A Tale of Two Benchmarks

12 Pages Posted: 24 Jun 2009

See all articles by Aye M. Soe

Aye M. Soe

Standard & Poor's

Srikant Dash

Standard & Poor's

Date Written: June 22, 2009

Abstract

It is well documented that the returns of two leading small-cap benchmarks, the S&P SmallCap 600 and the Russell 2000, have diverged over the last 15 years. In this study, we used attribution frameworks to understand the return differential between the two indices. The analysis shows that approximately half of the excess returns are attributable to the impact of the July effect, which is caused by the annual Russell reconstitution in June. We expect this effect to moderate over time due to enhancements made to Russell’s rebalancing process. The remaining excess return can be explained by the following: (1) The results from Brinson performance attribution model suggest that while there is little impact of sector allocation between the S&P SmallCap 600 and the Russell 2000, the composition of stocks within individual sectors contributes significantly to the performance differential. (2) The results from the Fama-French Three Factor model confirm that compared to the Russell 2000, the S&P SmallCap 600 has a higher exposure to value risk. (3) The higher value tilt is affected through the S&P SmallCap 600 requirement that additions must have positive earnings. In this paper, we demonstrate that such profitability screens have added to performance in a neutral universe.

Keywords: performance attribution

JEL Classification: C60

Suggested Citation

Soe, Aye M. and Dash, Srikant, A Tale of Two Benchmarks (June 22, 2009). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1423907 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1423907

Aye M. Soe (Contact Author)

Standard & Poor's ( email )

London EC2M 7NJ
United Kingdom

Srikant Dash

Standard & Poor's ( email )

London EC2M 7NJ
United Kingdom

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
142
Abstract Views
1,240
Rank
364,105
PlumX Metrics