Resumen
We composed and contrasted stock returns for large capitalized companies (S&P 500) with returns of real estate investment trusts using the Financial Times equity, mortgage and composite indexes. The time period which was chosen was 2000 through 2011. This period is significant because up until the crash of 2008, the real estate bubble was forming. Major real estate problems were already in force in 2007, but serious deflation really did not fully commence until the stock market crash in the late summer and early fall of 2008. With such heavy doses of deflation, one would think real estate was doomed. We found that average returns for the S&P 500 during this time period was 2.44% vs. a 13.73% average return for the composite Real Estate Investment Trusts (REIT) index. We calculated the geometric returns of .0054% for the S&P 500 vs. 11.21% for the composite REIT. This geometric return calculation was necessary because of many negative returns over a short period of time. The real surprise came when we risk adjusted our numbers using coefficients of variation. Using average returns, we found that the S&P 500 took 7.9959 units of risk for each unit of return, while the composite REIT composite only took 1.6497 units of risk per return. Even the SE Mortgage index only took 2.4914 units of risk per unit of return, while the Equity REIT index took on 1.5744 units of risk per return. Utilizing geometric returns or compounded rates of return, we found a coefficient of variation (CV) of 9.755 for the S&P 500, where the composite REIT experienced a 2.0205 CV and the FTSE Mortgage index showed a 4.0023 CV. Even though mortgage REITs took a greater hit than equity REITs, we still found a favorable relationship of risk and return vs. investment in common stocks. Money managers, who were properly diversified, rode out the financial storm much more comfortably with REITs as part of their diversification parameters.