Arbitrage Bounds and UK Unit Trust Performance

Abstract:  We use the arbitrage performance bounds of Ahn, Cao and Chretien (2003) to evaluate UK unit trust performance between January 1988 and December 2002. We find that trust performance is sensitive to the admissible stochastic discount factor used for both the average trust and the majority of individual trusts. The investment style, size, load charge, and annual charge of the trust all have an impact on trust performance. We find for some trusts, the Jensen (1968) and Ferson and Schadt (1996) measures do not satisfy arbitrage bounds by the base assets.     

Investor Heterogeneity and the Cross-section of U.K. Investment Trust Performance

We use the upper and lower bounds derived by Ferson and Lin (2010) to examine the impact of investor heterogeneity on the performance of U.K. investment trusts relative to alternative linear factor models. We find using the upper bounds that investor heterogeneity has an important impact for nearly all investment trusts. The upper bounds are large in economic terms and significantly different from zero. We find no evidence of any trusts where all investors agree on the sign of performance beyond what we expect by chance. Using the lower bound, we find that trusts with a larger disagreement about trust performance have a weaker relation between the trust premium and past Net Asset Value (NAV) performance.     

An exploration of the persistence of UK unit trust performance

We examine the persistence in UK unit trust performance between January 1982 and December 1996. We find significant persistence in the relative rankings of trusts using different performance measures. We also find significant persistence in the performance of portfolios of trusts, formed on the basis of prior year excess returns, when performance is evaluated relative to models based on the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) or arbitrage pricing theory (APT). However this persistence is eliminated when performance is evaluated relative to a model similar to Carhart [Journal of Finance 52 (1997) 57]. Using a conditional performance measure leads to significant reversals in performance with this model.     

An Empirical Examination of U.K. International Unit Trust Performance

We examine the performance of U.K. unit trusts with international equity objectives between January 1985 and December 2000 using four international factor models. The international version of the Carhart (1997) model performs the best in explaining the cross-section of international stock returns. There is little evidence of superior performance by international trusts relative to the global models. We also find that the choice between a local and global version of the Carhart model has a significant impact on the relation between the investment sector of the trust and performance.JEL classification: G10, G12     

Performance Evaluation Of U.K. Unit Trusts Within The Stochastic Discount Factor Framework

We examine the performance of U.K. unit trusts between January 1982 and December 1996 within the stochastic discount factor approach across a wide class of models. No one model dominates the others in correctly pricing passive portfolios or detecting superior performance for hypothetical trading strategies. We find no evidence of significant superior performance by the unit trusts for any model of the stochastic discount factor. Also, the charges of the trust have a mixed effect on trust performance.     

Is international trust performance predictable over time? A note

We examine whether past return measures have any significant predictive ability for future returns of UK unit trusts with international equity objectives. We find significant positive persistence between the past return performance of the trust relative to its investment sector and future trust returns relative to its sector. This result holds at short‐run and long‐run return horizons. The persistence is stronger in trusts that perform well relative to their sector. Our findings suggest that the past return performance of the trust relative to their sector provides a useful guide to future return performance relative to their sector.     

Exploring the Conditional Performance of U.K. Unit Trusts

We evaluate the conditional performance of U.K. equity unit trusts using the approach of Lynch and Wachter (2007, 2008) relative to three conditional linear factor models. We find significant time variation in the conditional performance of some trust portfolios and individual trusts using the lag term spread as the information variable. The conditional performance of the trusts is countercyclical and larger trusts have more countercyclical performance than smaller trusts within certain investment sectors. These patterns in conditional trust performance cannot be fully explained by the underlying securities that the trusts hold.

Ethical Unit Trust Financial Performance: Small Company Effects and Fund Size Effects

Recent papers which have examined unit trusts have controlled either for a 'fund size effect' or for the 'small firms effect' in the investment portfolio. The contribution of this paper is an analysis of the 'small firms effect' whilst simultaneously controlling for the 'fund size effect'. We show that the ethical unit trusts have significantly greater exposure than general unit trusts to the 'small firms effect', and that net of this there is no significant evidence of over or under performance by ethical trusts using an adjusted Jensen measure. Using two cross-sectional approaches, we demonstrate that whilst a 'small firms effect' has a role to play in explaining unit trust performance, fund size is not correlated with the financial performance of unit trusts. This cross-sectional analysis also provides some evidence that ethical unit trusts may perform less well than general unit trusts.     

The performance of enhanced-return index funds: evidence from bootstrap analysis

We apply the bootstrap technique proposed by Kosowski et al. [J. Finance, 2006, 61, 2551–2595] in conjunction with Carhart's [J. Finance, 1997, 52, 57–82] unconditional and Ferson and Schadt's [J. Finance, 1996, 51, 425–461] conditional four-factor models of performance to examine whether the performances of enhanced-return index funds over the 1996 to 2007 period are based on luck or superior ‘enhancing’ skills. The advantages of using the bootstrap to rank fund performance are many. It eliminates the need to specify the exact shape of the distribution from which returns are drawn and does not require estimating correlations between portfolio returns. It also eliminates the need to explicitly control for potential ‘data snooping’ biases that arise from an ex-post sort. Our results show evidence of enhanced-return index funds with positive and significant alphas after controlling for luck and sampling variability. The results are robust to both stock-only and derivative-enhanced index funds, although the spread of cross-sectional alphas for derivative-enhanced funds is slightly more pronounced. The study also examines various sub-periods within the sample horizon.     

U.K. Unit Trust Performance: Does it Matter Which Benchmark or Measure is Used?

We explore the validity of different benchmark specifications used to evaluate U.K. fund performance, and we examine the sensitivity of U.K. unit trust performance to the factor benchmark specification and two performance measures. Our findings suggest that the different benchmark specifications create some bias when we evaluate U.K. fund performance with either performance measure. We find that the performance of the trusts is sensitive to the factor benchmark specification used, but not to the performance measure. We also find significant time-series variations in the abnormal performance of the trusts.     

The effects of focus versus diversification on bank performance: Evidence from Chinese banks

This paper investigates the effects of focus versus diversification on bank performance using data on Chinese banks during the 1996–2006 period. We construct a new measure, economies of diversification, and compare the results to those of the more conventional focus indices, which are based on the sum of squares of shares in different products or regions. Diversification is captured in four dimensions: loans, deposits, assets, and geography. We find that all four dimensions of diversification are associated with reduced profits and higher costs. These results are robust regardless of alternative measures of diversification and performance. Furthermore, we observe that banks with foreign ownership (both majority and minority ownership) and banks with conglomerate affiliation are associated with fewer diseconomies of diversification, suggesting that foreign ownership and conglomerate affiliation may play important mitigating roles. This analysis may provide important implications for bank managers and regulators in China as well as in other emerging economies.     

Capital structure,equity ownership and firm performance

This paper investigates the relationship between capital structure, ownership structure and firm performance using a sample of French manufacturing firms. We employ non-parametric data envelopment analysis (DEA) methods to empirically construct the industry’s ‘best practice’ frontier and measure firm efficiency as the distance from that frontier. Using these performance measures we examine if more efficient firms choose more or less debt in their capital structure. We summarize the contrasting effects of efficiency on capital structure in terms of two competing hypotheses: the efficiency-risk and franchise-value hypotheses. Using quantile regressions we test the effect of efficiency on leverage and thus the empirical validity of the two competing hypotheses across different capital structure choices. We also test the direct relationship from leverage to efficiency stipulated by the Jensen and Meckling (1976) agency cost model. Throughout this analysis we consider the role of ownership structure and type on capital structure and firm performance.     

An Examination of UK Unit Trust Performance within the Arbitrage Pricing Theory Framework

This paper examines the performance of a sample of 101 United Kingdom unit trusts within an Arbitrage Pricing Theory framework and considers the relationship between performance and the investment objective, size and expenses of the trusts. Also, portfolio strategies using past trust performances to rank the trusts fails to generate significant abnormal returns relative to two different benchmark portfolios.     

The level and quality of Value-at-Risk disclosure by commercial banks

In this paper we study both the level of Value-at-Risk (VaR) disclosure and the accuracy of the disclosed VaR figures for a sample of US and international commercial banks. To measure the level of VaR disclosures, we develop a VaR Disclosure Index that captures many different facets of market risk disclosure. Using panel data over the period 1996–2005, we find an overall upward trend in the quantity of information released to the public. We also find that Historical Simulation is by far the most popular VaR method. We assess the accuracy of VaR figures by studying the number of VaR exceedances and whether actual daily VaRs contain information about the volatility of subsequent trading revenues. Unlike the level of VaR disclosure, the quality of VaR disclosure shows no sign of improvement over time. We find that VaR computed using Historical Simulation contains very little information about future volatility.     

Evaluating the Performance of International Mutual Funds

In this paper, we examine the performance of a sample of fifteen U.S.-based internationally diversified mutual funds between 1982 and 1988. Two performance measures are used, the Jensen measure and the positive period weighting measure proposed by Grinblatt and Titman. We find no evidence that the funds, either individually or as a whole, provide investors with performance that surpasses that of a broad, international equity index over this sample period.     

Specific knowledge and performance measurement

I examine optimal incentives and performance measurement in a model where an agent has specific knowledge (in the sense of Jensen and Meckling) about the consequences of his actions for the principal. Contracts can be based both on “input” measures related to the agent's actions and an “output” measure related to the principal's payoff. Whereas input‐based pay minimizes income risk, only output‐based pay encourages the agent to use his knowledge efficiently. In general, it is optimal to use both kinds of performance measures. The results help to explain some empirical puzzles and lead to several new predictions.     

An Intertemporal International Asset Pricing Model: Theory and Empirical Evidence

We extend Campbell's (1993) model to develop an intertemporal international asset pricing model (IAPM). We show that the expected international asset return is determined by a weighted average of market risk, market hedging risk, exchange rate risk and exchange rate hedging risk. These weights sum up to one. Our model explicitly separates hedging against changes in the investment opportunity set from hedging against exchange rate changes as well as exchange rate risk from intertemporal hedging risk. A test of the conditional version of our intertemporal IAPM using a multivariate GARCH process supports the asset pricing model. We find that the exchange rate risk is important for pricing international equity returns and it is much more important than intertemporal hedging risk.     

Persistence and the four‐factor model in the Australian funds market: a note

We investigate whether Australian fund managers are able to deliver persistent performance using Carhart’s (1997) four‐factor model. Short‐ and long‐term persistence is examined and the sample is also divided into unit trusts and superannuation funds. We do not find evidence of persistence in any sample of funds. We find that winner (loser) funds tend to hold past winner (loser) stocks. Winner and loser unit trusts both appear to have positive exposure to small stocks.     

Performance of UK Investment Trusts: 1980–1994

This study investigates the selectivity and timing performance of a large sample (79) of UK investment trusts over a long period (15 years) by applying a number of models. There are few studies in this area in the UK. It is often argued that investors hold investment trust shares to obtain diversification and managerial skills. Managerial skill, if present, should be observed in the form of superior selectivity and timing performance measures. The general decline in the level of discount observed in the industry over the sample period suggests that excess returns could be obtained by holding investment trusts shares. We use single index and multifactor models for the analysis. Positive but statistically insignificant, selectivity estimates and negative, and at times significant, timing estimates are observed.     

Predicting European Takeover Targets

This article extends the Palepu (1986) acquisition likelihood model by incorporating measures of a technical nature, e.g. momentum, trading volume as well as a measure of market sentiment. We use the proposed model to predict takeover targets in a large sample of European and cross‐border merger and acquisition deals and validate its performance on an in‐ and out‐of‐sample basis. The robustness of the proposed model is investigated across several dimensions. In addition we explore the ability of the model to form the basis of successful takeover timing investment strategies. The results of our empirical analysis suggest that the proposed model predicts European takeover targets with relatively high accuracy and is able to determine portfolios that earn significant returns which are not explained by conventional risk factors.