Factor tilt strategies have generally produced less alpha in live portfolios compared to theoretical factor long–short paper portfolios and have largely been unsuccessful in replicating smart beta strategies. End-investors, consequently, often reap a much smaller return from factor exposure than they expect. The winning approach to factor investing is buying the losers: Past negative performance appears to be predictive of positive future returns.
(VIDEO) Why Factor Tilts Are Not Smart “Smart Beta”
We challenge the common view that “smart beta” strategies and factor tilts are the same. In fact, factor-replicated portfolios are poor substitutes for their smart beta counterparts. Performance is poor, turnover is high, and capacity is terrible. Why? Implementation details matter—both for performance and for trading costs.
(VIDEO) Alice in Factorland and the Incredible Shrinking Factor Return
Research by Rob Arnott, Vitali Kalesnik, and Lillian Wu shows that factor-tilt strategies suffer from substantial return slippage (vs. factor long–short paper portfolios) due to the real-world costs of implementation.