Search

This article documents significant dispersion in the beta estimates of exchange-traded funds as available on some leading financial websites. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first [...]

Purpose--Aims to test to determine whether the selection of the historical return time interval (monthly, quarterly, semiannual, or annual) used for calculating real estate investment trust (REIT) returns has a significant effect on optimal portfolio allocations. Design/methodology/approach--Using a mean-variance utility function, optimal allocations to portfolios of stocks, bonds, bills, and REITs across different levels of assumed investor risk aversion are calculated. The average historical returns, standard deviations, and correlations (assuming different time intervals) of the various asset classes are used as mean-variance inputs. Results are also compared using more recent data, since 1988, with, data from the full REIT history, which goes back to 1972. Findings--Using the more recent REIT datarather than the full dataset results in optimal allocations to REITs that are considerably higher. Likewise, using monthly and quarterly returns tends to understate the variability of REITs and leads to higher portfolio allocations. Research limitations/implications--The results of this study are based on the limited historical return data that are currently available for REITs. The results of future time periods may not prove to be consistent with the findings. Practical implications--Numerous research papers arbitrarily decide to employ monthly or quarterly returns in their analyses to increase the number of REIT observations they have available. These shorter interval returns are generally annualized. This paper addresses the consequences of those decisions. Originality/value--It has been shown that the decision to use return estimation intervals shorter than a year does have dramatic consequences on the results obtained and, therefore, must be carefully considered and justified. Keywords Assets management, Real estate, Returns Paper type Research paper

This study compares the impact that life cycle income and current income have on the number of vacation and pleasure trips taken and trip expenditures of families. Total household expenditure is used as a surrogate for permanent or life cycle income. A stratified sample was taken from the U.S. Department of Labor consumer survey data. The impact of additional variables such as age of consumer unit, reference person, and number of old and young people in the household is also evaluated. The percentage spent on trips increases as the total expenditure quintile rises, while the percentage spent on trips decreases as the income quintile increases. Total household expenditures is the strongest variable for forecasting trips and the spending on them.

The Value Line Investment Survey is one of the most well-known and most widely used sources of financial information and investment advice for individual investors. Value Line has managed to [...]