Meeting new peers: The effects of Morningstar category reassignment on fund flows and star ratings

We investigate how the reassignment of a fund's Morningstar category affects fund flow and Morningstar star rating. We find that funds assigned to a different category gain positive abnormal flows and this effect is significant mainly for high-rated funds. Category reassignment does not improve a fund's star rating on average, and flows are less responsive to a star-rating change if the rating change is likely to be driven by category reassignment. The positive abnormal flows captured by high-rated funds after category reassignment are consistent with a visibility story: some investors filter funds by Morningstar category and star rating, and category reassignment makes a fund more visible to a new group of investors if the fund is highly rated. In contrast, a low-rated fund is likely to be selected only by investors who do not refer to the fund's Morningstar information and, hence, gains little visibility from category reassignment. We also find evidence that more sophisticated investors are more likely to consider not only fund rating but also fund category when evaluating fund performance.     

The performance of US equity mutual funds

The paper examines the performance of US no-load equity mutual funds. Fund performance is derived using stochastic frontier analysis for a flexible functional form. This analysis allows us to derive parametric estimates of efficiency scores for each fund in our sample for the first time in the literature. Our results indicate that US no-load equity funds display varying levels of efficiency over time but also depending on size and on investment style. Robustness analysis reaffirm the efficiency scores remain consistent across different selections of inputs and outputs as well as the underlying distribution of the return. Having estimated each fund’s efficiency in the sample we unveil their underlying dynamics, also with respect to risk and operational characteristics such as flows, assets, and Morningstar star ratings. Panel-VAR estimations reveal that the response of funds’ efficiency to a shock in risk is positive and substantial. Some evidence of reverse causality is also observed. Finally, we extend our analysis to investigate the relationship between funds performance and key covariates across subgroups defined by size.     

Morningstar ratings and future performance

Morningstar is one of the major ratings suppliers of Australian managed funds. Ratings are a convenient information source for investors. Over time the ratings methodology used by Morningstar in Australia has become more like its North American counterpart. However, Morningstar Australia uniquely retains a commitment to a qualitative dimension to their research. This paper explores the relationship between Morningstar, qualitative and quantitative ratings and future fund product performance. Results do not support predictive power in the ratings, in the relatively short periods available for analysis, using a range of commonly used performance measures.     

Effects of Market Segmentation and Bank Concentration on Mutual Fund Expenses and Returns: Evidence from Finland

A tremendous amount of research examines US mutual funds, but fund markets also thrive in other countries. However, research about these fast growing markets is lacking. This study addresses Finnish funds. Fast growth of the Finnish fund industry, strong bank dominance in the industry and recent EU membership make it an interesting market to examine. The Finnish fund market is also of particular interest since it had the fastest growth among the EU countries during 1996–2000. We find evidence that bank‐managed and older funds charge higher expenses but investors are not compensated for paying higher expenses with higher risk‐adjusted returns, suggesting a potential agency problem. Overall, Finnish fund expenses have decreased over time, consistent with EU membership reducing market segmentation and generating competition.     

Flow-Performance Relationship and Star Effect: New Evidence from Chinese Mutual Funds

In this paper, we reexamine the mutual fund flow-performance relationship and star effect using mutual funds in China that have unique features of high risk and low performance persistence. Confirming prior studies, we find that fund performance is positively related to flows in subsequent periods. However, our results show that funds that performed well in the past do not attract additional inflows after controlling for performance. In addition, a star fund, a fund with a five-star Morningstar rating, does not have any significant effect on the fund's flows. These results suggest that it is important to recognize the difference in investor groups and factors that affect performance persistence when analyzing the mutual fund flow-performance relationship.     

Mutual fund expenses: Evidence on the effect of distribution channels

This paper employs a new set of variables in examining the determinants of fund expenses. The Finnish Association of Mutual Funds requires the industry to disclose new variables such as turnover and tracking error from 2002. Using this information the authors examine whether bank-managed funds are managed more actively than their non-bank competitors, which would explain their higher management fees. Equity and balanced funds distributed through bank offices charge higher expense ratios than funds distributed through independent fund management companies. The results suggest that existing customer relationship, bank cross-selling and convenience rather than operational expenses contribute to fund selection of bank mutual fund customers.     

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.     

Selling winners, holding losers: Effect on fund flows and survival of disposition-prone mutual funds

Recent studies suggest that presence of a disposition effect in a large subset of investors can create stock mispricings, which has serious implications for market efficiency. We examine whether US equity mutual funds are disposition-prone, how that effect influences performance, investor flows and fund survival, and whether the disposition orientation of mutual funds affects stock prices in a sustained manner.We find that about 30% of all funds exhibit some degree of disposition behavior and that such funds underperform funds that are not disposition-prone by 4-6% per year. Moreover, after controlling for performance, tax overhang and other factors that potentially affect flows, disposition-prone funds attract significantly smaller flows than other funds. The results suggest that mutual fund investors are smart enough to minimize investment in disposition-prone funds. Consequently, disposition-prone funds have significantly higher rates of failure than other funds, thereby reducing the impact of such trading behavior on security prices.     

Rating mutual funds: Construction and information content of an investor-cost based rating of Danish mutual funds

We develop a new rating of mutual funds: the atpRating. The atpRating assigns crowns to each individual mutual fund based upon the costs an investor pays when investing in the fund in relation to what it would cost to invest in the fund's peers. Within each investment category, the rating assigns five crowns to funds with the lowest costs and one crown to funds with the highest costs.We investigate the ability of the atpRating to predict the future performance of a fund. We find that an investor who has invested in the funds with the lowest costs within an investment category would have obtained a risk-adjusted excess return that is approximately 3–4 percentage points higher per annum than if the funds with the highest costs had been invested in.We compare the atpRating with the Morningstar Rating. We show that one reason why the atpRating and the Morningstar Rating contain different information is that the returns Morningstar uses as inputs when rating funds are highly volatile whereas the costs the atpRating uses as inputs when rating funds are highly persistent. In other words, a fund that has low costs one year will most likely also have low costs the following year, whereas the return of a fund in a certain year generally contains only little information about the future return that the fund will generate.Finally, we have information on the investments in different mutual funds made by a small subgroup of investors known to have been exposed to both the atpRating and the Morningstar Rating. We find that investors have clear preferences for funds rated high by both the atpRating and the Morningstar Rating.     

Are better governed funds better monitors?

Using Morningstar mutual fund stewardship grade data, we find that the governance mechanisms of mutual funds play a key role in their monitoring of portfolio firms and in their investment decisions. Mutual funds with better governance practices tend to vote responsibly on corporate governance proposals of their portfolio firms and also provide better return performance. Furthermore, these funds tend to avoid investing in poorly governed firms. The results suggest that funds with quality governance are more likely to act in the interest of their investors, and that costs associated with funds' monitoring of their portfolio firms do not adversely affect their return performance.     

The Information Content of Australian Managed Fund Ratings

Abstract:  We examine the information content of managed fund ratings for Australian retail investors. Because fund ratings, premised on a quantitative-qualitative model, are highly transitory, we question whether investors formulate their investment decisions with respect to changes in ratings and whether ratings, in turn, react to fund flows. We find that information regarding fund flows can be obtained from ratings, and that rating changes can have far-reaching effects. Investors flock to newly upgraded funds while they penalize those that have been downgraded by withdrawing funds. Investors are constantly anticipating ratings revisions, particularly downgrades, and we attribute this phenomenon to the role of qualitative factors in the ratings.     

The impact of the Arab Spring and the Ebola outbreak on African equity mutual fund investor decisions

Financial development and stock markets have been widely considered to be key factors in economic growth. Among institutional investors, mutual funds play a key role in providing financial resources to stock markets, particularly in developing countries. Different from other investments, mutual fund flows could be affected by retail investors’ behavior and their overreaction to specific events. We considered 78 equity mutual funds that are geographically specialized in African countries and observed monthly flows and performance for the period of 2006–2015. We find that two major events, Ebola and the Arab Spring, significantly affected the fund flows, controlling for fund performance, expenses and market returns. Retail investors over-reacted to these major events, withdrawing their savings from the African mutual funds. This result is particularly strong when connected to the media coverage of these events: the higher the number of articles about Arab Spring and Ebola, the higher the withdrawals. These irrational investors’ behavior damaged the funds’ managers market timing ability, and reduced the equity capital injection into African stock markets. Our results have several implications for both holders of frontier market mutual funds and the overall asset management industry.     

International equity flows and country funds

This study investigates the relationships between U.S. equity flows in foreign countries and returns of closed-end country funds for emerging Latin American markets, emerging Asian markets and developed markets. The major issues addressed are (1) relationships between flows and fund returns based on two basic models—information contribution and feedback trading effects, (2) the role of volatility in these relationships, and (3) the effects of the Asian crisis. Basic findings include: (1) information contribution (past flows affect returns) and feedback trading arguments (past returns affect flows) are supported; (2) strong evidence is found for the market segmentation argument rather than the investor sentiment argument; (3) there exists strong evidence of significant volatility effects under information contribution and feedback trading; (4) the Asian crisis effects are important but limited to Asian funds.     

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.     

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.     

Asset Fire Sales and Purchases and the International Transmission of Funding Shocks

We identify a new channel for the transmission of shocks across international markets. Investor flows to funds domiciled in developed markets force significant changes in these funds' emerging market portfolio allocations. These forced trades or “fire sales” affect emerging market equity prices, correlations, and betas, and are related to but distinct from effects arising purely from fund holdings or from overlapping ownership of emerging markets in fund portfolios. A simple model and calibration exercise highlight the importance to these findings of “push” effects from funds' domicile countries and “co‐ownership spillover” between markets with overlapping fund ownership.     

Daily mutual fund flows and redemption policies

We examine how redemption policies affect daily fund flows in open-end mutual funds. Since short-term trading of fund shares, as manifested in daily fund flows, can have an adverse impact on returns to the fund’s shareholders, mutual funds might find it desirable to discourage short-term trading through the use of redemption fees. However, if daily fund flows are due to fund shareholders’ legitimate liquidity demands, the redemption fee would have little effect on daily fund flows and possibly adversely affect fund shareholders by imposing a liquidity cost on them. We find that the likelihood of a fund charging a redemption fee is largely a function of its overall fee structure. We also use a sample of funds that imposed redemption fees to examine whether the distribution of daily fund flows changes after the initiation of the redemption fee. We find that the redemption fee is an effective tool in controlling the volatility of fund flows.     

Blurred stars: Mutual fund ratings in the shadow of conflicts of interest

Using unique data on trading commission payments to mutual fund rating companies (MFRCs) by mutual funds in China, this paper investigates whether the conflicts of interest arising from trading commission payments bias MFRCs’ mutual fund star ratings and hence affect their informativeness. We find the rating of a mutual fund is more optimistic when the MFRC either (i) receives trading commission fees from the mutual fund or (ii) can potentially receive fees in the future. The paper further shows that the usefulness of ratings in terms of predicting a fund’s future performance is negatively impacted by conflicts of interest. There is also evidence that investors can see through the problem, responding less enthusiastically (in terms of fund flows) to the ratings of conflicted MFRCs. We further find that the introduction of a rating qualification system that aims to improve mutual fund rating quality exacerbates the rating bias.     

Performance aspects of Greek bond mutual funds

This paper examines the performance characteristics of Greek bond funds and the impact of fund flows on portfolio returns. The evidence shows that on average bond funds do not offer risk-adjusted profits exceeding the returns of the benchmark index, which is in consistence with the US and international evidence. Returns before fees are slightly superior to the returns of the benchmark index, but when fees are considered they lag considerably. The security selection and market timing skills of fund managers are also tested using both an unconditional and a conditional model to test for the impact of public information variables. We also find that fund flows impact negatively on market timing.     

Do funds selected by managers’ skills perform better?

We construct a simple intuitive rating mechanism to evaluate stock picking and market timing skills of equity and hybrid equity fund managers in China. We find that both our skill-rated 5-star (SR-5S) fund and the Morningstar 5-star (MS-5S) fund portfolios outperform the market. The SR-5S fund portfolio outperforms its counterpart MS-5S portfolio in most situations, depending on whether portfolio performance is measured by the abnormal returns of the CAPM model, the Fama-French three-factor (FF3) model, the Carhart four-factor (CH4) model and the Fama-French five-factor (FF5) model. Both market timing skill and stock picking skill affect the performance difference between the SR-5S fund and MS-5S fund portfolios. Additionally, the departure of a SR-5S or MS-5S fund manager is associated with fund performance declines, and the declines in performance for SR-5S funds are generally larger than the declines for the MS-5S funds.