What I don't understand is that is the efficient frontier really drawn from calculating all combination of
expected return on a portfolio and the level of risk or just a imaginary shape?
One school of thought is that value stocks are riskier than the market as a whole and investors are compensated with
higher expected returns for the additional risk.
Even including data back to 1925, there has never been a lower level of
expected returns for a balanced portfolio heavily weighted toward bonds.
And insurance product can only protect life, don't
expect return from such investment product.
So high - beta is a sort of implicit leverage, which investors should be willing to pay more for in the form of
lower expected returns.
But then, what has higher
expected returns in the overall market, if we will really want to get deep here, are they lower price stocks or higher priced stocks?
So fixed - income investors have to experience short - term pain in the form of lower bond prices to eventually see higher
expected returns over the long term.
Historical stock market data provide investors with a powerful set of tools for constructing portfolios that can maximize
expected returns at given levels of risk.
And I believe that one can stay away from it
if expected returns on investment is greater than say 6 %.
The 10 -
year expected return for a portfolio with the majority of its assets in bonds is at the lowest level in almost a century of data.
In this article, we offer our estimation of
expected returns going forward, based on the logic and the framework we develop in our prior three articles.
The world is very different today than it was in 1972, and we are
adjusting expected returns and our portfolio management techniques accordingly.
In the first scenario, the cost of diversification is low based on how much it would
reduce expected returns, and so a diversified portfolio makes sense.
This gives reasonable
positive expected return while lowering the risk of having to sell during a crisis as the time to purchase gets shorter and shorter.
Because risk and reward are related, a conservative investor can
also expect returns that are, on average and over time, lower than those of someone with a moderate or aggressive portfolio.
Some critics of whole life insurance make a comparison using 8 % to 10 % annual
expected returns which are likely not realistic.
While not without trade - offs (generally slightly lower
expected return compared to the stock market) the advantages may make life insurance exceptionally more valuable for some clients.
On any given day, an investor who uses a leveraged or inverse product can
expect a return very similar to the stated objective.
With open ended funds like mutual funds buying and selling transactions can be carried out any given day and one can start
expecting returns within 3 days or so.
Model specification choices such as when and how to shrink parameter estimates could result in
different expected return outputs than are generated by the model used here.
For nearly every target rate of return, a diversified portfolio of minimally - correlated investments can be constructed that will be lower risk than one investment with
equal expected return.
Phrases with «expected returns»