Institutional investment flows and the determinants of top fund manager turnover

This study examines how the termination of superannuation investment mandates contributes to the departure of top fund managers in companies delegated the portfolio management role. Terminations of superannuation plan mandates increase the probability of a fund company changing the responsible fund manager. Objective‐adjusted returns are also significant managerial turnover considerations. These results illustrate that significant losses of superannuation fund clients act as an external control mechanism in the investment management industry that complements internal managerial performance measures.     

Mutual fund characteristics, managerial attributes, and fund performance

This study provides a comprehensive examination of recent mutual fund performance by analyzing a large set of both mutual funds and fund attributes in an effort to link performance to fund-specific characteristics. The results indicate that the hypothesized relationships between performance and the explanatory variables are generally upheld. After taking into consideration general market conditions and fund investment objective, the characteristic variables that relate to fund popularity, growth, cost, and management also explain performance. Finally, after controlling for survivorship and benchmark error as well as fund-specific factors, the results refute the performance persistence phenomenon.     

Portfolio concentration and fund manager performance

This research examines the relationships among portfolio concentration, fund manager skills, and fund performance in Taiwan's equity mutual fund industry, yielding several empirical findings as follows. First, after controlling for other factors, concentrated equity funds tend to have smaller net asset values, larger fund flows, higher turnover rates, and a younger age and prevail in smaller fund families. Second, concentrated fund managers buy and sell stocks more smartly based on economic trends or market factors than do diversified fund managers, i.e., they have better market‐timing abilities. Third, only partial evidence supports the premise that concentrated equity funds have better next‐quarter risk‐adjusted performances than do diversified ones, as these fund managers' skills positively correlate to risk‐adjusted fund performance. Fourth, fund managers who have better stock‐picking abilities and intensively invest in certain industries generally exhibit better Carhart's alpha in the next quarter than do other fund managers. Fifth, fund managers' stock‐picking abilities more closely relate to long‐term performance than do their market‐timing abilities. Lastly, positive performance persistence is much stronger than negative performance persistence, but concentrated funds do not have stronger performance persistence than do diversified funds.     

Active investment manager portfolios and preferences for stock characteristics

The present study investigates the stock characteristic preferences of institutional Australian equity managers. In aggregate we find that active managers exhibit preferences for stocks exhibiting high‐price variance, large market capitalization, low transaction costs, value‐oriented characteristics, greater levels of analyst coverage and lower variability in analyst earnings forecasts. We observe stronger preferences for higher volatility, value stocks and wider analyst coverage among smaller stocks. We also find that smaller investment managers prefer securities with higher market capitalization and analyst coverage (including low variation in the forecasts of these analysts). We also document that industry effects play an important role in portfolio construction.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Portfolio manager ownership and fund performance

This paper documents the range of portfolio manager ownership in the funds they manage and examines whether higher ownership is associated with improved future performance. Almost half of all managers have ownership stakes in their funds, though the absolute investment is modest. Future risk-adjusted performance is positively related to managerial ownership, with performance improving by about 3 basis points for each basis point of managerial ownership. These findings persist after controlling for various measures of fund board effectiveness. Fund manager ownership is higher in funds with better past performance, lower front-end loads, smaller size, longer managerial tenure, and funds affiliated with smaller families. It is also higher in funds with higher board member compensation and in equity funds relative to bond funds. Future performance is positively related to the component of ownership that can be predicted by other variables, as well as the unpredictable component. Our findings support the notion that managerial ownership has desirable incentive alignment attributes for mutual fund investors and indicate that the disclosure of this information is useful in making portfolio allocation decisions.     

保险资金的证券投资绩效分析

本文回顾了保险资金在证券投资领域的政策变化历程,分析了保险资金运用效率与基金业绩评价的诸多不同,指出了基于资产组合优化理论的保险资金评价方法的不足,提出用影子组合法,作为一种正向制度激励,对保险资金运用效率进行评价,并基于该方法对三家上市保险公司的资金运用效率进行了比较。     

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.     

Trading behaviour and the performance of daily institutional trades

Using a unique database of daily trading activity, the present study examines the ability of active Australian equity managers to earn superior risk‐adjusted returns. We find evidence of superior trade performance, where performance is a function of stock size. Our findings indicate that active equity managers are able to successfully exploit private information more readily in stocks ranked 101–150 by market‐cap, where the degree of analyst coverage, information flows and market efficiency are lower than for large‐cap stocks. We also find evidence of manager specialization. Our evidence provides further support of the value of active investment management in Australian equities.     

Measuring fund style,performance and activity: a new style‐profiling approach

We construct new measures of fund style, performance and activity from linear combinations of off‐the‐shelf stock‐market indices. A fund's benchmark portfolio is a linear combination of two or more reference portfolios that in a least‐squares sense most closely approximates the fund's portfolio. The resulting linear combination scalar is itself a measure of fund style and the distance between a fund and its benchmark is a measure of fund activity. Our approach has a number of advantages over existing characteristic‐matching methods. We illustrate our approach using a data set of US institutional 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.     

Derivative use,fund flows and investment manager performance

Prior literature which examines the use of derivatives by investment managers does not discern between different types of derivative trading strategies. This study is the first to examine and gather data on a particular type of derivative trading strategy undertaken by investment managers. We examine the extent to which equity fund managers use index futures to manage fund flows and the effect this has on their alpha and market timing measures of performance. Our results show that funds that do not use derivatives exhibit lower returns and negative market timing skills when they experience fund flow. The performance of funds that use derivatives, however, is independent of investor’s liquidity demands. In fact, the unconditional performance of the average user fund is statistically equivalent to the performance of the average non-user fund conditional on zero fund flow. Our results provide evidence that derivatives can be beneficial for mutual fund holders under certain conditions.     

Relative importance of hedge fund characteristics

This study compares the relative importance of thirteen attributes in explaining the cross-sectional variations in the returns of hedge funds, using a large sample from the TASS database covering the 1989–2005 period. We use a simple characteristic-based model of return decomposition, which has never before been applied to hedge funds. The characteristic factors are estimated using cross-sectional dummy-variable regressions. Their importance is found to be time-varying. We find that diversification across styles matters, but that it could be improved significantly by also diversifying across other characteristics, mainly including performance, volatility and fee structure.      

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.     

Investment restrictions and fund performance

We examine the effect of investment restrictions on mutual fund performance. Utilizing a unique panel of mutual fund contract changes, we explore several ways these changes affect a fund, including: performance, funding risk, and managerial contracting. We find that the general shift towards fewer restrictions over the period 1996–2011 has provided little benefit to mutual funds. Specifically, neither performance nor flow increased and we observe no changes in risk on average. We do find, however, an increased likelihood of management turnover when restrictions are removed. We conclude that contract restrictions do not explain the general underperformance of mutual funds, and that these investment restrictions are not binding.     

When boards use related parties: outsourcing and superannuation fund performance

Superannuation funds heavily outsource key fund functions to service providers who play a crucial role in superannuation fund operations and affecting Australians’ retirement savings. We examine the impact of related party service provider usage and trustee‐director affiliation on investment performance. We find that for‐profit funds significantly underperform when using related party service providers. The underperformance is more severe when the board is controlled by more affiliated trustee‐directors and belongs to a vertically integrated conglomerate group. Our results raise concerns about whether recent regulatory reforms increasing trustee‐directors’ duties effectively address the conflicts of interest inherent in related party service provider arrangements.     

The information content of portfolio performance history and persistence in fund performance: An examination of rollover funds

This paper examines the relation between past and future performance and explores the optimal past performance information set for a subset of Australian investment funds, namely, rollover funds. Four categories of funds are examined: fixed interest; multi-sector yield; multi-sector balanced; and multi-sector growth. This study extends the performance persistence literature through the use of three methodologies (1) regression analysis;(2) non-parametric contingency tables; and (3) top (and bottom) quartile rankings to explore the information content of fund performance history for groups of funds differentiated by investment objective. The results of the regression analysis suggest that there is evidence in support of persistence in performance for the fixed interest funds (particularly when performance is measured in terms of Jensen Alpha) but much more ambiguous evidence in relation to the multi-sector funds. Contingency table analysis of fund performance histories of varying lengths reveals quite different results depending upon whether raw or risk-adjusted returns are used. Use of raw returns creates an overall impression of performance reversals, whereas use of risk-adjusted returns suggests the existence of performance persistence. Finally, the use of prior period top-quartile and bottom-quartile ranking are found to show strong evidence of persistence in respect to the risk-adjusted performance of fixed-interest funds.     

Differences in strategy, quality management practices and performance reporting systems between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies

In recent years, an increasing number of organizations are obtaining accreditation offered by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Although ISO accreditation may reflect an organization's pursuit of a quality-focused business strategy and a commitment to quality management practices, ISO accreditation may merely be a response to external (customers') demands for quality certification. This study investigates whether ISO accredited companies differ from non-ISO accredited companies in business strategy and in their implementation of quality management practices. It also investigates differences between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies in their reporting of quality in physical and financial terms and traditional performance measures. Based on a mail questionnaire sent to a sample of ISO and non-ISO accredited New Zealand manufacturing companies, the results showed a significant difference in the business strategy pursued by the two groups, with ISO accredited companies regarding quality as more important than cost efficiencies. However, there was no significant difference in the quality management practices of ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies, except in the areas of process improvement and quality measurement. There was also little evidence of differences in performance reporting systems between ISO accredited and non-ISO accredited companies.