Why Does Performance Persistence Vary Among Closed-End Funds?

This study extends the research on closed-end fund performance persistence by investigating whether the persistence of both net asset value (NAV) and market price returns of U.S. registered closed-end funds is related to various fund characteristics. The sample consists of 505 closed-end funds, which are investigated over the period from January 1976 to December 1996. The analysis tests whether persistence is related to the fund characteristics size, goal, management fees, turnover, fund family membership, fund experience, and the exchange on which a fund is traded. The results vary across holding periods used to calculate persistence but are similar with respect to the NAV and market price returns. Funds with lower expense ratios and funds traded on the NYSE show more persistence of strong NAV and market price performance.     

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.     

The effect of investor service costs on mutual fund performance

We examine the effect of investor service costs on mutual fund performance. Benchmarking passive funds against ETFs managed by the same fund company with the same investment objectives, we show that passive funds on average underperform ETFs by 42 bps in annualized net returns, of which about 90% can be attributed to investor service costs. Further benchmarking active funds against passive funds, we show that active funds on average outperform passive funds by 31 bps in annualized gross returns. However, the higher expense ratios charged by active funds lead to about 28 bps of underperformance in annualized net fund returns.     

Exchange-traded funds,persistence in tracking errors and information dissemination

We estimate tracking errors from 26 exchange-traded funds (ETFs) utilizing three different methods and test their relative performance using Jensen's model. We find that tracking errors are significantly different from zero and display persistence. Based on Jensen's alpha, risk adjusted returns are significantly inferior to benchmark returns for all ETFs with two exceptions at conventional significance levels revealing that passive investment strategy does not outperform market returns. We then examine the degree to which frequently used factors such as expense ratio, dividends, exchange rate and spreads of trading prices may be underlying sources of tracking errors causing this underperformance. We find that the change in the exchange rate is a significant source of tracking errors. Our serial correlation test, runs test and panel regression analysis reveal that Asian markets display relatively greater persistence and therefore are less efficient in disseminating information and noisier in filtering the information contained in returns.     

Reputation stretching in mutual fund starts

This study examines the role of reputation stretching in the context of mutual funds. We show that the reputation stretching strategy increases net fund inflows to new funds run by well-performing fund managers and yields a net increase of fund inflows to fund families. Reputable fund managers exhibit one-year performance persistence for managing new funds, which can help investors assess managers when selecting funds. We also find that the decrease in information asymmetry associated with managerial reputation benefits investors by leading to an increase in new fund returns in the short run, compared to those of new funds run by managers without track records. Overall, the reputation stretching strategy benefits both investors, by reducing information asymmetry and improving investment returns, and fund families, by increasing net fund inflows to new equity funds.     

Generalized runs tests to detect randomness in hedge funds returns

The major contribution of this paper is to make use of generalized runs tests (Cho and White, 2011) to analyze the randomness, i.e. the lack of persistence, in both absolute and relative returns of hedge funds. We find that about 42% of the HFR universe exhibit iid absolute returns over the period spanning 2000 to 2012. These funds are mainly found in proportions within the Macro and Equity Hedge strategies. A similar result holds for relative returns. We also find that funds having non-iid returns often exhibit ARCH effects and structural breaks, with largest breaks located within financial crises. Also, only a small percentage displays persistence in their relative performance, 8.2% to 16.7% of the universe, mainly found in proportions within the Relative Value and Event-Driven strategies. The robustness of results is challenged by implementing the tests on a crisis-free period. We find similar results for absolute returns. For relative ones, differences appear across strategies and benchmarks, but still both ARCH and breaks are present. Our work contributes to the hedge fund literature in terms of methodology, portfolio allocation, and performance measurement.     

Mutual fund performance persistence: Factor models and portfolio size

We re-examine US mutual fund performance persistence. We investigate persistence (i) using both “academic” factor models and “practitioner” index models, (ii) using decile-size recursive portfolios and also portfolios formed from smaller numbers of funds, (iii) using nonparametric bootstrap p-values as well as conventional t-tests and (iv) using both net-of-fee fund returns (net alphas) and gross alphas. Our key result is that positive net alpha performance persistence can be found using small portfolios of funds together with a holding period of 6 months or less, for both practitioner index models and academic factor models.     

Closed-End Fund Expenses and Investment Selection

Investment returns on closed‐end funds are highly volatile. Because expenses have a definite negative impact on closed‐end fund returns, investors should include the expense ratio as a criterion for fund selection in addition to performance, investment objective, and risk of the fund. This paper constructs a model of the expense ratio of closed‐end funds to explain cross‐sectional differences in the expense ratios for the period between 1989–1996. We relate closed‐end fund expenses to fund characteristics and identify the factors that can help investors choose low expense closed‐end funds.     

“Hot Hands” in bond funds

We investigate persistence in the relative performance of 3549 bond mutual funds from 1990 to 2003. We show that bond funds that display strong (weak) performance over a past period continue to do so in future periods. The out-of-sample difference in risk-adjusted return between the top and bottom decile of funds ranked on past alpha exceeds 3.5 percent per year. We demonstrate that a strategy based on past fund returns earns an economically and statistically significant abnormal return, suggesting that bond fund investors can exploit the observed persistence. Our results are robust to a wide range of model specifications and bootstrapped test statistics.     

Long-Run Performance Persistence of Investment Funds

This article analyzes the long-run persistence of returns and risk of investment in the assets of money, bound, and stock funds recorded on the Polish market in 2000–12. Portfolios of safe, hybrid, and stock classes are formed on the basis of tested funds. The persistence of returns and the Sharpe ratio are investigated in rolled five-year sub-periods, with one year step. Also, persistence in performance is assessed using classic CAPM and Fama and French models, which allow for evaluating management skills. We find the occurrence of the Sharpe ratio long-run persistence of money and bound funds. The study does not explicitly show long-run persistence in hybrid and stock fund portfolios. The CAPM and Fama and French models simulations of returns on stock and hybrid funds indicate varying management skills during five-year periods.     

Performance persistence of closed-end funds

Studies of performance persistence of closed-end funds (CEFs) use two measures of persistence; autocorrelation and rank correlation of performance. The autocorrelation measure offers limited information because it cannot separate persistence relative to the market and to the industry. The rank correlation measure is generally applied to two periods, disregarding multi-period persistence. We investigate performance persistence of CEFs in terms of both market price return and net asset value return using contingency tables and multiple regression models. Jensen’s alpha and the Sharpe ratio are used as measures of risk-adjusted performance. We test three hypotheses: (i) CEFs performing better than the industry median will do so persistently, (ii) CEFs outperform the market persistently; and (iii) performance persistence can be partly explained by dividend yield. The findings are fivefold. First, the number of persistent years varies with the models used to calculate risk-adjusted performance. Second, with 4-index unconditional beta fixed variance model, CEFs persistently beat their industry for six out of 10 years in terms of both market price return and net asset value return. Third, with a 4-index unconditional beta fixed variance model, we find performance persistence relative to market for 6 and 7 years, out of the 10 years considered, in terms of market price return and net asset value return, respectively. Fourth, the disaggregate sample tests show that performance of municipal bond funds is more persistent than equity funds and taxable bond funds. Fifth, dividend patterns can partially explain persistence with liquidity as control.     

A Test of the Persistence in the Performance of UK Managed Funds

We employ a United Kingdom data set of weekly returns from a sample of investment trust companies available on the Datastream database. We analyse the relative performance of the funds and determine whether a 'good' (above-median), past-performance is indicative of future performance. Our study focuses on within sample relative performance. We examine persistence in performance in the short and long run based on a number of tests. Overall we find that both raw and risk-adjusted returns exhibit evidence of persistence in performance in the long run but not in the very short run.     

Luck versus Skill in the Cross‐Section of Mutual Fund Returns

The aggregate portfolio of actively managed U.S. equity mutual funds is close to the market portfolio, but the high costs of active management show up intact as lower returns to investors. Bootstrap simulations suggest that few funds produce benchmark‐adjusted expected returns sufficient to cover their costs. If we add back the costs in fund expense ratios, there is evidence of inferior and superior performance (nonzero true α) in the extreme tails of the cross‐section of mutual fund α estimates.     

A new perspective on performance persistence: evidence using portfolio holdings

We investigate the existence and sources of performance persistence for Australian equity funds, using monthly portfolio holdings data. We find significant persistence among outperforming rather than underperforming funds, which is primarily related to security selection skill, and is associated with growth‐orientated funds. Meanwhile, the relation between persistence and momentum is secondary and nuanced. Further, persistence largely derives from existing holdings, while subsequent active trading contributes only moderately positive returns for both outperforming and underperforming funds. We also find that persistence fades beyond 6 months and vanishes after 24 months. Our findings differ from those for U.S. equity funds and previous Australian studies, implying that persistence may vary with market context and its identification may depend on data availability.     

Explaining persistence in mutual fund performance

This study investigates the determinants of persistence in mutual fund performance. Previous research that uses factor-mimicking portfolios and characteristic benchmarks to model fund performance fails to explain all the persistence in fund returns. This study employs a model that directly relates mutual fund returns to the characteristics of the stocks held by funds. Adjusting fund returns for the size of the stocks in which funds invest and financial ratios intended to capture fund manager investment styles explains all the persistence in mutual fund returns from 1976–1985, the period in which persistence is most prevalent.     

Analysis of Consumer Reports’ recommended mutual funds compared to actual performance

This study examines 60 mutual funds presented in the February 2007 issue of Consumer Reports. In addition, data for the same group of mutual funds were obtained as of 30 September 2008 to evaluate the recommendations provided in Consumer Reports. In order to exclude the major declines that occurred in the stock market in October 2008, the time periods of 30 November 2006 and 30 September 2008 were analyzed in this study. Specifically, this research examines the relationship between mutual funds’ net assets, share prices, manager tenures, expense ratio, tax–cost ratio and annualized returns to see whether Consumer Reports is a reliable source for investors seeking to purchase mutual funds.     

Persistent performance in the mutual fund market: Tests with funds and investment advisers

Recent studies of mutual funds have concluded that there is some evidence of superior performance. We test for the existence of superior performance and its persistence with mutual funds and mutual fund investment advisers on a data set of monthly returns from 1979 to 1989 for 1,387 mutual funds grouped by 243 advisers. We find no evidence of superior performance or its persistence but we do find significant evidence of persistence of inferior performance. Consistent with previous studies our findings depend on the benchmark chosen, with multiple benchmarks producing a larger degree of inferior performance.     

Short term persistence in mutual fund market timing and stock selection abilities

Using daily return data from 448 actively managed mutual funds over a recent 9-year period, we look for persistence, over two consecutive quarters, in the ability of funds to select individual stocks and time the market. That is, we decompose overall fund performance into excess returns resulting from stock selection and timing abilities and we separately test for persistence in each ability. We find persistence in the ability to time the market only among well performing funds and in the ability to select stocks only among the very best and worst performers. The existing literature patterns appear only when funds are ranked by their overall performance, which includes stock selection, market timing and fees. With respect to overall performance, there is persistence among most poorly performing and only the top well performing funds. Furthermore, the profitability of a winner-picking strategy depends on the rebalancing frequency and potentially the size of the investment. Small investors cannot profit, whereas large investors can take advantage of the class-A share fee structure and realize positive abnormal returns by annually rebalancing their portfolios.     

Why Do Money Fund Managers Voluntarily Waive Their Fees?

Over half of money fund managers voluntarily waive fees they have a contractual right to claim. Moreover, as a consequence of fee waivers, funds on average collect one half of reported expense ratios. Variation in fee waivers is significant and relates to differences in relative performance. Both low-performing retail and institutional funds waive fees to improve their net performance. More interestingly, high-performing retail, but not institutional, funds use fee waivers to strategically adjust net performance to increase expected fund flows. Despite fund flow incentives, high-performing institutional funds do not waive more because they cannot significantly improve their relative performance.     

Capacity effects and winner fund performance: the relevance and interactions of fund size and family characteristics

This study analyzes the existence of capacity effects and performance persistence for US equity mutual funds for the period from 1992 to 2007. We focus on winner funds and distinguish between capacity effects from both size and inflows and explore their interactions with two measures of family size, i.e. family total net assets under management (family TNA) and the number of funds at the family level (family breadth). The differentiation of family size allows us to analyze competing effects at the family level such as economies of scale as well as organizational complexity costs and conflicts of interest. Our empirical results confirm diseconomies of scale at the winner fund level and indicate that only small winner funds with low inflows significantly outperform the four-factor benchmark on a net return basis. There are no universal benefits from economies of scale at the family level, but our findings suggest the existence of conflicts of interest in families offering a relatively large number of funds. Small winner funds in families offering a small number of funds significantly outperform while economies of scale only materialize among extremely small winner funds. We provide detailed robustness checks for our empirical results. Overall, simply conditioning on fund size is not sufficient for selecting future outperforming funds. The results indicate that fund investors may earn positive abnormal returns when combining information on fund size with information on fund flows or fund family affiliations in their asset allocation decisions.