MAM
FMCGs were top TV advertisers in week 9
BENGALURU: 10 FMCG players were top television advertisers in week 9 of 2017 (Saturday, 25 February to Friday, March 3, 2017) Top 10 Advertisers *Across Genre : All India (U+R) : 2+ Individuals as per . Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) data. FMCG major Hindustan Lever Limited (Lever) was the top advertiser with 1,25,370 television ad insertions or spots during the week under consideration.
In terms of brands, six FMCG brands, one each from politics, mobile banking, mobile apps and jewellery genres were advertised on television the most in week 9 of 2017 as per BARC data for Top 10 Brands *Across Genre : All India (U+R) : 2+ Individuals.
This paper must be read with a caveat: It deals only with the players present in BARC’s top 10 lists of advertisers and brandsper week. The sums/percentages of other advertisers/brands other than those indicated in BARC’s top 10 lists of have not been considered/mentioned in this paper during the period under consideration and those numbers could be more/higher.
During the first 8 weeks of 2017, 17 advertisers (a maximum possible of 80 for 8 weeks) were present in the top 10 list of advertisers and 42 brands (a maximum possible of 80 for 8 weeks) were present in the list at least once during the 8 weeks. In week 9, one new advertiser–Coca Cola India Limited was added to the top 10 advertisers list to take the count to of top TV advertisers in weeks 1 to 9 of 2017 to 18 advertisers. Also, one new brand – Pears entered the top 10 brands in terms of TV ad spots list in week 9 to take the total number of most advertised brands in the first nine weeks of 2017to 43.
Though the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) dropped to the third position in week 9 in terms of television ad insertions of brands in a week in week 9 with 7,920 spots, overall, it topped the list during the first nine weeks of 2017 with 71,450 insertions.
Mobile Banking brand Airtel Payments Bank was the most advertised brand on television in week 9 of 2017 with 10,673 insertions, followed by FMCG Oral care brand Close Up Ever Fresh with 8,430 insertions in week 9. As mentioned above, the BJP was the third most advertised brand in week 9. Please refer to the charts below for the top 10 brands in week 9 of 2017. Three brands entered top 10 brands list in week 9 as compared to week 8 – They were – GoodKnight Active Plus, Pears and Dr Ortho Oil & Capsule. The brands that exited the list from week 8 were Jio Fi, Vivo V5 Plus and Dettol Liquid Soap. Among the 43 brands in the lists over 9 weeks’ Surf Excel Easy Wash was present in 6 lists in the first nine weeks of 2017, including week 9. In terms of frequency, the BJP was next with a presence in 5 weeks of the nine during the first nine weeks of 2017.
Risk and return maintain inverse proportionality within mutual funds – higher potential rewards accompany elevated volatility, while stability demands lower expectations. SEBI’s Riskometer (1-5 scale) standardizes visualization, but quantitative metrics reveal nuanced relationships across categories and market cycles.
Fundamental Risk-Return Relationship
Equity funds (Riskometer 4-5) deliver historical 12-16% CAGR alongside 18-25% standard deviation—large-cap 15% volatility, small-cap 30%+. Debt funds (1-2) yield 6-8% with 2-6% volatility. Hybrids (3) average 9-12% returns, 10-14% volatility.
Sharpe ratio measures return per risk unit – equity 0.7-0.9, debt 0.5-0.7 over complete cycles. Higher risk categories compensate through return premium capturing economic growth.
Volatility Metrics Explained
Standard Deviation: Annual NAV return dispersion—equity 18-22%, debt 4-6%.
Maximum Drawdown: Peak-to-trough losses – equity 50%+ (2008), debt 8-12%.
Beta: Market sensitivity – equity 0.9-1.1, debt 0.1-0.3.
Sortino Ratio focuses downside volatility—equity 1.0-1.3 favoring recoveries.
Value at Risk (VaR) estimates 95% confidence, worst 1-month loss: equity 10-15%, debt 1-2%.
Category Risk-Return Profiles
Large-cap equity: 12-14% CAGR, 15% volatility, Sharpe 0.8.
Mid/small-cap: 15-18%, 22-30% volatility, Sharpe 0.7.
Corporate bond debt: 7-8%, 4% volatility, Sharpe 0.6.
Liquid funds: 6.5%, <1% volatility—capital preservation.
Credit risk debt: 8.5%, 6% volatility—yield pickup.
Hybrids: 10-12%, 12% volatility—balanced exposure.
Review types of mutual funds specifications confirming mandated asset allocations driving profiles.
Historical Risk-Return Tradeoffs (2000-2025)
Complete cycles: Equity 14% CAGR/18% volatility; 60/40 equity/debt 11%/11% volatility; debt 7.5%/5% volatility. Bull phases (2013-2021): equity 18%, debt 8%. Bear markets (2008, 2020): equity -50%/+80% swings, debt -10%/+10%.
Inflation-adjusted: Equity 8% real CAGR; debt 1.5% real—growth funding requires equity allocation.
Risk Capacity Assessment Framework
Short-term goals (1-3 years): Riskometer 1-2 (liquid/debt), 2-4% real returns. Medium-term (5-7 years): Level 3 (hybrid), 4-6% real. Long-term (10+ years): Level 4-5 (equity), 6-9% real.
Personal factors: Age (younger = higher risk), income stability, emergency fund coverage, other assets. Drawdown tolerance—20% comfortable vs 40% discomfort signals capacity limits.
Portfolio Construction Principles
Diversification: 60/40 equity/debt reduces volatility 40% versus equity-only while capturing 80% returns.
Correlation: Equity/debt 0.3 average enables smoothing.
Rebalancing: Annual drift correction sells outperformers (equity +25%), buys underperformers (debt -5%).
Style balance: Large-cap stability offsets mid-cap growth volatility.
Quantitative Risk Management Tools
Sharpe Ratio: >1.0 indicates efficient risk-taking.
Information Ratio: Alpha per tracking error.
Downside Deviation: Focuses losses only.
Stress Testing: 2008 scenario simulations reveal portfolio behavior extremes.
Conclusion
Higher mutual fund risk levels correlate with elevated return potential – equity 12-16% amid 18-25% volatility versus debt 6-8%/4-6%. Risk capacity matching, category diversification, rebalancing discipline, and quantitative metric interpretation align portfolios with personal tolerance across economic cycles.
Disclaimer: Investments in the securities market are subject to market risk, read all related documents carefully before investing.
