Newell, G and Karantonis, A (2003) The predictive accuracy of investor sentiment for commercial property in Australia. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 8(3), pp. 117-128. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Accurate property forecasting is essential for effective asset allocation in investment portfolios, as well as within a property investment strategy. Using the Jones Lang LaSalle investor sentiment surveys over 1991-2000, commercial property investor sentiment is compared with actual property performance to assess the predictive accuracy of investor sentiment for commercial property in Australia. Investor sentiment is seen to be more effective in assessing property sectors than geographic regions, as well as being more accurate for those property markets for which institutional investors have their largest property portfolio allocations. Naïve measures of investor sentiment are also shown to perform at least as well as the current investor sentiment procedures, as well as there being little evidence of improved accuracy for investor sentiment in recent years.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | investor sentiment, commercial property, predicted versus actual performance, accuracy, benchmarking, naïve strategies, Australia |
| Index terms: | property market, strategy, survey, accuracy, property investment, benchmarking, commercial property, evidence, Australia, investor, forecasting |
| Subjects: | construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, economic analysis, Geography, data collection methods, real estate economics, prediction and forecasting, performance measurement, management, professional development, sociology |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Procurement, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here