Take the 2-minute tour ×
Quantitative Finance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for finance professionals and academics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've recently stumbled on something that really surprised me. These papers (1, 2) find that past standard deviation of returns is inversely related to future returns. That is, portfolio of low historical variance constituents (stocks) $\to$ better returns.

My question: Are there any studies that contradict these findings for any market(s)? Or is this pretty much the consensus view at the moment? Is this anomaly as well established as the size, momentum, B/M anomalies?

(I'm talking specifically about historical return standard deviation, and not idiosyncratic volatility. I already know that the results for idiosyncratic volatility are ambiguous and there are findings either way.)


1 "Benchmarks as Limits to Arbitrage: Understanding the Low-Volatility Anomaly", Baker, Bradley & Wurgler, (2011), Financial Analysts Journal.

2 "The Volatility Effect" by Blitz and Vliet, (2007), Journal of Portfolio Management.

share|improve this question
8  
See this question: Why does the minimum variance portfolio provide good returns?. Also, some quants from AQR wrote a paper recently that shows how much of Warren Buffet's performance can be attributed to "betting against beta", ie picking low-beta stocks. –  chrisaycock Oct 29 '12 at 5:17
    
@jase minimum variance between two equities are highly negatively correlated. Hence they offset/compliment each others risk.... –  bonCodigo Jan 15 '13 at 19:56
    
@bonCodigo I don't understand. –  Jase Jan 16 '13 at 0:07
    
Do you mean risk-adjusted returns? –  Joshua Jan 25 '13 at 4:48

2 Answers 2

Here is a piece on trying to replicate the results of low vol anomaly.

http://systematicedge.wordpress.com/2012/07/06/low-volatility/

share|improve this answer
    
Could you briefly summarize the paper (objectives, main findings) in a few sentences so I can award the answer? –  Jase Jan 26 '13 at 1:53
    
The piece simply aims to use an alternate measure of volatility (beta) and check for the robustness of the low volatility anomaly. It universe encompasses small cap, mid cap, large cap. The results are summarized in the table whereby each top 50 stock’s performance are compared with the bottom 50’s performance. Results confirm the anomaly. –  user1234440 Jan 26 '13 at 14:38

Yes, there are contradictions in other markets. Think of U.S. government debt securities.

Building a low volatility portfolio would result in holding T-Bills, earning a meager return and experiencing very little volatility.

Building a high volatility portfolio would result in holding longer duration T-Bonds, and would deliver appreciably higher returns than the T-Bill portfolio over time.

share|improve this answer
    
The papers talk about stocks only. –  Jase Dec 23 '12 at 1:54

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.