UK mutual fund performance: Skill or luck?

Using a comprehensive data set on (surviving and non-surviving) UK equity mutual funds, we use a cross-section bootstrap methodology to distinguish between ‘skill’ and ‘luck’ for individual funds. This methodology allows for non-normality in the idiosyncratic risk of the funds — a major issue when considering those funds which appear to be either very good or very bad performers, since these are the funds which investors are primarily interested in identifying. Our study points to the existence of stock picking ability among a relatively small number of top performing UK equity mutual funds (i.e. performance which is not solely due to good luck). At the negative end of the performance scale, our analysis strongly rejects the hypothesis that most poor performing funds are merely unlucky. Most of these funds demonstrate ‘bad skill’. Recursive estimation and Kalman ‘smoothed’ coefficients indicate temporal stability in the ex-post performance alpha's of winner and loser portfolios. We also find performance persistence amongst loser but not amongst winner funds.     

Does corporate social responsibility affect mutual fund performance and flows?

We use an asset-weighted composite corporate social responsibility (CSR) fund score to study the effects of CSR on fund performance and flows. Compared to low-CSR funds, high-CSR funds display poorer performance, stronger performance persistence, a weaker performance-flow relationship, and comparable persistence in flows. These findings are consistent with investors in high-CSR funds deriving utility from non-performance attributes.     

What impact does a change of fund manager have on mutual fund performance?

Using a unique database of UK fund manager changes over the period from 1997 to 2011, we examine the impact of such changes on fund performance. We find clear evidence to suggest that a manager change does affect the benchmark-adjusted performance of UK mutual funds. In particular we find a significant deterioration in the benchmark-adjusted returns of funds that were top performers before the manager exit and, conversely, a significant improvement in the average benchmark-adjusted returns of funds that were poor performers before the manager exit. Our use of the Carhart's (1997) four-factor model reveals that the improvement in average post manager exit performance is accompanied by a reduction in market risk, a slight reduction in exposure to small cap stocks, and an increase in exposure to value and momentum stocks. Overall, our results suggest that UK fund management companies have been relatively successful in replacing bad managers with better managers, but relatively unsuccessful at finding equivalent replacements for their top performing managers. We believe that regulators should therefore try to ensure that all efforts are made by fund management companies to inform all of their investors about a change in management.     

A new family of equity style indices and mutual fund performance: Do liquidity and idiosyncratic risk matter?

We propose and test novel multifactor models of daily mutual fund performance. To this aim, we set up equity style indices and derive risk factors, which nest the established Fama and French (1992) and Carhart (1997) factors. We add two additional risk factors, namely idiosyncratic risk and Amihud (2002) liquidity. Our sample contains 528 actively managed mutual funds with European stock market focus during 2002 to 2009. Model estimation reveals that—while market excess return and size appear significant for the cross-section of all funds—the remainder factors explain the performance of subsets of funds. About one third of the funds exhibit significant factor sensitivities not only with respect to valuation or momentum, but also with respect to liquidity or idiosyncratic risk. No single risk factor is dominated and hence our six factor model may serve as a valid performance benchmark. In a four factor model setting, the Carhart model and a model with valuation replaced by liquidity perform best. Our results remain stable under various robustness checks. We further document that managers on average prefer liquid stocks, show no aggregate idiosyncratic risk preference and deliver results that are consistent with equilibrium models of fund performance.     

Do machines beat humans? Evidence from mutual fund performance persistence

We study the performance persistence of quantitative actively managed US equity funds. We show that the persistence of quantitative funds originates from poor performers and that there are reversals at the top of the performance scale, which is no different from the widely accepted evidence in the mutual fund literature. When testing for differences in performance persistence between quantitative and non–quantitative funds, we find no differences for poorly performing funds, but we observe significantly more reversals for quantitative funds at the top of the performance distribution. We also find that the differences in performance persistence are not explained by differences in flow–induced incentives to generate alpha, as there is no heterogeneity in investors preferences when allocating capital to these funds. Overall our results are consistent with machines having less skill than their human counterparts.     

Endogeneity in the mutual fund flow–performance relationship: An instrumental variables solution

We use an instrumental variables (IV) approach to examine the effects of dynamic endogeneity when estimating the relationship between mutual fund flows and performance. Unlike the one-stage estimation approach commonly used in prior research, the IV approach allows us to address reverse causality between flow and performance. Through rigorous exclusion tests, we conclude that fund media coverage, risk ranking, and management structure win in a horse race as exogenous instruments for fund flow, while the fund turnover ratio and institutional share perform best as instruments for fund performance. We then demonstrate that endogeneity bias leads to inaccurate inferences in one-stage estimates, as evidenced by the reversals of the signs of flow and performance coefficient estimates when we switch to the IV approach. We find that careful attention to model specification allows us to resolve several widespread inconsistencies in the literature that were likely driven by model misspecification.     

The performance of precious-metal mutual funds: Does uncertainty matter?

We studied the relative risk-adjusted returns and downside risk performance of precious-metal mutual funds (PMFs) in different uncertainty periods (pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis) using propensity score matching techniques and difference-in-differences matching regression. For a sample of PMFs and global corporate funds quoted in USD over the period January 2005 to June 2015, we found that the relative performance of PMFs differed across uncertainty periods. Thus, they performed similarly to corporate funds in the pre-crisis period, they outperformed corporate funds regarding risk-adjusted returns but underperformed in terms of downside risk in the crisis period and they displayed a similar risk-return performance to corporate funds in the post-crisis period. Difference-in-difference estimates indicate that a shift from low to high uncertainty had a positive impact on risk-adjusted returns for PMFs, whereas this advantage dissipated when uncertainty was reduced. However, fluctuations in uncertainty had mixed effects on the relative downside risk associated with PMFs. This evidence has implications for investors who seek to gain exposure to precious metals using PMFs.     

Informativeness of mutual fund advertisements: Does advertising communicate fund quality to investors?

We uncover a positive relation between advertising expenditures and skill in the mutual fund industry. Motivated by economic signaling models, we find that funds advertising in magazines outperform their peers by 83 basis points in the subsequent year. We determine that the performance differential between advertising and nonadvertising funds is largest when investment opportunities are high and persists for 36 months. Generally, the positive relation between advertising expenditures and future fund flows is not sensitive to the content of the advertisements and is strongest when investor attention is high.     

WSJ Category Kings – The impact of media attention on consumer and mutual fund investment decisions

We exploit a novel natural experiment to establish a causal relation between media attention and consumer investment behavior, independent of the conveyed information. Our findings indicate a 31% local average increase in quarterly capital flows into mutual funds mentioned in a prominent Wall Street Journal “Category Kings” ranking list, compared to those funds which just missed making the list. This flow increase is about seven times larger than extra flows due to the well-documented performance-flow relation. Other funds in the same fund complex receive substantial extra flows as well, especially in smaller complexes. There is no increase in flows when the Wall Street Journal publishes similar lists absent the prominence of the Category Kings labeling. We show mutual fund managers react to the incentive created by the media effect in a strategic way predicted by theory, and present evidence for the existence of propagation mechanisms including increased fund complex advertising subsequent to having a Category King and increased efficacy of subsequent fund media mentions.     

Changes to mutual fund risk: Intentional or mean reverting?

An empirical issue is whether a mutual fund’s change in intertemporal risk is intentional or arises from risk mean reversion. Our methodology uses actual fund trades to identify funds that actively change risk. Funds that are statistically identified as trading to change return variance or tracking error variance do not exhibit risk mean reversion. Mostly, funds trade to reduce risk and, in particular, tracking error variance. This is most evident for funds that previously attained a low tracking error variance. We find no evidence of a relation between past performance and intended changes to return variance or tracking error variance.     

Asset sales in the mutual fund industry: Who gains?

We analyze gains from intercorporate sales of mutual fund subsidiaries, using mandated SEC disclosures to assess the performance of mutual funds transferred by these transactions. Sellers are financial conglomerates (banks) using equity-based deals to transfer poorly performing funds to highly focused asset management companies. The transferred funds experience significant improvements in risk-adjusted returns, efficiency, and asset growth. These improvements are closely correlated with the gains in wealth to buyers and sellers at deal announcements, indicating the market efficiently capitalizes expected performance improvements. Our results provide evidence that these transactions transfer assets to acquirers better able to manage them, generating gains for fund holders and buyer and seller shareholders.     

Herding by mutual funds: impact on performance and investors’ response†

In this paper we investigate whether herding by actively managed equity funds affects their performances and flows over the 1980–2013 period. We show that during the herding quarter, on average, funds that trade with the herd benefit from this behavior. Although this does not directly translate into a positive association between the extent to which funds herd and their subsequent performance, we find that the funds that follow the herd earn negative abnormal returns whereas the ones that lead earn no abnormal returns. Our results also indicate that investors react adversely to follower funds while they are neutral towards the leader funds.     

The effect of near- versus distant-future mindsets on socially responsible investors’ mutual fund preferences

Socially responsible investing (SRI) has seen tremendous growth in recent years. For SRI investors, choosing among potential SRI investments often requires making trade-offs between social responsibility and financial aspects of the investment. In this study, we examine contexts where investors are more versus less willing to make such trade-offs, specifically in the context of SRI-guided mutual funds among Muslim investors. We expect that priming a near-future mindset will make respondents less likely to trade-off social responsibility for financial considerations, whereas priming a distant-future mindset will make respondents more likely to make such trade-offs. Using a discrete choice experimental design among Saudi Arabian adults, we find support for our hypotheses. Managerial implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

Do investors show an attentional bias toward past performance? An eye-tracking experiment on visual attention to mutual fund disclosures in simplified fund prospectuses

This study examines the cognitive processes underlying investors’ extrapolations of past fund performance and whether investors’ attention patterns may explain their return-chasing behaviors. We measured the attention that investors paid to mutual fund disclosures in a simplified fund prospectus using unobtrusive infrared eye tracking. Results suggest that prior fund performance, which is normatively irrelevant information and not useful in predicting future performance, received considerable attention from investors. More interestingly, the impact of prior fund performance on investors’ purchasing intentions was fully mediated through expected returns and attention paid to past performance information. The results indicate that investors apparently believe in performance persistence or in a ‘hot hand’ effect, and that mutual fund purchases are driven by salient information such as superior performance. Moreover, we tested the disclaimer mandated by regulatory bodies, which warns that past performance does not guarantee future results. We found that the disclaimer was ineffective in reducing investors’ extrapolation biases, despite the fact that the disclaimer was attended to and properly encoded by investors.     

Do liquidity and idiosyncratic risk matter? Evidence from the European mutual fund market

This paper examines the interaction of idiosyncratic risk, liquidity and return across time in determining fund performance, as well as across investment style portfolios of European mutual funds. This study utilizes a unique data set including returns for equity mutual funds registered in six European countries. Overall, using monthly data, we find that both liquidity and idiosyncratic risk are relevant in determining mutual fund returns. Our results are robust across different model specifications. We show that model specifications up to six factors are useful as these risk factors capture different aspects in the cross-section of mutual funds returns. The evidence regarding mutual funds subgroups is strongly in favor of the significance of liquidity, and idiosyncratic risk to a lesser extent, as risk factors. Even if liquidity and idiosyncratic risk are considered at the same time, one factor is not significantly decreasing the importance of the other factor.     

Actively managed mutual funds holding passive investments: What do ETF positions tell us about mutual fund ability?

We provide the first in-depth examination of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) within actively managed mutual fund (AMMF) portfolios to better understand why AMMFs make substantial investments in passive ETFs. We examine the association between holding ETF positions and AMMF performance, as well as indirect measures of performance, including market timing, flow management, and cash holdings. We find that over one-third of AMMFs take an ETF position between 2004 and 2015. Our results indicate that AMMFs allocating large portions of their portfolio to ETFs perform worse, by between 0.41% and 1.63% annually using various performance measures. These AMMFs also exhibit worse market timing and hold more cash. In contrast, AMMFs that hold ETFs in small amounts have similar characteristics to non-user AMMFs. Therefore, the act of holding an ETF does not signal inferior ability, however, taking large ETF positions does.     

How mutual fund investors’ objective and subjective knowledge impacts their information search and processing behaviour

Contrary to the popular belief that objective knowledge (OK) (that is, what is actually stored in the memory) and subjective knowledge (SK) (that is, what individuals perceive they know) differently impact information search and information-processing behaviour, an empirical study conducted on 268 mutual fund (MF) investors suggests no significant difference in the impact of OK and SK on the width and depth of information search and information processing. The study suggests that OK and SK significantly positively impact the width and depth of information search and information-processing behaviour, however, no significant difference exists in the way they impact. The possible explanation put forward is that even though MF investors may suffer from self-deception (that is, pseudo expertise) and report high knowledge (that is, high SK), the impact of SK on actual investment behaviour is not significantly different from that of OK. The implications of the findings are also discussed.     

Does mutual fund ownership reduce stock price clustering? Evidence from active and index funds

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting - The literature is rich with examples of price clustering in financial markets. This study focuses on the relation between mutual fund ownership (both...