22-07-2024 · 市場觀點

Quant chart: Smaller caps, bigger potential?

Recent Robeco research tackles the question of whether smaller caps still have potential in today’s market environment, which has been dominated by mega caps in recent years. The answer? A resounding ‘yes’

    作者

  • Matthias Hanauer - Researcher

    Matthias Hanauer

    Researcher

  • Jan de Koning - Head of Quant Client Portfolio Management

    Jan de Koning

    Head of Quant Client Portfolio Management

  • Pim van Vliet - Head of Conservative Equities and Chief Quant Strategist

    Pim van Vliet

    Head of Conservative Equities and Chief Quant Strategist

Smaller caps have substantially underperformed their mega cap counterparts over the last decade. Remarkably, Apple alone is valued at over USD 3 trillion, exceeding the total market cap of the entire Russell 2000 Index.1 A long-term perspective, however, suggests that smaller caps have big potential.

Alternating index performance

Figure 1 compares the performance of the MSCI World Equal Weighted Index with the standard MSCI World Index. The former treats each stock equally, while the latter gives more weight to larger companies. This highlights the performance of the average stock relative to the value-weighted market, which has increasingly been dominated by mega caps in recent years.

Figure 1 | Relative performance of MSCI World Equal Weighted vs. MSCI World

Figure  1  |  Relative performance of MSCI World Equal Weighted vs. MSCI World

Source: Robeco, LSEG, MSCI. The figure shows the relative performance MSCI World Equal Weighted Index vs. the MSCI World Index. Performance is measured via the total return index and the sample period is May 1973 to June 2024.

When the relative performance is blue, the equal-weighted index is outperforming; when red, the value-weighted index is outperforming. As you can see, historically speaking equal-weighting has generally outperformed value-weighting, supported by research indicating that benefits from size, value, and short-term reversal exposures outweigh the detractions from lower momentum exposure.2 While equal-weighting typically delivers positive results, value-weighting significantly outperformed during the dot-com bubble (1994-1999) and from 2011 onwards.

Periods of underperformance for the equal-weighted portfolio often align with challenging times for active managers, who tend to deviate from value-weighted portfolios and are more tilted towards equal-weighted ones.

Skyrocketing valuations versus neglect

So, is this time different? When comparing the two periods of equal-weighted underperformance, we see remarkable parallels. Both periods are characterized by the rise of narratives around disruptive technologies fueling the emergence of new business models, leading to skyrocketing valuations in some market segments while investors neglect others.

Similar to today, equal-weighted portfolios fell out of favor at the end of the 1990s, just before a 10-year run of outperformance. This serves as a potent reminder that investors would do well not to fall prey to recency bias and overemphasize the recent outperformance of value-weighted indices. Historical, long-term evidence suggests that if (or rather, when) this trend reverses, a longer period often sets it, and equal-weighting outperforming value-weighting is more often normal than exceptional.

緊貼荷寶量化投資

獲取荷寶的電郵月報及最新觀點報告,構建最綠色的投資組合。

掌握新形勢

Small caps coming into their own again

In this context, it’s worth taking a closer look at the relative performance of small caps versus large caps. While we are skeptical about size as a standalone factor, as their higher returns also come with higher risk,3 we observe that the MSCI World Small Cap Index outperformed the MSCI World Index over the last 20+ years (see Figure 2). However, similar to the analysis above, the large-cap index has been difficult to beat in recent years, particularly after 2018.

Figure 2 | Relative performance and valuation of MSCI World Small Cap vs. MSCI World

Figure  2  |  Relative performance and valuation of MSCI World Small Cap vs. MSCI World

Source: Robeco, LSEG, MSCI. The figure shows the relative performance and valuation spread of the MSCI World Small Cap Index vs. the MSCI World Index. Performance is measured via the total return index, and the valuation spread is based on four bottom-up-calculated multiples (price-to-book, forward price-to-earnings, price-to-cash EPS, and price-to-dividend). For each multiple, the valuation ratio of the MSCI World Small Cap Index is divided by the same valuation ratio for the MSCI World Index. The sample period is March 2003 to June 2024.

Is the recent underperformance of small caps due to weaker fundamentals or large caps becoming more expensive? Figure 2 illustrates that changes in relative valuations between these segments have significantly impacted their relative performance. Small caps tend to outperform when they become relatively more expensive than large caps, and underperform when they become cheaper.

Therefore, the underperformance of small caps over the last six years has been more a function of changes in relative valuation than of deteriorating fundamentals. In fact, annual valuation changes account for over 70% of the variation in relative performance. The widening gap between performance and valuation suggests that without this disparity, small-cap outperformance would have been much higher over the full period.

Value spread full of opportunities

As of the end of June 2024, the value spread between small and large caps is at levels not seen in over 20 years (see the red dashed line), offering a multi-decade opportunity for investors. Specifically, small caps are trading at a discount of over 20% compared to large caps, based on a composite of valuation ratios (P/B, Fwd P/E, P/C, and 1/DY), while they have traded at a premium of up to 30% in the past.

This large and significant discount is consistent across different valuation ratios and cannot be attributed to differences in sector distributions between small and large caps. Since the valuation ratios also consider the (expected) profitability of different market segments, the argument that a decline in small-cap profitability might explain their underperformance is not supported.

The two graphical insights above highlight that investors should not overemphasize the recent outperformance of mega caps, as history and valuations show that this is more the exception than the rule. It’s worth considering a deviation from market cap weighting and having a more balanced exposure to both small and large caps in your portfolios to capture higher long-term returns.

Footnotes

1 Apple market cap as of the end of June 2024. Cf., FTSE Russel, 2024 Russell US Indexes reconstitution: summary of preliminary changes, 2024.
2 Cf. Swade, Nolte, Shackleton, Lohre, Why Do Equally Weighted Portfolios Beat Value-Weighted Ones?, Journal of Portfolio Management, 2023, 49 (5).
3 Cf., Blitz and Hanauer, Settling the Size Matter, Journal of Portfolio Management, 2021, 47 (2).

Quant Charts

免責聲明

本文由荷宝海外投资基金管理(上海)有限公司(“荷宝上海”)编制, 本文内容仅供参考, 并不构成荷宝上海对任何人的购买或出售任何产品的建议、专业意见、要约、招揽或邀请。本文不应被视为对购买或出售任何投资产品的推荐或采用任何投资策略的建议。本文中的任何内容不得被视为有关法律、税务或投资方面的咨询, 也不表示任何投资或策略适合您的个人情况, 或以其他方式构成对您个人的推荐。 本文中所包含的信息和/或分析系根据荷宝上海所认为的可信渠道而获得的信息准备而成。荷宝上海不就其准确性、正确性、实用性或完整性作出任何陈述, 也不对因使用本文中的信息和/或分析而造成的损失承担任何责任。荷宝上海或其他任何关联机构及其董事、高级管理人员、员工均不对任何人因其依据本文所含信息而造成的任何直接或间接的损失或损害或任何其他后果承担责任或义务。 本文包含一些有关于未来业务、目标、管理纪律或其他方面的前瞻性陈述与预测, 这些陈述含有假设、风险和不确定性, 且是建立在截止到本文编写之日已有的信息之上。基于此, 我们不能保证这些前瞻性情况都会发生, 实际情况可能会与本文中的陈述具有一定的差别。我们不能保证本文中的统计信息在任何特定条件下都是准确、适当和完整的, 亦不能保证这些统计信息以及据以得出这些信息的假设能够反映荷宝上海可能遇到的市场条件或未来表现。本文中的信息是基于当前的市场情况, 这很有可能因随后的市场事件或其他原因而发生变化, 本文内容可能因此未反映最新情况,荷宝上海不负责更新本文, 或对本文中不准确或遗漏之信息进行纠正。