0
$\begingroup$

I am conducting PCA on several return series of funds and am finding that when I look at the first principal component the values are huge and this the volatility is also enormous relative to the funds I have used to construct the PCA.

The average return vol for the funds is 3.38% with the largest being roughly 5%. The volatility however for the first PC is 17%, I thought the first PC was most likely a market factor (although with funds instead of stocks I’m not sure). I think the first PC in this instance is most likely a healthcare factor as funds with large loadings in the first PC are heavy on healthcare stocks.

My question therefore is how can the first PC have such a large volatility and what might the first PC represent (not specifically)?

$\endgroup$
10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What % of the returns are explained by the first PC? It doesn't quite make sense that the first PC would be "huge" (i.e. > 70%...?) and it's Vol would be 17%, whilst the average Vol for the funds would be only 3.38%. Otherwise, what time series are you looking at? Does it include the past year (i.e. Covid-induced higher vol?) The healthcare sector stocts have been very volatile over the past year, which could explain the relatively higher vol for the Healthcare sector. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 10:26
  • $\begingroup$ Ok so I’m not mad that doesn’t really make sense does it! I am using the last three years so includes Covid yep but even so, I compared the returns against the S&P biotech select which is a very volatile biotech index and the returns are still way higher vol wise. 20% explained variance for the first PC $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 10:35
  • $\begingroup$ Note I am using a PCA on the transposed return series meaning the PCs themselves have a value for each date which I am comparing the vol of the PC to the funds $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 10:42
  • $\begingroup$ The key question is: what % of the variance of the returns are explained by your first PC? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 10:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If the first PC only explains 20% of the variance of the returns, then your results are not that surprising: it could be that the first PC has 17% vol whist the remaining 80% of your PCs only have vol < 3%, which could then in total produce a vol of 3.38%. Also it is a bit odd that the first PC only explains 20% of your data variance: in my experience, the first PC usually explains between at least 50% to over 70% of the total variance in the data... $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2021 at 11:09

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.