Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Definition of a decision problem consists into a two-element process (C, ) (Roy, 1991, EscobarToledo & Lpez-Garcia, 2005, and Zbigniew & Watrbski (2008):
C represents a set of criteria, describing relations between properties of decision alternatives and preference levels of considered alternatives, and represents a set of meta-data of a decision situation, consisting into the decision makers expectations about a decision situation.
Using a concordance index and a discordance index for each criteria gj, descending and ascending distillations procedures are conducted (Belton & Stewart, 2001, and Rogers et al., 1999). Being defined the two pre-orders, they are combined to get the final overall ranking of the alternatives.
Methodology
Empirical work objectives:
Give to portfolio management a new perspective in an effort
to support decision maker in his investment decision. So, the hypothesis is to transform portfolio management into a multicriteria problem, and using ELECTRE III method, we explore the application of financial theory (financial ratios)
Methodology
Financial ratios (Criterias of the model):
Return on Assets (ROA): express how much profit a
company generated compared to its assets.
Methodology
Return on Equity (ROE): Give us the ratio between profits and shareholders' equity, and is expected to have a rate of return higher than the rate of return on treasury bonds, to be able to say that the company is really profitable. ROEN = Net Income N / Equity N-1
Methodology
Financial Autonomy (FA): This ratio related to the company's financial structure, express the extent to
Methodology
General Liquidity (GL): Liquidity refers to the ability to convert the asset into cash, being some items more
Methodology
Reduced Liquidity (RL): Measures a company's ability to meet its short-term liabilities with cash provenience of its net assets, but in a way more demanding than in the
Methodology
Hypothesis of the model:
Portfolios composed by assets selected by ELECTRE outperform the market (PSI-20TR)? Portfolio profitability is higher than market profitability?
Is portfolio riskier than the market? Portfolio standard deviation is lower than market standard deviation?
Methodology
Data:
Alternatives: Shares traded in PSI-Geral from 1999 to
2011;
Methodology
Monthly data from interest treasury bonds, 3M, from 1999 to 2011, Institute for the Management of Treasury and Public Credit, IP (IGCP, IP); Annual financial data from financial statements (balance sheet, income statement and annex for each company previously selected) from 1999 to 2011, in order to calculated financial ratios. Specifically we collected: total asset, equity, net income, current liabilities, cash, clients and inventories; Dividends paid by each company selected, from 2000 to 2011.
Methodology
Table 2 Portfolios dates
Portfolio n P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 Initial /Historical Period 2000 2004 2001 2005 2002 2006 2003 2007 2004 2008 2005 2009 2006 2010 2007 2011 Follow-up Period
1y Jan05-Dec05 Jan06-Dec06 Jan07-Dec07 Jan08-Dec08 Jan09-Dec09 Jan10-Dec10 Jan11-Dec11 2y Jan05-Dec06 Jan06-Dec07 Jan07-Dec08 Jan08-Dec09 Jan10-Dec10 Jan11-Dec11 3y Jan05-Dec07 Jan06-Dec08 Jan07-Dec09 Jan08-Dec10 Jan10-Dec11
Methodology
Thresholds of the model: For ROA and ROE: P 1 (p > 3,42%; q 2,63%) P 2 (p > 2,88%; q 2,21%) P 3 (p > 2,80%; q 2,15%) P 4 (p > 2,79%; q 2,14%) P 5 (p > 3,14%; q 2,41%) P 6 (p > 3,24%; q 2,50%) P 7 (p > 3,07%; q 2,36%) P 8 (p > 2,90%; q 2,23%) q threshold (indifference) correspond to the interest treasury bonds, 3M, annual average, for the periods defined; p threshold (preference) corresponds to q threshold plus 30%.
Methodology
For FA: p > 30%; q 25% For GL and RL: p > 1,50; q 1,00
Results
Table 3 Shares selected by ELECTRE
P1 (00-04) 1 Orey 2 3 4 5 6 Ibersol Brisa Cimpor Semapa BPI Cofina 7 PT Soane BCP 8 9 Portucel Reditus 9 6 7 P2 (01-05) 1 Cimpor 2 3 Orey Ibersol Brisa Semapa BPI Cofina Teixeira Duarte PT BCP Mota Engil Portucel Reditus BES 8 7 P3 (02-06) 1 Cimpor 2 3 Ibersol PT Semapa Teixeira Duarte Orey Cofina 5 6 Brisa Zon BPI Sonae Portucel BCP Jernimo Martins BES 7 P4 (03-07) 1 Cimpor 2 3 Zon Ibersol PT Teixeira Duarte Sonae Reditus Semapa Cofina BPI Orey Jernimo Martins Portucel 8 9 Brisa Mota Engil 5 4 P5 (04-08) 1 Cimpor 2 Zon PT Reditus 3 BPI Ibersol Jernimo Martins Orey Semapa Sonae Portucel Brisa 6 7 P6 (05-09) 1 Cimpor 2 3 4 PT Jernimo Martins Zon BPI Portucel 5 6 7 Ibersol Reditus Mota Engil EDP Teixeira Duarte Brisa 7 P7 (06-10) 1 PT 2 3 4 5 6 Brisa Jernimo Martins Ibersol Zon Portucel Cimpor Mota Engil EDP Semapa BPI Reditus P8 (07-11) 1 PT Jernimo 2 Martins 3 4 Brisa Ibersol Portucel Zon Cimpor EDP Mota Engil Semapa
4 5
5 6 7 8 9
8 9
10 Toyota BES
Results
Profitability by portfolio
Chart 1 Profitability: P1 vs PSI
2000-2004
2005
2005-2006
2005-2007
2001-2005
2006
2006-2007
2006-2008
2002-2006
2007
2007-2008
2007-2009
2003-2007
2008
2008-2009
2008-2010
2004-2008
2009
2009-2010
2009-2011
2005-2009
2010
2010-2011
2006-2010
2011
2007-2011
Results
Profitability by holding period
Table 4 Follow-up results, by group (1 year)
Follow-up Results - 1 y PSI ELECTRE MEAN -0,2060% 0,1093% SHARPE'S INDEX -6,77% -1,27% N OBSERVATIONS 84 84 RISK FREE 0,1832%
Source: Own elaboration, September 2012
Results
Parametric and Non-parametric tests:
Test the significance of assumptions (methods of the
model) that may influence the behaviour of variable
From Normality test results, only ELECTRE has a normal distribution for 1st and 2nd follow-up periods. In 3rd followup period any method has a normal distribution.
Ho : = 0% (average profitability of Methodi isnt significant different from zero, with i = PSI and ELECTRE). H1 : , < , > 0% (p average profitability of Methodi is significant different from zero, with i = PSI and ELECTRE).
Generally, we conclude that in every method our average profitability isnt significantly different from 0%.
Ho : i k = 0 (average profitability of Methodi isnt significant different from average profitability of Methodk, with i, k = PSI and ELECTRE). H1 : i k 0 (average profitability of Methodi is significant different from average profitability of Methodk, with i, k = PSI and ELECTRE).
Differences observed between average profitability for these two groups arent statistically different in every follow-up period (despite values are different, means cannot be differentiated, probably because sample is to small), but ELECTRE achieved higher average profitability than the market.
H0: F(Xi) F(Xj) (F(Xj and F(Xj)) are method function distribution,
For second and third follow-up period ELECTRE achieved higher average
profitability than the market PSI. In a three years holding period, ELECTRE performance better.
Conclusions
ELECTRE methodology proved to be a good tool to select assets to invest in a buy and hold perspective, within shares traded in PSI; Compared to PSI-20 TR, and in the long term (holding period of three years), ELECTRE III, in average, achieved higher profitability than the market itself;
Conclusions
Findings left by this empirical work, leaves us open other lines of future research:
comparing ELECTRE results with results obtained by traditional methods, we would keep this conclusion?
OBRIGADA
a.lima@doc.isvouga.pt