Journal of applied corporate finance · 2006 · 102 citations · 3 references
BusinessEconomicsFinanceAsset PricingFinancial EconomicsPortfolio ManagementAsset Return ModelingEquity RiskFinancial RiskPortfolio TheoryRisk MeasurementRisk-return AnalysisDownside Risk AnalysisDownside Risk MeasurementMarket BetaPortfolio Risk EstimationPortfolio Risk MeasurementRisk-adjusted Return ModelsRisk-adjusted Return ValuationRisk-return Tradeoff Analysis
Traditional risk measures emphasize volatility, yet downside risk more accurately reflects investors’ concern for negative market swings, a perspective championed by pioneers such as Harry Markowitz. This paper critiques standard deviation and beta, introduces downside risk concepts—including semideviation and downside beta—and examines their use in asset‑pricing models and risk‑adjusted return calculations. The authors demonstrate how to compute semideviation, downside beta, and related risk‑adjusted metrics in Excel spreadsheets. Empirical examples reveal that equity costs based on downside risk can differ substantially from CAPM estimates, and that the Sortino ratio offers a distinct risk‑adjusted return measure compared to the Sharpe ratio.
Although investors associate risk with negative outcomes and downside fluctuations, modern portfolio theory does not. For investors, volatility per se is not necessarily bad; volatility below a benchmark is. A stock that magnifies the market's fluctuations is not necessarily bad; one that magnifies the market's downside swings is. Even Harry Mar‐kowitz, the father of modern portfolio theory, viewed downside risk as a better way to assess risk than the “mean‐variance” framework that he ultimately proposed and that has since become the standard. This article highlights the shortcomings of traditional measures of risk (the standard deviation and beta), introduces the concept of downside risk, and discusses two measures of it—the “semideviation” and “downside beta.” It also discusses the use of such measures in asset pricing models to estimate required returns on equity. Data from a few well‐known companies are used to illustrate that the cost of equity based on downside risk can be substantially different from that based on the CAPM. The article concludes with a brief discussion of risk‐adjusted returns and a comparison of the traditional method of calculating such returns with both the Sharpe ratio and its counterpart in a downside risk framework, the Sortino ratio. The appendix demonstrates how to calculate these risk measures in Excel.
3
Frank A. Sortino, Robert Van Der Meer · The Journal of Portfolio Management · 1991 · 601 citations · Full text
Management, Economics, Finance +17
Systematic risk in emerging markets: the D-CAPM
Javier Estrada · Emerging Markets Review · 2002 · 300 citations