Excess-Return Index
Install and import#
npm install fintech-algorithmsimport { calculate } from "fintech-algorithms/index-and-benchmark-engineering/return-variants/excess-return-index";Signature#
calculate(data)Total return less a cash return, giving the return over funding. This is what a futures or swap position on the index actually earns, which is why structured products quote it.
Parameters#
| Name | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
data | { totalReturns: number[]; cashReturns: number[]; baseLevel: number } | Both series must cover identical periods; mismatched compounding frequencies are a silent error. baseLevel is the index value at the start of the series; it scales the level but never the returns. |
Returns#
{ excessReturns, levels, endingLevel }
Excess returns and the level series they generate.
Errors#
- When the two return series differ in length — throws
Complexity: time O(n),
space O(n).
Worked example#
verified This is the worked example published in the article, replayed by the test suite on every run. The output cannot drift.
Input#
{
"totalReturns": [0.005, -0.002, 0.008, 0.001, -0.004, 0.006],
"cashReturns": [0.00015, 0.00015, 0.00016, 0.00016, 0.00016, 0.00017],
"baseLevel": 1000
}Call#
calculate(data)Returns#
object with 3 fields: excessReturns, levels, endingLevel
{
"excessReturns": [0.004849, -0.00215, 0.007839, 0.00084, -0.004159, 0.005829],
"levels": [1000, 1004.849273, 1002.689171, 1010.548996, 1011.397722, 1007.19098],
"endingLevel": 1013.061905
}Diagrams#
Calculation flow#
Excess-Return Index calculation flow
flowchart LR
A["Point-in-time inputs"] --> B["Validate units and timing"]
B --> C{"Contract feasible?"}
C -->|No| D["Reject with reason"]
C -->|Yes| E["Calculate Excess-Return Index"]
E --> F["Recompute invariants"]
F --> G{"Checks pass?"}
G -->|No| D
G -->|Yes| H["Publish audited output"]
Excess-Return Index methodology state
stateDiagram-v2
[*] --> FrozenInputs
FrozenInputs --> Validated: contract passes
FrozenInputs --> Rejected: missing or infeasible
Validated --> Calculated: apply named rule
Calculated --> Audited: invariants pass
Calculated --> Rejected: invariant fails
Audited --> Published: version and timestamp recorded
Published --> Revised: approved correction
Revised --> FrozenInputs: rebuild from retained source state
How it works#
This page states the contract — how to call it correctly. The article explains the concept: why it works, and where it breaks.
References#
- S&P Dow Jones Indices Index Mathematics Methodology — S&P Dow Jones Indices
- S&P DJI Equity Indices Policies & Practices — S&P Dow Jones Indices
- FTSE Russell Capping Methodology — FTSE Russell, LSEG
- FTSE Russell Index Policy and Methodology Library — FTSE Russell, LSEG
- MSCI Global Investable Market Indexes Methodology Library — MSCI
- MSCI Minimum Volatility Indexes Methodology — MSCI
- S&P Risk Control 2.0 Indices Methodology — S&P Dow Jones Indices
- Principles for Financial Benchmarks — International Organization of Securities Commissions
- Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 — European Union
- Portfolio Selection — Harry Markowitz
- On the Properties of Equally-Weighted Risk Contributions Portfolios — Sébastien Maillard, Thierry Roncalli, and Jérôme Teïletche
- Fundamental Indexation — Robert Arnott, Jason Hsu, and Philip Moore
- FTSE Currency Hedging Methodology Overview — FTSE Russell, LSEG