Real estate survey 2011: Methodology


Published on:

Can commercial real estate keep going up?
Colony corners FDIC fire sales
Chinese developers beat the ban


Regional breakdown
Country breakdown

Queries about results: Kalin Trifonov

Euromoney’s seventh annual Real Estate Survey canvassed the opinions of real estate developers, advisers, investment managers, corporate end-users and banks worldwide.

The survey was conducted from March 17 to June 15 2011. We received 1,272 valid responses, 19.3% up on the 1,066 responses received in 2010.

The survey was filled in at country level and had two distinct components this year: Part A (performance figures), and Part B (nominations).

In Part A, we asked the respondents to provide a few essential figures outlining their firm’s size and performance over the past 12 months. Firms providing this basic data were awarded points in their category on a pro-rata basis as outlined further below.

In Part B of the survey we asked the respondents to nominate the companies that they thought were best, second best and third best at providing various real estate products and services in their country over the past 12 months. We awarded four, three and two points, respectively, to each of those nominations in that category and country. We also awarded a small number of participation points to the respondent’s own firm for each completed survey (maximum of three respondents per company, per country) when they nominated their peers. The overall category results were produced by aggregating the nominations from Part B, the points from Part A, and the participation points. Global and regional results are aggregates of country results.

The full results of this survey are published at:

How Part A was scored to contribute to country scores:

Part A constitutes up to 30% of the total score in each overall category – eg, the best developer overall category was 70% weighted by the nominations received in Part B and 30% weighted by the data reported in Part A.

We used the quantitative information reported in Part A (various numbers of fields were scored for the different participant types) to calculate a score for each firm. If only one field was scored it carried a weight of 3/7ths of the total points received from Part B voting in that country in the relevant category (i.e. if there were five scored fields in part A, each was given a total value of 3/35ths of the total Part B nomination points for that category). For each of the variables in Part A the firms were awarded pro rata points based on their share of the total for that variable in that country.

Firms were awarded their Part A points only if they had received at least one vote in the country in their category and limited to 3/7ths of their B score.

How Part B was scored to contribute to country scores:

For each company nominated we awarded points as follows:

1st place - 4 points
2nd place - 3 points
3rd place - 2 points

For each company casting a vote, we asked them to tell us for what category they should be nominated. We then gave them a small number of points for that category if they nominated their peers. These participation points were limited to a maximum of 12 per company, per country.

Voting companies were allowed to provide up to three Part B responses in each country.

Please direct any questions to Kalin