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.     

Management of flow risk in mutual funds

This paper is the first to relate the investment practices of U.S. equity mutual funds to their management of flow risk, defined as the adverse effect of investor in- and outflows on fund performance. Using a comprehensive merged sample of 2585 actively managed U.S. domestic equity funds from the CRSP mutual fund database and the SEC’s regulatory N-SAR filings, we are the first to detect differences in funds’ responses to flow risk. We find that funds using derivatives, such as options and futures on indices as well as individual stocks, have higher performance than non-using funds. We further show that this outperformance is the result of superior flow risk management using these derivatives and not a result of derivatives based stock-picking or market-timing activities. Overall, our findings document that superior flow management ability is valuable when managing open-end mutual funds and should be considered by investors and researches when evaluating fund performance.     

Performance and risk exposure of international mutual funds

This study examined whether internationally diversified mutual funds increase a U.S. investor 's risk-adjusted return above that on a domestic benchmark mutualfund. Average returns on about one-half of the international funds exceeded the domestic benchmark fund's return. The risk-adjusted returns on the international mutual funds were not significantly different from that on the domestic benchmark fund. These results differ from earlier studies which generally found superior returns on international mutual funds. The benefits for the U.S. investor of holding an internationally diversified mutual fund appear to be limited for the period studied.     

Investing in equity mutual funds

We construct optimal portfolios of equity funds by combining historical returns on funds and passive indexes with prior views about asset pricing and skill. By including both benchmark and nonbenchmark indexes, we distinguish pricing-model inaccuracy from managerial skill. Modest confidence in a pricing model helps construct portfolios with high Sharpe ratios. Investing in active mutual funds can be optimal even for investors who believe managers cannot outperform passive indexes. Optimal portfolios exclude hot-hand funds even for investors who believe momentum is priced. Our large universe of funds offers no close substitutes for the Fama-French and momentum benchmarks.     

The performance of hedge funds and mutual funds in emerging markets

Use of short selling and derivatives is limited in most emerging markets because such instruments are not as readily available as they are in developed capital markets. These limitations raise questions about the value added provided by hedge funds, especially compared to traditional mutual funds active in these markets. We use five existing performance measurement models plus a new asset-style factor model to identify the return sources and the alpha generated by both types of funds. We analyze subperiods, different market environments, and structural breaks. Our results indicate that some hedge funds generate significant positive alpha, whereas most mutual funds do not outperform traditional benchmarks. We find that hedge funds are more active in shifting their asset allocation. The higher degree of freedom that hedge funds enjoy in their investment style might thus be one explanation for the differences in performance.     

美国晨星公司基金评级体系借鉴

截至2001年12月底，我国已设立48只封闭式基金，3只开放式基金，占沪、深两市流通总市值的比例为5.6％。随着我国基金业的迅猛发展，尤其是开放式基金的不断设立，如何准确、合理地对基金进行评级，成为摆在我们面前一个亟待解决的课题。……     

The performance of Japanese mutual funds

We analyze the performance of Japanese open-type stock mutualfunds for the 1981-1992 period. The results show that, regardlessof the performance measures and benchmarks employed, most ofthe Japanese mutual funds underperform the benchmarks by between3.6% and 10.8% per annum. These funds tend to invest more inlarge stocks with low book-to-market ratios. But this featuredoes not explain the underperformance. A potential explanationis the dilution effect caused by inflows of funds. In Japan,a new investor of an open-type fund only pays in the after-taxvalue of the net asset value. We conduct a bootstrap experimentto assess the magnitude of this dilution effect.     

Conditional performance evaluation for German equity mutual funds

We investigate the conditional performance of a sample of German equity mutual funds over the period from 1994 to 2003 using both the beta-pricing approach and the stochastic discount factor (SDF) framework. On average, mutual funds cannot generate excess returns relative to their benchmark that are large enough to cover their total expenses. Compared to unconditional alphas, fund performance sharply deteriorates when we measure conditional alphas. Given that stock returns are to some extent predictable based on publicly available information, conditional performance evaluation raises the benchmark for active fund managers because it gives them no credit for exploiting readily available information. Underperformance is more pronounced in the SDF framework than in beta-pricing models. The fund performance measures derived from alternative model specifications differ depending on the number of primitive assets taken to calibrate the SDF as well as the number of instrument variables used to scale assets and/or factors.     

Time-varying performance of international mutual funds

We examine the ability of one- and two-factor regime switching models to describe US, developed, and emerging market mutual fund returns. We find that a two-factor fixed transition probability model adequately describes the multivariate series of mutual fund returns without the need to model time-varying transition probabilities. Mutual fund performance, as measured by a state dependent Jensen's alpha, varies with economic regimes that are defined according to the global equity market mean. Our primary two-factor fixed transition probability model shows that emerging market mutual fund alphas are often significantly positive in global bull regimes. Consideration of alternative second risk factors suggests that both the foreign exchange factor, or the recently proposed Hou, Karolyi and Kho (2011) value factor can improve series forecasts and out-of-sample portfolio performance.     

Momentum strategies of German mutual funds

The existence of the momentum effect in stock returns has been documented for the US (e.g., Jegadeesh and Titman in J. Finance 48(1), 65–91, 1993) and many other national equity markets worldwide (e.g., Griffin et al. in J. Finance 58(6), 2515–2547, 2003). However, little is known about the active employment of momentum strategies among institutional investors outside the US. This paper provides first evidence of momentum behavior among German mutual funds. We find the fund trades to follow stock returns on an aggregated institutional level. Moreover, we detect significant momentum behavior among funds with a European and global equity focus, as well as among funds predominantly investing in Asia. In contrast, German funds do not seem to engage in momentum strategies when trading domestic stocks. While only half the funds in our sample trade in accordance with past returns, 66 % of the funds within the largest size quintile follow momentum strategies. Finally, we do not find momentum trading funds to outperform the other funds.     

The ABCs of mutual funds: On the introduction of multiple share classes

We study a significant innovation with widespread consequences for the mutual fund industry: the introduction of multiple-class funds that give investors a choice among alternative load and fee structures. The transition to a multiple-class structure represents an important step in the evolution of the mutual fund industry. It also provides a well-controlled setting for research on the structure of funds, on investor clienteles and their impact on fund performance and, more generally, about the manner in which financial innovations tend to be adopted. We develop a simple model of a fund's decision on whether and when to introduce new classes and empirically investigate the model's predictions that: (a) Funds with more skilled management, less sensitivity of flows to performance, smaller size, higher existing loads and membership in larger families are better positioned to benefit and, therefore, more likely to switch to a multiple-class structure earlier; (b) The new classes increase the level and volatility of fund inflow by attracting investors with short and uncertain investment horizons – which, in turn, can negatively impact fund performance. Our empirical results are generally supportive of the model's predictions.     

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.     

Closing and cloning in open-end mutual funds

Using a unique dataset, we document that only those closed funds for which no new fund is subsequently launched continuously deliver positive abnormal returns. This suggests the existence of an optimal fund scale. In spite of the potential diseconomies of scale, a non-trivial proportion of closed funds have new funds cloned—the scale motive would not be a complete explanation for the closure. When managers of closed funds clone new funds, they receive greater public attention and thus can attract more fund flows and charge higher fees. Furthermore, better-performing closed fund managers attract more fund flows to their new siblings, making the closure an effective mechanism to extract economic rents. Overall, we find that closing and cloning is an attractive strategy for funds seeking to increase their management fees and funds with more managers in place. Aspects of the closed fund family also affect the launch decision of new siblings.     

Performance persistence of international mutual funds

This study applies the “winner–winner, winner–loser” methodology developed by Brown and Goetzmann, Goetzmann and Ibbotson, and Malkiel to test for short-term performance persistence in international equity mutual funds over the 20-year period from 1977 to 1996. Persistence tests are applied to a database consisting of all international equity funds in existence during this period, varying from a low of 11 (1977) to a high of 473 (1996) funds, reflecting the extremely rapid growth of this asset class over the last 20 years. The authors are not aware of any other persistence studies of international equity funds. The results show statistically significant performance persistence for 1-year holding periods, but no persistence for 2-, 3- or 4-year periods. For 1-year periods, overall, performance persistence is statistically significant at the .001 level. This leads to the conclusion that international equity mutual funds exhibit strong performance persistence for short-term (1-year holding periods), but persistence generally fades after the first year. These results are generally consistent with results found by other researchers using this methodology. Survivorship bias is a concern in virtually all time series studies of mutual fund returns. This bias is minimal in this study because each new fund is added to the database, merging funds continue to be included and adjustments are made for funds that cease operations. The only bias is that if any fund closed and did not merge with an existing fund, that fund would not have returns to be included for the future periods. Only 28 funds ceased operations over the 20-year period during which 490 new funds were introduced.     

Idea sharing and the performance of mutual funds

I develop an equilibrium model to explain why few mutual fund managers consistently outperform, even though many have strong informational advantages. The key ingredient is that managers obtain investment ideas through idea sharing. Idea sharing improves statistical significance of alpha through increased price informativeness. But it also causes better informed managers to take larger positions, which makes their alpha noisier—although a significant fraction of managers builds strong informational advantages, statistical significance and persistence of alpha concentrate in underperforming funds. I argue that in-house development of ideas cannot explain these facts.     

On the characteristics and performance of long-short, market-neutral and bear mutual funds

We evaluate the return performance of long-short, market-neutral and bear mutual funds using multi-factor models and a conditional CAPM that allows for time-varying risk. Differences in the bearish posture of these mutual funds result in different performance characteristics. Returns to long-short mutual funds vary with the market, returns to market-neutral mutual funds are uncorrelated with the market and returns to bear mutual funds are negatively correlated. Using the conditional CAPM we document significant changes in the market-risk exposure of the most bearish of these funds during different economic climates. We then assess the flow-performance relationship for up to 60 months following up and down markets and find that investors direct flows towards market-neutral and bearish funds for several months after down markets. Market-neutral funds provide a down market hedge, but bear funds do not generate the returns that investors hope for.     

False discoveries in volatility timing of mutual funds

This paper examines the volatility timing of US mutual funds by controlling the false discovery rate to find out how many funds are truly countercyclical (procyclical) timing funds. Empirical results show that, given the whole universe of our sample funds, the percentages of countercyclical and procyclical volatility timing funds are about equal. We also find that while the standard approach, which simply counts the number of significant positive (negative) timing coefficients, does not incorporate false discoveries in volatility timing, it provides quite accurate volatility timing results. Finally, we find that the performance measures for an equally weighted portfolio of procyclical timing funds are greater than for an equally weighted portfolio of countercyclical timing funds in the in-sample test, consistent with our expectation that procyclical timers earn higher returns because they take on more risk. However, the countercyclical timing portfolio outperforms the procyclical timing portfolio in the out-of-sample test.     

Active timing decisions of equity mutual funds

In this paper we examine an aspect of professional investment management which has not been adequately documented and studied; the extent to which equity mutual fund managers actively adjust their portfolio's equity risk exposure over time. Estimates of a portfolio's quarter-end beta are developed using the actual stock holdings of the portfolio at the quarter-end. Changes in these beta estimates from one quarter to the next are shown to arise from both passive and active asset allocation. We find that active risk adjustment dominates passive rebalancing and that equity risk exposure is quite variable over time. Thus, individual investors who estimate the equity risk inherent in a portfolio based on a single time series return beta might seriously misestimate the portfolio's current equity risk. We also test whether active risk management is better characterized as anticipatory of future market events or reactive to past market events.     

The performance of US bond mutual funds

We evaluate the performance of the US bond mutual fund industry using a comprehensive sample of bond funds over a long time period from January 1998 to February 2017. In this one study, we examine bond fund selectivity, market timing and performance persistence. We evaluate bond funds relative to their self-declared benchmarks and in terms of both gross-of-fee returns and net-of-fee returns. We document considerable abnormal performance among funds both to the fund (gross returns) and to the investor (net returns). Bond fund performance is found to be superior in the post financial crisis period. However, past strong performance cannot be relied upon to predict future performance. Finally, while some funds exhibit market timing ability; we find a predominance of negative market timing among US bond mutual funds.