By continuing on this site you have agreed to cookies being placed and accessed by this website. More information and adjusting cookie settings.

Robeco uses cookies to analyze your visit to this site, to share information via social media and to personalize the site and advertisements in line with your own preferences. By clicking on agree or by continuing on this site, you agree to the above. More information and adjusting cookie settings.

AGREE

Robeco uses cookies to analyze your visit to this site, to share information via social media and to personalize the site and advertisements in line with your own preferences. By clicking on agree or by continuing on this site, you agree to the above. More information and adjusting cookie settings.

AGREE

By continuing on this site you have agreed to cookies being placed and accessed by this website. More information and adjusting cookie settings.

Beauty and the beast of low-volatility investing

Beauty and the beast of low-volatility investing

17-02-2015 | Insight | David Blitz, PhD, Matthias Hanauer, Pim van Vliet, PhD Usually focusing on how to design the best low-volatility strategy, David Blitz, Matthias Hanauer and Pim van Vliet have set out to construct a very bad low-volatility strategy. Comparing good and bad low-volatility strategies they found very different performance characteristics. Clearly, not all low-volatility stocks are created equal. The results highlight the importance of being selective when investing in low-volatility stocks.

  • What differentiates a successful low-volatility approach from an unsuccessful one?
  • What is good, what is bad and how do generic low-volatility strategies fit into this?    
  • How can you avoid expensive losers?

Share this page:

Join the conversation




Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter to receive updates and to stay informed about upcoming webinars.