Investment Risk | The Risk Institute

Four things you need to be doing with risk capital

January 5 2017August 26, 2019

Risk capital gives financial firms the cushion they need to protect liability holders from unexpected losses. Simply put, risk capital is your home-run money — funds that are invested in high-risk, high-reward investments. It reduces debt overhang that could limit borrowing capability and makes the costs of bankruptcy or firm distress more remote.

But there’s a catch — adding risk capital can only benefit firms’ balance sheets if it is allocated efficiently, according to a study co-authored by Isil Erel, Academic Director of the Risk Institute and Distinguished Professor of Finance at The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business.

The study, “A Theory of Risk Capital”, was co-written by Erel, Stewart C. Myers at MIT Sloan School of Management, and James A. Read Jr. at The Brattle Group Inc. in Cambridge, Mass. In the study, Erel, Myers, and Read focus on diversified firms with safe and risky businesses in their portfolios. The firms have customers and counterparties who are not willing to bear significant default risk.

Know if your company’s risk capital really working for you — here are the four things you need to know and be doing.

1) Risk capital must be allocated

To assess profitability,
To make investment decisions,
To price products and services, and
To set compensation.

2) Efficient risk capital allocation has to do two things: 1) there can be no risk that changes in the business portfolio that would affect the credit quality of the firm’s liabilities, and 2) firms have to avoid shifting risk capital from one business to another.

3) Of course, your business is doing all that already, so what do you really need to focus on? Your marginal default rate in order to allocate the risk capital.

The marginal default rate is the derivative of the value of the firm’s option to default with respect to a change in the business size, according to the study. The required amount of capital depends on the target credit quality and on the risk of the business portfolio. Businesses with the largest marginal default values should receive the most risk capital and be charged most of the costs of the risk capital.

4) Risk capital can help expand your business, but keep in mind that riskier businesses need free passes to expand, which will increase the default risk. These risky businesses might also operate at a lower credit quality.

To mitigate the effects on credit quality of the overall business, businesses shouldn’t use risk capital that’s fixed in the short term.

Remember, any asset or activity with uncertain returns requires risk capital. By focusing on marginal default values, credit quality, and risk within the business portfolio, firms can us risk capital efficiently to help improve their bottom lines.

If you want to dig deeper into this (and other) of the latest risk research, the full paper and accompanying translation are available on our website.

Show me the money

December 9 2016December 9, 2016

Are private equity investments worth the risk?

Question: Do private equity returns and diversification benefits adequately compensate investors?

This is the debate swirling in investment circles, and it’s the question that researchers Berk A. Sensoy from The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business and Nicholas P.B. Bollen from Vanderbilt University work toward answering in their paper, “How much for a haircut? Illiquidity, secondary markets and the value of private equity.”

Private equity investments have illiquidity and market risks related to the timing of capital flows and require management fees that are usually two percent of investors’ capital commitments per year, plus performance fees typically equal to 20 percent of the profits. According to the researchers, the returns and diversification benefits do justify the risks and costs borne by investors.

The drawback is that secondary sales could result in discounts from fund net asset values of as much as 50 percent during financial crises. During other times, the discount could be 20 percent. Despite these discounts, the study finds that the historical performance and diversification benefits of venture capital and buyout funds, the main types of private equity firms, are sufficient to justify their risks and fees. For example, buyout funds have on average outperformed public equities by about 3% per year.

So what percentage of your portfolio should you allocate to private equity?

If you’re an extremely conservative investor with an extreme risk aversion, the researchers recommend that you should allocate no more than about 10 percent of your portfolio to private equity investments.

If you’re an investor with low to moderate risk aversion, you can comfortably allocate up to 40 percent of your portfolio.

To set yourself up for the best chance of success, the study notes that you should be particularly willing to take the risk of private equity investments if you can access average-performing funds.

While this study will certainly not end the debate, Bollen and Sensoy’s study shows that the returns and diversification benefits of private equity appear sufficient to compensate for the risks and costs for limited partners who have a broad range of risk preferences at portfolio allocations typically observed in practice. The findings offer limited partners a guide in making their portfolio allocation decisions.

If you want to dig deeper into this (and other) of the latest risk research, the full paper and accompanying translation are available on our website.

Brexit’s Anticipated Impact on U.S. Middle Market Businesses

July 18 2016

By Philip S. Renaud II, MS, CPCU
Executive Director, The Risk Institute
The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business

Despite the clear vote by British voters to exit the EU, the impact of the vote on both Britain and the European Union is anything but clear. Policymakers are now required to focus attention on some very uncertain and unsettling repercussions.

In what is very likely the earliest data anywhere about the impact of Brexit on U.S. companies, the National Center for the Middle Market at The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business, has just released the results of its survey studying the impact of Brexit on companies within the Middle Market segment. The results have indicated the following:

About half of middle market companies say Brexit would have little or no impact on their business.
The other half, however feel that they will be impacted. One in eight companies foresee an extremely significant impact.
Manufacturers will be impacted more than the market as a whole.
Approximately 28% of Middle Market companies say they will reduce investment in the U.K., while approximately 21% will reduce investment elsewhere in the E.U.
Much of that money will remain in the U.S., with approximately 26% say they will increase investment in the homeland. Likewise, Asia may also be a direct beneficiary of investment.
The study also revealed that an impact on sales and procurement may be seen. Companies have indicated that they will purchase less from Britain given the reduction in British Sterling.
An expectation also may exist that increased “red tape” may be an indirect result of Brexit. Questions remain about any changes to customs, tariff on imported goods, quota restrictions, etc., as well as overall changes in import/export trade regulation in the short and longer term.

The complete study can be found at https://go.osu.edu/BrexitMidMarket.

We are appreciative of our partnership with the National Center for the Middle Market and for their foresight and timing in issuing this informative finding.

The Risk Institute at The Ohio State University Fisher College of Business brings together practitioners and researchers to engage in risk-centered conversations and to exchange ideas and strategies on integrated risk management. Visit The Risk Institute website for more information about how you can join the conversation about enterprise risk management.