Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gyourko, J.
Right arrow Articles by Linneman, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 27, No. 4, 497-508 (1990)
DOI: 10.1080/00420989020080471
© 1990 Urban Studies Journal Limited

Analysing the Risk of Income-producing Real Estate

Joseph Gyourko

Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

Peter Linneman

Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA, Wharton Real Estate Center

Institutional investors typically allocate under 5 per cent of their portfolios to income-producing real estate, yet the results of most academic studies imply that far larger allocations are optimal. One widespread argument is that the conflict between observed behaviour and scholarly prediction is spurious in the sense that it arises due to the use of faulty appraisal-based data. While lagged appraisals undoubtedly do smooth real estate return data, we argue that two other factors help explain the low measured variance of income-producing property returns and the low covariances of appraisal-based index returns with the stock market. The first is that most appraisal-based series are unlevered while the Standard and Poor 500 firms are approximately 50 per cent levered. A synthetic leveraging (i.e. gearing) of the Frank Russell Company real property series almost doubles the variance in its returns. The second factor flows from real estate market fundamentals. Because rents basically are a fixed cost to tenant firms, rental flows on existing buildings should be more stable than are the firms' cash flows. This implies that real property returns would not co-vary strongly with the stock market.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?