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.

Enhancing a low-volatility strategy is particularly helpful when generic low volatility is expensive

01-06-2012 | Research | Pim van Vliet, PhD Frequently the question comes up if low-volatility is ‘expensive’, measured by multiples such as P/E and P/B ratios. The investors asking this are sometimes worried about the expected performance of low-volatility in such an environment. In this note, we address this question using an extended 82-year sample period for the US stock market.

We find that a generic lowvolatility strategy sometimes exhibits value (1990s) and sometimes growth (1930s) characteristics. An enhanced low-volatility strategy, which includes valuation and sentiment factors, yields a much better return/risk ratio than a generic low-volatility strategy and is necessary to achieve superior long-term returns.

Recently, the P/B ratio of a generic low-volatility strategy has become relatively high again. Historically, generic low-volatility underperforms the market in such an environment, but proves effective to lower the risk. An enhanced low-volatility strategy is particularly helpful when generic low-volatility is expensive and improves the return of a generic low-volatility strategy by up to 6% per year.
Share this page: