The economic gain of being small in the mutual fund industry: U.S. and international evidence

Motivated by the ongoing debate on the interaction between fund size and fund performance, we investigate the effect of asset growth on fund performance. We explicitly measure the economic gain (loss) of being a small (large) fund by comparing the average performance of a large fund vis à vis its average performance when it was small. Our results reveal that for the U.S. actively managed equity funds, the risk-adjusted return differential amounts to 7.08% per year in favor of small funds. Moreover, we fail to identify any performance loss for a fund relative to its history unless it belongs in the top 70% of fund size. However, the documented implicit performance handicap of U.S. large equity funds is not met in funds investing outside the U.S. Our findings carry important implications for the mutual fund industry and for the fund selection process.     

Active management, fund size, and bond mutual fund returns

Conventional wisdom holds that bonds are relatively homogenous investments compared to equities. Consequently, factors that explain variation in returns among bond mutual funds may differ in magnitude from those for equity mutual funds. In this study, a time-series cross-sectional analysis is employed to investigate the relationship between a bond fund's risk-adjusted return and specific fund attributes. Results indicate that a bond fund's past performance does not predict future performance and that bond fund managers are generally ineffective at increasing risk-adjusted returns. However, unlike equity mutual funds, bond mutual funds do appear to enjoy economies of scale.     

European Mutual Fund Performance

This paper presents an overview of the European mutual fund industry and investigates mutual fund performance using a survivorship bias controlled sample of 506 funds from the five most important mutual fund countries. The latter is done using the Carhart (1997) 4-factor asset-pricing model. In addition we investigate whether European fund managers exhibit 'hot hands', persistence in performance. Finally the influence of fund characteristics on risk-adjusted performance is considered. Our overall results suggest that European mutual funds, and especially small cap funds are able to add value, as indicated by their positive after cost alphas. If we add back management fees, four out of five countries exhibit significant out-performance at an aggregate level. Finally, we detect strong persistence in mean returns for funds investing in the UK. Our results deviate from most US studies that argue mutual funds under-perform the market by the amount of expenses they charge.     

Do mutual fund managers time market liquidity?

This paper examines mutual fund managers' ability to time market-wide liquidity. Using the CRSP mutual fund database, we find strong evidence that over the 1974–2009 period, mutual fund managers demonstrate the ability to time market liquidity at both the portfolio level and the individual fund level. Liquidity timing predicts future fund performance and the difference in the risk-adjusted returns between top and bottom liquidity-timing funds is approximately 2% per year. Funds exhibiting liquidity-timing ability tend to have longer histories, higher expense ratios, and higher turnover rates.     

Why mutual funds “underperform”

I propose a parsimonious model that reproduces the negative risk-adjusted performance of actively managed equity mutual funds. In the model, a fund manager can generate state-dependent active returns at a disutility. Negative expected performance and mutual fund investing simultaneously arise in equilibrium because the active return the fund manager generates covaries positively with a component of the pricing kernel that the performance measure omits, consistent with recent empirical evidence. Using data on U.S. funds, I also document new empirical evidence consistent with the model's cross-sectional implications.     

International evidence on ethical mutual fund performance and investment style

Using an international database containing 103 German, UK and US ethical mutual funds we review and extend previous research on ethical mutual fund performance. By applying a Carhart multi-factor model [Carhart, Journal of Finance 57 (1997) 57] we overcome the benchmark problem most prior ethical studies suffered from. After controlling for investment style, we find no evidence of significant differences in risk-adjusted returns between ethical and conventional funds for the 1990–2001 period. Our results also suggest that ethical mutual funds underwent a catching up phase, before delivering financial returns similar to those of conventional mutual funds. Finally, our performance estimates are robust to the inclusion of ethical indexes, which, surprisingly, are not incrementally capable of explaining ethical mutual fund return variation.     

Mutual fund corporate culture and performance

In this paper we test if a mutual fund's own corporate culture predicts fund performance. To do this we use Morningstar's corporate culture ratings for mutual funds and then examine the ability of these corporate culture ratings to predict risk-adjusted performance of domestic equity funds over the period 2005–2010. Using methods that are robust to survivorship bias, we find there is little significant evidence that corporate culture predicts better fund performance. Indeed, we find that no individual component of the Morningstar stewardship rating including board quality, fees, manager incentives and regulatory issues is able to consistently predict fund performance.     

Mutual Fund Performance: Evidence from the UK

This paper uses a large sample containing the complete return histories of 2300 UK open-ended mutual funds over a 23-year period to measure fund performance. We find some evidence of underperformance on a risk-adjusted basis by the average fund manager, persistence of performance and the existence of a substantial survivor bias. Similar findings have been reported for US equity mutual funds. New findings not previously documented for other markets include evidence that mutual fund performance varies substantially across different asset categories, especially foreign asset categories. We also identify some new patterns in performance related to the funds' distance from their inception and termination dates: underperformance intensifies as the fund termination date approaches, while, in contrast, there is some evidence that funds (weakly) outperform during their first year of existence.     

Mutual Fund Performance: Evidence from the UK

This paper uses a large sample containing the complete returnhistories of 2300UK openended mutual funds over a 23-year periodto measure fund performance. We find some evidence of underperformanceon a risk-adjusted basis by the average fund manager, persistenceofperformance and the existence of a substantial survivor bias.Similar findings have been reported for US equity mutual funds.New findings not previously documented for other markets includeevidence that mutual fund performance varies substantially acrossdifferent asset categories, especially foreign asset categories.We also identify some new patterns in performance related tothe funds' distance from their inception and termination dates:underperformance intensifies as the fund termination date approaches,while, in contrast, there is some evidence that funds (weakly)outperform during their first year of existence.     

On the concentration of mutual fund portfolio holdings: Evidence from Taiwan

This paper tests the alternative hypotheses of investment selection skills versus overconfidence of equity mutual funds managers in Taiwan. We find that fund holdings’ concentration levels are high and positively related to funds’ risk-adjusted returns in tranquil market periods; however, the concentration levels are low and more negatively related to risk-adjusted returns in turmoil market periods. The time varying concentration-performance relation is not driven by fund size. Our finding implies that fund managers have superior investment selection skills when the market is less volatile, but they exhibit overconfidence when the market is in turmoil, suggesting an investment strategy of shifting from concentrated funds to more broadly diversified funds when market condition becomes worse.     

Asset sales in the mutual fund industry: Who gains?

We analyze gains from intercorporate sales of mutual fund subsidiaries, using mandated SEC disclosures to assess the performance of mutual funds transferred by these transactions. Sellers are financial conglomerates (banks) using equity-based deals to transfer poorly performing funds to highly focused asset management companies. The transferred funds experience significant improvements in risk-adjusted returns, efficiency, and asset growth. These improvements are closely correlated with the gains in wealth to buyers and sellers at deal announcements, indicating the market efficiently capitalizes expected performance improvements. Our results provide evidence that these transactions transfer assets to acquirers better able to manage them, generating gains for fund holders and buyer and seller shareholders.     

The company you keep: Investment adviser clientele and mutual fund performance✰

This study examines how the composition of an investment adviser's client base (identified via Form ADV filings) relates to the performance of its mutual funds. Investment advisers catering to institutional clients realize statistically and economically superior risk-adjusted mutual fund performance relative to retail-oriented advisers. Subsequent tests identify the channel(s) responsible for the relationship. The evidence is consistent with both a governance mechanism (i.e., Evans and Fahlenbrach 2012) as well as inefficiencies stemming from the costly search mechanism of Gârleanu and Pedersen's (2018) model for asset management. The results suggest that institutional clients can identify better performing investment managers, particularly in market segments where retail mutual fund investors face higher search costs.     

Mutual fund performance and fund prospectus clarity

We conduct a cross-sectional examination of the writing clarity (readability) of mutual fund prospectuses from 20 major US mutual fund families. We focus on the language in the objective/strategy and principal risks sections, using Flesch scores and word counts to measure writing clarity. There is considerable variation in readability among funds and fund families. Flesch readability scores do not vary across fund objective, but within funds, risk discussions are more clear than are discussions of objective/strategy. Generally, the readability of a fund's risk discussion is lower for load funds than no-load funds, and readability increases with fund size and beta and decreases with raw and risk-adjusted three-year returns.     

HEDGE FUNDS: WHAT DO WE KNOW?

Hedge funds are attracting increased attention because of their reputation for earning superior (risk-adjusted) returns. Hedge Fund Research Inc. estimates that in 2001 there were about 7,000 hedge funds with investor capital of about $600 billion. And yet the diversity of hedge funds, combined with a general lack of transparency, makes the hedge fund industry something of a "black box."
This article provides an overview of the legal structure of hedge funds, the various fund investment strategies, and the existing research on overall hedge fund performance. Without uniform and comprehensive reporting requirements, it is difficult to ascertain the size and scope of hedge fund investments. Nonetheless, current research provides persuasive evidence that hedge funds earn positive risk-adjusted returns, on average, in contrast to their counterparts in the mutual fund industry. In an attempt to explain these higher returns, the authors begin by noting that hedge funds are subject to considerably less regulation than other investment institutions because their client base is limited to wealthy individuals and institutions. Hedge funds can thus employ investment strategies that mutual funds and pension funds are prohibited from pursuing, such as short selling, high leverage, derivatives, concentrated holdings, and limited redemptions. As a result, the funds may be able to earn excess returns by operating in illiquid and specialized markets where there is a shortage of arbitrage capital. At the same time, and perhaps even more important, hedge funds are in a better position than conventional mutual funds to attract skilled managers because of their use of performance-based incentive fee structures.     

Mutual fund flows and investor returns: An empirical examination of fund investor timing ability

We examine the timing ability of mutual fund investors using cash flow data at the individual fund level. Over 1991–2004 equity fund investor timing decisions reduce fund investor average returns by 1.56% annually. Underperformance due to poor timing is greater in load funds and funds with relatively large risk-adjusted returns. In particular, the magnitude of investor underperformance due to poor timing largely offsets the risk-adjusted alpha gains offered by good-performing funds. Investors in both actively managed funds and index funds exhibit poor investment timing. We demonstrate that our empirical results are consistent with investor return-chasing behavior.     

MARKET VOLATILITY AND PERVERSE TIMING PERFORMANCE OF MUTUAL FUND MANAGERS

Prompted by the recent volatility in equity markets, I investigate performance evaluation methods and the mutual fund managers' ability to select undervalued investments and time major market movements during the high-market-volatility period of the 1980s. Specifically, I examine mutual fund managers' stock-selection and market-timing abilities by employing a five-factor risk-adjusted model based on Carhart's four-factor loading model and Bhattacharya and Pfleiderer's quadratic timing model adjusted for perverse timing behavior. Individually, some managers persistently affect fund performance through the selection of undervalued investments, however, at the expense of timing performance. In addition, funds that demonstrate an ability to time major market movements showed persistence in timing performance before and after the October market crash of 1987.     

Prudent man or agency problem? On the performance of insurance mutual funds

Active equity mutual funds managed by insurance companies underperform peer funds by over 1% per year. There is no evidence that insurance funds make less risky investments; instead they have lower risk-adjusted returns and their fund flows are less sensitive to performance when they perform poorly. Across insurance funds, those with heavy advertising, directly established by insurers or using parent firms' brandnames, and those whose managers simultaneously manage substantial non-mutual-fund assets, are more likely to underperform. We conclude that insurers' efforts to cross-sell mutual funds aggravate agency problems that erode fund performance.     

The benefits of option use by mutual funds

Based on comprehensive regulatory data on equity mutual fund option use from the SEC's N-SAR filings, we are the first to present consistent evidence that equity funds' option use generates higher risk-adjusted performance. We further show that this is a direct effect of option use and not an indirect effect of other fund characteristics. Option use also directly results in lower systematic risk, as funds show significantly lower market betas during periods of options usage. Finally, mutual funds use options mainly for hedging as they primarily use protective puts and covered calls. These results are independent of known phenomena, such as the low beta anomaly, and robust to tests for endogeneity and a novel 5-factor model including an investable option strategy factor (IOS). Overall, our findings show that mutual fund option use is beneficial to investors and does not pose risk to the financial system as feared by the SEC. Our results are thus important for investors as well as regulators.     

A comparative performance of conventional and Islamic unit trusts: Market timing and persistence evidence

It is expected that the returns and resistance of Islamic mutual funds will be different from conventional mutual funds as the former have limited choices for portfolio diversification. This article analyses the performance of conventional and Islamic unit trusts for the period February 1995 to July 2012 in the Malaysian market, one of the most developed Islamic mutual fund markets. The performance analysis is based on four parameters: (i) risk-adjusted returns of unit trusts; (ii) market timing abilities; (iii) selection performance; and (iv) persistence. The results of this study suggest that the returns of both conventional and Islamic unit trusts have outperformed the market throughout the sample period. The results for market timing and selectivity are mostly the same for both categories of funds. However, Islamic unit trusts seem to have better resistance to market downturn than conventional unit trusts. The results of this research can be used by investors to identify funds or create portfolios that are more suitable for a recessionary scenario and for fund managers to better manage their portfolio performance during times when markets are likely to fall. The findings in this article are highly relevant for policymakers, investors and fund managers to determine policy matters, deciding on investment and marketing strategy for Islamic mutual funds.     

Picking funds with confidence

We present a new approach to selecting actively managed mutual funds that uses both portfolio holdings and fund return information to eliminate funds with predicted inferior performance through a sequence of pairwise fund comparisons. Our methodology determines both the number of skilled funds and their identities, and locates funds with substantially higher risk-adjusted returns than those identified by conventional alpha-ranking methods. We find strong evidence of time-series variation in both the number of funds identified as superior using our approach, as well as in their performance across different economic states.