2016년 4월 23일 토요일

20160424 - 현재 매크로 상황 정리

시장을 크게 네가지 국면으로 나눠 보자. 2x2.

리스크 온
리스크 오프
x
Us Treasury yield High
Us Treasury yield Low

2016.1월 초 : 12월 FOMC, 금리 올림. 과거에 질러놓은 이야기 때문에 시장의 기대(상승한 금리)에 부합하는 행동이 차라리 행동을 하지 않는 것보다 시장에 주는 충격에 덜 할 것이라고 생각. 금리 인상. 중국+이머징 작살. 현재와 같은 상항에서 금리를 올리면 어떻게 되는지 알게 됨. 앞으로 쉽게 금리를 올리지는 못 할 것.
===> Risk Off &  Us Treasury Yield headed to Low

2016. 02.11 ~ 2016.03 중순 : 시장이 지나치게 빠졌던 상황에서 반등. (2월 11일 S&P 저점. Double bottom). 건강한 강세장의 모습 이었음.
===> Risk On & Us Treasury Yield headed to High

2016.03 중순 ~ 20160410정도? : 201603 중순을 기점으로 주가 상승 & 금리 상승이 함께 있는 상황은 종료 됨.  S&P 입장에서 현재 레벨을 돌파하기 위해서는 또 다른 에너지가 필요한 부담 스러운 레벨 이었는데 중앙은행 발 달러 약세로 인해 한 레벨 더 오를 수 있었음. 금리 안정적, 유가 상승, 주가 상승.
===> Risk On & Us Treasury Yield Headed to Low

20160410 ~ 현재 : 지속적으로 Risk On. Risk On의 관성이 남아 있는 시점. Risk On 을 원해서 모든걸 Risk On 의 신호로 해석하고 있는 단계. 다만 지금 눈여겨 볼 점은 금리가 상승하기 시작 했다는 것.
===>  Risk On & Us Treasury Yield has started to go High


현재 : 달러 약세의 바닥을 테스트 하는 지점. 달러 약세가 강세로 추세 전환 하기 위해서는 에너지가 필요. 어떤 에너지가 있을까?
모건스탠리 - 20160415 보고서


Additionally, our FX team notes the following triggers for a resumption of USD strength: i) Weaker EM data and in particular in China, where our base case is that this happens in 2H16 as the fiscal stimulus fades; 
ii) Additional easing measures by DM central banks to fight the USD weakness, notably Japan; --> 4월 28일 BOJ 
iii) Continued closing of the US output gap, sparking questions about how long the Fed can remain on hold;
 iv) Commodity prices reversing the recent rally. Specifically on oil, our oil strategists believe disappointment will come from non-compliance with any potential deal. 

Finally, we also think core rates represent a important risk due to the very low levels, particularly given that markets are now reaching lows similar to a year ago, which were indeed followed by a sharp sell-off. 





2. 일본
최근 옌이 강했는데 니케이가 올랐다.!


3. 중국

4. 유럽

5. 한국
- 원달러 : 주요 이평선을 다 깨고 내려 왔는데 굳이 떨어지는 칼날을 받을 필요가 있는가 싶다.
- 채권 : 1.43% 찍고 현재 1.47%

2016년 4월 22일 금요일

수익률 계산

1. Equity 포트폴리오를 총 얼마 매입 했는지를 계산 (첫날 매입 금액)

2. 선물 포트폴리오를 매입 하는데 비용이 얼만큼 들었는지 계산

3. 1+2 를 총 사용 금액으로 결정
  - 현재는 현물 7 : 선물 1 의 비율로 사용 금액을 결정. 즉 3번 고정.


4. Daily 수익률 계산

  1. Daily equity 누적 수익률 계산 = Equity 누적 벌어드린 금액 총 합계 / 3
    1. Daily equity 당일 수익률 계산 = 1 / t-1일 누적
    2. 참고 : 분모를 선물 사는데 필요한 돈으로 수정 해주기 전 pure 한 수익률도 표시해 준다.
  2. Daily 선물 누적 수익률 계산 = 선물 누적 벌어드린 금액 총 합계 / 3
    1. 선물 누적 벌어드린 총 합계 계산 시, 


코스닥매입금
계약수
종가
20160401
600
-10
600
20160402
605
-3
603
20160403
607
-1
605
20160404
604
1
604
20160405


605
이런 정보를 바탕으로 당일 까지 누적 금액 계산하기
==> daily 수익률은 t일까지 누적 수익률 /t-1 일까지의 누적 수익률


5. Daily




**** Equity 포트가 오름으로써 생길 수 있는 비용에 관한 문제
1. 선물 가격이 떨어 지면서 추가 납입금이 늘어 날 수 있음
2. Equity 포트의 notional 이 커짐으로써 Short 을 해줘야 하는 계약수가 늘어남

CH15 : Performance Measurement and Attribution

Performance attribution dissects the return in order to pinpoint the exact sources of value

Important function of performance measurement is to determine whether the portfolio manager outperformed or underperformed the benchmark and whether the difference was due to skill or luck.

Source of excess returns is key to understanding how well and efficiently the factor model and all other parts of the investing strategy are working.


15.2 Measuring returns

CH3 : Basic QEPM Models

3.2 Basic QEPM models and portfolio construction procedures

There are two generic factor models that are used to determine how stock returns and risks vary with factors

  • Fundamental factor model
  • Economic factor model
They employ different techniques for modeling stock returns.

Average stock return is determined by the product of the factor premium and the factor exposure.

  • Factor premium : How much investors are willing to pay for each factor 
    • Fundamental factor model : Must be estimated with historical relationships between stock returns and factor exposure
    • Economic factor medel : Can be determined up to a propotionality without a statical estimation in certain cases
  • Factor exposure : measures how sensitive the stock return is to a factor
    • Fundamental factor model (ex> p/e, marketcap..) : directly observerable 
    • Economic factor model  : Must be estimeated
<Steps>
3.2.1 Factor Choice
3.2.2 The data decision
  • Cross-sectional dimension : The cross-sectional dimension defines a data set by the characteristics of the stocks it includes 
    • 특정 data set 의 특징은  최종 포트폴리오에 영향을 미칠 것이다.
    • 특정 data set 에 속한 주식의 숫자는 estimation을 쉽게 만들 것이다.
  • Time-series dimension : 
3.2.3 Factor Exposure
  • Fundamental factor model : easy
  • Economic factor model : 뒤에서 이야기 하겠지만 먼저 factor premium을 계산하고, 이 factor premium과 return과의 관계를 통해서 계산한다.
3.2.4 Factor Premium




2016년 2월 9일 화요일

20160209_Some articles

1. 5 Things You Have To Learn From Kyle Bass

http://blog.stocktwits.com/5-things-we-learned-from-kyle-bass/

2. 'Risk Parity' strategy shows strain
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8542e88e-cea6-11e5-92a1-c5e23ef99c77.html#axzz3zfwok1Cd

Last year was a terrible one for “risk parity”, once one of the hottest strategies in the investment world, as losses mounted and some analysts blamed it for exacerbating market turbulence. So far 2016 has offered little respite.
...
But the performance started to sag in 2014, and nosedived last year, ruining its reputation for resilience in almost any conditions. The Salient Risk Parity index slumped 12 per cent in 2015 and JPMorgan’s gauge of risk parity fund performance fell more than 8 per cent.
...
Even pioneers of the strategy have suffered a bad time. Bridgewater’s “All Weather” risk parity fund lost 7.7 per cent last year and is down about 10 per cent net of fees since July 2014, according to a person familiar with the matter.
....
Adding to the woes(Commodity), bonds — a big part of risk parity portfolios — have failed to act as a suitable counterweight for the once seemingly bulletproof strategy.
....
“Rates have historically done well in environments like this, but last year we got nothing out of it,” says Mr Knight....“This is a world where there are some purists, and the theory underpinning risk parity is strong, so there aren’t that many that change their approach,” he says. “I don’t consider myself a purist, and there are some regimes that aren’t that risk parity friendly.”
...
The crucial question is whether this bout of underperformance is an unpleasantly long but still temporary blip, the start of a new risk parity-unfriendly market regime, or even a symptom of something more broadly awry in the fundamental assumptions underpinning the strategy.
Industry insiders are still confident it is the first, and are hopeful that a turnround beckons. Bridgewater’s All Weather fund is still “a much better ‘sleep at a night’ portfolio than any single asset class and most portfolios”, argues an executive at the hedge fund.
Similarly, Mr Mendelson at AQR says that apart from some minor implementation tweaks he has not changed anything as a result of market movements. “Systematic investing does best when you run a consistent process that doesn’t change in response to short-term fluctuations,” he argues.


3. 스마트베타, 패시브와 액티브 모두의 대안
http://m.thebell.co.kr/m/newsview.asp?svccode=00&newskey=201602010100002350000145

4. Hedgeable
https://www.hedgeable.com/hedgeable-investment-philosophy-white-paper#capm

...
Eliminating 75% of the losses during these two periods has an immense effect on portfolio growth, adding more than $1 million over 25 years. For a hard-working American investing for retirement, that extra $1 million can significantly boost their standard of living.
MPT based index investing will never achieve this kind of loss reduction; an MPT philosophy inherently accepts all losses and thus represents a huge opportunity cost for long-term investors.
...
Contrary to what the MPT zealots have made the public believe, managers have been able to achieve the kind of loss reduction shown above. Consider the tangible example of the performance of Bridgewater Associates’ Pure Alpha Fund (the firm where Hedgeable CEO Mike Kane began his career) versus the S&P:

Bridgewater produced a return that nearly doubled that of the S&P with about half the volatility, and a (-14.18%) max drawdown, thus cutting out 75.03% of the losses. Bridgewater is an alternative manager that invests in futures, options, and other vehicles that are typically only purchased for wealthy or sophisticated investors. But what if we could echo this sort of risk-managed profile by using large, liquid ETFs and stocks instead of complicated ultra-high-net-worth instruments? Later in this paper, we will explore how Hedgeable has disrupted the market by making that possible and available to everyone.
...

5. ‘Robo-advisers’ try to calm investor nerves
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3a44af14-c6ec-11e5-808f-8231cd71622e.html#axzz3zfwok1Cd

Daniel Egan, director of behavioural finance and investing at New York-based Betterment, said the firm had received higher volumes of calls and emails in recent weeks, and was trying to ease concerns by providing “very personalised, very positive” notifications when customers log in.

6. Which robos got off to the fastest start in 2016?

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160115/FREE/160119956/which-robos-got-off-to-the-fastest-start-in-2016
 
2016 1월 현재 로보어드바이져 AUM 2015 01과 비교








2016년 1월 31일 일요일

20160129의 기회 (BOJ)

BOJ 펴서 먹고 인생 피긴 힘들지.
이보단,
S&P를 주목하고 있었는데. 유일하게 악재가 될 수 있는 상황은 밤중에 발표되는 GDP.
GDP 발표 후 가능한 시장 시나리오는
1. 급등
2. 급락
3. 지지부진

1. 금등 -> 못들어감
2. 급락 -> 못들어감
3. 지지부진 -> 불확실 해소. "롱".

20160129. 3번.

Oil

1. OPEC 감산하지 못하는 이유
죄수 딜레마, 비 OPEC

http://m.post.naver.com/viewer/postView.nhn?volumeNo=3096954&memberNo=11292208&vType=VERTICAL