of

functioning to fit into the constantly changing and dynamic technology age. Apart from

regular banking business, the bank also focuses on merchant banking, leasing and other

fee-based business. Merchant banking activities have been beefed up by creating separate

cells in Mumbai, New Delhi, Chennai and Secunderbad to cash in on the growing

potential in the capital market following the growth impulses in the economy. In 1995 the

bank issued 20,00,000 bonus shares in the ratio of 1:1 which was followed by rights issue

in the ratio of 1:2 at a premium of Rs 25 per share in 1996. Thus equity share capital

stood increased to Rs.6 crore. KVB and I-Flex Solutions have announced that I-Flex's

flagship product Flexcube was deployed across 183 branches of the bank. The

deployment of the flexcube Universal Banking system will enhance bank's corporate and

Retail banking business, and offer its customers anytime, anywhere access to its services.

This software would help to offer customers services through multiple delivery channels

including internet, phone, ATM etc. With a view to strengthening its capital base and
offering attractive returns to shareholders,the bank has awarded its shareholders bonus

shares in the ratio of 1:1. Subsequent to this bonus issue the Equity capital stood

increased at Rs.16.40 crores from Rs.6 crores. The bank has also made rights issue on

December,2002 to January,2003 and the issue was oversubscribed. The bank has tied up

for bancassurance with Bajaj Allianz General Insurance to hawk their non-life insurance

products through their branches. The total branches as at March,2005 were 231 and the

ATMs at 156. During 2004-05 the company introduced 6 new loan products i.e KVB

Special Home Loan, IPO Funding Scheme, KVB Kisan Mithra Scheme, Easy Trade Fin

Scheme, KVB Happy Kisan Scheme and Gold Card Scheme for Export Constituents of

the Bank. Further the company has launched a new product 'Cash Passport' which is

similar to ATM/Debit card and this product is offered in pursuance of the agreement

entered into with 'Travelex' which is engaged in travel related services all over the world.

Travellers going abroad can use this card preloaded with the required foreign exchange.

In 2004-05 the bank has entered into an agreement with MITR consortium because of

which ATMs of Punjab National Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Indian Bank and

UTI Bank are at the services of KVB customers. Further the bank has implemented

RTGS facility for instant funds transfer across the country in 26 centres. In 2005-06 the

bank has launched Mobile Top-up facility to re-charge the cell phone of all service

providers through our ATM.


Financial Summary of Company

FigureHeads DataType Months Months


Date - 200603 200512
For Months - 3 9
Net Sales/Income Rs 172.14 566.4
Other Income Rs 56.46 0
OPBDIT Rs 151.46 398.25
DEP Rs 0 0
Tax Rs 8.9 37.5
PAT Rs 44.37 90.98
Equity Rs 17.98 17.98
EPS Rs 73.59 73.59
BV Rs 484.78 484.78
P/E % 7.69341

Balance Sheet of Company for last 5 financial years


Name Mar-2006 Mar-2005 Mar-2004 Mar-2003 Mar-2002
CAPITAL AND

LIABILITIES

Capital + 17.98 17.98 17.98 16.41 6


Reserves and Surplus
853.65 742.9 694.05 542.27 424.11
+
Deposits + 7576.84 6672.19 5911.48 5121.92 4180.06
Borrowings + 195.62 92.31 103.19 267.76 306.09
Other Liabilities &
363.8 359.47 380.74 225.35 193.86
Provisions +

TOTAL 9007.89 7884.85 7107.44 6173.71 5110.12

ASSETS

Cash & Balances


470.62 381.49 327.05 230.47 209.96
with RBI
Balances with Banks

& money at Call & 311.73 273.68 270.75 458.58 649.09

Short Notice
Investments + 2298.13 2219.03 2173.01 1845.08 1538.91
Advances + 5555.45 4619.8 4023.24 3344.4 2460.03
Fixed Assets + 98.43 102.16 92.18 85.53 73.7
Other Assets + 273.53 288.69 221.21 209.65 178.43

TOTAL 9007.89 7884.85 7107.44 6173.71 5110.12

Contingent Liabilities
2552.92 2003.48 1958.66 1999.1 1907.03
+
Bills for collection 520.23 381.67 432.87 234.44 213.49

The Product of Company

Un Installed Production Sales Sales


Product Name
it Capacity Quantity Quantity Value
Income on investments Rs. 0 0 0 186.94
Interest on balance with
Rs. 0 0 0 10.68
RBI
Interest/disc on
Rs. 0 0 0 453.16
advance/bills
Others Rs. 0 0 0 0.07
10.32
6.8
3.52
2.24
1.9
3.86
2.32
28.6
Top 3 Shareholding of the company.

Total Public & Others 55.10


Total Foreign 20.93
Total Institutions 10.56
Top 5 Mutual funds That own the company

No.Of Shares % Portfolio


Scheme Name

DSP ML FTP - Series 3 (G) 5000.00 30.00


DSP ML FTP - Series 3 (D) 5000.00 30.00
Kotak FMP - Series 13 (G) 0 19.00
Kotak FMP - Series 13 (D) 0 19.00
DWS FTF - Series 4 (G) 0 14.99
The Price Status of the Company as on july 3, 2006

BSE 573.95 +8.10


NSE 573.65 +7.35
52 Week High 698.00
52 Week Low 271.15
Additional Company Profile Details

Chairman/BoarMembers:

Chairman&CEO : PTKuppuswamy

FaceValue:10

MarketLot:50

Industry:Banks - Private Sector


ICICI direct

History of the Company

ICICI Bank (ICICIBK) is a commercial bank promoted by ICICI Ltd, an Indian Financial

Institution. It was incorporated in Jan.'94 and received its banking licence from Reserve

Bank of India in May.'94. It is the 2nd largest bank in India. The bank has 562 branches

& extension counters across India and 1910 ATMs. The Bank offers a wide spectrum of

domestic and international banking services to facilitate trade, investment banking

,Insurance, Venture Captial, asset management, cross border business & treasury and

foreign exchange services besides providing a full range of deposit and ancillary services

for both individuals and corporates through various delivery Channels and specialized

subsidiaries. All the branches are fully computerised with the state-of-the-art technology

and systems, networked through VSAT technology. The bank is connected to the SWIFT

International network. The bank has 14 subsidiaries across India and other countries like

Uk, Canada and Russia. To maintain the leadership status bank foray into internet

banking by web- enable its existing products and services. It has gained favourable

acceptance from its customer for its initiatives in business to business and business to

customer solution. To efficiently distribute its products and services, the bank has

developed multiple access channels comprising lean brick and mortar branches, ATMs,

call centers and Internet banking. The Bank has introduced the concept of mobile ATMs
in the remote/rural areas. It has also extended its mobile banking services to all cellular

service providers across India and NRI customers in USA,UK,Middle-East and

Singapore. In 2000-01 the Bank of Madura (BOM) got merged with ICICIBK. With this

merger ICICIBK has become one of the largest private sector banks in India. The Board

of Directors , approved the merger of ICICI(Financial Institution) with ICICI Bank in

2001. The two subsidiaries of ICICI Ltd viz ICICI Personal Financial Serivces and ICICI

Capital Services was also merged with the ICICI Bank with effective from 28th March

2002. During May,2003 the bank has acquired Transamerica Appple Distribution

Finance Private Ltd which is primarily engaged in financing in the two-wheeler segment.

After acquisition the name of the company was changed to ICICI Distribution Finance

Private Limited. The Banks subordinated long-term foreign currency debt was upgraded

to Baa3 to Ba1 by Moody's Investor Service. In the Wholesale Banking segment,the bank

has achieved a significant milestone in the market making activity by expanding the

product suite to include foreign exchange options against Indian Rupee as RBI allowed

them to be traded w.e.f.07.07.2003.The bank has emerged as one of the largest market-

makers in merchant as well as inter-bank markets for this product.


Financial Summary of The Company

FigureHeads DataType Months Months


Date - 200603 200512
For Months - 3 9
Net Sales/Income Rs 3989.79 13175.9
Other Income Rs 1601.92 0
OPBDIT Rs 3658.22 9035.83
DEP Rs 0 0
Tax Rs 239.87 462.45
PAT Rs 789.93 1750.14
Equity Rs 889.83 740.92
EPS Rs 25.99 25.99
BV Rs 170.34 170.34
P/E % 17.2226

Management of the company

Chairman N Vaghul
Managing Director & CEO K V Kamath
Director Somesh R Sathe
Director Lakshmi N Mittal
Director Anupam Puri
Director Marti G Subrahmanyam
Deputy Managing Director Nachiket Mor
Joint Managing Director Kalpana Morparia
Deputy Managing Director Chanda D Kochhar
Director P M Sinha
Nominee (Govt) Vinod Rai
Director M K Sharma
General Manager & CS Jyotin Mehta
Joint Managing Director Lalita D Gupte
Addtnl Non-Executive Director V Prem Watsa
Director Sridhar Iyengar
Director T S Vijayan
Additional Director R K Joshi
Additional Director Narendra Murkumbi

Product of the Company

Installed Production Sales Sales


Product Name Unit
Capacity Quantity Quantity Value

Income on investments Rs. 0 0 0 2229.44


Income on investments Rs. 0 0 0 3692.76
Interest on balance with
Rs. 0 0 0 232.01
RBI
Interest on balance with
Rs. 0 0 0 335.46
RBI
Interest/disc on
Rs. 0 0 0 6752.83
advance/bills
Interest/disc on
Rs. 0 0 0 9684.96
advance/bills
Others Rs. 0 0 0 71.32
Others Rs. 0 0 0 195.61
Finantial analysis by Ratios
Name Mar-2005 Mar-2004 Mar-2003 Mar-2002 Mar-2001
Key Ratios
Credit-Deposit(%) 91.74 99.7 125 111.56 40.73
Investment / Deposit (%) 55.52 67.26 88.91 90.95 48.02
Cash / Deposit (%) 7 8.85 8.3 6.2 7.44
Interest Expended /
69.83 77.93 84.8 72.44 67.44
Interest Earned (%)
Other Income / Total
27.33 25.41 25.26 22.1 15.45
Income (%)
Operating Expenses /
25.49 21.32 16.1 23.07 22.07
Total Income (%)
Interest Income / Total
6.39 7.7 8.84 3.47 7.81
Funds (%)
Interest Expended / Total
4.46 6 7.5 2.52 5.27
Funds (%)
Net Interest Income / Total
1.93 1.7 1.34 0.96 2.54
Funds (%)
Non Interest Income /
2.4 2.62 2.99 0.98 1.43
Total Funds (%)
Operating Expenses /
2.24 2.2 1.9 1.03 2.04
Total Funds (%)
Profit before Provisions /
2.09 2.12 2.43 0.91 1.93
Total Funds (%)
Net Profit / Total funds
1.36 1.4 1.14 0.42 1.01
(%)
RONW (%) 19.51 21.91 18.87 7.23 13.21
Bio Data of the Company

Industry Name: Finance & Invest


House Name: BQ
Year Of Incorporation: 1994
Regd.Office
Address: 55 Hanuman Road,Connaught Place
District: New Delhi
State: New Delhi
Pin Code: 110001
Telephone No.: 91-011-51512000
Fax: 91-011-23354944
Email Id: WebSite:
Auditors
Auditors: R V Shah & Co Company Status: A
Registrars
Name: Intime Spectrum Registry Ltd Address: 3rd Flr Phase I A-31,Naraina Indl

Area,Near Payal Cinema,New Delhi - 110 028


Tel No.: 91-11-51410592-94 Fax: 91-11-25896530
Balance Sheet of the Company

Name Mar-2005 Mar-2004 Mar-2003 Mar-2002 Mar-2001


CAPITAL AND

LIABILITIES

Capital + 1086.76 966.4 962.66 962.55 196.82


Reserves and
11813.2 7394.16 6320.65 5632.41 1092.26
Surplus +
Deposits + 99818.8 68108.6 48169.3 32085.1 16378.2
Borrowings + 33544.5 30740.2 33178.5 48681.2 1032.79
Other Liabilities
22172.1 18940.2 19129.1 17598.2 1036.51
& Provisions +

TOTAL 168435 126150 107760 104959 19736.6

ASSETS

Cash & Balances


6344.9 5408 4886.14 1774.47 1231.66
with RBI
Balances with 6585.08 3062.64 1602.86 11011.9 2362.03

Banks & money at


Call & Short

Notice
Investments + 50487.3 42742.9 35462.3 35891.1 8186.86
Advances + 91405.1 62647.6 53279.4 47034.9 7031.46
Fixed Assets + 4038.04 4056.41 4060.73 4239.34 384.75
Other Assets + 9574.82 8232.02 8468.83 5007.82 539.83

TOTAL 168435 126150 107760 104959 19736.6

Contingent
268154 202942 89438.5 39446.6 13848
Liabilities +
Bills for collection 2392.09 1510.93 1336.78 1323.42 1229.8
Total Shareholding of the Company

Total Foreign 73.52


Total Institutions 15.07
Total Public & Others 6.76
Top 5 Mutual Funds that own the company

Scheme Name No.Of Shares % Portfolio

Birla FMP - Annual Series 2 (D) 0 426.28


Birla FMP - Annual Series 2 (G) 0 426.28
Grindlays FMP - 11 - A (G) 0 99.91
Grindlays FMP - 11 - A (D) 0 99.91
Grindlays FMP - 11 - A (G) 0 99.90
Additional Company Profile Details

Chairman/BoardMembers:

Chairman : NVaghul

FaceValue:10

MarketLot:1

Industry:Banks-PvtSector
Karvy

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. The KVB had commenced its banking business in 1916 at

Karur Town (Tamilnadu). Over the years the bank has graduated to become one of the

top banks in the private sector with strong and healthy fund.

Financial Summary

FigureHeads DataType Months Months


Date - 200603 200512
For Months - 3 9
Net Sales/Income Rs 172.14 566.4
Other Income Rs 56.46 0
OPBDIT Rs 151.46 398.25
DEP Rs 0 0
Tax Rs 8.9 37.5
PAT Rs 44.37 90.98
Equity Rs 17.98 17.98
EPS Rs 73.59 73.59
BV Rs 484.78 484.78
P/E % 7.69341
Balance sheet

Name Mar-2006 Mar-2005 Mar-2004 Mar-2003 Mar-2002


CAPITAL AND
LIABILITIES

Capital + 17.98 17.98 17.98 16.41 6


Reserves and Surplus
853.65 742.9 694.05 542.27 424.11
+
Deposits + 7576.84 6672.19 5911.48 5121.92 4180.06
Borrowings + 195.62 92.31 103.19 267.76 306.09
Other Liabilities &
363.8 359.47 380.74 225.35 193.86
Provisions +

TOTAL 9007.89 7884.85 7107.44 6173.71 5110.12

ASSETS

Cash & Balances


470.62 381.49 327.05 230.47 209.96
with RBI
Balances with Banks
& money at Call & 311.73 273.68 270.75 458.58 649.09
Short Notice
Investments + 2298.13 2219.03 2173.01 1845.08 1538.91
Advances + 5555.45 4619.8 4023.24 3344.4 2460.03
Fixed Assets + 98.43 102.16 92.18 85.53 73.7
Other Assets + 273.53 288.69 221.21 209.65 178.43

TOTAL 9007.89 7884.85 7107.44 6173.71 5110.12

Contingent Liabilities
2552.92 2003.48 1958.66 1999.1 1907.03
+
Bills for collection 520.23 381.67 432.87 234.44 213.49
Financial Analysis of the company

Name Mar-2006 Mar-2005 Mar-2004 Mar-2003 Mar-2002


Key Ratios
Credit-Deposit(%) 71.41 68.68 66.78 62.4 60.47
Investment / Deposit (%) 31.7 34.9 36.42 36.38 35.58
Cash / Deposit (%) 5.98 5.63 5.05 4.73 5.76
Interest Expended /
56.54 56.55 54.11 67.21 65.88
Interest Earned (%)
Other Income / Total
18.03 16.07 11.04 20.66 17.84
Income (%)
Operating Expenses / Total
24.87 24.24 21.56 16.03 15.12
Income (%)
Interest Income / Total
7.71 7.88 9.75 9.14 10.32
Funds (%)
Interest Expended / Total
4.36 4.46 5.28 6.14 6.8
Funds (%)
Net Interest Income / Total
3.35 3.42 4.48 3 3.52
Funds (%)
Non Interest Income / Total
1.7 1.51 1.21 2.38 2.24
Funds (%)
Operating Expenses / Total
2.34 2.28 2.36 1.85 1.9
Funds (%)
Profit before Provisions /
2.71 2.66 3.32 3.53 3.86
Total Funds (%)
Net Profit / Total funds
1.6 1.41 2.43 2.22 2.32
(%)
RONW (%) 16.58 14.3 25.35 25.28 28.6

Top 5 mutual funds that own the company


Scheme Name No.Of Shares % Portfolio
DSP ML FTP - Series 3 (G) 5000.00 30.00
DSP ML FTP - Series 3 (D) 5000.00 30.00
Kotak FMP - Series 13 (G) 0 19.00
Kotak FMP - Series 13 (D) 0 19.00
DWS FTF - Series 4 (G) 0 14.99

Top 3 shareholder of the company

Shareholding Top 3
Total Public & Others 55.10
Total Foreign 20.93
Total Institutions 10.56

MANAGEMENT THEORY AND SHAREKHAN


In the management theory we study the principles of managemen that should be present

in any organization for the management of that organization. These principles are about:

Division of work

Work Specialization

Equity

Organizational hierarchy

Unity of command

Unity of direction

Scalar chain

Spain of control

Communication

Equity

Motivation

Team Work

Employees’ participation.

In Sharekhan I observed most of these principles are outdated or are present in the

organization in some different or modified form these principles are discussed with

context to Sharekhan as follows

Division of work ;
Work division is done in Sharekhan securities ltd. but the employees working there are

not restricted to do other jobs which are not assigned to them in case of necessity the

employees cooperate each other and handle the other jobs also.

Work specialization

This principle is followed in Sharekhan, the employees are placed according to their

area of specialization, like marketing people for marketing of product of company and

people from finance for research analyst jobs and technicians are people from

Technology background.

Organizational hierarchy

The organizational hierarchies shows the relationships of subordinates and superiors in

the organization , this is not exactly same in the Sharekhan however the relationship of

the people in Sharekhan have been pre defined but the employees work together as team

work. There are no formalities an executive can directly meet to the branch manager

without informing his superior manager, territory manager .

The organizational chart in the Sharekhan is as follows mainly concerned for a single
branch
Chief executive
officer

Regio Regio Regio Regio


nal nal nal nal
Manag Manag Manag Manag
er er er er

Branch Manager

Territory Manager

Assistant Relation
Manager manager

Executives

Thus this is the hierarchy of the management in the Sharekhan ltd, but the relations for
accountability, communication etc. are not so much formal as provided in management
theories.
GOVERNMENT POLICY

Sharekhan limited is a brokerage house. The company follows all the rules and

regulations as prescribed by companies law, and other guidelines issued by the SEBI for

a company. Morever SEBI also regulates the brokers of the share market. As being a

brokerage company Sharekhan always follow the prescribed guidelines issued by the

SEBI and other laws. That is the reason that ShareKhan was not listed in the black

list companies issued by SEBI like others India bulls etc.

Share khan always comply with legal formalities. It functions very transperantly, It

always secure the investors interest.

Sharekhan mainly comply with all SEBI guidelines issued as:

Capital adequacy norms

Registration norms

Payment of prescribed fees

Prevention from insider trading

Prevention of market manipulation

Investors interest protection

Code of conduct etc.

Thus Sharekhan is a clean and transperant organization which follows all the rules and

regulations and its government policy is cooperating.


NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL POSTION

Sharekhan ltd. is one of India’s leading and largest sharebroker company. It is 85

years old in this field. The original name of co. is S.S. Kantilal Ishwar lal Securties pvt.

Ltd. but the company advertise it with the name of Sharekhan ltd.

Customers have to do is walk into any of Sharekhan 588 share shops across 213 cities in

India to get a host of trading related services – the friendly customer service staff will

also help them with any account related queries they have.Share Khan ltd. has many

branches all over the India through where the company operates in different areas and

The company has a long chain of frenchisee also so the network of sharekhan ltd has

spread across all over the country. Share khan shops are available many places in India

and customer can take assistance from any of these for the product and service availing.

Regarding international image company deals in share market in India, so the other

countries people mostly through their own country stock exchanges and Sharekhan is

registered with Indian stock exchanges, however as it functions through online system so

the NRIs who invest in Indian share market mainly invest through Sharekhan so the

companies international image among NRIs is very good.


TAX ASPECTS OF THE COMPANY

About the taxation of the company Sharekhan ltd always pay its taxes timely and

honestly.

The main type of taxes paid by the company are

1. Income Tax

2. Sales Tax

3. Service Tax

However the company don’t reveal the amount of the taxes paid by it as it is not

necessary for it to do so because the company operate its business under the name of

“S.S. Kantilal ishwar lal securities pvt. Ltd, which is not a public company and hence

It need not to publish its accounts reports publicly.

Morever Sharekhan ltd. as being public company have not issued its capital to the

general public so it also need not to show its accounts reports like P&l and Balance

Sheets publicly.

SHARE MARKET POSTION OF SHAREKHAN LTD.

A company’ s share market postion refers its prices position of shares in the securities

maeket. Those companies which are listed on the stock exchanges have already issued

its shares in the market.

But Sharekhan limited has not issued its capital in the general public till now,

consequently it is not listed on the stock exchanges and hence the question for the share

market position of the company do not arise.


MAJOR PROBLEMS FACED BY THE COMPANY

The main problems faced by the company are as follows:

1. lack of motivation of investment in securities market in Indian public.

2. Dependence of Indian stock market on the foreign stock markets.

3. Tight legal frame work of SEBI.

4. Throat Cut Competition by other companies in the broking business.

5. Very much legal formalities for investors.

6. lack of updation of technology in India.

ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE COMPANY

• The company has highest no. of share shops in India.

• The company’s network has been spread in 215 cities of India.

• The company is the winner of Best Research publisher awards for 2005 for its

magazine Value line.

FUTURE PROSPECTS OF THE COMPANY

The future prospects of the company are bright of course, because of its fair and

transparent operations in the business, it has never been black listed by any legal body

for any breach of law.

The company in coming years will left its all competitors a far back and will be the only

name in the field of broking house .


Being stable for more than 85 years in the same field the company has created a brand

image in the financial market services. In coming month company is also issuing its First

IPO for the general public and hence its shares will also be traded in the securities

market.

Thus the company’s future prospects are good.


CHAPTER.2

RISK IN SECURITIES MARKET


The goal of the return management process is to maximize earnings in the context of an

acceptable level of risk. With risk defined as uncertainty, a key component of this

process is delineating the possible rangeof outcomes and their root causes. As new

circumstances arise, a securities lender is prompted to study existing data in order to

achieve a greater comprehension of potential situations a client may face.

The risks inherent in any securities lending program — including market, credit,

liquidity, operational,legal, and regulatory — are all relevant to the principal common

objectives shared by participants, namelystability of income and preservation of

principal. Of these, market and credit risk most readily lendthemselves to quantification

and modeling due to the greater frequency and depth of the data available.The following

narrative focuses on the cash-collateralized securities lending transaction. The risks to

participants who accept non-cash collateral will be addressed in a later article that will

deal, at length,with credit risk modeling efforts.

MARKET RISK

Market risk potentially impacts both the future market value of a portfolio of assets

and/or liabilities andspread income associated with the portfolio. The market risk

associated with securities lending containstwo components: interest rate risk and spread

rate risk.

INTEREST RATE RISK


Interest rate risk is the risk of interest rate fluctuations impacting spread income and/or

the value of theintegrated portfolio (i.e., both the collateral reinvestment and the funding

portfolios). This type of riskarises from maturity/reset timing mismatches between the

asset and liability positions. As noted in theDigest’s first article, the liability is the cash

collateral received from a borrower that has a certain costwhile the asset is the

investment purchased using that cash collateral that generates a certain yield.

RISK AND RETURNIN SECURITIES LENDING

To illustrate, consider an agent lender who has the opportunity to invest the cash received

from anovernight loan for which the agent lender will have to pay a 3.00% rebate into a

security that matures inthree months and yields 3.50%. There is a risk that over the

course of the three months the loan supporting this investment will become more

expensive (the rebate will rise), and thus spread incomewill decrease or potentially turn

negative. Had overnight rates actually increased more than anticipatedduring this period,

the three-month investment may not have been the optimal alternative.In this case,an

investment with a shorter maturity, albeit possibly initially at a lower spread, might have

been thebetter alternative since it would have matured more quickly and been reinvested

into an instrument reflecting current interest rates. In fact, as part of the interest rate risk

management process, a numberof alternative interest rate “paths” are modeled, in which

the timing and magnitude of potential ratechanges are examined.In addition to having an

effect on spread income, changes in interest rates also have an impact on themarket value

of the portfolio. The relationship of market value to purchase price is captured by its net
asset value (NAV). The first Digest article noted that a security with a yield exceeding

the current market rate of interest for an investment with a similar maturity structure and

credit quality will be valued inexcess of par, while a security with a yield lower than the

current market rate of interest for a similarinvestment will be valued below par. In the

latter scenario, an investment might have seemed attractiveat the inception of the

transaction, but with an increase in interest rates, the original investment is now trading

at a value below the purchase price.

In effect, if the security is not sold prior tomaturity, it willonly incur an opportunity cost

or a foregone opportunity to earn the current yield. As such, NAV is anindicator of how

the portfolio will perform relative to the market going forward, and increased volatilityof

this measure is suggestive of a build-up of risk.

SPREAD RATE RISK

Spread rate risk can be viewed as either market- or credit-related, but is best summarized

as the marketrisk associated with the macro-economic credit outlook. This risk affects

floating rate securities, whose return is impacted by the following elements: the index

rate and the spread over this rate, and an elementnof risk associated with each. The index

rate, or reference rate, is a designated interest rate to which the coupon of a floating rate

security changes (e.g., Prime, LIBOR). For example, consider a security that pays

LIBOR + 5 basis points and resets on the 15th of every month. The interest rate risk

component is a function of the time to reset for the index rate, which in this case would

be between the 16th of the current month and the 14th of the following month. Spread
rate risk would be the risk that the 5-basis-point spread to the index is no longer at a level

appropriate to the

security.

The effect of such a change in market spreads has significant market value implications

for floating rate securities, which generally have longer expected maturities than the

fixed rate securitiestypically purchased in a securities lending program. However, the

widening and tightening of such spreads, which generally occurs in response to changes

in perceived credit quality for the class of

securities of which this issue is a part (e.g., AA Finance), will typically vary within a

narrow band. Over the longer term, it is the potential for changes in interest rate levels —

and not spreads — that poses the greater risk to earnings. Clearly, this is what makes

floating rate securities an attractive investment.

CREDIT RISK

The second primary risk factor is credit risk. This risk takes two forms — reinvestment

credit risk and borrower credit risk.

REINVESTMENT CREDIT RISK

Reinvestment credit risk is the risk that a change in the creditworthiness of an issuer will

result in achange in the market value of the issue. Whereas spread rate risk measures the

risk of a change in valuedue to changes in broad market credit concerns, credit risk, in
this context, measures the risk to value for a specific issue/issuer. In the extreme case, it

is the risk that default, or the inability of the issuer tomeet payment obligations, will

result in a substantial erosion in value. Changes in credit quality that do not result in

default will not have a realized monetary consequence unless the issue is sold prior to

maturity. However, there is an opportunity cost to the extent that the yield available to

current purchasers of the security is higher. A defaulted issue can impair the value of the

reinvestment portfolio to the extent most or all of its value is not recoverable.

All securities purchased for the collateral reinvestment vehicles must meet strict credit

quality standards. State Street devotes significant resources to analyzing the ongoing

creditworthiness of both its approved issuers and any prospective issuers under

consideration for inclusion in the program.

BORROWER CREDIT RISK

Borrower credit risk arises from the potential inability of a borrower to return the loaned

securities. Losses can arise when the collateral on hand is insufficient to purchase

replacement securities at the time at which a borrower defaults. Borrower credit risk is

alow probability, but potentially high impact, event.This risk can be mitigated by

entering into lending agreements with highly rated counterparties and by ensuring that

the loans are properly collateralized on a daily basis. State Street conducts a rigorous

analysis of both prospective and current borrowers to ensure clients’ financial protection.

This analysis is performed on a regular basis — monthly, quarterly and annually —and

includes a review of corporate and regulatory financial statements.


To measure the combination of both market and credit risks, a statistical model was

developed that combines the potential residual (or unsecured) risk in a portfolio of loans

and collateral to an individual borrower with an assessment of the likelihood that the

borrower will default over a defined time horizon. Residual risk is defined as the level of

price risk that may be unsupported by the collateral margin held.The beneficial effect of

an indemnification against borrower default, where provided, becomes part of

the analysis.

SL PERFORMANCEANALYZER®

The monitoring and management of risk within the portfolio is a key part of the return

management process at State Street. SL PerformanceAnalyzer®, a proprietary risk-

adjusted performance measurement toolset for securities lending, enables participants to

track portfolio market and credit risk through time, view program earnings within this

context, and view an internally derived combined estimate of this risk going forward.

THE RISKRETURN TREND ANALYZER

The RiskReturn Trend Analyzer enables a securities lending participant to view spread

return relative to aggregate portfolio risk (market and credit) over time. These risks will

vary in response to both changes in the risk profile of the portfolio and the volatility of

underlying market rates and spreads. The light bluebars represent spread, dark blue bars

represent risk and the grey line represents risk-return ratio. By having

access to such a metric, a participant can easily identify changes to the risk-return

dynamic.
THE NAV TREND ANALYZER

The NAV Trend Analyzer provides a view of the current NAV of a given collateral

reinvestment portfolio in the context of an estimate of how much it can be expected to

fluctuate over the coming month. This estimate combines the risk profile of the collateral

reinvestment portfolio with State Street’s expectationfor the volatility of underlying rates

and spreads to create a probability-based interval within which the NAV

is expected to fall. The preceding table details the current NAV projected one month

forward and the level at which the NAV actually settled. Widened bands signal periods

of increased risk while narrowed bands signal periods of reduced risk.

Risk comes in a variety of forms and is something to be managed by traders and

investors alike. The Optionetics approach to the markets prioritizes this topic and

provides individuals with a foundation for success. This three-part series will focus on

investment risk, trading risk and individual security risk.

InflationRisk

The existence of inflation risk is the main reason individuals accept market risk. If

current dollars had the same purchasing power any number of years going forward, a

compounded rate of return from liquid US Treasury Bills would certainly satisfy a

conservative investor and may even compete for the aggressive investor’s attention.

Convinced? If not, consider the following:


Data Period Jan 1, 1934 – Feb 1, 2006
Initial Value $1
Number of Months 869 (72.4 years)
Final Value (with inflation*) $1.0012
72.4 year return $15.55
Final Value (no inflation) 0.12%
72.4 year return 1,555%
* Based upon actual CPI data for the period (St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank)

So if the next 72.4 years exactly duplicates the period evaluated, you have less than a

penny to spare if your expenses remain the same and you choose to invest solely in T-

Bills. However, if you use a more realistic three month holding period for T-bill assets

with a 100% return of principal, you are left with an amount that is slightly under $1.00

(0.9924). Without inflation the picture is much rosier; an initial investment in T-Bills that

is left to compound monthly (rather than a quarterly compounding) will provide the

investor with an account valued at more than 15 times the initial amount.

Bond Risk

Perhaps a conservative investor decides that by simply replacing the T-Bill investment

with a longer maturity Treasury Note, all will be fine regardless of inflation. Although T-

Note yields are usually higher than T-Bills, periods where the yield curve becomes flat or

inverted highlight a different issue. The timing of the purchase for the longer term

security will impact investment returns. This brings us the next investor risk—interest

rate risk.

Interest rate risk is the risk of having your money locked into a lower rate of return while
interest rates rise. Assuming the asset is held to maturity to benefit from the 100% return

of principal, the longer the term to maturity for the fixed income investment, the more

opportunity there is to receive sub-standard interest rates on the money. As a result, the

10-year note is deemed to have more interest rate risk than the 90-day bill, while the 30-

year bond is deemed to have more interest rate risk than both

the note and the bill.

Using 10-year note returns starting in April 1953 and assuming 10-year holding periods

with inflation, a $1.00 initial investment will be valued at $2.65 after 639 months (53

years). A conservative investor may feel a 265% return is acceptable; however, we have

yet to account for taxes. Incorporating a 20% tax applied semi-annually results in a final

value of $2.21.

An investor who seeks even better fixed income returns by entering the municipal or

corporate bond world encounters yet another type of investment risk: credit risk.

Although defaults are less likely in the municipal bond market (reflected by lower

yields), they can occur. This type of investment does benefit from favorable tax treatment

which will boost returns.

In terms of corporate bonds, credit risk increases (reflected by higher yields) as the credit

rating decreases. AAA corporate bonds are deemed less risky from a return of principal

standpoint and, therefore, offer lower yields. Interest is taxable and there’s no guarantee

that the credit rating and safety of the bond downgraded during the holding
period.

At this time, historical municipal and corporate bond returns will not be analyzed. Those

interested may want to pursue this analysis using a bond fund or exchange traded fund

(ETF) proxy such as a Nuveen Municipal Fund or the iSharesâ Corporate Bond Fund.

The biggest challenges include obtaining sufficient return histories and incorporating

appropriate tax impacts to the result.

Stock Market Risk

Investors generally turn to the stock market to realize returns that will outpace inflation

after accounting for taxes. Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) serves as one basis for

portfolio construction aimed at maximizing reward while minimizing risk. This approach

makes use of the following:

1) Capital Market Line Represents optimal portfolios for a given level of risk.
Capital Asset Pricing ModelAssesses the risk-return impact of adding a security
2)
(CAPM) into a well diversified portfolio.
A linear asset price model based on risk versus
3) Security Market Line
returns.
A linear model of asset return versus market

4) Security Characteristic Line return, using an asset risk measure to identify

undervalued and overvalued securities.


Beta, alpha and Sharpe Ratios are all measurements associated with portfolio and

security risk.
Inflation risk represents the risk associated with insufficient returns (not keeping pace

with increasing costs), while credit risk and stock market risk highlight represent the risk

associated with seeking higher returns (losses). Investors generally seek maximize

returns for a given level of risk by diversifying their portfolios (see previous articles on

diversification and correlations). However, market risk cannot be diversified away—

some risk of losses will always remain even in optimal

portfolios.

A two-part personal finance article series from May & June this year examined the

impact of inflation and investment returns on retirement savings when income was

removed from the account on a monthly basis. A thirty year period was examined starting

with January 1962 and investment returns were based upon actual S&P 500

returns, including dividends.

Using the same monthly inflation, return and dividend data, a $1 initial investment and a

20% tax rate on gains applied quarterly, the ending balance after 30 years was

approximately $1.26, or 126%. Remove the dividend returns and the account is valued at

$1.11 after thirty years. This represent a nice difference from compounded fixed income

returns over a 70 year period, particularly since the return of 0.12% excluded taxes.

Although the 10-year note return of 221% over 53 years seems to be an argument for T-

Note investments, when using thirty year results from initiation of the strategy, $0.96

remained in the account. Again, due to interest rate risk, the month of initiation will
impact the results with different thirty year periods yielding different returns.

Investment Risk

Investment risk includes credit risk and market risk which are both taken to combat

another risk—that due to inflation. Investors and traders need to assess the actual historic

results of the strategies they employ for their investments. In this manner, the individual

can better understand the true financial risks in which they are exposing themselves. Two

such risks may include under-investing in bonds & equities or over-investing in assets

with limited returns (i.e. an SPY Leap only strategy that misses

dividends).

In order to manage necessary market risk, the investor must take steps to understand

those risks and minimize them through diversification. Numerous articles on the topic of

asset allocation and diversification are available in the Optionetics.com article archives

by completing an author keyword search for 2004 and 2005. Traders, who often self-

direct their investment accounts, must proactively examine the performance of

investments versus the performance of trading given the goals for each, and re-evaluate

those allocations.
RETURNS IN SECURITIES MARKET
HISTORY

How to Calculate ReturnsThe Relationship between Inflation and Returns The Historical

Record: Year-to-year total returns on

common stocks - Average annual returns What’s the difference between Returns and

Risk PremiumsHow to calculate measures of the VariabilityReturns: standard deviations

and frequency distributions Risk and Return - 2

1. IF WE GET A 15% RETURN IS THAT GOOD?

- relative to a benchmark
- inflation

- discount rate

- risk: dispersion

2. HOW TO QUANTIFY AND ADJUST FOR RISK?

• DISTINCTION: EXPECTED RETURN VS. REALIZED

RETURN

DISPERSION ( WANT TO SAVE JOB)

OIL PROJECT: EXPECTED RETURN 15%

STD 30%

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 3

3. WHERE DO DISCOUNT RATES COME FROM?

• WHY IS THE DISCOUNT RATE THE OPPORTUNITY

COST FOR THE FIRM?

• LOOK TO HISTORY AS GUIDE FOR PRESENT

4. WHY DO WE CARE ABOUT RISK?

• POTENTIAL OF BAD OUTCOMES

• IF TRULY INDEPENDENT CAN GET MULTIPLE BAD

DRAWS

==> HISTORICAL PRICE DOES NOT MATTER

• Risk Preferences are different across individuals!

==> It is not enough to say "I DON'T LIKE RISK" - We want to

measure how much risk individuals want to avoid.


2.0 CALCULATING RETURNS

• income component - direct cash payments such as dividends orinterest

• price change - loosely, capital gain or lossThe return calculation is unaffected by the

decision to cash out or holdsecurities.

Percentage Return: Refers to the rate per dollar invested.

Realized Percentage Return =

Dividend Yield + Capital Gains Yield

Where: Dividend Yield = Dt/Pt-1

Capital Gains Yield = (Pt - Pt-1) / Pt-1

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 5

3.0 INFLATION AND RETURNS

A. Real versus Nominal Returns

• Nominal Returns - returns not adjusted for inflation; percentagechange in nominal

dollars.

• Real Returns - returns that have been adjusted for inflation;percentage change in

purchasing power.

B. The Fisher Effect

1. A expected relationship between nominal returns, real returns, and

the expected inflation rate. Let r be the nominal rate, R be the real

rate, and if be the expected inflation rate,

(1 + r) = (1+ R) x (1+ if)

hence r = R + if + (R x if)).
2. A definition whereby the real rate can be found by deflating the

nominal rate by the inflation rate:

R = (1 + r) / (1 + if) - 1.

Risk and Return - 6

4.0 AVERAGE RETURNS

A. Calculating Average Returns

ARITHMETIC AVERAGE: add them up, divide by T

• AAR =

• used in calculation of single period expectation.

GEOMETRIC AVERAGE RETURNS (HOLDING PERIODRETURNS):

• GAR =

• used in calculation of holding period returns.

GAR/Holding-Period Returns

The holding period return is the return that aninvestor would get when holding an

investmentover a period of n years, when the return during year i is given as ri :1 ) 1 ( ) 1

()1(

return period holding

2 1 - + ??+ ?+ =

nrrrm

Note the GAR is annualized version of theholding period return.Risk and Return - 8

Holding Period Return: ExampleSuppose your investment provides the following returns

over a four-year period:


Year Return

1 10%

2 -5%

3 20%

4 15% % 21 . 44 4421 .

1 ) 15 . 1 ( ) 20 . 1 ( ) 95 (. ) 10 . 1 (

1)1()1()1()1(

return period holding Your

4321

==

- ???=

- + ?+ ?+ ?+ =

rrrr

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 9

Holding Period Return (GAR): ExampleAn investor who held this investment would

have actually realized an annual return of 9.58%:

Year Return

1 10%

2 -5%

3 20%

4 15% % 58 . 9 095844 .
1 ) 15 . 1 ( ) 20 . 1 ( ) 95 (. ) 10 . 1 (

)1()1()1()1()1(

return average Geometric

4321

==

- ???=

+ ?+ ?+ ?+ = +

rrrrr

• So, our investor made 9.58% on his money for fouryears, realizing a holding period

return of 44.21%4 ) 095844 . 1 ( 4421 . 1 =

Risk and Return - 10

Arithmetic Average Return: Example

Note that the arithmetic average is not the same thing

as the holding period or geometric average:

Year Return

1 10%

2 -5%
3 20%

4 15%

% 10

% 15 % 20 % 5 % 10

return average Arithmetic 4 3 2 1

=++-=

+++=rrrr

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 11

Holding Period Returns

A famous set of studies dealing with the rates of returns oncommon stocks, bonds, and

Treasury bills was conductedby Roger Ibbotson and Rex Sinquefield.They present year-

by-year historical rates of return starting in

1926 for the following five important types of financial instruments in the United States:

• Large-Company Common Stocks

• Small-company Common Stocks

• Long-Term Corporate Bonds

• Long-Term U.S. Government Bonds

• U.S. Treasury Bills

Risk and Return - 12

The Future Value of an Investment of $1 in 1926


0.1

10

1000

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Common Stocks

Long T-Bonds

T-Bills

$40.22

$15.64

63 . 845 , 2 $ ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( 1 $ 1999 1927 1926 = + ??+ ?+ ?r r r l

•the frequency distribution of the returns (see next slide).

•the standard deviation of those returns

Risk and Return - 14

U.S. Historical Returns, 1926-1999

Source: © Stocks, Bonds, Bills, and Inflation 2000 Yearbook™, Ibbotson Associates,

Inc., Chicago (annually updates work by

Roger G. Ibbotson and Rex A. Sinquefield).

– 90% + 90% 0%

Average Standard

Series Annual Return Deviation Distribution

Large Company Stocks 13.0% 20.1%

Small Company Stocks 17.7 33.9


Long-Term Corporate Bonds 6.1 8.7

Long-Term Government Bonds 5.6 9.2

U.S. Treasury Bills 3.8 3.2

Inflation 3.2 4.5

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 15

5.0 RISK

A. ALONG WITH RETURN COMES RISK:

==>Security returns are examples of random variables -

B. The Principle of Diversification

• Principle of diversification: variability of multiple assets heldtogether less than the

variability of typical stock.

• The portion of variability present in a typical single security that isnot present in a large

group of assets held together (portfolio of assets) is termed diversifiable risk or unique

risk.

• Why does risk go down for a portfolio? Unique risks tend to

cancel each other out.

• The level of variance that is present in collections of assets is termed undiversifiable

risk or systematic risk.

• A typical single stock on NYSE  a nnual


   
 

DRAWS

==> HISTORICAL PRICE DOES NOT MATTER


• Risk Preferences are different across individuals!

==> It is not enough to say "I DON'T LIKE RISK" - We want to

measure how much risk individuals want to avoid.

2.0 CALCULATING RETURNS

• income component - direct cash payments such as dividends orinterest

• price change - loosely, capital gain or lossThe return calculation is unaffected by the

decision to cash out or holdsecurities.

Percentage Return: Refers to the rate per dollar invested.

Realized Percentage Return =

Dividend Yield + Capital Gains Yield

Where: Dividend Yield = Dt/Pt-1

Capital Gains Yield = (Pt - Pt-1) / Pt-1

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 5

3.0 INFLATION AND RETURNS

A. Real versus Nominal Returns

• Nominal Returns - returns not adjusted for inflation; percentagechange in nominal

dollars.

• Real Returns - returns that have been adjusted for inflation;percentage change in

purchasing power.

B. The Fisher Effect

1. A expected relationship between nominal returns, real returns, and

the expected inflation rate. Let r be the nominal rate, R be the real
rate, and if be the expected inflation rate,

(1 + r) = (1+ R) x (1+ if)

hence r = R + if + (R x if)).

2. A definition whereby the real rate can be found by deflating the

nominal rate by the inflation rate:

R = (1 + r) / (1 + if) - 1.

Risk and Return - 6

4.0 AVERAGE RETURNS

A. Calculating Average Returns

ARITHMETIC AVERAGE: add them up, divide by T

• AAR =

• used in calculation of single period expectation.

GEOMETRIC AVERAGE RETURNS (HOLDING PERIODRETURNS):

• GAR =

• used in calculation of holding period returns.

GAR/Holding-Period Returns

The holding period return is the return that aninvestor would get when holding an

investmentover a period of n years, when the return during year i is given as ri :1 ) 1 ( ) 1

()1(

return period holding

2 1 - + ??+ ?+ =

nrrrm
Note the GAR is annualized version of theholding period return.Risk and Return - 8

Holding Period Return: ExampleSuppose your investment provides the following returns

over a four-year period:

Year Return

1 10%

2 -5%

3 20%

4 15% % 21 . 44 4421 .

1 ) 15 . 1 ( ) 20 . 1 ( ) 95 (. ) 10 . 1 (

1)1()1()1()1(

return period holding Your

4321

==

- ???=

- + ?+ ?+ ?+ =

rrrr

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 9

Holding Period Return (GAR): ExampleAn investor who held this investment would

have actually realized an annual return of 9.58%:

Year Return

1 10%
2 -5%

3 20%

4 15% % 58 . 9 095844 .

1 ) 15 . 1 ( ) 20 . 1 ( ) 95 (. ) 10 . 1 (

)1()1()1()1()1(

return average Geometric

4321

==

- ???=

+ ?+ ?+ ?+ = +

rrrrr

• So, our investor made 9.58% on his money for fouryears, realizing a holding period

return of 44.21%4 ) 095844 . 1 ( 4421 . 1 =

Risk and Return - 10

Arithmetic Average Return: Example

Note that the arithmetic average is not the same thing

as the holding period or geometric average:


Year Return

1 10%

2 -5%

3 20%

4 15%

% 10

% 15 % 20 % 5 % 10

return average Arithmetic 4 3 2 1

=++-=

+++=rrrr

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 11

Holding Period Returns

A famous set of studies dealing with the rates of returns oncommon stocks, bonds, and

Treasury bills was conductedby Roger Ibbotson and Rex Sinquefield.They present year-

by-year historical rates of return starting in

1926 for the following five important types of financial instruments in the United States:

• Large-Company Common Stocks

• Small-company Common Stocks

• Long-Term Corporate Bonds

• Long-Term U.S. Government Bonds


• U.S. Treasury Bills

Risk and Return - 12

The Future Value of an Investment of $1 in 1926

0.1

10

1000

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Common Stocks

Long T-Bonds

T-Bills

$40.22

$15.64

63 . 845 , 2 $ ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( 1 $ 1999 1927 1926 = + ??+ ?+ ?r r r l

•the frequency distribution of the returns (see next slide).

•the standard deviation of those returns

Risk and Return - 14

U.S. Historical Returns, 1926-1999

Source: © Stocks, Bonds, Bills, and Inflation 2000 Yearbook™, Ibbotson Associates,

Inc., Chicago (annually updates work by

Roger G. Ibbotson and Rex A. Sinquefield).

– 90% + 90% 0%

Average Standard
Series Annual Return Deviation Distribution

Large Company Stocks 13.0% 20.1%

Small Company Stocks 17.7 33.9

Long-Term Corporate Bonds 6.1 8.7

Long-Term Government Bonds 5.6 9.2

U.S. Treasury Bills 3.8 3.2

Inflation 3.2 4.5

Prof. Gordon M. Phillips

Risk and Return - 15

5.0 RISK

A. ALONG WITH RETURN COMES RISK:

==>Security returns are examples of random variables -

B. The Principle of Diversification

• Principle of diversification: variability of multiple assets heldtogether less than the

variability of typical stock.

• The portion of variability present in a typical single security that isnot present in a large

group of assets held together (portfolio of assets) is termed diversifiable risk or unique

risk.

• Why does risk go down for a portfolio? Unique risks tend to

cancel each other out.

• The level of variance that is present in collections of assets is termed undiversifiable

risk or systematic risk.


• A typical single stock on NYSE annual
  
 

To derive implications for systematic risk compensation and selectivity biases, we model

individual market returns as a two-regime process. We interpret regime 1 as the regime

when the market is open to international investors and investabledollar-denominated

returns are available for a given market. We discuss the details of this in the data section

below. Regime 2 is the regime where investable dollar returns

are not available and the market is inaccessible to international investors. We view the

transition from regime 1 to regime 2 as being associated with expropriationof

international investors. This expropriation can take various forms, includingcapital

controls, foreign exchange restrictions, and taxes on repatriations of foreign investments.

Information regarding the payoffs to international investors duringthe transition from

regime 1 to regime 2 and the ex-ante probability with which thistransition can happen are

not observable to an econometrician. In essence, we viewemerging markets returns akin

to payoffs of a defaultable bond which has not defaulted.As with the defaultable bond,

the likelihood of transition from regime 1to regime 2 affects measured mean returns

obtained solely from data sampled fromregime 1. Hence, one would expect that observed

mean returns, particularly for anemerging market, to be higher than the ex-ante risk

premium. This bias measures the compensation for expropriation and helps us understand

the risk-return relationacross markets. In equation (3), we present a time-series

representation of returns that will allowus to derive separate systematic risk

compensation from sample selectivity biasesin expected returns. Let yit+1 represent an

indicator for the regime in market i att + 1 being 1 or 2. The indicator yit+1 is equal to
one if the regime at t + 1 is 1 (open to international investors), and zero otherwise. The

return process, expressed indollars, is specified as

Rit+1 = E (Rit+1|It) + yit+1 (bi1et+1 + hi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1) (bi2et+1 + hi2t+1) , (3)

where E(Rit+1|It) is the ex-ante conditional mean of the gross return, et+1 is the

innovation in the systematic risk component, and hi1t+1 and hi2t+1 are diversifiable risk

components specific to market i. The exposure of the return to systematic risk is

determined by bi1 and bi2.Let rit+1 denote the excess return on market i, that is, rit+1 =

Rit+1 - Rf t.

Assuming that yit = 1, the valuation condition (1) then implies thatE (rit+1|It) = ls2et

[pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] , (4)

where pit is the probability of the regime where market i is accessible to international

investors at time t. In other words, pit is the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1,and (1 -

pit) is the probability of a switch to regime 2. The risk premium is determinedby the

aggregate market price of risk, ls2et, and an overall beta which is aprobability-weighted

average of the betas in the two regimes. Next, we describe thedetermination of regimes 1

and 2.

The Sample Selectivity Process

Let y_it be a latent process that determines the opening and closing for market i. Thatis,

it determines if the regime is 1 or 2. In particular, if y_it >0 then the regime is 1and if

y_it _ 0, then the regime is classified as 2. Given this classification, it follows 6

thatyit = ( 1 if y_it > 0,0 otherwise.(5)


Following Heckman (1976, 1979), we assume that the conditional mean of the

latentprocess is determined by a vector of pre-determined variables xit. Hence, we

assume

That y_it+1 = d0ixit + #it+1, #it+1|xit _ N(0, 1) , (6)

where #it+1, by assumption, is a standard normal error. Brown, Goetzmann, andRoss

(1995) argue that the survival of a market (the analogue of our regime 1) is

determinedsolely by the price process itself. However, this seems restrictive, as many

emerging markets, such as Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, have had comparable

drops in the market capitalization, but only Malaysia, directly expropriatedinternational

investors. This suggests that other economic considerations may be important in

determining whether investable dollar-denominated returns are availableto an

international investor. These other influences are captured by xit and #it+1. Further, the

latent variable model of selectivity provides connections betweendefault risk in sovereign

dollar-denominated bonds and the likelihood of capitalcontrols. This allows us to provide

a link between the cross-section of equity risk

premia and country risk ratings.Let f(.) denote the standard normal probability density

function, and let F (.)

denote the standard normal cumulative distribution function. It is straightforward to show

that the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1 is characterized by pit = E (yit+1|yit = 1,

xit) = Z ¥ -d0i xitf(#it+1)d#it+1 = Z d0i xit¥f(#it+1)d#it+1 = F _d0ixit_,(7)

where the third equality follows from the symmetry of the normal distribution. As#it+1

and the innovation in the return of asset i may be correlated, consider the

followingconditional projections for the different regimes


bi1et+1 + hi1t+1 = gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1, (8)

bi2et+1 + hi2t+1 = gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1, (9)

where gi1 and gi1 are the projection coefficients between bijet+1 +hit+1 and #it+1

andbijet+1 + hit+1 and #it+1, respectively, and vi1t+1 and vi2t+1 are projection errors.

The above equations then imply that the excess return process can be written as

rit+1 = E (rit+1|It) + yit+1(gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1)(gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1). (10)

2.4. The Sample Selectivity Criteria

We consider the case where data are missing as an outcome of an attrition process.That

is, we consider the sample selectivity effects of only observing the regimewhere the

markets are accessible to international investors. In this case, the restrictionon the

empirical conditional mean of the returns is

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = E (rit+1|It) + gi1E _#it+1|#it+1 > -d0ixit_, (11)

where we have conditioned on the fact that the market is in regime 1 today (yit = 1)and

tomorrow (yit+1 = 1). This captures our view that an econometrician only

observesinvestable dollar return sample from regime 1. Note that E_#it+1|#it+1 >

-d0ixit_ is the same as E(#it+1|yit+1 = 1). Moreover, this quantity satisfies the relation

E (#it+1|yit+1 = 1) =1pit Z ¥-d0i xit#it+1f(#it+1)d#it+1, (12)

which can be further simplified as follows

1pit Z ¥-d0i xit #it+1 f(#it+1) d#it+1 = f(d0ixit)pit= f(d0ixit)F(d0ixit). (13)

This is typically referred to as a hazard rate, or the inverse Mill’s ratio. We denotethis by

hit, that is, hit = f(d0ixit)/F(d0ixit). Based on the above results, it follows thatthe

conditional mean of the excess return is given by

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = ls2


et [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit. (14)

This restriction shows that there are two biases in measuring the ex-ante risk

premium.The first bias stems from the fact that the econometrician does not

observeregime 2 (the regime when investable dollar returns are not available). This is re-

flected in the first term of (14). bi1 can obviously be identified in the time series

fromobservations when the market is open. bi2 is the beta at transition from regime 1 to2.

Identification of bi2 and the transition probability of going to regime 2 (that is,81 - pit)

can not be measured without additional restrictions. Note that the resultingbias is on the

ex-ante mean of the return and we refer to it as a peso problem.

The second bias is due to sample selectivity, and the effects of this can be seenin the

second term of (14). This is an adjustment to the ex-post mean to correctly estimate the

ex-ante risk premium. Conditional on the availability of dollar returnstoday and

tomorrow, the risk premium is biased upwards. Put differently, investors require, on

average, a higher return when the market offers dollar returns, muchlike a defaultable

bond.

Brown, Goetzmann, and Ross (1995) focus on the second effect. It seems that the

measured risk premium will also be affected by the beta associated with the market shut-

down regime. If this beta is higher that in the regime for which datais available, then the

ex-ante mean asset will be higher, and in standard time-series regression this will show

up as an abnormal return, or an alpha. However, purgingthe empirical means of these two

effects implies that the ex-ante means lie on thesecurity market line.

In the special case of the world CAPM, equation (14) can be stated asE (rit+1|It, yit = 1,

yit+1 = 1) = E (rMt+1|It) [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit, (15)


where E (rMt+1|It) is the conditional risk premium on the world market portfolio,and the

betas are the world CAPM betas for the two regimes. As discussed above,taking account

of the peso problem requires measurement of bi2 and pit. In practise, estimating bi2 from

returns during a regime-switch is infeasible as there are very few, if any, in available

return data. Hence, in the empirical work, we will assumethat

bi1 = bi2 = biM. This gives us the following cross-sectional implications

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = lMtbiM + gi1hit, (16)

where lMt = E (rMt+1|It). In the empirical work we also consider time-variation inbetas.

Allowing for this time-variation is straightforward and does not affect any of the

derivations above.

Finally, note that for high survival probabilities, the hazard rate in equation (13)is almost

linear in the probabilities. Under the assumption that the probabilitiesabout expropriation

in equity markets and sovereign debt markets are highly re-lated, it is straightforward to

show that pit can essentially be backed out from observed sovereign bond spreads (see

Appendix A). The premise that probabilitiesof bond default and expropriation in equity

markets are related is supported bythe events in Malaysia in 1998 and the more recent

events in Argentina. Note thatfor small default probabilities, the hazard rate is almost

linear in sovereign bondspreads. As discussed and documented later, at least for the few

sovereign spreads that we observe, the spreads are highly correlated with observed

measures of country ratings. Hence, we can use the more extensively available data on

country ratingsto measure the hazard rates themselves.

3. Data
We collect monthly return data on 46 developed and emerging markets from

Datastream.According to International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank, 21

of these markets are classified as developed and 25 as emerging markets. The

underlyingsources of the data are Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI)

fordeveloped markets and IFC for emerging markets. The returns from IFC are the

investable returns that incorporate foreign investment restrictions (including special

classes of shares, sector restrictions, single foreign shareholder limits,

restrictionsallowing only authorized investors, company statues, and national limits). We

also consider the return on the MSCI world market portfolio. All returns are in U.S.

dollars,

and excess returns are calculated by subtracting the one-month Eurodollar rate =pp for

each month.The sample period is January 1984 to November 2000. It is, however, well

known that many emerging markets only were accessible for international investors

beginning in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. This is reflected in our data base. Data

for emerging markets are included as and when they open up. We let the opening date of

an emerging market be the date when IFC begins to record investable returns. The

inclusion date for each market is shown in Table 1. The inclusion dates are similar to

what other studies have considered to be the financial market liberalization dates (see, for

instance, Kim and Singal, 2000, Bekaert and Harvey, 2000, and Henry,2000). Our

empirical results are not sensitive to using alternative choices of liberalizationdates. The

total number of observations for developed markets is 203 and for emerging markets the

number of observations varies between 90 and 144.In Table 1 we report summary

statistics of the monthly dollar returns. The averagereturns across developed and
emerging markets are about the same, 1.32%and 1.34% per month, respectively.

However, the average standard deviation ofemerging markets is about twice as high as

for developed markets. It also seemsto be greater dispersion in returns and return

volatilities of emerging economies.The correlation with the world market return is much

higher for developed markets

than for emerging markets.Table 2 presents information regarding various attributes of

the countries. Theseattributes are used in our cross-sectional analysis of risk premia. The

Real GDP perCapita attribute is the real GDP per capita in constant dollars in 1990

(expressed ininternational prices, base 1985). The Trading Activity attribute is the sum of

exportsand imports divided by GDP in 1990. The real GDP per capita and trading

activityattributes are collected from the World Penn Tables. The Economic Rating and

theFinancial Rating attributes refer to the average country ratings from inclusion dateto

November 2000, and is provided by the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG).

The economic risk rating is meant to measure an economy’s current strengths

andweaknesses, whereas the financial risk rating is meant to measure an

economy’sability to finance its official, commercial, and trade obligations. More

specifically,the variables determining the economic rating include a weighted average of

inflation,debt service as a percent of exports, international liquidity ratios, foreign

tradecollection experience, current account balance, and foreign exchange market

indicators.In the empirical work our measure of reputation is the financial rating, whichis

a weighted average of loan default, delayed payment of suppliers’ credit, repudiationof

contracts by government, losses from exchange controls, and expropriation of private


investment. The country ratings are published on a scale from 0 to 50 where a higher

number indicates lower risks. We have re-scaled the ratings to be

between 0 (low) and 100 (high). A rating of 0 to 49 then indicates a very high risk;50 to

59 high risk; 60 to 69 moderate risk; 70 to 79 low risk; and 80 or more verylow risk. The

country rating are used by Erb, Harvey, and Viskanta (1996) in theirstudy of the time-

series predictability of future returns. La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes,Shleifer, and Vishny

(1998) use these ratings to study investor protection and ownership structure across

countries. In this paperwe use the ratings to measure sampleselectivity.

Finally, we report betas versus the MSCI world market portfolio. The betas are,on

average, about the same for developed and emerging markets. However, thedispersion in

betas is much larger across emerging markets ranging from 0.07 to1.80, whereas they are

all about one in the developed markets.

It is evident from Table 2 that the emerging economies are economies with relativelylow

GDP per capita. Further, emerging economies have a much lower countryratings than

developed economies. In fact, the correlation between the real GDP percapita and the

ratings are 70% (economic rating) and 80% (financial rating). Thetrading activity

attribute has a lower correlation with the real GDP per capita (about20%). The

correlations between trading activity and the ratings are about 20% and40%. There are a

few outliers (notably Hong Kong and Singapore), but excludingthem does not affect the

correlation between trading activity and credit rating significantly.We also collect

sovereign spreads for nine emerging economies from J.P. Morgan.2 These are economies

with Brady bonds (restructured dollar-denominateddebt). We argue that the country

ratings contain much of the cross-sectional information in the spreads. For each month,
we computed the correlation between the sovereign spreads and the composite country

ratings. The correlations variedfrom -95% to -46% with an average of -72%. That is,

sovereign nations with a highspread on their dollar-denominated debt tend to have a low

country rating. This isalso highlighted in Figure 1, which shows the spreads versus

country ratings afterthe averages of the variables for each month have been subtracted.

That is, the variablesare measured as deviation from month averages to sweep out time

effects. Thecorrelation is about -58% and is highly significant (a p-value close to zero).

Similar results are obtained with either financial or economic country ratings.Our sample

begins in 1984 for developed markets, and in the late 1980s andearly 1990s for emerging

markets. Consequently, only brief data histories are available,particularly for emerging

economies. This makes it difficulty to solely rely ontime-series methods for measurement

and statistical inference. For this reason, weextensively use pooled cross-sectional

methods in the estimation. Importantly, therelative rankings of the attributes do not vary

a lot over time, indicating that mostof the information is in the cross-section. We

typically rely on the time series to

2The nine economies are Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Korea, Mexico, Peru, Poland,

Turkey, andVenezuela.estimate exposures to risk sources, but evaluates the asset pricing

implications inthe cross-section. Increasing the sample for developed markets (going

back to 1976)does not change our results qualitatively and are therefore not reported.In

some specifications we allow the beta of a market versus the world market portfolio to

vary according a conditional information variable, namely the world excess dividend

yield (i.e., the dividend yield on the world market portfolio in excess of the one-month

Eurodollar deposit rate). These series are collected from Datastream.


4. Estimation and Methodology

In this section we present the estimation approach and discuss testable implications in the

time series as well as in the cross-section. We employ the generalized methodof moments

(GMM) of Hansen (1982) to estimate all parameters simultaneously asin Cochrane

(2001), and similar to Bansal and Dahlquist (2000) and Jagannathan andWang (2002). In

this framework, specific distributional assumptions of the asset returnsare not required,

and wedo not need to work in a normally independently and identically distributed

setting. We can handle both conditional heteroskedasticityand serial correlation in pricing

errors. The approach is different from traditional approaches as we avoid the problem of

generated regressors, and it is not necessary

to develop further methods and corrections as in two-step procedures.We have to deal

with missing data as the dollar return series for emerging markets

handle the missing data as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). The idea is to balance the data

set, and then apply the asymptotic results in the standard GMM framework. This is

further discussed below. We are interested in estimating the risk exposures and risk

premia simultaneously.Consider N markets (i = 1, 2, . . . , N), each with T observations (t

= 1, 2, . . . , T).Recall that the emerging markets have different lengths of histories. We

describe the

estimation approach for the world CAPM with time-varying betas.As in Jagannathan and

Wang (1996), Cochrane (1996), amongst others, we evaluate

the implications of the model in the cross-section as their is considerable cross- sectional

variation in the mean returns. Consider the cross-sectional risk premium implications in

equation (16). In addition, allow for the market beta of an asset to be time-varying
according to biM + biMzzt, where zt is a variable known at time t capturing time

variation in the market beta. The implications for the cross-section

of unconditional mean excess returns can then be written as

E (rit+1) = lMbiM + lMzbiMz + gihi, (17)

where lM = E (lMt) and lMz = E (lMtzt). The biMs and biMzs are the standard

time series projection coefficients. Hence, our first sets of moment conditions, for

each market i, are

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) yityit+1] = 0, (18)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1yityit+1] = 0, (19)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1ztyityit+1] = 0. (20)

These moment conditions are exactly identified. We have 3N moment conditionsand the

same number of parameters. The point estimates from these moment conditions

correspond to the usual least squares estimates. We follow the literature and add

constants, or alphas. In the world CAPM, the aiMs should be equal to zero.Indeed, we

will evaluate the CAPM by checking whether the alphas are all equal tozero in the time

series. Our focus, however, is on the ability of the various modelsh and without sample

selectivity) to explain the cross-section of risk premia.

Note that we use the regime indicator variable to make our unbalanced panel abalanced

panel as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). That is, the moment conditions are multiplied

with the product of the regime indicators at time t and t + 1, yityit+1. The product

yityit+1 selects returns when markets are open both at time t and t + 1. In essence, this

procedure treats missing observations as zeros. This has a practical advantage since the
usual moment conditions which contain missing data can be filled with zeros, and then

standard GMM routines can be utilized.3

The sample selectivity part in equation (17) is gihi. As noted in the discussion of

equation (14), under simplifying assumptions, the probability of default can be recovered

from the sovereign bond spread. Further, this spread can be used to 3Hayashi (2000)

considers, also in an analysis of panel data, a similar approach. Stambaugh (1997)

presents an alternative approach to address this econometric issue.

14

completely characterize the hazard rate at time t. However, the data on sovereign interest

rate spreads are not available for many economies in our sample period. As shown

earlier, there is a high negative correlation between the country ratings and the spreads in

the cross-section (for economies where sovereign spread data are available). That is, a

country with a low rating tends to have a high spread (a high probability of default).

Consequently, to characterize the cross-section of hazardrates, we model the hazard rate

for market i as follows

gihi = (g00 + g01Ci) Ai, (21)

where Ai proxies for hi in the cross-section. For example, we let Ai equal the countryis

economic rating which then captures the cross-sectional variation in the hazardrate.

Further, to allow for controlled cross-sectional heterogeneity in gi, we model it as

gi = g00 + g01Ci, where Ci denotes a country-specific attribute such as its return

volatility, financial rating, or its trading activity.

The cross-sectional parameters (i.e., the risk premium parameters and the g00and g01

parameters) are then identified in the last set of moment conditions for each asset i
E [(rit+1 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (22)

We also consider a specification with a constant term

E [(rit+1 - l0 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (23)

The constant term l0 should be zero according to theory, and a non-zero constant

indicates that a model cannot price the assets on average. Alternatively, a non-zero

constant can be interpreted as a zero-beta rate different from the riskfree rate thatis

imposed. Note that all parameters including the betas and the cross-sectional parameters

l0, lM, lMz, g00, and g01 are jointly estimated using GMM. Details of the estimation are

given in Appendix B.

Results

This section presents the empirical results. Recall, that we earlier reported that the cross-

sectional dispersion in the average returns is fairly large for emerging markets and small

for developed markets. This cross-sectional dispersion poses a serious challenge to asset

pricing models. Variables that characterize the selectivity bias, such as country ratings,

have very little time-series variation, but considerablecross-sectional variation. Hence,

the effects of selectivity are primarily identifiable in the cross-section. Given the large

cross-sectional dispersion in the data along with the short data histories for many

emerging markets, we, as in Black, Jensen, and Scholes (1972), Fama and MacBeth

(1973), and Jagannathan and Wang (1996), focusprimarily on the explaining the cross-

sectional differences in risk-premia.

We first discuss the ability of the various models to capture the cross-section of average

returns through only systematic risk. We then include sample selectivity in the cross-

section. Finally, we discuss the results and provide further interpretations


of the results.

Evidence in the Absence of Selectivity

In Table 3, we provide evidence from the cross-section of asset returns. The estimated

risk premium for the market portfolio is negative, as can be seen in row 2 of Panel A.

This is a standard finding (see, for instance, Jagannathan and Wang, 1996). The ability of

the CAPM with constant betas to explain the cross-section of average returns is basically

zero as indicated by the adjusted R-square. In Panel B, we consider the CAPM where the

market betas are allowed to be time-varying. The model fails to capture the cross-

sectional dispersion in average returns in this specification as well The adjusted R-square

is only about 8%. The theoretical restriction that l0 = 0 can be rejected at the 5%

significance level. However, the constant term, as discussed below, is not particularly

relevant when sample selectivity is included in

the model. For completeness, we have conducted the time-series tests for both the

constant beta and timevaryingbeta versions of the CAPM (not reported in a table). We

find that the joint test of zero alphasis rejected in both cases. The rejections seem to be

primarily due to abnormal returns in emergingmarkets—this is consistent with Harvey

(1995) who also shows that CAPM implications are rejectedin emerging markets data.

The failure of the CAPM can also be seen in Figure 2 where we plot the averagereturns

against the predicted expected returns from the model. A true model would,ignoring

estimation errors, produce observations along the 45-degree line. The figure reveals that

there is almost no dispersion in predicted expected returns. Hence, the model does not

capture the large cross-sectional variation in average returns.

Evidence with Selectivity Included


The model specifications with sample selectivity are also reported in Table 3. Inthese

specifications the selectivity is modelled as (g00 + g01si)Ai, where si is the annual return

volatility for market i, and Ai is defined as the economic rating for country i less the

economic rating for the U.S. The expression (g00 + g01si) is the gi for country i. The

proxy for the hazard rate for country i is Ai, based on thereasoning provided earlier. Note

that Ai is negative for emerging economies and close to zero for developed economies.

This specification captures the intuition that as economies improve their economic rating

they become akin to developed marketsand the sample selectivity term would fall.When

sample selectivity is incorporated in the standard CAPM (in Panel A), thecross-sectional

R-square rises to 41% and the parameters associated with the selectivityterm are

significant (a p-value of 3%). The time-varying beta based CAPMwith sample selectivity

included is reported in Panel B. This specification does quitewell in capturing the cross-

sectionalvariation in risk premia, and has an adjustedR-square of 61%. The magnitudes

of the parameters that govern the selectivity bias(that is, g00 andg01) are similar across

different specifications. They are in all casesjointly significant at usual significance

levels (see the column labelled “Test ofJointSignificance”). The last two rows of Panel B

highlights the relevance, or the lackthereof, of the constant term l0. The empirical results

across thetwo cases (includingl0, or not) are comparable. Hence, as suggested by theory,

the constant term isnot particularly important.Table 4 provides themagnitudes of the

overall risk premia explained by systematicrisk and by sample selectivity. Economies

with poor economic rating have alarger andpositive selectivity bias. For developed

economies the variable Ai is essentiallyzero and hence the effect of selectivity on their

mean returns is absent.


the constant beta CAPM, the systematic risk contribution is about 0.45% per month for

both emerging and developed economies. However, the selectivity premium is0.50% per

month for emerging markets and close to zero for developed markets. Inthe model with

time-varying betas (see PanelB),the fraction of the emerging marketreturn attributed to

the selectivity bias is somewhat higher, and now stands at 0.58%per month. For

emergingmarkets more than 1/2 of the ex-post risk premium can beattributed to

selectivity. That is, sample selectivity seems to be the dominant influenceon the

measured risk premiums in emerging economies. Sample selectivity isnot an important

dimension for understanding measured risk premiain developedmarkets.The higher

explanatory ability of the world CAPM with time-varying betas andsample selectivity

can be seen in Figure 3which displays the average returns againstpredicted expected

returns. The improvement in fit is visible and the model is ableto produce the

highdispersion in average returns.We also considered alternative specifications for the

parameter gi. In particular,we replaced si with a reputationalvariable—the financial

rating of an economy i lessthe comparable rating for the U.S. The ability of this

specification in terms of capturingthecross-sectional variation in risk premia (i.e.,

adjusted R-square) is about30%. This R-square is quite high relative the specifications

withouttheselectivityeffects. As shown in Table 4 the average emerging markets risk

premium is still predominantlydue to selectivity bias. Yet anotherchoice for the

specification of gi, thetrading activity variable, produces again similar results.Finally, we

consider a specification where we use thespreads (short samplesavailable for nine

economies) on the Brady bonds to measure the hazard rates directly.The approach is as

follows. We projecttheaverage spreads on the averagecountry ratings and use these


projection coefficients to infer spreads and defaulprobabilities (under theassumption of

zero recovery as in Appendix A) for allemerging markets. Recall that we are making the

assumption that the probabilityof default indebt markets coincides with the probability of

expropriation. Fromthe probabilities we can then compute the hazard rates (i.e., the his).

For developedmarkets we assume a zero default probability (and hence a zero hazard

rate). Withthis measure of the hazard rate, and the same specificationforthe gi as before,

we estimate the cross-sectional regression in equation (22). This specification

capturesabout 36% of the cross-sectional variation in risk premia. We find thatthe

selectivity18term, that is gihi, is about the 0.63% per month. The average probability of

the defaultis about half a percent per month. Hence, the bias in the mean return of about

0.63% per month can be supported by rather small probability of default (risk of

expropriation).Note that the empirical evidence for this specification is quite similarto

that discussed in the time-varying beta case in Panel B of Table 3.

5.3. What Drives the Selectivity Bias?

In Panel A of Table 5 we inquire what economic variables can explain the

crosssectionaldispersion in the selectivity bias for emerging markets. In particular, weare

interested in whether the measured selectivity premium is related to trading

activityand/or measures of reputation. To do so, we considerthe measures of

theselectivity premium based on the specification where gi = (g00 + g01si), and

therelative economic rating is the proxy for thehazard rate. This specification was

reportedin Table 3. The reputational variable (the financial rating of country i lessthe

comparable rating for theU.S.)is able to explain about 32% of the dispersion inthe

selectivity premium. This regression also shows that the selectivity premiumrises as
thecountry’s financial rating falls. Similarly, when we use the tradingactivity variable,

this explains about 19% of the dispersion in the selectivitypremium.Economies with

larger trading activity have a smaller selectivity premium.In essence our evidence

suggests that both trading activityand reputational considerationsare important for

explaining the selectivity premium.Allowing the selectivity premium to depend on the

volatilityinthe cross-sectionis motivated by arguments presented in Brown, Goetzmann,

and Ross (1995). Ourevidence indicates that this attribute is notuniquely important to

capture the crosssectionaldifferences in risk premia. Indeed, the trade activity and

financial reputationvariables do, at least ineconomic terms, a comparable job of

explaining the cross-sectional differences in the risk premia. Thus, it seems to us that this

is dueto the fact that the volatility of returns are related to these variables.Thisis shownin

Panel B of Table 5: return volatility is decreasing in both trading activity andfinancial

reputation. These variables, based on the work of Eaton and Gersovitz(1981), and Bulow

and Rogoff (1989a, 1989b) should matter to the compensationthat emerging markets

have toadditionallypay, due to risks of expropriation. Wefind that this indeed is the case.

In this paper we show that the cross-sectional differences in the equity returns

acrosssovereign economies is determined by two features—systematic risk and a

selectivitypremium. We show that the selectivity premium captures more than 1/2 of

theaverage risk premium in emerging markets. The equity riskpremia in

developedmarkets seems to be driven solely by systematic risk. The main economic

implicationof this result is that after taking account ofselectivity premium all

internationalequity returns reflect systematic risk, as predicted by theory.Our empirical

work also shows that sovereigns thathave better financial marketreputations and trade
more actively have to pay a smaller selectivity premium. Thisempirical evidence lends

support to theview that both reputations and fear of tradesanctions are important in

determining the cost of equity borrowing for a sovereignnation.

Measuring Hazard Rates From Sovereign Spreads

This Appendix shows how the hazard rate can be measured from sovereign bondspreads.

Consider a dollar denominated pure discount bond issued by a country.The payoff is

equal to one if there is no default, and µb + bbet+1 +hbt+1 if the countrydefaults. The

payoff process can thus be written as qbt+1= ybt+1 + (1 - ybt+1) (µb + bbet+1 + hbt+1) .

(24)

For simplicity, we assume that bb = 0. That is, we assume that the recovery valueof the

bond is not related to the systematic risk in the world economy.Further, theexpected

payoff on this bond in default is less than one (i.e., µb < 1). Valuing thispayoff using the

stochastic discount factor implies that

1/Rbt = [pbt + (1 - pbt) µb] /Rf t. (25)

Solving for the probability of no default, we obtain

pbt =Rf t - µbRbtRbt (1 - µb). (26)

Assume that the probabilities of default for the bond correspond to the probabilityof a

market shut-down, that is, pbt = pit. Under the further assumptionthat therecovery rate is

zero, we can directly recover the probability of default. Further,given the normal

cumulative distribution function wecan completely characterizethe hazard rate.The above

expression can also be used to compute the ex-ante beta on market i.We denote this with

bit =pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2. If we assume that the ratio of thebetas across the two regimes is

equal to a constant c and µb = 0, it follows that


bit = bi1 _Rf tRbt + c _Rbt - Rf tRbt __. (27)

Note that Rf t and Rbt can be observed directly from U.S. Treasuries and

Sovereignbonds, or as we demonstrate, approximated with a country’s relativecountry

rating.Hence, conditional on c, one can estimate the model with both a peso problem

andsample selectivity. In the special case with c = 1,there is no peso problem and wehave

that bit = bi1 = bi2.21B. Estimation DetailsThis Appendix shows the estimation in more

detail. Let q0 denote thetrue parametervector that we want to estimate. The typical

elements in q0 are aiM, biM, and biMz that are specific to each market, and the common

parameters l0, lM, lMz, g00and g01. By stacking the sample counterparts of the moment

conditions in (18) to (20), and (23), we have a vector of moment conditions

gT (q) =1T Tåt=1f (Xt, q) , (28)

where Xt summarizes the data used to form the moments conditions. The vectorgT (q)

has the dimension 4N. The moment conditions, given by (18) to (20), exactlyidentify the

aiM, biM, and biMz parameters. However, the moment conditions, givenby (23), is

overidentified. We have N moment conditions, but only 5 parameters (l0,lM, lMz, g00

and g01).We estimate the parameters by setting linear combinations of gT equal to zero.

That is, the moment conditions can be written as

ATgT = 0, (29)

where AT is a (3N + 5) × 4N matrix. In particular, our choice of AT is designed toensure

that the point estimates are the ones given by ordinary least squares.

Let AT

be the product of two matrices denoted by A1T and A2T (that is, AT = A1TA2T).

Thefollowing matrices result in least square point estimates


A1T =26666666664I3N 03N · · · 03N003N 1 · · · 1003Nˆ b1M · · · ˆ bNM003Nˆ b1Mz · ·

· ˆ bNMz003N A1 · · · AN003N C1A1 · · · CNAN, (30)

where I3N is the identity matrix with dimension 3N, 03N is a 3N vector of zeros,0N is an

N vector of zeros, and A2T is a diagonal matrix with typical element equalto 1/ åTt=1

yit+1. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are estimates of biMs and biMzs, and they are

given in the estimation. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are exactly the least square

estimatesobtained in a regression of the assets’ excess returns on the market excess

returnand scaled market excess returns as in (18) to (20). Further, the estimates of l0,

lM,lMz, g00, and g01 coincide with the least square estimates obtained in a regressionof

average returns on the betas and the proxies for sample selectivity. Our choice ofAT

ensures that ATgT (qT) = 0.

Based on Hansen (1982) we know that when linear combinations of gT are setequal to

zero as in (29), the asymptotic distribution of the point estimator qT is given

by

pT (qT - q0) d

! N _0, (A0D0)-1 _A0S0A00_(A0D0)-10_, (31)

where D0 is the gradient of the moment conditions in (28), and where S0 is the

variance-covariance matrix of the moment conditions and given by

S0 =¥åj=-¥E hf (Xt, q0) f _Xt-j, q0_0i. (32) The sample counterpart ST is estimated

using the procedure in Newey and West(1987) with four lags. D0 and A0 can be

estimated by their sample counterparts DTand AT. Note that the standard errors based on

(31) are robust to heteroskedasticity

and serial correlation in the moment conditions.


Table 1: Summary Statistics of Global Equity Returns

Mean Standard Deviaiion coreallation With world nclusion

Panel A. Developed Markets

Australia 1.07 6.84 0.52 84-01 203

Austria 1.16 7.33 0.34 84-01 203

Belgium 1.60 5.55 0.64 84-01 203

Canada 0.99 5.13 0.70 84-01 203

Denmark 1.18 5.66 0.53 84-01 203

Finland 1.91 8.62 0.54 88-01 156

France 1.59 6.07 0.70 84-01 203

Germany 1.38 6.27 0.60 84-01 203

Hong Kong 1.84 8.76 0.53 84-01 203

Ireland 1.03 5.73 0.65 88-01 156

Italy 1.46 7.51 0.51 84-01 203

Japan 1.02 7.36 0.76 84-01 203

Netherlands 1.56 4.73 0.75 84-01 203

New Zealand 0.30 7.02 0.47 88-01 156

Norway 1.09 7.26 0.58 84-01 203

Singapore 0.85 8.05 0.54 84-01 203

Spain 1.81 7.03 0.66 84-01 203

Sweden 1.65 6.92 0.63 84-01 203

Switzerland 1.51 5.38 0.66 84-01 203

U.K. 1.33 5.41 0.76 84-01 203


U.S. 1.38 4.37 0.79 84-01 203

Average 1.32 6.52 0.61

Panel B. Emerging Markets

Argentina 3.89 23.46 0.06 89-01 144

Brazil 3.16 19.61 0.31 89-01 144

Chile 1.83 7.73 0.24 89-01 144

China 0.26 13.41 0.27 93-01 96

Colombia 1.43 10.91 0.10 91-03 118

Greece 2.18 12.22 0.19 89-01 144

Hungary 1.61 13.15 0.47 93-01 96

India 0.36 8.68 0.13 92-12 97

Indonesia -0.08 15.13 0.41 90-10 123

Jordan 0.69 4.85 0.22 89-01 144

Korea 0.37 14.15 0.39 92-02 107

Malaysia 0.23 10.12 0.39 89-01 116

Mexico 2.04 10.18 0.42 89-01 144

Pakistan 0.99 12.56 0.08 91-04 117

Peru 0.75 9.14 0.34 93-01 96

Philippines 0.42 11.42 0.40 89-01 144

Poland 3.24 17.91 0.37 93-01 96

Portugal 0.96 6.91 0.51 89-01 144

South Africa 0.98 8.34 0.53 93-01 96

Sri Lanka -0.22 10.07 0.31 93-01 96


Taiwan 0.72 10.50 0.37 91-02 119

Thailand 0.38 12.55 0.43 89-01 144

Turkey 2.48 19.39 0.16 89-09 136

Venezuela 3.00 17.43 0.02 90-02 131

Zimbabwe 1.80 12.81 0.21 93-07 90

Average 1.34 12.50 0.29

Panel C. World

World 1.21 4.24 1.00 84-01 203

This table presents summary statistics of monthly dollar returns in global equity markets

from nclusion date to November 2000. Panels A, B and C show statistics for developed

markets, emrging markets and theWorld, respectively. The labels Average in Panels A

and B refer to theaverage (equally-weighted) across developed and emerging markets,

respectively. The meansand standard deviations are expressed in % per month.

Correlation with World refers to thecorrelation coefficient with the world market

portfolio. The inclusion date (year-month) is thefirst month with observations of

investable returns. The last observation of Malaysia is August1998. T refers to the

number of observations for each market.


CHAPTER.3
RISK AND RETURN: PORTFOLIO THEORY AND ASSET

PRICING MODELS

a. A portfolio is made up of a group of individual assets held incombination. An asset

that would be relatively risky if held inisolation may have little, or even no risk if held in

a welldiversifiedportfolio.

b. The feasible, or attainable, set represents all portfolios that canbe constructed from a

given set of stocks. This set is onlyefficient for part of its combinations.

c. An efficient portfolio is that portfolio which provides the highestexpected return for

any degree of risk. Alternatively, the efficient portfolio is that which provides the lowest

degree of risk for any expected return.

d. The efficient frontier is the set of efficient portfolios out of thefull set of potential

portfolios. On a graph, the efficientfrontier constitutes the boundary line of the set of

potentialportfolios.
e. An indifference curve is the risk/return trade-off function for aparticular investor and

reflects that investor's attitude towardrisk. The indifference curve specifies an investor's

required rate of return for a given level of risk. The greater the slope of theindifference

curve, the greater is the investor's risk aversion.

f. The optimal portfolio for an investor is the point at which theefficient set of

portfolios--the efficient frontier--is just tangentto the investor's indifference curve. This

point marks the highest level of satisfaction an investor can attain given the set

ofpotential portfolios.

g. The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) is a general equilibriumnmarket model

developed to analyze the relationship between risk andrequired rates of return on assets

when they are held in welldiversifiedportfolios. The SML is part of the CAPM.

h. The Capital Market Line (CML) specifies the efficient set of portfolios an investor can

attain by combining a risk-free asset and the risky market portfolio M. The CML states

that the expected return on any efficient portfolio is equal to the riskless rate plusa risk

premium, and thus describes a linear relationship between expected return and risk.

i. The characteristic line for a particular stock is obtained byregressing the historical

returns on that stock against thehistorical returns on the general stock market. The slope

of thecharacteristic line is the stock's beta, which measures the amountby which the

stock's expected return increases for a given increasein the expected return on the market.

j. The beta coefficient (b) is a measure of a stock's market risk. Itmeasures the stock's

volatility relative to an average stock, whichhas a beta of 1.0.

k. Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) is an approach to measuring theequilibrium

risk/return relationship for a given stock as a functionof multiple factors, rather than the
single factor (the market return) used by the CAPM. The APT is based on complex

mathematicaland statistical theory, but can account for several factors (such asGNP and

the level of inflation) in determining the required return

for a particular stock.

l. The Fama-French 3-factor model has one factor for the excess marketreturn (the

market return minus the risk free rate), a second factor

for size (defined as the return on a portfolio of small firms minusthe return on a portfolio

of big firms), and a third factor for thebook-to-market effect (defined as the return on a

portfolio of firmswith a high book-to-market ratio minus the return on a portfolio offirms

with a low book-to-market ratio).

m. Most people don’t behave rationally in all aspects of their personallives, and

behavioral finance assume that investors have the same

types of psychological behaviors in their financial lives as intheir personal lives.

Security A is less risky if held in a diversified portfolio because ofits lower beta and

negative correlation with other stocks. In a

single-asset portfolio, Security A would be more risky because sA > sBand CVA >

CVB.The intercept, a, seems to be about 3.5. Using a calculator with atleast squares

regression routine, we find the exact equation to be

X k = 3.7 + 0.56 M k , with r = 0.96.

b. The arithmetic average return for Stock X is calculated as follows:

%. 6 . 10

2 . 18 ... 0 . 23 0 . 14 (
kAvg =

+++-

The arithmetic average rate of return on the market portfolio,determined similarly, is

12.1%.

.6

Several points should be noted: (1) sM over this particular periodis higher than the

historic average sM of about 15 percent,indicating that the stock market was relatively

volatile during thisperiod; (2) Stock X, with sX = 13.1%, has much less total risk thanan

average stock, with sAvg = 22.6%; and (3) this example demonstrates that it is possible

for a very low-risk single stock to have lessrisk than a portfolio of average stocks, since

sX < sM.

c. Since Stock X is in equilibrium and plots on the Security MarketLine (SML), and

given the further assumption that X X k kˆ = and

M M k kˆ = --and this assumption often does not hold--then this equationmust hold:

Since sp is only 62 percent of sM, the probability distribution for Condition 2 is clearly

more peaked than that for Condition 3; thus,we can be reasonably confident of the

relevant locations of the distributions for Conditions 2 and 3.With regard to Condition 1,

the single-asset portfolio, we can besure that its probability distribution is less peaked

than that forthe 100-stock portfolio. Analytically, since b = 0.62 both for thesingle stock

portfolio and for the 100-stock portfolio,

. 0 ) 62 . 0 ( ) 62 . 0 ( 2
p

Ys»+s>s+s=s

We can also say on the basis of the available information that sY is smaller than sM;

Stock Y's market risk is only 62 percent of the"market," but it does have company-

specific risk, while the market portfolio does not. However, we know from the given data

thatsY = 13.8%, while sM = 19.6%. Thus, we have drawn the distribution or the single

stock portfolio more peaked than that of the market.The relative rates of return are not

reasonable. The return for any

stock should be

ki = kRF + (kM - kRF)bi.

Stock Y has b = 0.62, while the average stock (M) has b = 1.0;

therefore,

kY = kRF + (kM - kRF)0.62 < kM = kRF + (kM - kRF)1.0.

A disequilibrium exists--Stock Y should be bid up to drive its yielddown. More likely,

however, the data simply reflect the fact thatpast returns are not an exact basis for

expectations of future returns.


Portfolio Theory

 Suppose Asset A has an expected return of 10 percent and a standard

deviation of 20 percent. Asset B has an expected return of 16 percent and a

standard deviation of 40 percent. If the correlation between A and B is 0.6,

what are the expected return and standard deviation for a portfolio

comprised of 30 percent Asset A and 70 percent Asset B?

 Portfolio Expected Return

r̂P = w A r̂A + (1 − w A ) r̂B


= 0.3( 0.1) + 0.7( 0.16 )
= 0.142 = 14.2%.
Portfolio Standard Deviation

σ p = WA2σ A2 + (1 − WA ) 2 σ B2 + 2WA (1 − WA ) ρ AB σ A σ B
= 0.32 ( 0.22 ) + 0.7 2 ( 0.4 2 ) + 2( 0.3)( 0.7 )( 0.4)( 0.2)( 0.4 )
= 0.309
Attainable Portfolios  = 0.4
AB
Attainable Portfolios: rAB = +1
Attainable Portfolios: rAB = -1
Attainable Portfolios with Risk-Free Asset (Expected risk-free return = 5%)

asible and Efficient Portfolios


Feasible and Efficient portfolios

Expe
Port
The feasible set of portfolios represents all portfolios that can be constructed from a

given set of stocks.

An efficient portfolio is one that offers:

the most return for a given amount of risk, or

the least risk for a give amount of return.

The collection of efficient portfolios is called the efficient set or efficient frontier.
Expected
Return, rp
 An investor’s optimal portfolio is defined by the tangency point between the

efficient set and the investor’s indifference curve.

 Indifference curves reflect an investor’s attitude toward risk as reflected in

his or her risk/return tradeoff function. They differ among investors

because of differences in risk aversion.


What are the assumptions of the CAPM?

 Investors all think in terms of single holding period.

 All investors have identical expectations.

 Investors can borrow or lend unlimited amounts at the risk-free rate.

 All assets are perfectly divisible.

 There are no taxes and no transactions costs.

The
 All investors are price takers, that is, investors’ buying and selling won’t

influence stock prices.


 Quantities of all assets are given and fixed.

What impact does RF have onthe efficient frontier?

 When a risk-free asset is added to the feasible set, investors can create

portfolios that combine this asset with a portfolio of risky assets.

 The straight line connecting rRF with M, the tangency point between the line

and the old efficient set, becomes the new efficient frontier.
What is the Capital Market Line?
Ef
 The Capital Market Line (CML) is all linear combinations of the risk-free

asset and Portfolio M.

 Portfolios below the CML are inferior.

 The CML defines the new efficient set.

 All investors will choose a portfolio on the CML.

Expe
The m
is the
H

Run
Illu
_
r
20
Inte
 Anal
The re
m

2
Tw
co
Betas
The dif
good
R
W

The A
world
F

the
hig
R
under

ri = rRF
Requir
rRF =6.8
6.3%, c i=
Markowitz Portfolio Theory


CAP
Combining stocks into portfolios can reduce standard deviation below the level

obtained from a simple weighted average calculation.

• Less than perfect correlation coefficients make this possible.

• The various weighted combinations of stocks that create this standard deviations

constitute the set of efficient portfolios.

CAPM:
FIXED INCOME – AN EVOLUTION IN RISK AND

RETURN

Declining bond yields and a flat yield curve, driven by fallinginflation, have dominated

returns from traditional fixed income over the last few years. At the same time, the

growth of thecorporate bond market has meant a greater focus on credit. Nolonger are the

returns from taking on credit risk seen as secondary.Instead credit has become a

legitimate asset class in its own right.These developments have opened up opportunities

for clientsto receive alternative sources of return by accepting different types of risk from

some of the newer fixed income classes.

Rewards from new sources of risk

In the past, investors’ fixed income return was mainly from government

bonds.Consequently, their exposure was primarily to interest rate risk, receiving a

premiumas compensation for this exposure. In recent years, new fixed income securities

rewardinvestors with returns from other types of risks. For example, corporate bonds

generatereturns by taking on credit risk; convertible bonds produce returns from credit

and equityrisk; and hybrid securities can source returns from credit risk, correlation,

liquidity risk,and equity risk. The chart below shows the different risks associated with

the newer fixed

income securities and how interest rate risk has diminished as a prime contributor to

riskand return. Some securities comprise an aggregate of risks, whereas others have only

oneor two risk types like credit default swaps (CDS).

Risks associated with differing fixed income securities


Customised credit risk via CDOs

The evolution of fixed income securities such as collateralised debt obligations

(CDOs)allows investors exposure to customised credit risk. CDOs are interest-bearing

securitiescomprising a portfolio of credit risk. The portfolio is made up of physical

corporate bonds or synthetic credit positions using credit default swaps or a combination

of both. This poolof credit assets is then securitised, similar to a mortgage pool and made

into tranches.

Risk

Each tranche is given an S&P rating ranging from AAA to sub-investment grade

(BBB-).Investors can buy into one or more of these tranches, thereby customising their

creditrisk. The riskiest or sub-investment grade tranche is exposed to the first losses if

thereis a default, while the AAA tranche is subject to the last default. Investors in the

riskier tranches are compensated by a higher income than investors in the highly rated

tranches.Historical data has shown that an investor is paid an average of around 1%

above cash forholding investment grade credit, 2% for sub-investment grade, for

example, anything lessthan BBB- and 3% above cash for emerging market debt.

CDSs help unbundle risk

While the advent of new investment risks has generated return opportunities forinvestors,

the development of derivative markets has permitted the unbundling of theserisks to

allow more effective investment strategies. A credit default swap (CDS) is a newtype of

credit derivative contract between two parties that separates and transfers thecredit risk of

an asset such as a corporate bond from one party to another. For example,
investors may previously have purchased a corporate bond and consequently

beenexposed to interest rate risk and credit risk. Now instruments such CDSs allow

investment managers to extract and hedge the unwanted risks such as the interest rate risk

givinginvestors exposure to only credit risk. CDSs are commonly used to leverage a

portfolio’s exposure to credit with the aim of adding value.

The benefits of correlation risk

Analysis of credit risks and returns (excluding traditional bond interest rate risk)

fromemerging market debt, corporate bonds and high yield securities reveals that there

arebenefits in diversifying between different types of credit securities due to low

correlations.These correlations are unlike those from traditional bond risks, in that the

investor is notbenefiting from different interest rates but from varying credit risks.

However, portfoliosof credit risk may reduce the diversification benefit between bonds

and equities as creditrisks are modestly correlated to equity performance, posing new

challenges in strategicasset allocation.

An active approach to risk management

As risks within fixed income markets evolve, the skills and methods managers use

togenerate outperformance from these risks have also developed. Investment

managersnot only aim to add value from credit through relative value sector and stock

selection,but by taking an active approach to risk management and avoiding defaults.

Because default costs are real, issuers are forced by the market to a pay a higher spread to

compensate for the chance of a default over and above the risk free rate. There is

anopportunity to capture this excess return.With an active approach to risk management,


default risk can be minimised, potentiallydoubling an investor’s potential excess return.

The lighter section on the chart below,

called the default cost, is the percentage of the amount that can erode an investor’s excess

return. As the quality of credit securities fall, the value of active stock selection and

diversification, incorporating credit analysis, rises.

Premiums earned in different credit categories

Fixed income – an evolution

A greater focus on credit has seen an evolution in the way investors source their return

fromfixed income as well as the type of securities they invest in.Risks have also changed

alongwith the development of techniques to manage these risks. With complex new

securitiessuch as hybrids, floating ratenotes and more recently CDOs and CDSs, the need

for activemanagement and experienced resources is key, with the aim of adding value for

investors.

 Portfolio Theory

 Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM)

 Efficient frontier

 Capital Market Line (CML)

 Security Market Line (SML)

 Beta calculation

 Arbitrage pricing theory

 Fama-French 3-factor model


Chapter 4

 Expropriation Risk and Return in Global Equity

Markets
So if the next 72.4 years exactly duplicates the period evaluated, you have less than a

penny to spare if your expenses remain the same and you choose to invest solely in T-

Bills. However, if you use a more realistic three month holding period for T-bill assets

with a 100% return of principal, you are left with an amount that is slightly under $1.00

(0.9924). Without inflation the picture is much rosier; an initial investment in T-Bills that

is left to compound monthly (rather than a quarterly compounding) will provide the

investor with an account valued at more than 15 times the initial amount

BondRisk

Perhaps a conservative investor decides that by simply replacing the T-Bill investment

with a longer maturity Treasury Note, all will be fine regardless of inflation. Although T-

Note yields are usually higher than T-Bills, periods where the yield curve becomes flat or

inverted highlight a different issue. The timing of the purchase for the longer term

security will impact investment returns. This brings us the next investor risk—interest

raterisk.

Interest rate risk is the risk of having your money locked into a lower rate of return while

interest rates rise. Assuming the asset is held to maturity to benefit from the 100% return

of principal, the longer the term to maturity for the fixed income investment, the more

opportunity there is to receive sub-standard interest rates on the money. As a result, the

10-year note is deemed to have more interest rate risk than the 90-day bill, while the 30-

year bond is deemedto have more interest rate risk than both the note

andthebill.
Using 10-year note returns starting in April 1953 and assuming 10-year holding periods

with inflation, a $1.00 initial investment will be valued at $2.65 after 639 months (53

years). A conservative investor may feel a 265% return is acceptable; however, we have

yet to account for taxes. Incorporating a 20% tax applied semi-annually results in a final

valueof$2.21.

An investor who seeks even better fixed income returns by entering the municipal or

corporate bond world encounters yet another type of investment risk: credit risk.

Although defaults are less likely in the municipal bond market (reflected by lower

yields), they can occur. This type of investment does benefit from favorable tax treatment

whichwillboostreturns.

In terms of corporate bonds, credit risk increases (reflected by higher yields) as the credit

rating decreases. AAA corporate bonds are deemed less risky from a return of principal

standpoint and, therefore, offer lower yields. Interest is taxable and there’s no guarantee

that the credit rating and safety of the bond downgraded during the holding

period.

At this time, historical municipal and corporate bond returns will not be analyzed. Those

interested may want to pursue this analysis using a bond fund or exchange traded fund

(ETF) proxy such as a Nuveen Municipal Fund or the iSharesâ Corporate Bond Fund.

The biggest challenges include obtaining sufficient return histories and incorporating

appropriate tax impacts to the result.


Stock Market Risk

Investors generally turn to the stock market to realize returns that will outpace inflation

after accounting for taxes. Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) serves as one basis for

portfolio construction aimed at maximizing reward while minimizing risk. This approach

makes use of the following:

1) Capital Market Line Represents optimal portfolios for a given level of risk.
Capital Asset Pricing ModelAssesses the risk-return impact of adding a security
2)
(CAPM) into a well diversified portfolio.
A linear asset price model based on risk versus
3) Security Market Line
returns.
A linear model of asset return versus market

4) Security Characteristic Line return, using an asset risk measure to identify

undervalued and overvalued securities.


Beta, alpha and Sharpe Ratios are all measurements associated with portfolio and

security risk.

Inflation risk represents the risk associated with insufficient returns (not keeping pace

with increasing costs), while credit risk and stock market risk highlight represent the risk

associated with seeking higher returns (losses). Investors generally seek maximize

returns for a given level of risk by diversifying their portfolios (see previous articles on

diversification and correlations). However, market risk cannot be diversified away—

some risk of losseswill alwayremain even in optimal portfolios.


A two-part personal finance article series from May & June this year examined the

impact of inflation and investment returns on retirement savings when income was

removed from the account on a monthly basis. A thirty year period was examined starting

with January 1962 and investment returns were based upon actual S&P 500

returns, including dividends.

Using the same monthly inflation, return and dividend data, a $1 initial investment and a

20% tax rate on gains applied quarterly, the ending balance after 30 years was

approximately $1.26, or 126%. Remove the dividend returns and the account is valued at

$1.11 after thirty years. This represent a nice difference from compounded fixed income

returns over a 70 year period, particularly since the return of 0.12% excluded taxes.

Although the 10-year note return of 221% over 53 years seems to be an argument for T-

Note investments, when using thirty year results from initiation of the strategy, $0.96

remained in the account. Again, due to interest rate risk, the month of initiation will

impact the results with different thirty year periods yielding different returns.

InvestmentRisk

Investment risk includes credit risk and market risk which are both taken to combat

another risk—that due to inflation. Investors and traders need to assess the actual historic

results of the strategies they employ for their investments. In this manner, the individual

can better understand the true financial risks in which they are exposing themselves.

In order to manage necessary market risk, the investor must take steps to understand
those risks and minimize them through diversification. Numerous articles on the topic of

asset allocation and diversification are available in the Optionetics.com article archives

by completing an author keyword search for 2004 and 2005. Traders, who often self-

direct their investment accounts, must proactively examine the performance of

investments versus the performance of trading given the goals for each, and re-evaluate

those allocations.

Country Return Dynamics

To derive implications for systematic risk compensation and selectivity biases, we model

individual market returns as a two-regime process. We interpret regime 1 as the regime

when the market is open to international investors and investabledollar-denominated

returns are available for a given market. We discuss the details of this in the data section

below. Regime 2 is the regime where investable dollar returns

are not available and the market is inaccessible to international investors. We view the

transition from regime 1 to regime 2 as being associated with expropriationof

international investors. This expropriation can take various forms, includingcapital

controls, foreign exchange restrictions, and taxes on repatriations of foreign investments.

Information regarding the payoffs to international investors duringthe transition from

regime 1 to regime 2 and the ex-ante probability with which thistransition can happen are

not observable to an econometrician. In essence, we viewemerging markets returns akin


to payoffs of a defaultable bond which has not defaulted.As with the defaultable bond,

the likelihood of transition from regime 1

to regime 2 affects measured mean returns obtained solely from data sampled from

regime 1. Hence, one would expect that observed mean returns, particularly for an

emerging market, to be higher than the ex-ante risk premium. This bias measures the

compensation for expropriation and helps us understand the risk-return relationacross

markets. In equation (3), we present a time-series representation of returns that will

allowus to derive separate systematic risk compensation from sample selectivity biasesin

expected returns. Let yit+1 represent an indicator for the regime in market i att + 1 being

1 or 2. The indicator yit+1 is equal to one if the regime at t + 1 is 1 (open to international

investors), and zero otherwise. The return process, expressed indollars, is specified as

Rit+1 = E (Rit+1|It) + yit+1 (bi1et+1 + hi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1) (bi2et+1 + hi2t+1) , (3)

where E(Rit+1|It) is the ex-ante conditional mean of the gross return, et+1 is the

innovation in the systematic risk component, and hi1t+1 and hi2t+1 are diversifiable risk

components specific to market i. The exposure of the return to systematic risk is

determined by bi1 and bi2.Let rit+1 denote the excess return on market i, that is, rit+1 =

Rit+1 - Rf t.

Assuming that yit = 1, the valuation condition (1) then implies thatE (rit+1|It) = ls2et

[pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] , (4)

where pit is the probability of the regime where market i is accessible to international

investors at time t. In other words, pit is the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1,and (1 -

pit) is the probability of a switch to regime 2. The risk premium is determinedby the
aggregate market price of risk, ls2et, and an overall beta which is aprobability-weighted

average of the betas in the two regimes. Next, we describe thedetermination of regimes 1

and 2.

The Sample Selectivity Process

Let y_it be a latent process that determines the opening and closing for market i. Thatis,

it determines if the regime is 1 or 2. In particular, if y_it >0 then the regime is 1and if

y_it _ 0, then the regime is classified as 2. Given this classification, it follows 6

thatyit = ( 1 if y_it > 0,0 otherwise.(5)

Following Heckman (1976, 1979), we assume that the conditional mean of the

latentprocess is determined by a vector of pre-determined variables xit. Hence, we

assume

That y_it+1 = d0ixit + #it+1, #it+1|xit _ N(0, 1) , (6)

where #it+1, by assumption, is a standard normal error. Brown, Goetzmann, andRoss

(1995) argue that the survival of a market (the analogue of our regime 1) is

determinedsolely by the price process itself. However, this seems restrictive, as many

emerging markets, such as Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, have had comparable

drops in the market capitalization, but only Malaysia, directly expropriatedinternational

investors. This suggests that other economic considerations may be important in

determining whether investable dollar-denominated returns are availableto an

international investor. These other influences are captured by xit and #it+1. Further, the

latent variable model of selectivity provides connections betweendefault risk in sovereign

dollar-denominated bonds and the likelihood of capitalcontrols. This allows us to provide

a link between the cross-section of equity risk


premia and country risk ratings.Let f(.) denote the standard normal probability density

function, and let F (.)

denote the standard normal cumulative distribution function. It is straightforward to show

that the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1 is characterized by pit = E (yit+1|yit = 1,

xit) = Z ¥ -d0i xitf(#it+1)d#it+1 = Z d0i xit¥f(#it+1)d#it+1 = F _d0ixit_,(7)

where the third equality follows from the symmetry of the normal distribution. As#it+1

and the innovation in the return of asset i may be correlated, consider the

followingconditional projections for the different regimes

bi1et+1 + hi1t+1 = gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1, (8)

bi2et+1 + hi2t+1 = gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1, (9)

where gi1 and gi1 are the projection coefficients between bijet+1 +hit+1 and #it+1

andbijet+1 + hit+1 and #it+1, respectively, and vi1t+1 and vi2t+1 are projection errors.

The above equations then imply that the excess return process can be written as

rit+1 = E (rit+1|It) + yit+1(gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1)(gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1). (10)

2.4. The Sample Selectivity Criteria

We consider the case where data are missing as an outcome of an attrition process.That

is, we consider the sample selectivity effects of only observing the regimewhere the

markets are accessible to international investors. In this case, the restrictionon the

empirical conditional mean of the returns is

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = E (rit+1|It) + gi1E _#it+1|#it+1 > -d0ixit_, (11)

where we have conditioned on the fact that the market is in regime 1 today (yit = 1)and

tomorrow (yit+1 = 1). This captures our view that an econometrician only
observesinvestable dollar return sample from regime 1. Note that E_#it+1|#it+1 >

-d0ixit_ is the same as E(#it+1|yit+1 = 1). Moreover, this quantity satisfies the relation

E (#it+1|yit+1 = 1) =1pit Z ¥-d0i xit#it+1f(#it+1)d#it+1, (12)

which can be further simplified as follows

1pit Z ¥-d0i xit #it+1 f(#it+1) d#it+1 = f(d0ixit)pit= f(d0ixit)F(d0ixit). (13)

This is typically referred to as a hazard rate, or the inverse Mill’s ratio. We denotethis by

hit, that is, hit = f(d0ixit)/F(d0ixit). Based on the above results, it follows thatthe

conditional mean of the excess return is given by

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = ls2

et [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit. (14)

This restriction shows that there are two biases in measuring the ex-ante risk

premium.The first bias stems from the fact that the econometrician does not

observeregime 2 (the regime when investable dollar returns are not available). This is re-

flected in the first term of (14). bi1 can obviously be identified in the time series

fromobservations when the market is open. bi2 is the beta at transition from regime 1 to2.

Identification of bi2 and the transition probability of going to regime 2 (that is,81 - pit)

can not be measured without additional restrictions. Note that the resultingbias is on the

ex-ante mean of the return and we refer to it as a peso problem.

The second bias is due to sample selectivity, and the effects of this can be seenin the

second term of (14). This is an adjustment to the ex-post mean to correctly estimate the

ex-ante risk premium. Conditional on the availability of dollar returnstoday and

tomorrow, the risk premium is biased upwards. Put differently, investors require, on
average, a higher return when the market offers dollar returns, muchlike a defaultable

bond.

Brown, Goetzmann, and Ross (1995) focus on the second effect. It seems that the

measured risk premium will also be affected by the beta associated with the market shut-

down regime. If this beta is higher that in the regime for which datais available, then the

ex-ante mean asset will be higher, and in standard time-series regression this will show

up as an abnormal return, or an alpha. However, purgingthe empirical means of these two

effects implies that the ex-ante means lie on thesecurity market line.

In the special case of the world CAPM, equation (14) can be stated asE (rit+1|It, yit = 1,

yit+1 = 1) = E (rMt+1|It) [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit, (15)

where E (rMt+1|It) is the conditional risk premium on the world market portfolio,and the

betas are the world CAPM betas for the two regimes. As discussed above,taking account

of the peso problem requires measurement of bi2 and pit. In practise, estimating bi2 from

returns during a regime-switch is infeasible as there are very few, if any, in available

return data. Hence, in the empirical work, we will assumethat

bi1 = bi2 = biM. This gives us the following cross-sectional implications

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = lMtbiM + gi1hit, (16)

where lMt = E (rMt+1|It). In the empirical work we also consider time-variation inbetas.

Allowing for this time-variation is straightforward and does not affect any of the

derivations above.

Finally, note that for high survival probabilities, the hazard rate in equation (13)is almost

linear in the probabilities. Under the assumption that the probabilitiesabout expropriation

in equity markets and sovereign debt markets are highly re-lated, it is straightforward to
show that pit can essentially be backed out from observed sovereign bond spreads (see

Appendix A). The premise that probabilitiesof bond default and expropriation in equity

markets are related is supported bythe events in Malaysia in 1998 and the more recent

events in Argentina. Note thatfor small default probabilities, the hazard rate is almost

linear in sovereign bondspreads. As discussed and documented later, at least for the few

sovereign spreads that we observe, the spreads are highly correlated with observed

measures of country ratings. Hence, we can use the more extensively available data on

country ratingsto measure the hazard rates themselves.

3. Data

We collect monthly return data on 46 developed and emerging markets from

Datastream.According to International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank, 21

of these markets are classified as developed and 25 as emerging markets. The

underlyingsources of the data are Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI)

fordeveloped markets and IFC for emerging markets. The returns from IFC are the

investable returns that incorporate foreign investment restrictions (including special

classes of shares, sector restrictions, single foreign shareholder limits,

restrictionsallowing only authorized investors, company statues, and national limits). We

also consider the return on the MSCI world market portfolio. All returns are in U.S.

dollars,

and excess returns are calculated by subtracting the one-month Eurodollar rate =pp for

each month.The sample period is January 1984 to November 2000. It is, however, well

known that many emerging markets only were accessible for international investors

beginning in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. This is reflected in our data base. Data
for emerging markets are included as and when they open up. We let the opening date of

an emerging market be the date when IFC begins to record investable returns. The

inclusion date for each market is shown in Table 1. The inclusion dates are similar to

what other studies have considered to be the financial market liberalization dates (see, for

instance, Kim and Singal, 2000, Bekaert and Harvey, 2000, and Henry,2000). Our

empirical results are not sensitive to using alternative choices of liberalizationdates. The

total number of observations for developed markets is 203 and for emerging markets the

number of observations varies between 90 and 144.In Table 1 we report summary

statistics of the monthly dollar returns. The averagereturns across developed and

emerging markets are about the same, 1.32%and 1.34% per month, respectively.

However, the average standard deviation ofemerging markets is about twice as high as

for developed markets. It also seemsto be greater dispersion in returns and return

volatilities of emerging economies.The correlation with the world market return is much

higher for developed markets

than for emerging markets.Table 2 presents information regarding various attributes of

the countries. Theseattributes are used in our cross-sectional analysis of risk premia. The

Real GDP perCapita attribute is the real GDP per capita in constant dollars in 1990

(expressed ininternational prices, base 1985). The Trading Activity attribute is the sum of

exportsand imports divided by GDP in 1990. The real GDP per capita and trading

activityattributes are collected from the World Penn Tables. The Economic Rating and

theFinancial Rating attributes refer to the average country ratings from inclusion dateto

November 2000, and is provided by the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG).
The economic risk rating is meant to measure an economy’s current strengths

andweaknesses, whereas the financial risk rating is meant to measure an

economy’sability to finance its official, commercial, and trade obligations. More

specifically,the variables determining the economic rating include a weighted average of

inflation,debt service as a percent of exports, international liquidity ratios, foreign

tradecollection experience, current account balance, and foreign exchange market

indicators.In the empirical work our measure of reputation is the financial rating, whichis

a weighted average of loan default, delayed payment of suppliers’ credit, repudiationof

contracts by government, losses from exchange controls, and expropriation of private

investment. The country ratings are published on a scale from 0 to 50 where a higher

number indicates lower risks. We have re-scaled the ratings to

between 0 (low) and 100 (high). A rating of 0 to 49 then indicates a very high risk;50 to

59 high risk; 60 to 69 moderate risk; 70 to 79 low risk; and 80 or more verylow risk. The

country rating are used by Erb, Harvey, and Viskanta (1996) in theirstudy of the time-

series predictability of future returns. La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes,Shleifer, and Vishny

(1998) use these ratings to study investor protection and ownership structure across

countries. In this paperwe use the ratings to measure sampleselectivity.

Finally, we report betas versus the MSCI world market portfolio. The betas are,on

average, about the same for developed and emerging markets. However, thedispersion in

betas is much larger across emerging markets ranging from 0.07 to1.80, whereas they are

all about one in the developed markets.

It is evident from Table 2 that the emerging economies are economies with relativelylow

GDP per capita. Further, emerging economies have a much lower countryratings than
developed economies. In fact, the correlation between the real GDP percapita and the

ratings are 70% (economic rating) and 80% (financial rating). Thetrading activity

attribute has a lower correlation with the real GDP per capita (about20%). The

correlations between trading activity and the ratings are about 20% and40%. There are a

few outliers (notably Hong Kong and Singapore), but excludingthem does not affect the

correlation between trading activity and credit rating significantly.We also collect

sovereign spreads for nine emerging economies from J.P. Morgan.2 These are economies

with Brady bonds (restructured dollar-denominateddebt). We argue that the country

ratings contain much of the cross-sectional information in the spreads. For each month,

we computed the correlation between the sovereign spreads and the composite country

ratings. The correlations variedfrom -95% to -46% with an average of -72%. That is,

sovereign nations with a highspread on their dollar-denominated debt tend to have a low

country rating. This isalso highlighted in Figure 1, which shows the spreads versus

country ratings afterthe averages of the variables for each month have been subtracted.

That is, the variablesare measured as deviation from month averages to sweep out time

effects. Thecorrelation is about -58% and is highly significant (a p-value close to zero).

Similar results are obtained with either financial or economic country ratings.Our sample

begins in 1984 for developed markets, and in the late 1980s andearly 1990s for emerging

markets. Consequently, only brief data histories are available,particularly for emerging

economies. This makes it difficulty to solely rely ontime-series methods for measurement

and statistical inference. For this reason, weextensively use pooled cross-sectional

methods in the estimation. Importantly, therelative rankings of the attributes do not vary
a lot over time, indicating that mostof the information is in the cross-section. We

typically rely on the time series to

2The nine economies are Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Korea, Mexico, Peru, Poland,

Turkey, andVenezuela.estimate exposures to risk sources, but evaluates the asset pricing

implications inthe cross-section. Increasing the sample for developed markets (going

back to 1976)does not change our results qualitatively and are therefore not reported.In

some specifications we allow the beta of a market versus the world market portfolio to

vary according a conditional information variable, namely the world excess dividend

yield (i.e., the dividend yield on the world market portfolio in excess of the one-month

Eurodollar deposit rate). These series are collected from Datastream.

4. Estimation and Methodology

In this section we present the estimation approach and discuss testable implications in the

time series as well as in the cross-section. We employ the generalized methodof moments

(GMM) of Hansen (1982) to estimate all parameters simultaneously asin Cochrane

(2001), and similar to Bansal and Dahlquist (2000) and Jagannathan andWang (2002). In

this framework, specific distributional assumptions of the asset returnsare not required,

and wedo not need to work in a normally independently and identically distributed

setting. We can handle both conditional heteroskedasticityand serial correlation in pricing

errors. The approach is different from traditional approaches as we avoid the problem of

generated regressors, and it is not necessary

to develop further methods and corrections as in two-step procedures.We have to deal

with missing data as the dollar return series for emerging markets
handle the missing data as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). The idea is to balance the data

set, and then apply the asymptotic results in the standard GMM framework. This is

further discussed below. We are interested in estimating the risk exposures and risk

premia simultaneously.Consider N markets (i = 1, 2, . . . , N), each with T observations (t

= 1, 2, . . . , T).Recall that the emerging markets have different lengths of histories. We

describe the

estimation approach for the world CAPM with time-varying betas.As in Jagannathan and

Wang (1996), Cochrane (1996), amongst others, we evaluate

the implications of the model in the cross-section as their is considerable cross- sectional

variation in the mean returns. Consider the cross-sectional risk premium implications in

equation (16). In addition, allow for the market beta of an asset to be time-varying

according to biM + biMzzt, where zt is a variable known at time t capturing time

variation in the market beta. The implications for the cross-section

of unconditional mean excess returns can then be written as

E (rit+1) = lMbiM + lMzbiMz + gihi, (17)

where lM = E (lMt) and lMz = E (lMtzt). The biMs and biMzs are the standard

time series projection coefficients. Hence, our first sets of moment conditions, for

each market i, are

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) yityit+1] = 0, (18)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1yityit+1] = 0, (19)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1ztyityit+1] = 0. (20)

These moment conditions are exactly identified. We have 3N moment conditionsand the

same number of parameters. The point estimates from these moment conditions
correspond to the usual least squares estimates. We follow the literature and add

constants, or alphas. In the world CAPM, the aiMs should be equal to zero.Indeed, we

will evaluate the CAPM by checking whether the alphas are all equal tozero in the time

series. Our focus, however, is on the ability of the various modelsh and without sample

selectivity) to explain the cross-section of risk premia.

Note that we use the regime indicator variable to make our unbalanced panel abalanced

panel as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). That is, the moment conditions are multiplied

with the product of the regime indicators at time t and t + 1, yityit+1. The product

yityit+1 selects returns when markets are open both at time t and t + 1. In essence, this

procedure treats missing observations as zeros. This has a practical advantage since the

usual moment conditions which contain missing data can be filled with zeros, and then

standard GMM routines can be utilized.3

The sample selectivity part in equation (17) is gihi. As noted in the discussion of

equation (14), under simplifying assumptions, the probability of default can be recovered

from the sovereign bond spread. Further, this spread can be used to 3Hayashi (2000)

considers, also in an analysis of panel data, a similar approach. Stambaugh (1997)

presents an alternative approach to address this econometric issue.

14

completely characterize the hazard rate at time t. However, the data on sovereign interest

rate spreads are not available for many economies in our sample period. As shown

earlier, there is a high negative correlation between the country ratings and the spreads in

the cross-section (for economies where sovereign spread data are available). That is, a

country with a low rating tends to have a high spread (a high probability of default).
Consequently, to characterize the cross-section of hazardrates, we model the hazard rate

for market i as follows

gihi = (g00 + g01Ci) Ai, (21)

where Ai proxies for hi in the cross-section. For example, we let Ai equal the countryis

economic rating which then captures the cross-sectional variation in the hazardrate.

Further, to allow for controlled cross-sectional heterogeneity in gi, we model it as

gi = g00 + g01Ci, where Ci denotes a country-specific attribute such as its return

volatility, financial rating, or its trading activity.

The cross-sectional parameters (i.e., the risk premium parameters and the g00and g01

parameters) are then identified in the last set of moment conditions for each asset i

E [(rit+1 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (22)

We also consider a specification with a constant term

E [(rit+1 - l0 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (23)

The constant term l0 should be zero according to theory, and a non-zero constant

indicates that a model cannot price the assets on average. Alternatively, a non-zero

constant can be interpreted as a zero-beta rate different from the riskfree rate thatis

imposed. Note that all parameters including the betas and the cross-sectional parameters

l0, lM, lMz, g00, and g01 are jointly estimated using GMM. Details of the estimation are

given in Appendix B.

Results

This section presents the empirical results. Recall, that we earlier reported that the cross-

sectional dispersion in the average returns is fairly large for emerging markets and small

for developed markets. This cross-sectional dispersion poses a serious challenge to asset
pricing models. Variables that characterize the selectivity bias, such as country ratings,

have very little time-series variation, but considerablecross-sectional variation. Hence,

the effects of selectivity are primarily identifiable in the cross-section. Given the large

cross-sectional dispersion in the data along with the short data histories for many

emerging markets, we, as in Black, Jensen, and Scholes (1972), Fama and MacBeth

(1973), and Jagannathan and Wang (1996), focusprimarily on the explaining the cross-

sectional differences in risk-premia.

We first discuss the ability of the various models to capture the cross-section of average

returns through only systematic risk. We then include sample selectivity in the cross-

section. Finally, we discuss the results and provide further interpretations

of the results.

Evidence in the Absence of Selectivity

In Table 3, we provide evidence from the cross-section of asset returns. The estimated

risk premium for the market portfolio is negative, as can be seen in row 2 of Panel A.

This is a standard finding (see, for instance, Jagannathan and Wang, 1996). The ability of

the CAPM with constant betas to explain the cross-section of average returns is basically

zero as indicated by the adjusted R-square. In Panel B, we consider the CAPM where the

market betas are allowed to be time-varying. The model fails to capture the cross-

sectional dispersion in average returns in this specification as well The adjusted R-square

is only about 8%. The theoretical restriction that l0 = 0 can be rejected at the 5%

significance level. However, the constant term, as discussed below, is not particularly

relevant when sample selectivity is included in


the model. For completeness, we have conducted the time-series tests for both the

constant beta and timevaryingbeta versions of the CAPM (not reported in a table). We

find that the joint test of zero alphasis rejected in both cases. The rejections seem to be

primarily due to abnormal returns in emergingmarkets—this is consistent with Harvey

(1995) who also shows that CAPM implications are rejectedin emerging markets data.

The failure of the CAPM can also be seen in Figure 2 where we plot the averagereturns

against the predicted expected returns from the model. A true model would,ignoring

estimation errors, produce observations along the 45-degree line. The figure reveals that

there is almost no dispersion in predicted expected returns. Hence, the model does not

capture the large cross-sectional variation in average returns.

Evidence with Selectivity Included

The model specifications with sample selectivity are also reported in Table 3. Inthese

specifications the selectivity is modelled as (g00 + g01si)Ai, where si is the annual return

volatility for market i, and Ai is defined as the economic rating for country i less the

economic rating for the U.S. The expression (g00 + g01si) is the gi for country i. The

proxy for the hazard rate for country i is Ai, based on thereasoning provided earlier. Note

that Ai is negative for emerging economies and close to zero for developed economies.

This specification captures the intuition that as economies improve their economic rating

they become akin to developed marketsand the sample selectivity term would fall.When

sample selectivity is incorporated in the standard CAPM (in Panel A), thecross-sectional

R-square rises to 41% and the parameters associated with the selectivityterm are

significant (a p-value of 3%). The time-varying beta based CAPMwith sample selectivity

included is reported in Panel B. This specification does quitewell in capturing the cross-
sectionalvariation in risk premia, and has an adjustedR-square of 61%. The magnitudes

of the parameters that govern the selectivity bias(that is, g00 andg01) are similar across

different specifications. They are in all casesjointly significant at usual significance

levels (see the column labelled “Test ofJointSignificance”). The last two rows of Panel B

highlights the relevance, or the lackthereof, of the constant term l0. The empirical results

across thetwo cases (includingl0, or not) are comparable. Hence, as suggested by theory,

the constant term isnot particularly important.Table 4 provides themagnitudes of the

overall risk premia explained by systematicrisk and by sample selectivity. Economies

with poor economic rating have alarger andpositive selectivity bias. For developed

economies the variable Ai is essentiallyzero and hence the effect of selectivity on their

mean returns is absent.

the constant beta CAPM, the systematic risk contribution is about 0.45% per month for

both emerging and developed economies. However, the selectivity premium is0.50% per

month for emerging markets and close to zero for developed markets. Inthe model with

time-varying betas (see PanelB),the fraction of the emerging marketreturn attributed to

the selectivity bias is somewhat higher, and now stands at 0.58%per month. For

emergingmarkets more than 1/2 of the ex-post risk premium can beattributed to

selectivity. That is, sample selectivity seems to be the dominant influenceon the

measured risk premiums in emerging economies. Sample selectivity isnot an important

dimension for understanding measured risk premiain developedmarkets.The higher

explanatory ability of the world CAPM with time-varying betas andsample selectivity

can be seen in Figure 3which displays the average returns againstpredicted expected

returns. The improvement in fit is visible and the model is ableto produce the
highdispersion in average returns.We also considered alternative specifications for the

parameter gi. In particular,we replaced si with a reputationalvariable—the financial

rating of an economy i lessthe comparable rating for the U.S. The ability of this

specification in terms of capturingthecross-sectional variation in risk premia (i.e.,

adjusted R-square) is about30%. This R-square is quite high relative the specifications

withouttheselectivityeffects. As shown in Table 4 the average emerging markets risk

premium is still predominantlydue to selectivity bias. Yet anotherchoice for the

specification of gi, thetrading activity variable, produces again similar results.Finally, we

consider a specification where we use thespreads (short samplesavailable for nine

economies) on the Brady bonds to measure the hazard rates directly.The approach is as

follows. We projecttheaverage spreads on the averagecountry ratings and use these

projection coefficients to infer spreads and defaulprobabilities (under theassumption of

zero recovery as in Appendix A) for allemerging markets. Recall that we are making the

assumption that the probabilityof default indebt markets coincides with the probability of

expropriation. Fromthe probabilities we can then compute the hazard rates (i.e., the his).

For developedmarkets we assume a zero default probability (and hence a zero hazard

rate). Withthis measure of the hazard rate, and the same specificationforthe gi as before,

we estimate the cross-sectional regression in equation (22). This specification

capturesabout 36% of the cross-sectional variation in risk premia. We find thatthe

selectivity18term, that is gihi, is about the 0.63% per month. The average probability of

the defaultis about half a percent per month. Hence, the bias in the mean return of about

0.63% per month can be supported by rather small probability of default (risk of
expropriation).Note that the empirical evidence for this specification is quite similarto

that discussed in the time-varying beta case in Panel B of Table 3.

5.3. What Drives the Selectivity Bias?

In Panel A of Table 5 we inquire what economic variables can explain the

crosssectionaldispersion in the selectivity bias for emerging markets. In particular, weare

interested in whether the measured selectivity premium is related to trading

activityand/or measures of reputation. To do so, we considerthe measures of

theselectivity premium based on the specification where gi = (g00 + g01si), and

therelative economic rating is the proxy for thehazard rate. This specification was

reportedin Table 3. The reputational variable (the financial rating of country i lessthe

comparable rating for theU.S.)is able to explain about 32% of the dispersion inthe

selectivity premium. This regression also shows that the selectivity premiumrises as

thecountry’s financial rating falls. Similarly, when we use the tradingactivity variable,

this explains about 19% of the dispersion in the selectivitypremium.Economies with

larger trading activity have a smaller selectivity premium.In essence our evidence

suggests that both trading activityand reputational considerationsare important for

explaining the selectivity premium.Allowing the selectivity premium to depend on the

volatilityinthe cross-sectionis motivated by arguments presented in Brown, Goetzmann,

and Ross (1995). Ourevidence indicates that this attribute is notuniquely important to

capture the crosssectionaldifferences in risk premia. Indeed, the trade activity and

financial reputationvariables do, at least ineconomic terms, a comparable job of

explaining the cross-sectional differences in the risk premia. Thus, it seems to us that this

is dueto the fact that the volatility of returns are related to these variables.Thisis shownin
Panel B of Table 5: return volatility is decreasing in both trading activity andfinancial

reputation. These variables, based on the work of Eaton and Gersovitz(1981), and Bulow

and Rogoff (1989a, 1989b) should matter to the compensationthat emerging markets

have toadditionallypay, due to risks of expropriation. Wefind that this indeed is the case.

Conclusion

In this paper we show that the cross-sectional differences in the equity returns

acrosssovereign economies is determined by two features—systematic risk and a

selectivitypremium. We show that the selectivity premium captures more than 1/2 of

theaverage risk premium in emerging markets. The equity riskpremia in

developedmarkets seems to be driven solely by systematic risk. The main economic

implicationof this result is that after taking account ofselectivity premium all

internationalequity returns reflect systematic risk, as predicted by theory.Our empirical

work also shows that sovereigns thathave better financial marketreputations and trade

more actively have to pay a smaller selectivity premium. Thisempirical evidence lends

support to theview that both reputations and fear of tradesanctions are important in

determining the cost of equity borrowing for a sovereignnation.

Measuring Hazard Rates From Sovereign Spreads

This Appendix shows how the hazard rate can be measured from sovereign bondspreads.

Consider a dollar denominated pure discount bond issued by a country.The payoff is

equal to one if there is no default, and µb + bbet+1 +hbt+1 if the countrydefaults. The

payoff process can thus be written as qbt+1= ybt+1 + (1 - ybt+1) (µb + bbet+1 + hbt+1) .

(24)
For simplicity, we assume that bb = 0. That is, we assume that the recovery valueof the

bond is not related to the systematic risk in the world economy.Further, theexpected

payoff on this bond in default is less than one (i.e., µb < 1). Valuing thispayoff using the

stochastic discount factor implies that

1/Rbt = [pbt + (1 - pbt) µb] /Rf t. (25)

Solving for the probability of no default, we obtain

pbt =Rf t - µbRbtRbt (1 - µb). (26)

Assume that the probabilities of default for the bond correspond to the probabilityof a

market shut-down, that is, pbt = pit. Under the further assumptionthat therecovery rate is

zero, we can directly recover the probability of default. Further,given the normal

cumulative distribution function wecan completely characterizethe hazard rate.The above

expression can also be used to compute the ex-ante beta on market i.We denote this with

bit =pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2. If we assume that the ratio of thebetas across the two regimes is

equal to a constant c and µb = 0, it follows that

bit = bi1 _Rf tRbt + c _Rbt - Rf tRbt __. (27)

Note that Rf t and Rbt can be observed directly from U.S. Treasuries and

Sovereignbonds, or as we demonstrate, approximated with a country’s relativecountry

rating.Hence, conditional on c, one can estimate the model with both a peso problem

andsample selectivity. In the special case with c = 1,there is no peso problem and wehave

that bit = bi1 = bi2.21B. Estimation DetailsThis Appendix shows the estimation in more

detail. Let q0 denote thetrue parametervector that we want to estimate. The typical

elements in q0 are aiM, biM, and biMz that are specific to each market, and the common
parameters l0, lM, lMz, g00and g01. By stacking the sample counterparts of the moment

conditions in (18) to (20), and (23), we have a vector of moment conditions

gT (q) =1T Tåt=1f (Xt, q) , (28)

where Xt summarizes the data used to form the moments conditions. The vectorgT (q)

has the dimension 4N. The moment conditions, given by (18) to (20), exactlyidentify the

aiM, biM, and biMz parameters. However, the moment conditions, givenby (23), is

overidentified. We have N moment conditions, but only 5 parameters (l0,lM, lMz, g00

and g01).We estimate the parameters by setting linear combinations of gT equal to zero.

That is, the moment conditions can be written as

ATgT = 0, (29)

where AT is a (3N + 5) × 4N matrix. In particular, our choice of AT is designed toensure

that the point estimates are the ones given by ordinary least squares.

Let AT

be the product of two matrices denoted by A1T and A2T (that is, AT = A1TA2T).

Thefollowing matrices result in least square point estimates

A1T =26666666664I3N 03N · · · 03N003N 1 · · · 1003Nˆ b1M · · · ˆ bNM003Nˆ b1Mz · ·

· ˆ bNMz003N A1 · · · AN003N C1A1 · · · CNAN, (30)

where I3N is the identity matrix with dimension 3N, 03N is a 3N vector of zeros,0N is an

N vector of zeros, and A2T is a diagonal matrix with typical element equalto 1/ åTt=1

yit+1. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are estimates of biMs and biMzs, and they are

given in the estimation. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are exactly the least square

estimatesobtained in a regression of the assets’ excess returns on the market excess

returnand scaled market excess returns as in (18) to (20). Further, the estimates of l0,
lM,lMz, g00, and g01 coincide with the least square estimates obtained in a regressionof

average returns on the betas and the proxies for sample selectivity. Our choice ofAT

ensures that ATgT (qT) = 0.

Based on Hansen (1982) we know that when linear combinations of gT are setequal to

zero as in (29), the asymptotic distribution of the point estimator qT is given

by

pT (qT - q0) d

! N _0, (A0D0)-1 _A0S0A00_(A0D0)-10_, (31)

where D0 is the gradient of the moment conditions in (28), and where S0 is the

variance-covariance matrix of the moment conditions and given by

S0 =¥åj=-¥E hf (Xt, q0) f _Xt-j, q0_0i. (32) The sample counterpart ST is estimated

using the procedure in Newey and West(1987) with four lags. D0 and A0 can be

estimated by their sample counterparts DTand AT. Note that the standard errors based on

(31) are robust to heteroskedasticity

and serial correlation in the moment conditions.

Investment Risk

Investment risk includes credit risk and market risk which are both taken to combat

another risk—that due to inflation. Investors and traders need to assess the actual historic

results of the strategies they employ for their investments. In this manner, the individual

can better understand the true financial risks in which they are exposing themselves. Two

such risks may include under-investing in bonds & equities or over-investing in assets).
In order to manage necessary market risk, the investor must take steps to understand

those risks and minimize them through diversification. Numerous articles on the topic of

asset allocation and diversification are available in the Optionetics.com article archives

by completing an author keyword search for 2004 and 2005. Traders, who often self-

direct their investment accounts, must proactively examine the performance of

investments versus the performance of trading given the goals for each, and re-evaluate

those allocations.

Country Return Dynamics

To derive implications for systematic risk compensation and selectivity biases, we model

individual market returns as a two-regime process. We interpret regime 1 as the regime

when the market is open to international investors and investabledollar-denominated

returns are available for a given market. We discuss the details of this in the data section

below. Regime 2 is the regime where investable dollar returns

are not available and the market is inaccessible to international investors. We view the

transition from regime 1 to regime 2 as being associated with expropriationof

international investors. This expropriation can take various forms, includingcapital

controls, foreign exchange restrictions, and taxes on repatriations of foreign investments.

Information regarding the payoffs to international investors duringthe transition from

regime 1 to regime 2 and the ex-ante probability with which thistransition can happen are

not observable to an econometrician. In essence, we viewemerging markets returns akin


to payoffs of a defaultable bond which has not defaulted.As with the defaultable bond,

the likelihood of transition from regime 1

to regime 2 affects measured mean returns obtained solely from data sampled from

regime 1. Hence, one would expect that observed mean returns, particularly for an

emerging market, to be higher than the ex-ante risk premium. This bias measures the

compensation for expropriation and helps us understand the risk-return relationacross

markets. In equation (3), we present a time-series representation of returns that will

allowus to derive separate systematic risk compensation from sample selectivity biasesin

expected returns. Let yit+1 represent an indicator for the regime in market i att + 1 being

1 or 2. The indicator yit+1 is equal to one if the regime at t + 1 is 1 (open to international

investors), and zero otherwise. The return process, expressed indollars, is specified as

Rit+1 = E (Rit+1|It) + yit+1 (bi1et+1 + hi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1) (bi2et+1 + hi2t+1) , (3)

where E(Rit+1|It) is the ex-ante conditional mean of the gross return, et+1 is the

innovation in the systematic risk component, and hi1t+1 and hi2t+1 are diversifiable risk

components specific to market i. The exposure of the return to systematic risk is

determined by bi1 and bi2.Let rit+1 denote the excess return on market i, that is, rit+1 =

Rit+1 - Rf t.

Assuming that yit = 1, the valuation condition (1) then implies thatE (rit+1|It) = ls2et

[pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] , (4)

where pit is the probability of the regime where market i is accessible to international

investors at time t. In other words, pit is the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1,and (1 -

pit) is the probability of a switch to regime 2. The risk premium is determinedby the
aggregate market price of risk, ls2et, and an overall beta which is aprobability-weighted

average of the betas in the two regimes. Next, we describe thedetermination of regimes 1

and 2.

The Sample Selectivity Process

Let y_it be a latent process that determines the opening and closing for market i. Thatis,

it determines if the regime is 1 or 2. In particular, if y_it >0 then the regime is 1and if

y_it _ 0, then the regime is classified as 2. Given this classification, it follows 6

thatyit = ( 1 if y_it > 0,0 otherwise.(5)

Following Heckman (1976, 1979), we assume that the conditional mean of the

latentprocess is determined by a vector of pre-determined variables xit. Hence, we

assume

That y_it+1 = d0ixit + #it+1, #it+1|xit _ N(0, 1) , (6)

where #it+1, by assumption, is a standard normal error. Brown, Goetzmann, andRoss

(1995) argue that the survival of a market (the analogue of our regime 1) is

determinedsolely by the price process itself. However, this seems restrictive, as many

emerging markets, such as Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia, have had comparable

drops in the market capitalization, but only Malaysia, directly expropriatedinternational

investors. This suggests that other economic considerations may be important in

determining whether investable dollar-denominated returns are availableto an

international investor. These other influences are captured by xit and #it+1. Further, the

latent variable model of selectivity provides connections betweendefault risk in sovereign

dollar-denominated bonds and the likelihood of capitalcontrols. This allows us to provide

a link between the cross-section of equity risk


premia and country risk ratings.Let f(.) denote the standard normal probability density

function, and let F (.)

denote the standard normal cumulative distribution function. It is straightforward to show

that the conditional probability that yit+1 = 1 is characterized by pit = E (yit+1|yit = 1,

xit) = Z ¥ -d0i xitf(#it+1)d#it+1 = Z d0i xit¥f(#it+1)d#it+1 = F _d0ixit_,(7)

where the third equality follows from the symmetry of the normal distribution. As#it+1

and the innovation in the return of asset i may be correlated, consider the

followingconditional projections for the different regimes

bi1et+1 + hi1t+1 = gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1, (8)

bi2et+1 + hi2t+1 = gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1, (9)

where gi1 and gi1 are the projection coefficients between bijet+1 +hit+1 and #it+1

andbijet+1 + hit+1 and #it+1, respectively, and vi1t+1 and vi2t+1 are projection errors.

The above equations then imply that the excess return process can be written as

rit+1 = E (rit+1|It) + yit+1(gi1#it+1 + vi1t+1) + (1 - yit+1)(gi2#it+1 + vi2t+1). (10)

2.4. The Sample Selectivity Criteria

We consider the case where data are missing as an outcome of an attrition process.That

is, we consider the sample selectivity effects of only observing the regimewhere the

markets are accessible to international investors. In this case, the restrictionon the

empirical conditional mean of the returns is

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = E (rit+1|It) + gi1E _#it+1|#it+1 > -d0ixit_, (11)

where we have conditioned on the fact that the market is in regime 1 today (yit = 1)and

tomorrow (yit+1 = 1). This captures our view that an econometrician only
observesinvestable dollar return sample from regime 1. Note that E_#it+1|#it+1 >

-d0ixit_ is the same as E(#it+1|yit+1 = 1). Moreover, this quantity satisfies the relation

E (#it+1|yit+1 = 1) =1pit Z ¥-d0i xit#it+1f(#it+1)d#it+1, (12)

which can be further simplified as follows

1pit Z ¥-d0i xit #it+1 f(#it+1) d#it+1 = f(d0ixit)pit= f(d0ixit)F(d0ixit). (13)

This is typically referred to as a hazard rate, or the inverse Mill’s ratio. We denotethis by

hit, that is, hit = f(d0ixit)/F(d0ixit). Based on the above results, it follows thatthe

conditional mean of the excess return is given by

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = ls2

et [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit. (14)

This restriction shows that there are two biases in measuring the ex-ante risk

premium.The first bias stems from the fact that the econometrician does not

observeregime 2 (the regime when investable dollar returns are not available). This is re-

flected in the first term of (14). bi1 can obviously be identified in the time series

fromobservations when the market is open. bi2 is the beta at transition from regime 1 to2.

Identification of bi2 and the transition probability of going to regime 2 (that is,81 - pit)

can not be measured without additional restrictions. Note that the resultingbias is on the

ex-ante mean of the return and we refer to it as a peso problem.

The second bias is due to sample selectivity, and the effects of this can be seenin the

second term of (14). This is an adjustment to the ex-post mean to correctly estimate the

ex-ante risk premium. Conditional on the availability of dollar returnstoday and

tomorrow, the risk premium is biased upwards. Put differently, investors require, on
average, a higher return when the market offers dollar returns, muchlike a defaultable

bond.

Brown, Goetzmann, and Ross (1995) focus on the second effect. It seems that the

measured risk premium will also be affected by the beta associated with the market shut-

down regime. If this beta is higher that in the regime for which datais available, then the

ex-ante mean asset will be higher, and in standard time-series regression this will show

up as an abnormal return, or an alpha. However, purgingthe empirical means of these two

effects implies that the ex-ante means lie on thesecurity market line.

In the special case of the world CAPM, equation (14) can be stated asE (rit+1|It, yit = 1,

yit+1 = 1) = E (rMt+1|It) [pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2] + gi1hit, (15)

where E (rMt+1|It) is the conditional risk premium on the world market portfolio,and the

betas are the world CAPM betas for the two regimes. As discussed above,taking account

of the peso problem requires measurement of bi2 and pit. In practise, estimating bi2 from

returns during a regime-switch is infeasible as there are very few, if any, in available

return data. Hence, in the empirical work, we will assumethat

bi1 = bi2 = biM. This gives us the following cross-sectional implications

E (rit+1|It, yit = 1, yit+1 = 1) = lMtbiM + gi1hit, (16)

where lMt = E (rMt+1|It). In the empirical work we also consider time-variation inbetas.

Allowing for this time-variation is straightforward and does not affect any of the

derivations above.

Finally, note that for high survival probabilities, the hazard rate in equation (13)is almost

linear in the probabilities. Under the assumption that the probabilitiesabout expropriation

in equity markets and sovereign debt markets are highly re-lated, it is straightforward to
show that pit can essentially be backed out from observed sovereign bond spreads (see

Appendix A). The premise that probabilitiesof bond default and expropriation in equity

markets are related is supported bythe events in Malaysia in 1998 and the more recent

events in Argentina. Note thatfor small default probabilities, the hazard rate is almost

linear in sovereign bondspreads. As discussed and documented later, at least for the few

sovereign spreads that we observe, the spreads are highly correlated with observed

measures of country ratings. Hence, we can use the more extensively available data on

country ratingsto measure the hazard rates themselves.

3. Data

We collect monthly return data on 46 developed and emerging markets from

Datastream.According to International Finance Corporation (IFC) of the World Bank, 21

of these markets are classified as developed and 25 as emerging markets. The

underlyingsources of the data are Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI)

fordeveloped markets and IFC for emerging markets. The returns from IFC are the

investable returns that incorporate foreign investment restrictions (including special

classes of shares, sector restrictions, single foreign shareholder limits,

restrictionsallowing only authorized investors, company statues, and national limits). We

also consider the return on the MSCI world market portfolio. All returns are in U.S.

dollars,

and excess returns are calculated by subtracting the one-month Eurodollar rate =pp for

each month.The sample period is January 1984 to November 2000. It is, however, well

known that many emerging markets only were accessible for international investors

beginning in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. This is reflected in our data base. Data
for emerging markets are included as and when they open up. We let the opening date of

an emerging market be the date when IFC begins to record investable returns. The

inclusion date for each market is shown in Table 1. The inclusion dates are similar to

what other studies have considered to be the financial market liberalization dates (see, for

instance, Kim and Singal, 2000, Bekaert and Harvey, 2000, and Henry,2000). Our

empirical results are not sensitive to using alternative choices of liberalizationdates. The

total number of observations for developed markets is 203 and for emerging markets the

number of observations varies between 90 and 144.In Table 1 we report summary

statistics of the monthly dollar returns. The averagereturns across developed and

emerging markets are about the same, 1.32%and 1.34% per month, respectively.

However, the average standard deviation ofemerging markets is about twice as high as

for developed markets. It also seemsto be greater dispersion in returns and return

volatilities of emerging economies.The correlation with the world market return is much

higher for developed markets

than for emerging markets.Table 2 presents information regarding various attributes of

the countries. Theseattributes are used in our cross-sectional analysis of risk premia. The

Real GDP perCapita attribute is the real GDP per capita in constant dollars in 1990

(expressed ininternational prices, base 1985). The Trading Activity attribute is the sum of

exportsand imports divided by GDP in 1990. The real GDP per capita and trading

activityattributes are collected from the World Penn Tables. The Economic Rating and

theFinancial Rating attributes refer to the average country ratings from inclusion dateto

November 2000, and is provided by the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG).
The economic risk rating is meant to measure an economy’s current strengths

andweaknesses, whereas the financial risk rating is meant to measure an

economy’sability to finance its official, commercial, and trade obligations. More

specifically,the variables determining the economic rating include a weighted average of

inflation,debt service as a percent of exports, international liquidity ratios, foreign

tradecollection experience, current account balance, and foreign exchange market

indicators.In the empirical work our measure of reputation is the financial rating, whichis

a weighted average of loan default, delayed payment of suppliers’ credit, repudiationof

contracts by government, losses from exchange controls, and expropriation of private

investment. The country ratings are published on a scale from 0 to 50 where a higher

number indicates lower risks. We have re-scaled the ratings to

between 0 (low) and 100 (high). A rating of 0 to 49 then indicates a very high risk;50 to

59 high risk; 60 to 69 moderate risk; 70 to 79 low risk; and 80 or more verylow risk. The

country rating are used by Erb, Harvey, and Viskanta (1996) in theirstudy of the time-

series predictability of future returns. La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes,Shleifer, and Vishny

(1998) use these ratings to study investor protection and ownership structure across

countries. In this paperwe use the ratings to measure sampleselectivity.

Finally, we report betas versus the MSCI world market portfolio. The betas are,on

average, about the same for developed and emerging markets. However, thedispersion in

betas is much larger across emerging markets ranging from 0.07 to1.80, whereas they are

all about one in the developed markets.

It is evident from Table 2 that the emerging economies are economies with relativelylow

GDP per capita. Further, emerging economies have a much lower countryratings than
developed economies. In fact, the correlation between the real GDP percapita and the

ratings are 70% (economic rating) and 80% (financial rating). Thetrading activity

attribute has a lower correlation with the real GDP per capita (about20%). The

correlations between trading activity and the ratings are about 20% and40%. There are a

few outliers (notably Hong Kong and Singapore), but excludingthem does not affect the

correlation between trading activity and credit rating significantly.We also collect

sovereign spreads for nine emerging economies from J.P. Morgan.2 These are economies

with Brady bonds (restructured dollar-denominateddebt). We argue that the country

ratings contain much of the cross-sectional information in the spreads. For each month,

we computed the correlation between the sovereign spreads and the composite country

ratings. The correlations variedfrom -95% to -46% with an average of -72%. That is,

sovereign nations with a highspread on their dollar-denominated debt tend to have a low

country rating. This isalso highlighted in Figure 1, which shows the spreads versus

country ratings afterthe averages of the variables for each month have been subtracted.

That is, the variablesare measured as deviation from month averages to sweep out time

effects. Thecorrelation is about -58% and is highly significant (a p-value close to zero).

Similar results are obtained with either financial or economic country ratings.Our sample

begins in 1984 for developed markets, and in the late 1980s andearly 1990s for emerging

markets. Consequently, only brief data histories are available,particularly for emerging

economies. This makes it difficulty to solely rely ontime-series methods for measurement

and statistical inference. For this reason, weextensively use pooled cross-sectional

methods in the estimation. Importantly, therelative rankings of the attributes do not vary
a lot over time, indicating that mostof the information is in the cross-section. We

typically rely on the time series to

2The nine economies are Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Korea, Mexico, Peru, Poland,

Turkey, andVenezuela.estimate exposures to risk sources, but evaluates the asset pricing

implications inthe cross-section. Increasing the sample for developed markets (going

back to 1976)does not change our results qualitatively and are therefore not reported.In

some specifications we allow the beta of a market versus the world market portfolio to

vary according a conditional information variable, namely the world excess dividend

yield (i.e., the dividend yield on the world market portfolio in excess of the one-month

Eurodollar deposit rate). These series are collected from Datastream.

4. Estimation and Methodology

In this section we present the estimation approach and discuss testable implications in the

time series as well as in the cross-section. We employ the generalized methodof moments

(GMM) of Hansen (1982) to estimate all parameters simultaneously asin Cochrane

(2001), and similar to Bansal and Dahlquist (2000) and Jagannathan andWang (2002). In

this framework, specific distributional assumptions of the asset returnsare not required,

and wedo not need to work in a normally independently and identically distributed

setting. We can handle both conditional heteroskedasticityand serial correlation in pricing

errors. The approach is different from traditional approaches as we avoid the problem of

generated regressors, and it is not necessary

to develop further methods and corrections as in two-step procedures.We have to deal

with missing data as the dollar return series for emerging markets
handle the missing data as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). The idea is to balance the data

set, and then apply the asymptotic results in the standard GMM framework. This is

further discussed below. We are interested in estimating the risk exposures and risk

premia simultaneously.Consider N markets (i = 1, 2, . . . , N), each with T observations (t

= 1, 2, . . . , T).Recall that the emerging markets have different lengths of histories. We

describe the

estimation approach for the world CAPM with time-varying betas.As in Jagannathan and

Wang (1996), Cochrane (1996), amongst others, we evaluate

the implications of the model in the cross-section as their is considerable cross- sectional

variation in the mean returns. Consider the cross-sectional risk premium implications in

equation (16). In addition, allow for the market beta of an asset to be time-varying

according to biM + biMzzt, where zt is a variable known at time t capturing time

variation in the market beta. The implications for the cross-section

of unconditional mean excess returns can then be written as

E (rit+1) = lMbiM + lMzbiMz + gihi, (17)

where lM = E (lMt) and lMz = E (lMtzt). The biMs and biMzs are the standard

time series projection coefficients. Hence, our first sets of moment conditions, for

each market i, are

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) yityit+1] = 0, (18)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1yityit+1] = 0, (19)

E [(rit+1 - aiM - biMrMt+1 - biMzrMt+1zt) rMt+1ztyityit+1] = 0. (20)

These moment conditions are exactly identified. We have 3N moment conditionsand the

same number of parameters. The point estimates from these moment conditions
correspond to the usual least squares estimates. We follow the literature and add

constants, or alphas. In the world CAPM, the aiMs should be equal to zero.Indeed, we

will evaluate the CAPM by checking whether the alphas are all equal tozero in the time

series. Our focus, however, is on the ability of the various modelsh and without sample

selectivity) to explain the cross-section of risk premia.

Note that we use the regime indicator variable to make our unbalanced panel abalanced

panel as in Bansal and Dahlquist (2000). That is, the moment conditions are multiplied

with the product of the regime indicators at time t and t + 1, yityit+1. The product

yityit+1 selects returns when markets are open both at time t and t + 1. In essence, this

procedure treats missing observations as zeros. This has a practical advantage since the

usual moment conditions which contain missing data can be filled with zeros, and then

standard GMM routines can be utilized.3

The sample selectivity part in equation (17) is gihi. As noted in the discussion of

equation (14), under simplifying assumptions, the probability of default can be recovered

from the sovereign bond spread. Further, this spread can be used to 3Hayashi (2000)

considers, also in an analysis of panel data, a similar approach. Stambaugh (1997)

presents an alternative approach to address this econometric issue.

14

completely characterize the hazard rate at time t. However, the data on sovereign interest

rate spreads are not available for many economies in our sample period. As shown

earlier, there is a high negative correlation between the country ratings and the spreads in

the cross-section (for economies where sovereign spread data are available). That is, a

country with a low rating tends to have a high spread (a high probability of default).
Consequently, to characterize the cross-section of hazardrates, we model the hazard rate

for market i as follows

gihi = (g00 + g01Ci) Ai, (21)

where Ai proxies for hi in the cross-section. For example, we let Ai equal the countryis

economic rating which then captures the cross-sectional variation in the hazardrate.

Further, to allow for controlled cross-sectional heterogeneity in gi, we model it as

gi = g00 + g01Ci, where Ci denotes a country-specific attribute such as its return

volatility, financial rating, or its trading activity.

The cross-sectional parameters (i.e., the risk premium parameters and the g00and g01

parameters) are then identified in the last set of moment conditions for each asset i

E [(rit+1 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (22)

We also consider a specification with a constant term

E [(rit+1 - l0 - lMbiM - lMzbiMz - g00Ai - g01AiCi) yityit+1] = 0. (23)

The constant term l0 should be zero according to theory, and a non-zero constant

indicates that a model cannot price the assets on average. Alternatively, a non-zero

constant can be interpreted as a zero-beta rate different from the riskfree rate thatis

imposed. Note that all parameters including the betas and the cross-sectional parameters

l0, lM, lMz, g00, and g01 are jointly estimated using GMM. Details of the estimation are

given in Appendix B.

Results

This section presents the empirical results. Recall, that we earlier reported that the cross-

sectional dispersion in the average returns is fairly large for emerging markets and small

for developed markets. This cross-sectional dispersion poses a serious challenge to asset
pricing models. Variables that characterize the selectivity bias, such as country ratings,

have very little time-series variation, but considerablecross-sectional variation. Hence,

the effects of selectivity are primarily identifiable in the cross-section. Given the large

cross-sectional dispersion in the data along with the short data histories for many

emerging markets, we, as in Black, Jensen, and Scholes (1972), Fama and MacBeth

(1973), and Jagannathan and Wang (1996), focusprimarily on the explaining the cross-

sectional differences in risk-premia.

We first discuss the ability of the various models to capture the cross-section of average

returns through only systematic risk. We then include sample selectivity in the cross-

section. Finally, we discuss the results and provide further interpretations

of the results.

Evidence in the Absence of Selectivity

In Table 3, we provide evidence from the cross-section of asset returns. The estimated

risk premium for the market portfolio is negative, as can be seen in row 2 of Panel A.

This is a standard finding (see, for instance, Jagannathan and Wang, 1996). The ability of

the CAPM with constant betas to explain the cross-section of average returns is basically

zero as indicated by the adjusted R-square. In Panel B, we consider the CAPM where the

market betas are allowed to be time-varying. The model fails to capture the cross-

sectional dispersion in average returns in this specification as well The adjusted R-square

is only about 8%. The theoretical restriction that l0 = 0 can be rejected at the 5%

significance level. However, the constant term, as discussed below, is not particularly

relevant when sample selectivity is included in


the model. For completeness, we have conducted the time-series tests for both the

constant beta and timevaryingbeta versions of the CAPM (not reported in a table). We

find that the joint test of zero alphasis rejected in both cases. The rejections seem to be

primarily due to abnormal returns in emergingmarkets—this is consistent with Harvey

(1995) who also shows that CAPM implications are rejectedin emerging markets data.

The failure of the CAPM can also be seen in Figure 2 where we plot the averagereturns

against the predicted expected returns from the model. A true model would,ignoring

estimation errors, produce observations along the 45-degree line. The figure reveals that

there is almost no dispersion in predicted expected returns. Hence, the model does not

capture the large cross-sectional variation in average returns.

Evidence with Selectivity Included

The model specifications with sample selectivity are also reported in Table 3. Inthese

specifications the selectivity is modelled as (g00 + g01si)Ai, where si is the annual return

volatility for market i, and Ai is defined as the economic rating for country i less the

economic rating for the U.S. The expression (g00 + g01si) is the gi for country i. The

proxy for the hazard rate for country i is Ai, based on thereasoning provided earlier. Note

that Ai is negative for emerging economies and close to zero for developed economies.

This specification captures the intuition that as economies improve their economic rating

they become akin to developed marketsand the sample selectivity term would fall.When

sample selectivity is incorporated in the standard CAPM (in Panel A), thecross-sectional

R-square rises to 41% and the parameters associated with the selectivityterm are

significant (a p-value of 3%). The time-varying beta based CAPMwith sample selectivity

included is reported in Panel B. This specification does quitewell in capturing the cross-
sectionalvariation in risk premia, and has an adjustedR-square of 61%. The magnitudes

of the parameters that govern the selectivity bias(that is, g00 andg01) are similar across

different specifications. They are in all casesjointly significant at usual significance

levels (see the column labelled “Test ofJointSignificance”). The last two rows of Panel B

highlights the relevance, or the lackthereof, of the constant term l0. The empirical results

across thetwo cases (includingl0, or not) are comparable. Hence, as suggested by theory,

the constant term isnot particularly important.Table 4 provides themagnitudes of the

overall risk premia explained by systematicrisk and by sample selectivity. Economies

with poor economic rating have alarger andpositive selectivity bias. For developed

economies the variable Ai is essentiallyzero and hence the effect of selectivity on their

mean returns is absent.

the constant beta CAPM, the systematic risk contribution is about 0.45% per month for

both emerging and developed economies. However, the selectivity premium is0.50% per

month for emerging markets and close to zero for developed markets. Inthe model with

time-varying betas (see PanelB),the fraction of the emerging marketreturn attributed to

the selectivity bias is somewhat higher, and now stands at 0.58%per month. For

emergingmarkets more than 1/2 of the ex-post risk premium can beattributed to

selectivity. That is, sample selectivity seems to be the dominant influenceon the

measured risk premiums in emerging economies. Sample selectivity isnot an important

dimension for understanding measured risk premiain developedmarkets.The higher

explanatory ability of the world CAPM with time-varying betas andsample selectivity

can be seen in Figure 3which displays the average returns againstpredicted expected

returns. The improvement in fit is visible and the model is ableto produce the
highdispersion in average returns.We also considered alternative specifications for the

parameter gi. In particular,we replaced si with a reputationalvariable—the financial

rating of an economy i lessthe comparable rating for the U.S. The ability of this

specification in terms of capturingthecross-sectional variation in risk premia (i.e.,

adjusted R-square) is about30%. This R-square is quite high relative the specifications

withouttheselectivityeffects. As shown in Table 4 the average emerging markets risk

premium is still predominantlydue to selectivity bias. Yet anotherchoice for the

specification of gi, thetrading activity variable, produces again similar results.Finally, we

consider a specification where we use thespreads (short samplesavailable for nine

economies) on the Brady bonds to measure the hazard rates directly.The approach is as

follows. We projecttheaverage spreads on the averagecountry ratings and use these

projection coefficients to infer spreads and defaulprobabilities (under theassumption of

zero recovery as in Appendix A) for allemerging markets. Recall that we are making the

assumption that the probabilityof default indebt markets coincides with the probability of

expropriation. Fromthe probabilities we can then compute the hazard rates (i.e., the his).

For developedmarkets we assume a zero default probability (and hence a zero hazard

rate). Withthis measure of the hazard rate, and the same specificationforthe gi as before,

we estimate the cross-sectional regression in equation (22). This specification

capturesabout 36% of the cross-sectional variation in risk premia. We find thatthe

selectivity18term, that is gihi, is about the 0.63% per month. The average probability of

the defaultis about half a percent per month. Hence, the bias in the mean return of about

0.63% per month can be supported by rather small probability of default (risk of
expropriation).Note that the empirical evidence for this specification is quite similarto

that discussed in the time-varying beta case in Panel B of Table 3.

5.3. What Drives the Selectivity Bias?

In Panel A of Table 5 we inquire what economic variables can explain the

crosssectionaldispersion in the selectivity bias for emerging markets. In particular, weare

interested in whether the measured selectivity premium is related to trading

activityand/or measures of reputation. To do so, we considerthe measures of

theselectivity premium based on the specification where gi = (g00 + g01si), and

therelative economic rating is the proxy for thehazard rate. This specification was

reportedin Table 3. The reputational variable (the financial rating of country i lessthe

comparable rating for theU.S.)is able to explain about 32% of the dispersion inthe

selectivity premium. This regression also shows that the selectivity premiumrises as

thecountry’s financial rating falls. Similarly, when we use the tradingactivity variable,

this explains about 19% of the dispersion in the selectivitypremium.Economies with

larger trading activity have a smaller selectivity premium.In essence our evidence

suggests that both trading activityand reputational considerationsare important for

explaining the selectivity premium.Allowing the selectivity premium to depend on the

volatilityinthe cross-sectionis motivated by arguments presented in Brown, Goetzmann,

and Ross (1995). Ourevidence indicates that this attribute is notuniquely important to

capture the crosssectionaldifferences in risk premia. Indeed, the trade activity and

financial reputationvariables do, at least ineconomic terms, a comparable job of

explaining the cross-sectional differences in the risk premia. Thus, it seems to us that this

is dueto the fact that the volatility of returns are related to these variables.Thisis shownin
Panel B of Table 5: return volatility is decreasing in both trading activity andfinancial

reputation. These variables, based on the work of Eaton and Gersovitz(1981), and Bulow

and Rogoff (1989a, 1989b) should matter to the compensationthat emerging markets

have toadditionallypay, due to risks of expropriation. Wefind that this indeed is the case.

Conclusion

In this paper we show that the cross-sectional differences in the equity returns

acrosssovereign economies is determined by two features—systematic risk and a

selectivitypremium. We show that the selectivity premium captures more than 1/2 of

theaverage risk premium in emerging markets. The equity riskpremia in

developedmarkets seems to be driven solely by systematic risk. The main economic

implicationof this result is that after taking account ofselectivity premium all

internationalequity returns reflect systematic risk, as predicted by theory.Our empirical

work also shows that sovereigns thathave better financial marketreputations and trade

more actively have to pay a smaller selectivity premium. Thisempirical evidence lends

support to theview that both reputations and fear of tradesanctions are important in

determining the cost of equity borrowing for a sovereignnation.

Measuring Hazard Rates From Sovereign Spreads

This Appendix shows how the hazard rate can be measured from sovereign bondspreads.

Consider a dollar denominated pure discount bond issued by a country.The payoff is

equal to one if there is no default, and µb + bbet+1 +hbt+1 if the countrydefaults. The

payoff process can thus be written as qbt+1= ybt+1 + (1 - ybt+1) (µb + bbet+1 + hbt+1) .

(24)
For simplicity, we assume that bb = 0. That is, we assume that the recovery valueof the

bond is not related to the systematic risk in the world economy.Further, theexpected

payoff on this bond in default is less than one (i.e., µb < 1). Valuing thispayoff using the

stochastic discount factor implies that

1/Rbt = [pbt + (1 - pbt) µb] /Rf t. (25)

Solving for the probability of no default, we obtain

pbt =Rf t - µbRbtRbt (1 - µb). (26)

Assume that the probabilities of default for the bond correspond to the probabilityof a

market shut-down, that is, pbt = pit. Under the further assumptionthat therecovery rate is

zero, we can directly recover the probability of default. Further,given the normal

cumulative distribution function wecan completely characterizethe hazard rate.The above

expression can also be used to compute the ex-ante beta on market i.We denote this with

bit =pitbi1 + (1 - pit) bi2. If we assume that the ratio of thebetas across the two regimes is

equal to a constant c and µb = 0, it follows that

bit = bi1 _Rf tRbt + c _Rbt - Rf tRbt __. (27)

Note that Rf t and Rbt can be observed directly from U.S. Treasuries and

Sovereignbonds, or as we demonstrate, approximated with a country’s relativecountry

rating.Hence, conditional on c, one can estimate the model with both a peso problem

andsample selectivity. In the special case with c = 1,there is no peso problem and wehave

that bit = bi1 = bi2.21B. Estimation DetailsThis Appendix shows the estimation in more

detail. Let q0 denote thetrue parametervector that we want to estimate. The typical

elements in q0 are aiM, biM, and biMz that are specific to each market, and the common
parameters l0, lM, lMz, g00and g01. By stacking the sample counterparts of the moment

conditions in (18) to (20), and (23), we have a vector of moment conditions

gT (q) =1T Tåt=1f (Xt, q) , (28)

where Xt summarizes the data used to form the moments conditions. The vectorgT (q)

has the dimension 4N. The moment conditions, given by (18) to (20), exactlyidentify the

aiM, biM, and biMz parameters. However, the moment conditions, givenby (23), is

overidentified. We have N moment conditions, but only 5 parameters (l0,lM, lMz, g00

and g01).We estimate the parameters by setting linear combinations of gT equal to zero.

That is, the moment conditions can be written as

ATgT = 0, (29)

where AT is a (3N + 5) × 4N matrix. In particular, our choice of AT is designed toensure

that the point estimates are the ones given by ordinary least squares.

Let AT

be the product of two matrices denoted by A1T and A2T (that is, AT = A1TA2T).

Thefollowing matrices result in least square point estimates

A1T =26666666664I3N 03N · · · 03N003N 1 · · · 1003Nˆ b1M · · · ˆ bNM003Nˆ b1Mz · ·

· ˆ bNMz003N A1 · · · AN003N C1A1 · · · CNAN, (30)

where I3N is the identity matrix with dimension 3N, 03N is a 3N vector of zeros,0N is an

N vector of zeros, and A2T is a diagonal matrix with typical element equalto 1/ åTt=1

yit+1. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are estimates of biMs and biMzs, and they are

given in the estimation. The ˆ biMs and ˆ biMzs are exactly the least square

estimatesobtained in a regression of the assets’ excess returns on the market excess

returnand scaled market excess returns as in (18) to (20). Further, the estimates of l0,
lM,lMz, g00, and g01 coincide with the least square estimates obtained in a regressionof

average returns on the betas and the proxies for sample selectivity. Our choice ofAT

ensures that ATgT (qT) = 0.

Based on Hansen (1982) we know that when linear combinations of gT are setequal to

zero as in (29), the asymptotic distribution of the point estimator qT is given

by

pT (qT - q0) d

! N _0, (A0D0)-1 _A0S0A00_(A0D0)-10_, (31)

where D0 is the gradient of the moment conditions in (28), and where S0 is the

variance-covariance matrix of the moment conditions and given by

S0 =¥åj=-¥E hf (Xt, q0) f _Xt-j, q0_0i. (32) The sample counterpart ST is estimated

using the procedure in Newey and West(1987) with four lags. D0 and A0 can be

estimated by their sample counterparts DTand AT. Note that the standard errors based on

(31) are robust to heteroskedasticity

and serial correlation in the moment conditions.

Table 1: Summary Statistics of Global Equity Returns

Mean Standard Deviaiion coreallation With world nclusion

Panel A. Developed Markets

Australia 1.07 6.84 0.52 84-01 203

Austria 1.16 7.33 0.34 84-01 203

Belgium 1.60 5.55 0.64 84-01 203

Canada 0.99 5.13 0.70 84-01 203

Denmark 1.18 5.66 0.53 84-01 203


Finland 1.91 8.62 0.54 88-01 156

France 1.59 6.07 0.70 84-01 203

Germany 1.38 6.27 0.60 84-01 203

Hong Kong 1.84 8.76 0.53 84-01 203

Ireland 1.03 5.73 0.65 88-01 156

Italy 1.46 7.51 0.51 84-01 203

Japan 1.02 7.36 0.76 84-01 203

Netherlands 1.56 4.73 0.75 84-01 203

New Zealand 0.30 7.02 0.47 88-01 156

Norway 1.09 7.26 0.58 84-01 203

Singapore 0.85 8.05 0.54 84-01 203

Spain 1.81 7.03 0.66 84-01 203

Sweden 1.65 6.92 0.63 84-01 203

Switzerland 1.51 5.38 0.66 84-01 203

U.K. 1.33 5.41 0.76 84-01 203

U.S. 1.38 4.37 0.79 84-01 203

Average 1.32 6.52 0.61

Panel B. Emerging Markets

Argentina 3.89 23.46 0.06 89-01 144

Brazil 3.16 19.61 0.31 89-01 144

Chile 1.83 7.73 0.24 89-01 144

China 0.26 13.41 0.27 93-01 96

Colombia 1.43 10.91 0.10 91-03 118


Greece 2.18 12.22 0.19 89-01 144

Hungary 1.61 13.15 0.47 93-01 96

India 0.36 8.68 0.13 92-12 97

Indonesia -0.08 15.13 0.41 90-10 123

Jordan 0.69 4.85 0.22 89-01 144

Korea 0.37 14.15 0.39 92-02 107

Malaysia 0.23 10.12 0.39 89-01 116

Mexico 2.04 10.18 0.42 89-01 144

Pakistan 0.99 12.56 0.08 91-04 117

Peru 0.75 9.14 0.34 93-01 96

Philippines 0.42 11.42 0.40 89-01 144

Poland 3.24 17.91 0.37 93-01 96

Portugal 0.96 6.91 0.51 89-01 144

South Africa 0.98 8.34 0.53 93-01 96

Sri Lanka -0.22 10.07 0.31 93-01 96

Taiwan 0.72 10.50 0.37 91-02 119

Thailand 0.38 12.55 0.43 89-01 144

Turkey 2.48 19.39 0.16 89-09 136

Venezuela 3.00 17.43 0.02 90-02 131

Zimbabwe 1.80 12.81 0.21 93-07 90

Average 1.34 12.50 0.29

Panel C. World

World 1.21 4.24 1.00 84-01 203


This table presents summary statistics of monthly dollar returns in global equity markets

from nclusion date to November 2000. Panels A, B and C show statistics for developed

markets, emrging markets and theWorld, respectively. The labels Average in Panels A

and B refer to theaverage (equally-weighted) across developed and emerging markets,

respectively. The meansand standard deviations are expressed in % per month.

Correlation with World refers to thecorrelation coefficient with the world market

portfolio. The inclusion date (year-month) is thefirst month with observations of

investable returns. The last observation of Malaysia is August1998. T refers to the

number of observations for each market.

Table 2: Country Attributes

Real GDP pr Capita

Trading

Activity

Economic

Rating

Financial

Rating Beta

Panel A. Developed Markets

Australia 14,445 34.43 82.3 75.8 0.84

Austria 12,695 79.18 91.1 80.3 0.57

Belgium 13,232 144.96 87.6 78.6 0.83

Canada 17,173 51.24 89.2 78.5 0.85

Denmark 13,909 65.26 86.4 79.2 0.71


Finland 14,059 47.67 84.5 76.3 1.16

France 13,904 45.16 86.3 77.4 1.00

Germany 14,628 58.03 93.0 81.9 0.88

Hong Kong 14,849 262.96 83.7 78.4 1.11

Ireland 9,274 114.60 85.3 80.5 0.93

Italy 12,488 41.46 84.9 76.0 0.90

Japan 14,331 20.92 96.1 84.4 1.32

Netherlands 13,029 103.72 90.2 83.8 0.84

New Zealand 11,513 55.34 84.3 75.4 0.82

Norway 14,902 81.11 92.6 86.5 0.99

Singapore 11,710 373.26 89.2 83.9 1.03

Spain 9,583 37.52 81.2 75.1 1.08

Sweden 14,762 59.46 85.8 78.1 1.04

Switzerland 16,505 72.73 98.0 85.5 0.84

U.K. 13,217 51.48 90.7 73.2 0.97

U.S. 18,054 21.50 92.3 76.7 0.82

Average 13,727 86.76 88.3 79.3 0.93

Panel B. Emerging Markets

Argentina 4,706 15.18 63.4 60.6 0.31

Brazil 4,042 12.66 65.7 57.0 1.46

Chile 4,338 65.46 81.0 73.7 0.46

China 1,324 25.42 82.1 74.7 0.97

Colombia 3,300 35.38 75.0 67.4 0.31


Greece 6,768 54.16 68.9 68.5 0.54

Hungary 5,357 60.67 76.4 66.0 1.66

India 1,264 18.76 73.8 67.4 0.31

Indonesia 1,974 52.61 75.2 66.7 1.67

Jordan 2,919 144.21 64.0 71.4 0.26

Korea 6,673 62.48 85.9 78.8 1.52

Malaysia 5,124 154.20 83.5 81.1 1.04

Mexico 5,827 32.72 74.4 63.1 1.04

Pakistan 1,394 35.01 60.6 62.0 0.28

Peru 2,188 26.80 68.5 65.4 0.84

Philippines 1,763 61.48 64.0 66.7 1.12

Poland 3,820 45.84 77.8 72.1 1.80

Portugal 7,478 75.20 82.2 79.2 0.87

South Africa 3,248 47.22 75.3 71.2 1.18

Sri Lanka 2,096 67.37 69.2 68.1 0.86

Taiwan 8,063 89.88 92.6 86.5 1.03

Thailand 3,580 75.83 81.1 75.3 1.32

Turkey 3,741 41.99 60.3 55.4 0.73

Venezuela 6,055 59.64 72.6 64.5 0.07

Zimbabwe 1,182 59.00 55.7 56.0 0.74

Average 3,929 56.77 73.2 68.8 0.90

This table lists country attributes. Panels A and B show the attributes for developed

markets andemerging markets, respectively. The labels Average in Panels A and B refer
to the average (equallyweighted)across developed and emerging markets, respectively.

Real GDP per capita refers to RealGDP per capita in constant dollars (expressed in

international prices, base 1985). Trading Activityrefers to exports plus imports over

nominal GDP. Real GDP per capita and trading activity aretaken from the Penn World

Table for the year of 1990. Economic and Financial Ratings refer tothe average financial

and economic country rating provided by International Country Risk Guidefrom

inclusion date to November 2000. Beta refers to the slope-coefficient in a regression on

amarket’s excess return versus the excess return on the MSCI world market portfolio.

Table 3: Cross-Sectional Estimates of Risk and Sample Selectivity Premia

World Market Sample Selectivity Adjusted Tests of Joint Significance

R-square

Constant Market Conditional Relative

Economic Rating

Volatility × Relative

Economic Rating

World

Market

Sample

Selectivity All

l0 lM lMz g00 g01

Panel A: World CAPM with Constant Betas

0.75 -0.22 [0.12] [0.12]

(0.49)
1.08 -0.26 0.01 [0.69] [0.69]

(0.61) (0.65)

0.49 7.47 -0.82 0.32 [0.25] [0.03] [0.07]

(0.32) (4.81) (0.34)

0.74 -0.18 7.90 -0.80 0.41 [0.79] [0.03] [0.07]

(0.51) (0.67) (4.69) (0.32)

Panel B: World CAPM with Time-Varying Betas

0.78 1.36 -0.16 [0.11] [0.11]

(0.46) (0.66)

1.09 -0.18 0.13 0.08 [0.48] [0.48]

(0.55) (0.59) (0.82)

0.51 1.16 7.30 -0.86 0.48 [0.12] [0.03] [0.02]

(0.41) (0.62) (4.88) (0.35)

0.82 -0.18 0.26 7.92 -0.85 0.61 [0.27] [0.02] [0.06]

(0.47) (0.62) (0.85) (4.86) (0.33)

This table presents results from estimations of the asset pricing models. All markets are

estimated in one common system which includes both a timeseries estimation of betas as

well as a cross-sectional estimation of risk premia and sample selectivity premia. PaneA

and B show the results for the worldCAPM with constant and time-varying betas,

respectively. Autocorrelation and heteroscedasticityconsistent standard errors for the

estimatedcoefficients are reported in parentheses. The Adjusted R-square reports the

adjustedcoefficient of determination between fitted returnsgenerated by the model and

actual realized returns on the assets. Average pricing errorrefers to the cross-sectional
average (equally-weighted) ofthe pricing errors, and is reported for Developed and

Emerging markets.Tests of joint significance report p-values from tests of jointly

significant riskpremia associated with the market, sample selectivity, andall premia.

Table 4: Decomposition of Average Excess Returns

Average Systematic

Risk

Sample

Selectivity

Pricing

Error

Panel A: World CAPM with Constant Betas

Volatility Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.45 0.07 0.27

Emerging Markets 0.89 0.44 0.50 -0.05

Financial Rating Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.50 0.00 0.29

Emerging Markets 0.89 0.48 0.50 -0.09

Trading Activity Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.50 -0.05 0.33

Emerging Markets 0.89 0.51 0.49 -0.09

Panel B: World CAPM with Time-Varying Betas

Volatility Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.46 0.06 0.28


Emerging Markets 0.89 0.33 0.58 -0.01

Financial Rating Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.50 0.01 0.28

Emerging Markets 0.89 0.36 0.59 -0.07

Trading Activity Attribute

Developed Markets 0.79 0.50 -0.05 0.34

Emerging Markets 0.89 0.37 0.58 -0.06

This table presents the decomposition of the measured excess returns for developed and

emerging markets (equally-weighted averages) generated by

models with sample selectivity. Panel A and B show the decomposition for the world

CAPM with constant and time-varying betas, respectively, as in Table3.

The specification with the volatility attribute is as reported in Table 3 (withno constant

term). The specifications with financial rating and trading activity

use these attributes instead of the volatility attribute. The decompositions are expressed

in % per month. Average refers to the the average excess return

from inclusion date. Systematic risk refers to the contribution of market

components.Sample selectivity refers to contribution due to sample selectivity.

Pricing error refers to the average pricing error.

Table 5: Sample Selectivity and Volatility Projections

Constant Economic

Rating

Financial

Rating
Trading

Activity Volatility Adjusted

R-square

Test of Joint

Significance

Panel A: Sample Selectivity Projections

-0.15 -6.16 0.49

(0.14) (1.43)

-0.24 -5.05 0.32

(0.17) (1.57)

1.00 -0.26 0.19

(0.29) (0.10)

-1.60 0.17 0.74

(0.27) (0.02)

-1.76 -1.46 -2.15 0.01 0.14 0.87 [0.00]

(0.26) (1.73) (1.32) (0.05) (0.02)

Panel B: Volatility Projections

(0.17) (1.16) (0.89) (0.04) (0.01)

10.08 -20.76 0.20

(0.98) (6.99)

14.65 -1.30 0.19

(1.90) (18.65) (16.24) (0.87)


This table presents the results of cross-sectional regressions for 25 emerging markets.

Heteroscedasticityconsistent standard errors for the estimatedcoefficients are reported in

parentheses.Panel A and B show the results for sample selectivity and volatility,

respectively, on variouscountryattributes. Sample selectivity is measured as the part of

the measured equity premiumdue to sample selectivity as obtained in the worldCAPM

with time-varying betas using relativeeconomic rating, and volatility × relative economic

rating as in Table 3 (with no constant term).Theattributes are the economic rating, the

financial rating, and the relative trading activity. Allattributes are relative the U.S. The

Adjusted Rsquarereports the adjusted coefficient of determination.Test of joint

significance reports p-values (within square brackets) from a test of jointlysignificant

coefficients.
Securities and Exchange Board of India Group

on Secondary Market Risk Management

1 Background

The SEBI Group on Secondary Market Risk Management discussed the

introduction of interest rate derivatives in India at its meeting on

March 12, 2003. The Group’sdeliberations covered:

• The time table for introduction of exchange traded interest rate

derivatives inIndia

• The specification of the initial set of interest rate derivative contracts

to beintroduced

• The road map for introduction of additional products

• The risk containment systems for the initial set of derivatives

• The road map for research in fixed income analytics and the

resulting refinementof product design and fine tuning of the margining

system.In line with the Group’s view that its conclusions on these

issues be put up for public comments, the Group has prepared this

consultative document.

2 Need for Exchange Traded Derivative Products

The Reserve Bank of India’s Working Group on OTC Rupee Derivatives

has stated the need for exchange traded interest rate derivatives

admirably well:
“While OTC derivatives market has traditionally played a dominant role

in debt markets globally and would continue to do so in future, it is

desirable to supplement the OTC market by an active exchange-traded

derivative market. In fact, those who provide OTC derivative products

can hedge their risks through the use of exchangetradedderivatives. In

India, in the absence of exchange-traded derivatives, the risk ofthe

OTC derivatives market cannt be hedged effectively. Exchange-

tradedderivative market has the following features: an electronic

exchange mechanic m andemphasises anonymous trading, full

transparency, use of computers for ordematching, centralisation of

order flow, price-time pr ority for order matching, largeinvestor base,

wide geographical access, lower cost of intermediation, settlement

guarantee, better risk management, enhanced regulatory discipline,

etc. At present, inIndia, there exists a reasonable OTC market for

interest rate products which raises the need for exchange-traded

interest rate derivatives products.” 2“Also, some of the features of

OTC derivatives markets embody risks to financialmarket stability, viz.,

(i) the dynamic nature of gross credit exposures, (ii) information

asymmetries and lack of transparency, (iii) the high concentration

ofOTC derivative activities in major institutions, and (iv) the dominance

of OTC derivatives markets in the global financial system. Instability

arises when shocks,such as counterparty credit events and sharp

movements in asset prices that underlie derivative contracts, occur


which significantly alter the perceptions of current and potential future

credit exposures. When underlying asset prices change rapidly, the

size and configuration of counterparty exposures can become

unsustainably large and provoke a rapid unwinding of positions.”

(Paragraph 3.2) “The Group felt that there is a need for exchange-

traded interest rate derivatives (IRDs) as debtmarket volumes,

particularly in IRS, have been growing rapidly and exchange-traded

products would reduce the risk substantially through a clearing

corporation, novation, multilateral netting, centralised settlement and

risk management. The Group considered that India has already set up

mature institutional infrastructure for trading, clearing and settlement

in the equity markets which could be harnessed for the debt market. It,

therefore, proposes to allow trading in IRDs through the anonymous

order- driven screen-based trading system of the stockexchanges

which will facilitate participation byallclasses of investors and

increasemarket access across the country.” (Paragraph 3.3)“…interest

rate futures, interest rateoptions, interest rate swaps – both plain

vanilla swaps as well as swaps with embedded options like

caps/floors/collars, as well asstandardised repos may be allowed to be

traded on the stock exchanges.” (Paragraph 3.5)

It must also be added that interest rate risk is one of the most

pervasive risks in the


economy that affects not only the financial sector, but also the

corporate and householdsectors. The critical importance of interest

rate risk management for banks and financialinstitutions is well

understood, and its increasing importance for the corporate sector in

ahousehold financial savings on the assets side and the increasing

amount of housing loans on the liabilities side makes interest rate risk

increasingly important for the household sector. It is in fact likely that

for many households interest rate risk is vastly more important than

equity market risk. Moreover, because of the Fisher effect, interest

rateproducts are the primary mechanism available to hedge inflation

risk which is typicallynthe single most important macroeconomic risk

facing the household sector. In thiscontext, therefore, it is important

that the financial system provides the household sectorgreater access

to interest rate risk management tools through exchange traded

derivatives.Exchange traded derivatives are also potentially very

attractive to the corporate sector and to the financial sector.

3 Time Table for Introduction

The Group is well aware that the publicly available fixed income

analytics in India is not adequate for the development of a vibrant

derivatives market. While recognizing thatfixed income analytics is

among the most intellectually challenging parts of modern finance, the

Group is of the view that the development of this field has been held

back in India less by a lack of supply and more by the paucity of


demand. Therefore, rapid development of new markets and products is

the best way to solve the “chicken and egg”problem of whether the

market comes first or the analytics comes first.The Group recommends

therefore that the first set of exchange traded interest ratederivatives

start trading almost immediately. In consultation with the exchanges,

the Group has arrived at April 21 as the most feasible launch date. As

discussed later, the Group desires and expects that the Exchanges

would spearhead a concerted research effort in fixed income analytics

over the next three months. Allowing for a month for regulatory review

and two months for software changes, the Group desires and expects

that the improved product designs and more fine tuned

marginingsystems arising out of this researchwould be implemented

within a period of six months. Early launch has three major

implications:

1. The primary implication of early launch is a significant degree of

over-marginingin the initial six month period until more refined models

are implemented. Sincethere can be no compromise on the issue of

market safety, the Group is compensating for model risk by aggressive

over-margining.

2. Another implication is that to the extent that the zero coupon yield

curve that ispublicly available currently is not fully accurate, there

would be a basis risk inhedging interest rate risk using products based

on this curve. Since all hedgesInvolve e some degree of basis risk, the
Group does not regard this as a showstopper if there is complete

transparency regarding the construction of the yieldcurve. The yield

curve provider has been given clear directions to achieve this.The

Group desires and expects that an improved yield curve be

implementedwithin six months. The yield curve provider has been

given quantitativebenchmarks in this regard. These issues are

discussed more fully in 4.3 below.

3. For software reasons, it would be possible to allow only two decimal

places in theprice quotes at the time of launch.

Exchanges will howevermodifytheir softwareto allow four decimal

places as soon as possible. The National Stock Exchangehas indicated

that this could beaccomplishedby midMay, that is to say, withinone

month of launch. It must also be pointed out that one paisa is a small

numbercompared with theoneday standard deviation of most bond

prices, so thelimitation of two decimal places does not significantly

detract from the utility ofthe product for hedging purposes.

4 Product Specification: Long Bond Futures

4.1 Maturity and Coupon

The Group discussed three issues in connexion with product design for

the futures on long maturity risk free bonds:

1. The maturity of the underlying long bond

2. Maturities of the futures contracts

3. The characteristics of the bond


Regarding maturity of the underlying, there was unanimity that the

most liquid segment in the government securities market is the ten

year maturity and that this should be the maturity of the underlying

long bond for interest rate futures. Regarding maturity of the futures

contracts, it was decided that exchanges would be free to introduce

contracts up to a maximum maturity of one year. Exchanges would be

free to decide whether to have quarterly contracts beyond the first

three months, and whether the quarters should be fixed months of the

year or rolling quarterly horizons from the Contract introduction date.

There was some discussion regarding the choice between whether the

underlying should be a coupon bond or a zero coupon bond. The Group

decided that the exchanges should have the freedom to offer either or

both of these products and also to choose the coupon rate in case of

the coupon bond. Exchanges indicated that the coupon rates could be

in therange of 6-8%.

4.2 Physical Settlement versus Cash Settlement

The Group deliberated at length on the merits of physical and cash

settlement. Several advantages were identified with physical

settlement:

1. Some members felt that physical settlement would improve the

linkages betweenthe derivative market and the underlying market.

2. Some members also felt that the requirement of physical settlement

would act as a restraining force on speculators and reduce volatility.


3. Some members also felt that physical settlement might reduce basis

risk.

On the other hand, several disadvantages of physical settlement were

also noted:

4. First and foremost was the problem of market manipulation.

Relative to global standards, Indian banks hold a large fraction of their

assets in government securities.

5. Moreover, the issue size of any single government security is also

relatively small. This means that the entire issued amount of even a

very liquid overnment security is sometimes less than 10% of the

aggregate government urities holding of a single large player. This

means that a large player couldeasily corner the entire floating stock

of any specific issue. Gradual opening up ofthe Indian financial sector

to global players adds to the vulnerability of mostgovernment

securities to market manipulations. Most physically settled long

bondfutures deal with the problem of squeezes by allowing several

different bonds tbe delivered with different conversion factors.

However, even in this system,there is a “cheapest to deliver” bond

that could become the target of manipulation.

The alleged squeeze1 of German government bond futures in March

2001 by alarge regulated entity in that country was also referred to as

a pointer to whatcould happen in India. The “cheapest to deliver” bond

that was allegedlysqueezed in that case had an issue size of over _6b,
much larger than the issuesizes in the Indian market, but this issue

size was still regarded as too small.

2. Some participants (particularly households) may not have ready and

easy accessto the government securities market to achieve physical

delivery at low cost. Thecurrent government securities market is not

transparently and publicly accessibleto many of these participants.

3. The absence of short selling makes physical settlement more

problematic.After carefully deliberating on both sides of the issue, the

Group decided that the ten yearlong bond futures should initially be

launched with cash settlement.

4.3 The Zero Coupon Yield Curve

The Group then discussed the issue of determining the settlement

price. It was decidedthat the settlement price should be based on the

value of the notional bond determinedusing the zero coupon yield

curve computed by the yield curve provider designated bythe

exchange.If the notional bond is zero coupon, the settlement price of

the bond is simply the presentalue of the principal payment (at the

end of 10 years) discounted for 10 years at the 10year zero coupon

yield. For example, suppose that on 18/1/2003, the ten year zero

yieldpublished by the yield curve provider was 5.9023%

(annuallycompounded) implying aprice for the ten year zero of

56.3568 (100 x 1.059023-10). On the next working day,20/1/2003,

suppose that the yieldwas 5.8492% (annually compounded) implying a


priceof 56.6401. A person who bought a ten year zero coupon future

on 18/1/2003 would have

a mark to market gain of 28.33 paise on 20/1/2003.If the notional bond

has a coupon, the present value of the bond is obtained as the sum

ofpresent value of the principal payment discounted at the 10 year

zero coupon yield andthe present values of the coupons obtained by

discounting each coupon payment for thetime period remaining till the

coupon payment at the zero coupon yield for that maturity.The Group

decided that the following obligations should be imposed on the

designated Yeld curve provider (which could be the exchange itself or

a third party):

1. The yield curve should be computed by a completely objective

process withoutany element of human judgement so that any market

participant could arrive atthe same yield curve by applying the

published computation algorithm to publiclyavailable data.

2. The computation algorithm must be fully disclosed to the public. The

onlyeffective way of disclosing a computation algorithm is to disclose

the source

code. The yield curve provider would therefore be required to make

the entiresource code for its algorithm available on the web site under

a GNU GeneralPublic Licence. This requirement extends also to the

source code of thealgorithms used to convert a traded bond into a

series of cash flows and any othersimilar pre-processing that may be


carried out prior to the actual estimation itself.It also extends to the

algorithms that convert yield curve parameters into actualzero coupon

yields, the algorithms to value a notional bond given the zero

couponyields and any other similar post processing that may be

carried out after theactual estimation itself.

3. The yield curve provider would be required to make available on the

web site aset of at least 25 trading days (i.e. one month) of data suites

for the input data.Each day’s data suite would include the traded

prices and other transaction data2that is input into the estimation

algorithm. The data suite would also include thesample output from

the algorithm on this data suite. Similar data suites andsample outputs

must also be provided for the pre- processing and post-

processingalgorithms referred to above.

4. The yield curve provider would be required to make available on the

web site thefull time-series of yield curve parameters for as long a

period as possible. Thisdata set must extend back at least to April 1,

1999. The term yield curveparameters is used because many

estimation methods represent the entire yieldcurve as a functional

form that depends on a small number of parameters. Forexample, the

Nelson-Siegel functional form has four parameters. A cubic splinecould

have as parameters the location of the knots and the coefficients of

thecubic polynomial over each segment; alternatively theparameters

may be thecoefficients over a family of basis splines.


5 Product Specification: Notional T-Bill Futures

The Group agreed that there should be a future on a short term

interest rate. The choicehere is between a contract on an inter-bank

rate and a contract on a risk free interest rate.It was generally agreed

that the liquidity in the inter-bank market (MIBOR and MIFOR)is much

higher than in the T-Bills and in dated securities with a residual

maturity of lessthan one year. A contract on the inter-bank rate would

therefore be highly desirable. TheGroup washowever informed that

some legal issues have been raised on whethercontracts on indices

like MIBOR would fall within the definition of derivativesunder

theSCRA. Since the Group does not profess any expertise in legal

matters, it decided tosidestep the legal risk by focussing on contracts

on the risk free interest rate. The productthat is proposed is futures on

notional T-Bills with a maturity of 91 days (three months).Many of the

issues hereare similar to that for long bond futures and the

Group’srecommendations are also similar:

1. The contract would be cash settled.

2. The settlement price would be based on the risk free zero coupon

yield curve. Allthe objectivity and transparency requirements

discussed in 4.3 above would applyin this case also.

3. Exchanges would be free to introduce contracts up to a maximum

maturity of oneyear. Exchanges would be free to decide whether to

have quarterly contractsbeyond the first three months, and whether


the quarters should be fixed months ofthe year or rolling quarterly

horizons from the contract introduction date.

Chapter 5 Project work

Calculation of Beta for Nestle (I) ltd.

Mkt. Stock
Sensex price Mkt.return ret. xy x2 y2
july,2006 x y
4 10520.11 1029.95
5 10410.49 1066.4 3.53 -1.04 -3.67 1.08 12.46
6 10436.84 1091.3 2.33 0.253 0.59 0.06 5.42
7 10509.53 1106.9 1.43 0.7 1 0.49 2.05
10 10684.3 1108.05 0.14 1.66 0.23 2.75 0.01

Total 7.43 1.573 -1.85 4.38 19.94

For Nestle ltd. Beta is calculated as

Beta= n. sum. xy –(sum. x)(sum.y) / n. sumx2 –(sum x)2

Beta calculated by putting the values is -1.25 for nestle ltd.


Calcualtion of Beta for Sh. Cement ltd.

Sh. Cements
Mkt. Stock
Sensex price Mkt.return ret. xy x2 y2
x y
10520.11 720.25
10410.49 755.1 3.53 35.15 124 1.08 1235.5
10436.84 775.85 2.33 20.75 48.34 0.06 430.56
10509.53 800.2 1.43 24.35 34.82 0.49 593
10684.3 840.2 0.14 40 5.6 2.75 1600

7.43 120.25 212.76 4.38 3859.06

The calculation farmula for the beta is

Beta= n. sum. xy –(sum. x)(sum.y) / n. sumx2 –(sum x)2

The beta for the Sh. Cement ltd. is 1.12


Calculation of beta for Jindal steel ltd.

Jindal industries ltd.


Mkt. Stock
Sensex price Mkt.return ret. xy x2 y2
x y
10520.11 1409.15
10410.49 1448.15 3.53 39 137.67 1.08 1521
10436.84 1467.15 2.33 19 44.27 0.06 361
10509.53 1500.25 1.43 33.1 47.33 0.49 1095.61
10684.3 1523.25 0.14 23 3.22 2.75 529

7.43 114.1 232.49 4.38 3506.61

The formula for calculation of beta is

Beta= n. sum. xy –(sum. x)(sum.y) / n. sumx2 –(sum x)2

And the beta for jindal steel ltd. is -2.18


CONCLUSION

Investors want to maximize expected return subject to their tolerance for risk. Such

returns take the form of dividend and /or interest income and appreciation in the price for

the asset held.

The risk associated with holding common stock is really the likelihood that expected

returns will not materialize. If dividends or price appreciation fall swhort of expectations,

the investor is disappointed. The principle sources behind dividend and price

appreciation uncertainties are forces and factors that are either controllable or not subject

to control by the firm.

Uncontrollable forces, called sources of systematic risk, include market, interest rate and

purchasing power risks. Market risk reflects changes in investor attitudes toward equities
in general that stem from tangible and intangible events. Tangible events might include

expectations of lower expected profits and the resultant panic selling. Interest rate risk

and purchasing power risk are associated with changes in the price of money and other

goods and services. Increase in interest rates (the price of money) cause the prices of all

types of securities to be marked down. Rising prices of goods and services ( inflation or

purchasing power changes) have an adverse effect on security prices because the

postponement of consumption through any form of investment means less “real” buying

power in the future.

The principal sources of unsystematic risk affecting the holding of common stocks are

business risk and financial risk. Business risk refers to changes in the operating

environment of the firm and how the firm adapts to them. Financial risk is associated

with the debt debt and equity mix of financing the firm. Operating profits can be

magnified up or down, depending upon the extent to which debt financing is employed

and under what terms.

Total risk of aninvestment can be thought of as consisting of two components:

diversifiable and non diversifiable risk . the former risk can be almost entirely by holding

a large enough mix of carefully selected securities.

The only risk an investor is compensated for taking is thus non diversifiable risk. Beta

measures this risk and can be used to determine the appropriate required return on a

security.
SUGESSTIONS

1. Sharekhan ltd. should also issue an IPO so that the company can be promoted

much because of extra financial resources.

2. Sharekhan ltd. should reduce the Dmat opening charges.

3. It should lessen the brokerage charges so that it can cut the competitors easily.

4. It should also open its branches in small cities .

5. It should also adopt multimedia advertisement by way of T.V. and Mobile

Phones.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites:

www.sharekhan.com /companyinfo

dates of site visited: 1st july,2006 , 2nd july 2006, 5th july 2006,

www.google.com / risk and return analysis.

dates of site visited: 1st july,2006 , 2nd july 2006, 5th july 2006

Book:

Security Analysis and Risk Management

Author: Donald E. Fischer

Publisher: Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd.

Page no. reffered 90

Magazine:
Valueline

Publisher: ShareKhan

Newspaper

The Economic Times

Dates: july,2006 4,5, 6,7,10

Pages referred: Compulsory Rolling Stocks On BSE/NSE.

Market Intelligence.
Annexure 1

Market information of Nestle I)

Closing Prices

July,2006 Rs.

4 1029.95

5 1066.4

6 1091.3

7 1106.9

10 1108.5

Wk. ago 1003.35

Month ago 960


960.95

Face Value Rs.10

P/E ratio 33.4


Market
capitalization Rs.10684 cr.
52 week high 1348

52 week low 700

Annexure2
Market information of Jindal Steel
ltd

Closing Prices

July,2006

4 1409.15

5 1448.15

6 1467.15

7 1500.25

10 1523.25

Wk. ago 1421.65

Month ago 1311.45

Face Value Rs.5

P/E ratio 8.2


Market
capitalization Rs.4692 cr.

52 week high 974

52 week low 445

You might also like