BibTeX
@MISC{Davis08londonand,
author = {E Philip Davis and Yu-wei Hu},
title = {London and},
year = {2008}
}
Share
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
OpenURL
Abstract
We investigate the performance of Canadian pension funds relative to those from the UK and US, in the light of the ongoing quantitative asset restrictions that still apply in Canada, compared with the purer prudent person approach in the UK and US. We find that although Canadian funds often obtain better combinations of return and risk, returns are often less than could be obtained given financial market conditions, as shown by dummy portfolios split evenly between bonds and equities, or diversified into real estate, as well as mean-variance optimal portfolios. In contrast, UK and US funds typically outperform such benchmarks. Combined with criticisms of specific Canadian regulations in the light of finance theory and empirical evidence, the paper makes a case for removal of residual quantitative restrictions in Canada, and their replacement by sole prudent person regulations.
Keyphrases
purer prudent person approach u fund canadian pension fund canadian fund empirical evidence mean-variance optimal portfolio specific canadian regulation financial market condition real estate sole prudent person regulation residual quantitative restriction dummy portfolio ongoing quantitative asset restriction finance theory
