Course Syllabus - UMD
[pic]
GENEVA EXECUTIVE COURSES IN FINANCE
Performance Evaluation and Attribution (PEVA)
Theory and Practical Application
October 2 - 6, 2006
Professor Russ Wermers September 9, 2006
( 2006 R. Wermers
Lab Exercise #1, Part A: Computing and Comparing Basic Performance Measures
Objective: Our objective with this exercise is to compute some basic performance measures using Excel, and to examine how our ranking of a group of managers changes under these different measures. Thus, we look at some of the issues pointed out by Roll (1978) and others. The following Excel data tables are available for you to complete today’s list of tasks:
A. “net_returns_for_crystal_ball.xls” -- This file contains monthly net returns for several U.S.
mutual funds. The date is in the first column, formatted as RYYMMDD, where YYMM is the year and month
(ignore the R and DD characters)
B. “t-bills and s&p 500 (monthly).xls” -- This file contains the monthly returns for 30-day U.S.
Treasury Bills (“tbillretto”) and S&P 500 stocks
(“sp500retto”; value-weighed and rebalanced monthly, with
cash dividends reinvested). The date is in the first column, formatted as YYMMDD (again, ignore the DD characters)
C. “msp500.xls” -- This file contains the monthly returns for both the
equal-weighted (“ewretd”) and value-weighted (“vwretd”)
S&P 500 stocks (rebalanced monthly, with cash dividends
reinvested). The date is in the first column, formatted as
YYYYMMDD (again, ignore the DD characters)
Please complete the following tasks:
1. Compute the arithmetic average monthly return of each fund, and rank the funds by this simple measure.
2. Compute the geometric average monthly return of each fund, and re-rank the funds. How and why is this ranking different from #1?
3. Compute the Jensen measure of each fund, and re-rank the funds. Assume that the value-weighted S&P 500 index is the “market.” How and why is this ranking different from #1?
4. Repeat #3, this time using the equal-weighted S&P 500 index as the “market.” How and why is this ranking different from #3?
5. Compute the tracking error variance of each fund, using the value-weighted S&P 500 as the benchmark. Re-rank funds by this measure (that is, the top fund will have the lowest tracking error variance, and the bottom fund will have the highest TEV). Thus, do not consider the tracking error gain in this exercise. What does this ranking tell you about the risk-taking behavior of these funds? What doesn’t it tell you (i.e., systematic vs. idiosyncratic risk-taking)?
6. Using the Jensen model of #3, compute the information ratio of each fund, and re-rank the funds. How and why is this ranking different from #3?
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- english 101 syllabus course outline
- umd department of education
- high school course syllabus examples
- course syllabus example
- course syllabus examples
- business management course syllabus pdf
- esl course syllabus adult education
- umd special education
- blank course syllabus template
- college course syllabus sample
- course syllabus project management
- college course syllabus template