Shariah Based Financial Instruments Forecast - Research Paper Example

SHARIAH BASED FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS FORECAST By In order to study how volatile the Sukuk,an Islamic Financial instrument, was, this study considered Dow Jones Sukuk Grade Total Return Indices of 1-3, 3-5 and 7-10 year investment periods. Using MS Excel to compute monthly averages from daily returns and SPSS moving average (MA) function, a base historical data considering 12 months (n = 12) was quantitatively forecasted to predict the performance of the indices for 11 years. Results Evaluate that 3-5 year investments were more reliable than 7-10 year investments. Additionally, using benchmarking technique, yield to worst (YTW) to indicate the lowest expected yield, it was observed that a normalized value of 2.57% was at stake hence, investments were likely to yield 97.43% of the expected value at maturity. Based on 1-3 year investment and normal investments, balanced scorecard analysis Evaluateed that variable-income investment was much flexible but volatile to market shocks. On the other hand, it is observed that long-term fixed-income securities are much reliable but earn little income since they are not flexible. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 3 RATIONALE 4 OBJECTIVES OF THE PAPER 5 LITERATURE REVIEW 5 Instrument 5 Sukuk Investment Grade Total Return Index 5 Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 1-3 Year Total Return Index 6 Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 3-5 Year Total Return Index 7 Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 7-10 Year Total Return Index 7 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS TOOLS 8 Benchmarking 8 Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade Year Total Return Index 8 Yield to Worst 9 Balanced Scorecard 9 RESEARCH ARTICLES 11 METHODOLOGY 11 Data Collection 11 Forecast Timeframe 12 Data Analysis 12 Forecast Interpretation 13 CONCLUSION 14 References 15 APPENDIX A: Forecast Output 1 17 APPENDIX B: Graph 1: 3-5 and 7-10 Year Total Return Index 18 APPENDIX C: Alternative Interpretation to Graph 1 19 INTRODUCTION In the United States, the population of Muslims has increased dramatically since the past twenty years. Further, there are strong indications that the wealth of the population has also grown more rapidly. In turn, the United States has developed a market for financial and banking alternatives that are compliant with the Shariah principles, as well as the religious and moral law of the Islam. The concept of Shariah compliant or Islamic finance is typically based on the core tenets of the Islamic religion pertaining to property rights, economic and social justice, and distribution of wealth as well as its governance. Among the fundamental features of the Islamic finance system is the Prohibition of Gharar (ambiguous deals and contracts) and Riba that is interested (Kabir and Mahlkrecht 201, 74). According to proponents, Islamic finance significantly contributes to the global financial system stability. Apparently, the performance as well as the relative stability of the Islamic banks and financial institutions frequently originate from the unique features of the financial instruments they provide. The Islamic finance system insists on asset backing as well as the principle of risk sharing. This helps in ensuring the direct connection between the activities of the real sector and financial transactions. In this case, this paper focuses on quantitative forecasting and analyzing volatility of Sukuk financial instrument by considering benchmarking and perspectives of balanced scorecard as the analytical financial tools. RATIONALE The world economy relies on the inputs of various business entities that join financial power to fund, purchase, and market various financial instruments around the globe to support social development as well as offset market volatility. With reference to Islamic financial market, it is observed that other financial markets depend on this particular entity as instruments such as the Sukuk trade at the same level as corporate bonds and government treasuries under economies such as the UK and the US. In this regard, the rationale of this paper is to evaluate how the Sukuk stands up within the financial markets and how viable the instrument is based on applicability and the role played by financial tools related to the Sukuk and other financial instruments. Additionally, since the Sukuk is constrained by the Shariah Law, this paper also aims at assessing whether the constraint affects the financial instrument any differently within the global markets and/or financial index markets. OBJECTIVES OF THE PAPER The objectives of the this study is to assess how financial instruments based on Shariah jurisdictions enable investors and securities issuers to; 1. Interpret historical data in order to make investment decisions 2. Evaluate how Shariah compliant financial instrument fairs in the global market 3. Evaluate how relevant financial analysis tools, benchmarking and balanced scorecards can provide insight to influence investment decisions 4. To evaluate how volatile the Dow Jones’ investment Grade Total Return Index will perform from 2015 to 2026 LITERATURE REVIEW Instrument Sukuk Investment Grade Total Return Index Investment grades are ways that a corporate or municipal bonds are rated with regards to performance within the bond market. With reference to Sukuk which is an Islamic financial instrument offers various options for investors to take part in the bond market (Partney, 2007). However, since Sukuk is compliant to the Shariah jurisdiction which consider the ethics, culture, and religious beliefs, the rating of the instrument must adhere to the underlying guidelines. In this case, the Sukuk investment grade is a method of rating the Sukuk as an Islamic financial instrument. Based on the maturity period of the instrument, various categorizations of the instrument are applied in order to interpret how successful the instrument is within the global market (S&P Dow Jones Indices, 2015a). An investment grade is an indicator of performance highlighting how a municipal of corporate bond trading. However, when considering that government bonds and treasuries can also be rated under the same conditions, they are normally excluded as these hold the highest grades. Different rating companies such as S&P rate corporate and municipal bonds using upper and lower-case letters such as AAA and AA to indicate high quality credit (S&P Dow Jones Indices, 2015a; Farooq, 2013). Other ratings include AA and BBB which indicate medium quality credit. For other grades such as B, BB, CCC and so on indicate low quality credit and are referred to as junk bonds (Bethel, 2007). For investors looking forward to investing in the bond market, it is the ratings that determine their volatility. Volatility is a term used to define the level of risk that is associated with any financial instrument measured regionally or over a defined period. Since Sukuk financial instrument is used globally in accordance to the Islamic jurisdiction, the geographical factor of rating is normalized and, therefore, applicable in any region that embraces the Shariah compliance. Under these conditions, indices such as the Dow Jones Investment Index make use of timeframes to replace assess the volatility of the bonds over differing maturity periods (Esters, & Penrose, 2006). Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 1-3 Year Total Return Index With respect to the Sukuk investment grading, Dow Jones provides investors with various options of investing in the bond market. Among these options is the 1 to 3 year investment. However, since investment in a bond is mostly the decision of the investor, the Dow Jones Sukuk investment grading for 1-3 year bonds Evaluates historical performance of the index. In this case, when considering the ratings from S&P, Fitch, and/or Moody’s in cases where multiple ratings are available, investors will Dow Jones will consider the lowest rating to provide investors with authentic information of the performance of the bonds (Hassan and Lewis, 2007). Thus, the consideration of 1 to 3 years period aims at Evaluateing how bonds maturing between one year and three years’ period will perform with time. However, the Dow Jones approach provides the historical data on the total return of the Sukuk for bonds within the 1 to 3 years’ period. Under the 1-3 year bonds, the period is considered short but other options are at the disposal of investors such as bonds maturing or sold by the investors within a year (S&P Dow Jones Indices, 2015b). Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 3-5 Year Total Return Index When considering the movement of the Sukuk instrument, two considerations are vital in the analysis of time-sensitive volatility. Firstly, the securities’ market is affected by global financial impacts such as financial crises. In this case, the rate of exchange between various currencies across the globe have the potential impact of determining the returns from any given securities’ maturity period. Under the 3-5-years’ investment, higher risks are involved as market changes and financial impacts can affect the returns. However, differentiating government and corporate securities considered the guarantees involved. Government bonds and treasuries are stable and cannot be affected by market or financial issues facing a region or happening over a defined period. However, based on the changes in market and economic status of the investment region, corporate securities such as the 3-5 year bonds have the potential of promoting negative returns (S&P Dow Jones Indices, 2015c). Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade 7-10 Year Total Return Index The 7-10-year Sukuk Investment aims at tracking the performance of global fixed income securities under the Shariah compliant Islamic financial market. As confirmed under the 1-3 and 3-5 year securities’ maturity period, the 7-10 year period falls under the same risks. However, while there are variable-income investments, the fixed income securities under the Dow Jones Sukuk investment indicates predetermined income that voids the risks. However, based on concerns such as the rate of interest, fixed income securities are less profitable than variable-income securities. The difference between the two types of securities is majorly based on options (S&P Dow Jones Indices, 2015d). The option to invest in long-period securities is to ensure that a certain return is guaranteed after the set period. The option of investing in short-period securities is to ensure flexibility such that, based on returns and market performance, an investor can choose to reinvest or to withdraw his/her investment. The advantage of each timeframe of investment is associated with factors such as flexibility for short-period variable-income and guaranteed fixed return for long-term fixed income securities. The disadvantages of each is that the short-term investment is variable and low-to-high-returns can be expected which may not satisfy the financial goals of the investors. On the other hand, the long-term investment on fixed income securities lacks flexibility and investors cannot access the returns of their investment until the defined period is over (Chapra, 2008). FINANCIAL ANALYSIS TOOLS Benchmarking Benchmarking is a financial analysis tool that is used in the assessment of how investments as well as performances meet a certain criteria. For instance, assuming that a new company enters the Islamic market trading items new to the market, its performance may not be internally met if financial mission of the company is not clear. In this case, using marketing skills and knowledge, the company will research the dynamics of the market such as competition and volatility then use that information to grade itself. The grading of capabilities and financial power aids the company in positioning. Once positioned where it would perform and compete positively, the company has to set financial standards that is cannot perform below. In this case, under the Dow Jones Sukuk Investment, benchmarking is considered when applying two measures. This involve the annual total return index and the Yield to Worst (YTW) measures. Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Grade Year Total Return Index The Dow Jones Sukuk Investment Year Total Return index considered the variable-income short-term investments. Based on the periodic track record of these securities’ returns, investors are able to forecast how the securities under long-term maturity periods will perform. Hence, when considering the investor side, the short-term variable-income is considered a benchmark. The applicability of this argument is confirmed in the research method of moving average (MA) which indicates MA figures exceeding the base historical data with only one month. Based on yearly returns, short-term variable income trend is used to indicate that future investments should not go below the record of the benchmarked securities (Partney, 2007). Yield to Worst In benchmarking, an entity looks forward to performing above a certain set level. YTW is an example of a benchmarking tool which is used to measure how potential a bond issuer is capable of defaulting. YTW is defined as the lowest yield that can be received under the worst-case scenario. In this case, the worst case scenario is considered the benchmark which investors cannot go below. In order to cater for possible defaulting, YTW considers assumptions made to calculate the worst that can happen if the bond issuer opts to call, sink funds, or prepay (Investopedia, 2015). Thus, by using the YTW tool, investors and bond issuers are able to manage risks and ensure that requirements in income terms are met even in the worst possible cases. Therefore, YTW is a best-fit model for benchmarking to ensure that, without necessarily defaulting, the lowest potential yield is within the income expectations of the investor Balanced Scorecard A balanced scorecard can be envisioned from two perspectives without considering what it use is. The first perspective is from management point of view which suggests that the tool is used to either monitor or control performance. The second perspective involves that of an investor which considers the potential and likely expectations from a trading company. Based on the two perspective, the balanced scorecard is considered a financial tool for evaluating how four internal and external perspectives affect performance as well as interest in investment (UCOP, 2015). The four perspectives of the balanced scorecard involve business, learning, customer, and financial considerations. Under business perspective, the management considers how well the operations of a company or a business entity fits within the stated mission. Since corporate bonds or securities are issued by companies to investors, it is the business perspective that makes use of YTW to avoid defaulting. On the other hand, investors observe the stability of the business environment and operations of a company to make their decisions on whether to invest or not to. Secondly, under the learning and growth perspective, the company seeks to nurture individuals within the company that are able to meet the company’s financial mission. When observed from management and investor points of view, the learning and growth perspective is applied to prevent the potential securities’ issuer from defaulting and also prevents investors from investing in junk bonds. Thirdly, the customer perspective is majorly not the concern of an investor but rather that of management. To ensure that operations are able to meet financial projections of the company or corporation, management must provide service or trade products that will sustain the mission. However, based on the accessibility of market information on the same, investors will make their decisions based on the reception of the corporation in the business world. Thus, the choice of investment on varying securities’ maturity period is determined by how investors interpret the relationship between the bond issuer and its source of income. Finally, the financial perspective, which is every investor’s major concern deals with accuracy and timely provision of financial data. However, while accuracy and timely provisions are necessary, the term ‘balanced’ in the balanced scorecard requires the information provided to balance with that in other perspectives. The applicability of the financial perspective in decision making considers financial performance over several trading periods such yearly, semi-annually, and quarterly. This information is necessary in the Sukuk market index as it Evaluates what securities are more secure and which ones are highly risky under the conditions of fixed and variability of income (Ejaz, & 2014). RESEARCH ARTICLES Author/Editor Relevance Chapra, U. 2008. This article discusses the effects of global financial crises and how they contribute to market volatility. Farooq, M 2013 The article provides insight in the profitability forecasting methods for disaggregated earnings Esters, C. & Penrose, J. 2006, Provides information on how Sukuk instrument can be rated within the Islamic context. Hassan, M, & Lewis, M 2007, This article provides information relevant to the Islamic financial system and Evaluate how it differs from other financial systems Kabir, H., & M. Mahlkrecht, eds. 2011 This article discusses the Islamic capital market and Evaluates the different strategies used in financial analysis, forecasting, and management. Ejaz, N, & Khan, H 2014, This article offers insight regarding the movement of financial instruments as well as the impact of financial crises within the securities market. METHODOLOGY Data Collection Data was collected from an online secondary source at us.spindices.com which featured the Dow Jones Sukuk indices for 1-3, 3-5, and 7-10 years securities’ maturity periods. The data source provides both graphical and table representations which range from daily to 5-year periods. Data in this case is presented in terms of US$ but is verified to comply with Shariah compliance requirements. From the secondary database, data is imported in MS Excel indicating the daily indices from where it is further primarily analyzed using the mean/average function of MS Excel. The mean/averaging approach was employed to ensure that data in days was converted to months so as to set the base historical data for setting up the data required for forecasting. Additionally, the data was further exported from MS Excel into SPSS where variable properties were set to nominal for date and scale for the rest in order to ensure that data was compatible with SPSS. Forecast Timeframe After the computation of a year-long set of variables (May 19, 2014 to May 18, 2015) in days to monthly averages in MS Excel, the data, now comprising of only 12 complete months considered timeframe as the dependent variable while the securities’ maturity periods and the Yield to Worst were considered independent variables. Data was imported into the statistical software SPSS for quantitative analysis. In order to perform forecasts, a timeframe of 11 years into the future was considered using moving average method of level 2. This approach aimed offsetting a possible accuracy issue from the computed monthly averages. A level 2 moving average considered the average of 2 numerical values. However, since days were averaged into monthly values, considering a level 2 moving average takes the average of all trading days within the 2months. Hence the justification of the approach is to ensure that data does not sway far from actual figures in case other MA levels such as 3, 4, 5 or semi-annually were considered. Data Analysis Data analysis considered two levels. The first level was computing daily index values into monthly averages from May 19, 2014 to May 18, 2015 in order to acquire the base historical information for forecast analysis. The averaging of monthly daily averages was done in MS Excel since the exported raw data from the source was in Excel file. The average monthly values were then exported in to SPSS for forecasting. Forecasting considering moving average of level two which aimed at showing the selected independent variables faired for the next 11 years. However, since the analysis did not consider limit of outcome, forecasts were generated for 168 years (equivalent to 2016 months). However, this SPSS output was truncated to 11 years from May 18, 2015. Forecast Interpretation As indicated in output 1 in Appendix A, the red line indicates the base historical data while the blue lines indicate the predicted output. As observed from the output, 3-5 and 7-10 maturity periods for the returns have a steady increasing trend while the base historical data is indicated as red dots within the origin of the data. However, the output for 1-3 year return index as well as the non-timed returned do not Evaluate predicted future returns as these are considered thresholds or benchmarks in the model hence the availability of only the base historical account. Under the YTW output chart, it is seen under output 1 that Yield to Worst normalized at 0.0257 which translates to 2.57%. In this case, 2.57% YTW Evaluates that the worst case scenario in this model will, for the next 21 years, (the output date indicates Januaries of every year for 21 counts) consider a lowest expected yield of 97.43% of the current expected yield. Graphical representation under Appendix B indicates that the maximum expected yield for the 3-5 and the 7-10 year is slightly above $150 and slightly more than $200 respectively. However, for a financial analyst, the two variables indicate that during the same period, such as January of the 11th year (indicated as January 13000) the 3-5 and the 7-10 year return indices will be slightly above $130 and slightly below $180 respectively. In this case, it is more significant to invest in the 3-5 year maturity bonds within the 11 years then it is to invest in the 7-10 year fixed-income securities within the same period. LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH The limitations of this study involve the original data format which was in days and had to be averaged into monthly figures. This approach does not consider variations in return values within the month and may, therefore, interfere with seasonal predictions such as Easter and Christmas months. Secondly, the YTW output normalizes at 2.57% indicating a stability that does not par with the changing 3-5 and 7-10 year returns’ values. However, this can be interpreted to mean that the bond issuers, with reference the return trends may incur a stable business and financial output whereby they use the YTW of 2.57% as their benchmark to entice investors. CONCLUSION Based on the Shariah compliance of the Sukuk financial instrument, benchmarking using normal Dow Jones’ grade total return index and the yield to worst indicate that 3-5 year investment in securities is more grossing than the 7-10 year provided that each under a forecast period of 11 years will have a total return yield of above $130 and slightly below $180. Based on the consideration of balanced scorecard, the security of a financial security lies in its ability to generate positive returns after maturity. Fixed income securities such as the 7-10-year maturity period bonds yield small return but are guaranteed to yield the predetermined interest. On the other hand, since long periods invoke changes in the global financial markets, it is observed that short maturing periods for securities play important roles in ensuring flexibility of the investors and long-term financial effects such as crises can be avoided. Based on the data analysis and forecast output in this study, it was observed that, the 3-5 year maturity period can consider two 5-year maturity periods or three 3-year maturity periods. Cumulatively, these fair far better than the one 7- or 10- year maturity period under the 7-10-year securities. Hence fore, for investors, it is more financially beneficial to consider a shorter period under the current model. References Chapra, U. 2008. “The Global Financial Crisis: Can Islamic Finance Help Minimize the Severity and Frequency of Such a Crisis in the Future?” Paper for the Forum on the Global Financial Crisis held at the Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah Bethel, J. (2007). Policy Issues Raised by Structured Products. New Financial Instruments and Institutions. Brookings Institution Press, Nomura Institute of Capital Markets Research pp. 167-192. Partney, F. (2007). Financial Instruments and Institutions; Gap Filling, Hedge Funds, and Financial Innovation. Brookings Institution Press, Nomura Institute of Capital Markets; pp.101-140. Research (November 2007) Ejaz, N, & Khan, H 2014, The Underlying Cause of the Global Financial Crisis: An Islamic Perspective, Economic Papers, 33, 1, pp. 45-54, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 April 2015. Esters, C. & Penrose, J. 2006, Two Aspects of Rating Sukuk: Shariah Compliance and Transaction Security. January 13. Ratings Direct. Standards and Poor Farooq, M 2013, Forecasts of Future Profitability based on Disaggregated Earnings: A Comparative Analysis of Islamic and Conventional Banks, Journal of Managerial Sciences, 7, 2, pp. 255-272 Hassan, M, & Lewis, M 2007, Islamic finance: A system at the crossroads?’ Thunderbird International Business Review, 49, 2, pp. 151-160 Kabir, H., and M. Mahlkrecht, eds. 2011, Islamic Capital Markets: Products and Strategies. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons. S&P Dow Jones Indices. (2015a). Dow Jones Sukuk Total Return Investment Grade Index. Accessed online on May 20, 2015 from http://us.spindices.com/indices/fixed-income/dow-jones-sukuk-total-return-investment-grade-index UCOP. 2015, Enterprise Risk Management: Defining objectives using the Balanced Scorecard. Accessed online on May 20, 2015 from http://www.ucop.edu/enterprise-risk-management/procedures/objective-setting/using-the-balanced-scorecard.html Investopedia. 2015. Yield to Worst – YTW. Accessed online on May 20, 2015 from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/y/yieldtoworst.asp S&P Dow Jones Indices. 2015b. Dow Jones Sukuk 1-3 Year Investment Grade Index. Accessed online on May 20, 2015 from http://us.spindices.com/indices/fixed-income/dow-jones-sukuk-1-3-year-investment-grade-index S&P Dow Jones Indices. 2015c. Dow Jones Sukuk 3-5 Year Investment Grade Index. Accesed online on May 20, 2015 http://us.spindices.com/indices/fixed-income/dow-jones-sukuk-3-5-year-investment-grade-index S&P Dow Jones Indices. 2015d. Dow Jones Sukuk 7-10 Year Investment Grade Index. Accessed online on May 20, 2015 from http://us.spindices.com/indices/fixed-income/dow-jones-sukuk-7-10-year-investment-grade-index APPENDIX A: Forecast Output 1 APPENDIX B: Graph 1: 3-5 and 7-10 Year Total Return Index APPENDIX C: Alternative Interpretation to Graph 1 APPENDIX D: Moving Average Output SPSS) Original Data Moving Average Forecasts Date 7-10 year index 3-5 year index 1-3 year index Normal index yield to worst 7-10 year index 3-5 year index 1-3 year index Normal index yield to worst May-14 102.24 105.77 103.85 104.59 0.0245 - - - - 0.0257 Jun-14 102.26 105.96 104.03 104.71 0.0251 102.79 106.02 - 0.0257 Jul-14 102.86 106.2 104.17 105.04 0.0254 102.82 106.21 - -- 0.0257 Aug-14 103.77 106.56 104.51 105.58 0.0248 103.42 106.45 104.35 105.4 0.0257 Sep-14 104.16 106.75 104.62 105.82 0.0249 104.33 106.82 104.69 105.94 0.0257 Oct-14 105.14 107.01 104.74 106.31 0.0264 104.71 107 104.8 106.18 0.0257 Nov-14 106.11 107.55 105.1 106.91 0.0256 105.7 107.26 104.92 106.68 0.0257 Dec-14 105.66 107.5 104.81 106.7 0.0271 106.66 107.8 105.28 107.27 0.0257 Jan-15 107.74 108.32 105.23 107.84 0.0262 106.22 107.75 105 107.07 0.0257 Feb-15 108.81 108.48 105.54 108.43 0.0257 108.29 108.57 105.41 108.2 0.0257 Mar-15 108.75 108.38 105.56 108.22 0.0264 109.37 108.74 105.73 108.79 0.0257 Apr-15 109.64 108.96 105.89 108.82 0.0255 109.31 108.63 105.75 108.59 0.0257 May-15 108.92 108.81 105.99 108.59 0.0265 110.19 109.21 106.06 109.15 0.0257 Jun-15 109.48 109.06 0.0257 Jul-15 110.03 109.31 0.0257 Aug-15 110.59 109.56 0.0257 Sep-15 111.15 109.82 0.0257 Oct-15 111.7 110.07 0.0257 Nov-15 112.26 110.32 0.0257 Dec-15 112.82 110.58 0.0257 Jan-16 113.37 110.83 0.0257 Feb-16 113.93 111.08 0.0257 Mar-16 114.49 111.33 0.0257 Apr-16 115.04 111.59 0.0257 May-16 115.6 111.84 0.0257 Jun-16 116.16 112.09 0.0257 Jul-16 116.71 112.35 0.0257 Aug-16 117.27 112.6 0.0257 Sep-16 117.83 112.85 0.0257 Oct-16 118.38 113.11 0.0257 Nov-16 118.94 113.36 0.0257 Dec-16 119.5 113.61 0.0257 Jan-17 120.06 113.86 0.0257 Feb-17 120.61 114.12 0.0257 Mar-17 121.17 114.37 0.0257 Apr-17 121.73 114.62 0.0257 May-17 122.28 114.88 0.0257 Jun-17 122.84 115.13 0.0257 Jul-17 123.4 115.38 0.0257 Aug-17 123.95 115.63 0.0257 Sep-17 124.51 115.89 0.0257 Oct-17 125.07 116.14 0.0257 Nov-17 125.62 116.39 0.0257 Dec-17 126.18 116.65 0.0257 Jan-18 126.74 116.9 0.0257 Feb-18 127.29 117.15 0.0257 Mar-18 127.85 117.4 0.0257 Apr-18 128.41 117.66 0.0257 May-18 128.97 117.91 0.0257 Jun-18 129.52 118.16 0.0257 Jul-18 130.08 118.42 0.0257 Aug-18 130.64 118.67 0.0257 Sep-18 131.19 118.92 0.0257 Oct-18 131.75 119.17 0.0257 Nov-18 132.31 119.43 0.0257 Dec-18 132.86 119.68 0.0257 Jan-19 133.42 119.93 0.0257 Feb-19 133.98 120.19 0.0257 Mar-19 134.53 120.44 0.0257 Apr-19 135.09 120.69 0.0257 May-19 135.65 120.95 0.0257 Jun-19 136.2 121.2 0.0257 Jul-19 136.76 121.45 0.0257 Aug-19 137.32 121.7 0.0257 Sep-19 137.88 121.96 0.0257 Oct-19 138.43 122.21 0.0257 Nov-19 138.99 122.46 0.0257 Dec-19 139.55 122.72 0.0257 Jan-20 140.1 122.97 0.0257 Feb-20 140.66 123.22 0.0257 Mar-20 141.22 123.47 0.0257 Apr-20 141.77 123.73 0.0257 May-20 142.33 123.98 0.0257 Jun-20 142.89 124.23 0.0257 Jul-20 143.44 124.49 0.0257 Aug-20 144 124.74 0.0257 Sep-20 144.56 124.99 0.0257 Oct-20 145.11 125.24 0.0257 Nov-20 145.67 125.5 0.0257 Dec-20 146.23 125.75 0.0257 Jan-21 146.78 126 0.0257 Feb-21 147.34 126.26 0.0257 Mar-21 147.9 126.51 0.0257 Apr-21 148.46 126.76 0.0257 May-21 149.01 127.01 0.0257 Jun-21 149.57 127.27 0.0257 Jul-21 150.13 127.52 0.0257 Aug-21 150.68 127.77 0.0257 Sep-21 151.24 128.03 0.0257 Oct-21 151.8 128.28 0.0257 Nov-21 152.35 128.53 0.0257 Dec-21 152.91 128.79 0.0257 Jan-22 153.47 129.04 0.0257 Feb-22 154.02 129.29 0.0257 Mar-22 154.58 129.54 0.0257 Apr-22 155.14 129.8 0.0257 May-22 155.69 130.05 0.0257 Jun-22 156.25 130.3 0.0257 Jul-22 156.81 130.56 0.0257 Aug-22 157.37 130.81 0.0257 Sep-22 157.92 131.06 0.0257 Oct-22 158.48 131.31 0.0257 Nov-22 159.04 131.57 0.0257 Dec-22 159.59 131.82 0.0257 Jan-23 160.15 132.07 0.0257 Feb-23 160.71 132.33 0.0257 Mar-23 161.26 132.58 0.0257 Apr-23 161.82 132.83 0.0257 May-23 162.38 133.08 0.0257 Jun-23 162.93 133.34 0.0257 Jul-23 163.49 133.59 0.0257 Aug-23 164.05 133.84 0.0257 Sep-23 164.6 134.1 0.0257 Oct-23 165.16 134.35 0.0257 Nov-23 165.72 134.6 0.0257 Dec-23 166.28 134.85 0.0257 Jan-24 166.83 135.11 0.0257 Feb-24 167.39 135.36 0.0257 Mar-24 167.95 135.61 0.0257 Apr-24 168.5 135.87 0.0257 May-24 169.06 136.12 0.0257 Jun-24 169.62 136.37 0.0257 Jul-24 170.17 136.63 0.0257 Aug-24 170.73 136.88 0.0257 Sep-24 171.29 137.13 0.0257 Oct-24 171.84 137.38 0.0257 Nov-24 172.4 137.64 0.0257 Dec-24 172.96 137.89 0.0257 Jan-25 173.51 138.14 0.0257 Feb-25 174.07 138.4 0.0257 Mar 20125 174.63 138.65 0.0257 Apr-25 175.18 138.9 0.0257 May-25 175.74 139.15 0.0257 Jun-25 176.3 139.41 0.0257 Jul-25 176.86 139.66 0.0257 Aug-25 177.41 139.91 0.0257 Sep-25 177.97 140.17 0.0257 Oct-25 178.53 140.42 0.0257 Nov-25 179.08 140.67 0.0257 Dec-25 179.64 140.92 0.0257 Jan-26 180.2 141.18 0.0257 Feb-26 180.75 141.43 0.0257 Mar-25 181.31 141.68 0.0257 Apr-26 181.87 141.94 0.0257 May-26 182.42 142.19 0.0257 Jun-26 182.98 142.44 0.0257 Jul-26 183.54 142.69 0.0257 Aug-26 184.09 142.95 0.0257 Sep-26 184.65 143.2 0.0257 Oct-26 185.21 143.45 0.0257 Nov-26 185.77 143.71 0.0257 Dec-26 186.32 143.96 0.0257 Jan-27 186.88 144.21 0.0257 Read More