0
$\begingroup$

I often see it quoted that the M2 measure offers an advantage over the sharpe, as sharpe is 'difficult to interpret' for negative returns. eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modigliani_risk-adjusted_performance#:~:text=The%20M2%20measure%20is,to%20the%20risk%2Dfree%20rate.

However, consider the following returns:

enter image description here

enter image description here

This has the following sharpe and M2 ratios:

enter image description here

Now Fund A has been more been more volatile and has eeked out a 1% return. Fund B has been less volatile and made a small loss. Both have beaten the benchmark.

Look at the M2 ratios. Fund A sees its M2 return reduced as it has been more volatile than the benchmark. Fund B's M2 shows a worse return, ie greater loss, despite having lower volatility than the benchmark.

Seems to me that Fund B should be showing a smaller loss if the M2 measure is meant to fix working with fund losses? Am I misunderstanding how M2 is meant to be applied?

Thanks

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ The interpretation of negative Sharpe Ratios is indeed problematic. But M2 is basically a monotonic transformation or re-working of the Sharpe Ratio (which some people consider more intuitive than the SR), so I don't see how it could solve this inherent issue with the Sharpe Ratio. It is the same concept dressed in different clothing. $\endgroup$
    – nbbo2
    Aug 26, 2020 at 19:29
  • $\begingroup$ Devil's advocate, but any fund/strategy showing a negative Sharpe (return) is bad, so the fact comparing two negative Sharpes is problematic is moot $\endgroup$
    – Chris
    Aug 27, 2020 at 2:20
  • $\begingroup$ @noob2: it appears this is the case! I was thrown off by various internet sources stating M2 fixes this issue this sharpe. Obviously not. I had in my mind possibly I wasn't implementing the formula correctly. $\endgroup$
    – JasonB
    Aug 27, 2020 at 7:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Chris. I see your point, but how would you assess funds where their benchmark has fallen for say 2-3 years? (I'd say alpha likely the better metric then.) $\endgroup$
    – JasonB
    Aug 27, 2020 at 7:15

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.