Risk Damodaran PDF
Risk Damodaran PDF
Risk Damodaran PDF
Aswath Damodaran
Aswath Damodaran! 1!
What is Risk?!
危機
The first symbol is the symbol for “danger”, while the second is the
symbol for “opportunity”, making risk a mix of danger and
opportunity.
Aswath Damodaran! 2!
Equity Risk!
Aswath Damodaran! 3!
I. Theory Based Models!
Aswath Damodaran! 4!
A. The Capital Asset Pricing Model!
The capital asset pricing model is the oldest and still the most widely
used model for risk in the investment world.
It is derived in four steps:
• Uses variance as a measure of risk
• Specifies that a portion of variance can be diversified away, and that is
only the non-diversifiable portion that is rewarded.
• Measures the non-diversifiable risk with beta, which is standardized
around one.
• Translates beta into expected return -
Expected Return = Riskfree rate + Beta * Risk Premium
Aswath Damodaran! 5!
Step 1: The Mean-Variance Framework!
Expected Return
Aswath Damodaran! 6!
Step 2: The Importance of Diversification: Risk
Types!
Competition
may be stronger
or weaker than Exchange rate
anticipated and Political
risk
Projects may
do better or Interest rate,
Entire Sector Inflation &
worse than may be affected
expected News about
by action Econoomy
Firm-specific Market
Aswath Damodaran! 7!
The Effects of Diversification!
Aswath Damodaran! 8!
The Role of the Marginal Investor!
Aswath Damodaran! 9!
Step 3: The Market Portfolio!
The risk of any asset is the risk that it adds to the market portfolio
Statistically, this risk can be measured by how much an asset moves
with the market (called the covariance)
Beta is a standardized measure of this covariance
Beta is a measure of the non-diversifiable risk for any asset can be
measured by the covariance of its returns with returns on a market
index, which is defined to be the asset's beta.
The cost of equity will be the required return,
Cost of Equity = Rf + Equity Beta * (E(Rm) - Rf)
where,
Rf = Riskfree rate
E(Rm) = Expected Return on the Market Index
The risk premium is the premium that investors demand for investing
in an average risk investment, relative to the riskfree rate.
As a general proposition, this premium should be
• greater than zero
• increase with the risk aversion of the investors in that market
• increase with the riskiness of the “average” risk investment
Assume that stocks are the only risky assets and that you are offered
two investment options:
• a riskless investment (say a Government Security), on which you can
make 5%
• a mutual fund of all stocks, on which the returns are uncertain
How much of an expected return would you demand to shift your money
from the riskless asset to the mutual fund?
Less than 5%
Between 5 - 7%
Between 7 - 9%
Between 9 - 11%
Between 11- 13%
More than 13%
If this were the capital market line, the risk premium would be a
weighted average of the risk premiums demanded by each and every
investor.
The weights will be determined by the magnitude of wealth that each
investor has. Thus, Warren Bufffet’s risk aversion counts more
towards determining the “equilibrium” premium than yours’ and
mine.
As investors become more risk averse, you would expect the
“equilibrium” premium to increase.
Survey investors on their desired risk premiums and use the average
premium from these surveys.
Assume that the actual premium delivered over long time periods is
equal to the expected premium - i.e., use historical data
Estimate the implied premium in today’s asset prices.
"
"
Arithmetic Average"
Geometric Average"
Stocks - T. Bills" Stocks - T. Bonds" Stocks - T. Bills" Stocks - T. Bonds"
1928-2011" 7.55%" 5.79%" 5.62%" 4.10%"
" 2.22%" 2.36%" " "
1962-2011" 5.38%" 3.36%" 4.02%" 2.35%"
"
2002-2011"
2.39%"
3.12%"
2.68%"
-1.92%"
"
1.08%"
"
-3.61%"
" 6.46%" 8.94%" " "
What is the right premium?
Go back as far as you can. Otherwise, the standard error in the
estimate will be large.
Be consistent in your use of a riskfree rate.
Use arithmetic premiums for one-year estimates of costs of equity and
geometric premiums for estimates of long term costs of equity.
Historical data for markets outside the United States is available for
much shorter time periods. The problem is even greater in emerging
markets.
The historical premiums that emerge from this data reflects this data
problem and there is much greater error associated with the estimates
of the premiums.
While default risk spreads and equity risk premiums are highly correlated, one
would expect equity spreads to be higher than debt spreads. In fact, one
simple way to adjust the default spread for the additional risk in the equity
market is to multiply it by the relative volatility (standard deviation of
equities/ standard deviation of government bond)
Risk Premium for Brazil in early 2009
• Standard Deviation in Bovespa (Equity) = 34%
• Standard Deviation in Brazil $ denominated Bond = 21.5%
• Default spread on $ denominated Bond = 2.5%
• Country Risk Premium (CRP) for Brazil = 2.5% (34%/21.5%) = 3.95%
• Total Risk Premium for Brazil = US risk premium (in ‘09) + CRP for
Brazil = 3.88% + 3.95% = 7.83%
There are many who find theory based models of equity risk lacking
because
• They look at both upside and downside volatility (it is only the latter that
investors don’t like)
• They are based upon market prices rather than fundamentals
• They break risk down into diversifiable and non-diversifiable components,
a break down that may have no relevance if you are only minimally
diversified.
The alternative models for equity risk can broadly be classified as
• Models that are based upon accounting statements
• Proxy models (where something else stands in for risk)
• Market implied measures of risk
• Risk adjusted earnings/ cash flows
• Margin of Safety
Aswath Damodaran! 36!
a. Accounting based risk measures!
Accounting Ratio: Pick an accounting ratio, and scale risk to this ratio.
Thus, the median book debt to capital ratio for US companies at the
start of 2011 was 51%. The book debt to capital ratio for 3M at that
time 30.91%, yielding a relative risk measure of 0.61 for the company,
obtained by dividing 3M’s debt ratio (30.91%) by the market average
(51%).
Compute an accounting beta: Look at changes in accounting earnings
at a firm, relative to accounting earnings for the entire market. Firms
that have more stable earnings than the rest of the market or whose
earnings movements have nothing to do with the rest of the market
will have low accounting betas.
Look at returns on individual stocks over long periods and search for
characteristics shared by companies that earn high returns.
This approach was kicked off by Fama and French, who found that
low price to book and small market cap stocks earned higher returns
than the rest of the market. In the years since, there have been
additional three additional variables that seem to be correlated with
returns:
• Earnings momentum: Companies that have reported stronger than
expected earnings growth in the past earn higher returns than the rest of
the market.
• Price momentum: Returns are higher for stocks that have outperformed
markets in recent time periods and lower for stocks that have lagged.
• Liquidity: Stocks that are less liquid (lower trading volume, higher bid-
ask spreads) earn higher returns than more liquid stocks.
If you can observe the price of a risky asset, and you can estimate the
expected cash flows on that asset, you can back out the market’s
implied “required return” for that asset.
With bonds, we use promised coupons and the face value, in
conjunction with the price of the bond today to compute yields to
maturity.
With stocks, with we can used expected dividends or cash flows
together with the stock price to get an expected return on the stock.
Risk adjusting the cash flows requires more than taking the expected
cash flow across all scenarios, good and bad. You have to convert
these expected cash flows into certainty equivalent cash flows.
There are two practical approaches to computing certainty equivalent
cash flows. .
• In the first, you consider only those cash flows from a business that are
"safe" and that you can count on, when you do valuation. If you do so, and
you are correct in your assessment, you don't have to risk adjust the cash
flows.
• The second variant is an interesting twist on dividends and a throw back
to Ben Graham. To the extent that companies are reluctant to cut
dividends, once they initiate them, it can be argued that the dividends paid
by a company reflects its view of how much of its earnings are certain.
The "margin of safety" has a long history in value investing. While the
term may have been in use prior to 1934, Graham and Dodd argued
that investors should buy stocks that trade at significant discounts on
value and developed screens that would yield these stocks.
To put into practice the margin of safety (MOS), investors have to
• Screen for companies that meets good company criteria: solid
management, good product and sustainable competitive advantages.
• Estimate intrinsic value. Value investors use a variety of approaches in
this endeavor: some use discounted cash flow, some use relative valuation
and some look at book value.
• . The third step in the process is to compare the price to the intrinsic value
and that is where the MOS comes in: with a margin of safety of 40%, you
would only buy an asset if its price was more than 40% below its intrinsic
value.
Proposition 1: MOS comes into play at the end of the investment process,
not at the beginning.
Proposition 2: MOS does not substitute for risk assessment and intrinsic
valuation, but augments them.
Proposition 3: The MOS cannot and should not be a fixed number, but
should be reflective of the uncertainty in the assessment of intrinsic value.
Proposition 4: Being too conservative can be damaging to your long term
investment prospects.
a. Explicit versus implicit: There are plenty of analysts who steer away
from discounted cash flow valuation and use relative valuation
(multiples and comparable firms) because they are uncomfortable with
measuring risk explicitly. The danger with implicit assumptions is that
you can be lulled into a false sense of complacency, even as
circumstances change.
b. Quantitative versus qualitative: Analysts who use conventional risk
and return models are accused of being too number oriented and not
looking at qualitative factors enough. Perhaps, but the true test of
whether you can do valuation is whether you can take stories that you
hear about companies and convert them into numbers for the future.
c. Simple versus complicated: Sometimes, less is more and you get
your best assessments when you keep things simple.
When you buy a bond, you are promised a fixed payment (the interest
rate on the bond). The best case scenario for you is that you receive
that fixed payment. The worse case scenarios have a much wider
range, with the worst case scenario being that you do not receive any
of your promised cash flows.
Since the potential for upside is limited and for downside is very large,
we measure risk in bonds by looking at the downside or default risk.
Presentation of
additional
information to
S&P rating
committee:
Discussion and
vote to confirm
or modify rating.
If the firm has bonds outstanding, and the bonds are traded, the yield to
maturity on a long-term, straight (no special features) bond can be
used as the interest rate.
If the firm is rated, use the rating and a typical default spread on bonds
with that rating to estimate the cost of debt.
If the firm is not rated,
• and it has recently borrowed long term from a bank, use the interest rate
on the borrowing or
• estimate a synthetic rating for the company, and use the synthetic rating to
arrive at a default spread and a cost of debt