The Performance of Actively Managed International Mutual Funds

International mutual funds allow individual investors to diversify abroad at a reasonable cost. This paper tests whether international funds that actively engage in country and security selection outperform passive global benchmarks. We apply a mean-variance efficiency test that incorporates the practical prohibition against short sales of open-end mutual funds. Our tests reject the efficiency of the world equity market portfolio over the sample period, and our funds as a group outperform the inefficient world index. However, we find no evidence of security selectivity ability using a 12-country benchmark. We do find that active international funds provide global diversification benefits. Tests using the Positive Period Weight (PPW) measure of Grinblatt and Titman (1989), which is robust to nonlinearity in fund and benchmark returns, yield similar results.     

Determinants of cost efficiencies in the mutual fund industry

We evaluate determinants of cost efficiencies in the U.S. mutual fund industry for 1998-2003. Our empirical results show that cost increases in this industry have been less than proportional to increases in assets. We find that funds without a 12b-1 plan show larger economies of scale than funds with a 12b-1 plan; institutional funds show greater economies of scale than do retail funds; and that fund families that are more focused in their investment objectives reap benefits of lower fund management costs than do fund families that are more diversified in their investment objectives.     

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.     

ECONOMIES OF SCALE IN MUTUAL FUND ADMINISTRATION

Since many mutual fund expenses are fixed costs, asset growth should reduce the ratio of fund expenses to average net assets. A translog cost function is estimated for a sample of 2,610 funds to evaluate the existence and extent of economies of scale in mutual fund administration. The elasticity of fund expenses with respect to fund assets is significantly less than one, indicating there are economies of scale in mutual fund administration. Average costs diminish over the full range of fund assets; however, the rapid decrease in average costs is exhausted by about $3.5 billion in fund assets.     

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.     

Mutual Fund Advisory Contracts: An Empirical Investigation

We investigate marginal compensation rates in mutual fund advisory contracts and find the following. Equity and foreign fund advisors receive higher marginal compensation than debt and domestic fund advisors. Advisors of funds with greater turnover receive higher marginal compensation. Also, closed-end fund advisors receive higher marginal compensation than open-end fund advisors. Finally, we find that marginal compensation is lower for advisors of large funds and members of large fund families. We argue that these differences in marginal compensation reflect differences in advisor marginal product, differences in the difficulty of monitoring performance, differences in control environments, and scale economies.     

The determinants of mutual fund starts

For a sample of 1163 mutual funds started over the period 1979-1992,we find that fund initiations are positively related to thelevel of assets invested in and the capital gains embedded inother funds with the same objective, the fund family's priorperformance, the fraction of funds in the family in the lowrange of fees, and the decision by large families to open similarfunds in the prior year. In addition, consistent with the presenceof scale and scope economies in fund openings, we find thatlarge families and families that have more experience in openingfunds in the past are more likely to open new funds.     

证券投资基金规模适度性研究——基于中国市场的证据

随着社保、养老金等中长期资金的大规模入市,中国公募基金规模面临更快扩张,那么基金规模究竟是可以无限扩张还是存在制约？本文研究发现,基金规模扩张会受到基金经理与投资者之间的委托代理冲突、边际规模报酬递减、投资者大规模赎回的制约。基于此,本文提出了基金管理规模适度区间的概念及其相应计量模型,并借此对2011—2019年间中国公募基金市场规模的适度性进行实证判断和检验,结果显示:(1)中国公募基金的平均管理规模在2015年之前过大,2016年之后趋向适度,而在2019年出现偏小现象。(2)中国基金市场规模适度区间的上、下限呈现逐年减小趋势,但二者的差值,即适度性区间的宽度却逐年增加。(3)规模适度基金的业绩表现远好于规模不足和规模过大两类基金,但市场上的规模适度基金占比则小于另外两类基金。最后,本文就如何提升公募基金,尤其是对安全性和盈利性要求更高的养老保险基金的规模适度性提出了相应对策建议。     

UNITARY BOARDS AND MUTUAL FUND GOVERNANCE

A unique governance structure for mutual funds is unitary board—one board overseeing all funds in the entire family. We find strong evidence for unitary board as an effective governance mechanism. Funds with unitary boards are associated with lower fees, are more likely to pass the economies of scale benefits to investors, are less likely to be involved in trading scandals, and rank higher on stewardship. In contrast, funds with larger or more independent boards charge higher fees and rank lower on stewardship. Our findings indicate that unitary boards of small size, rather than independent boards, may be more beneficial to fund shareholders.     

A Fundamental Approach to Estimating Economies of Scale and Scope of Financial Products: The Case of Mutual Funds

We propose a Fundamental approach to estimate the economies of scale and scope for financial institutions offering multi-product lines. We first estimate pure economies of scale from its fundamental definition, which is the marginal cost reduction that is to be achieved by single product firms of increasing size that offer the same product. Similarly, we estimate the economies of scope from its fundamental definition, as the marginal cost reduction achieved by the addition of a new product line. Operationally, we compare the cost of operating a say, 3 product-line financial institution with the cost of operating a portfolios of companies that are synthetically created from a control sample of financial institutions offering fewer, such as 2 and 1 similar product lines. When this approach is applied to mutual funds data, we find economies of scale for some fund type. The evidence on marginal cost economies due to increasing scope is rather weak. The results have practical implications for potential organizers and current management of investment companies.     

Fund ownership and stock price informativeness of Chinese listed firms

We examine the impact of mutual fund ownership on stock price informativeness in China. Existing evidence shows that stock price informativeness is low in China, and attributes this to firms’ lack of disclosure incentives under the weak investor protection institutional environment. Mutual funds are more sophisticated and influential than individual investors to monitor firms, and thus serve as an external governance mechanism to improve corporate transparency. However, the impact of mutual funds in China can also be moderated by state ownership of listed firms, which reduces firms’ dependence on outside investors for capital. Indeed, we find that mutual fund ownership is positively related to share price informativeness, but this effect is less pronounced among state-controlled firms. The main policy implication from our findings is that mutual funds contribute to the corporate information environment of emerging economies but further privatization of listed firms would be needed to realize greater benefit.     

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.     

Should Investors Avoid All Actively Managed Mutual Funds? A Study in Bayesian Performance Evaluation

This paper analyzes mutual-fund performance from an investor's perspective. We study the portfolio-choice problem for a mean-variance investor choosing among a risk-free asset, index funds, and actively managed mutual funds. To solve this problem, we employ a Bayesian method of performance evaluation; a key innovation in our approach is the development of a flexible set of prior beliefs about managerial skill. We then apply our methodology to a sample of 1,437 mutual funds. We find that some extremely skeptical prior beliefs nevertheless lead to economically significant allocations to active managers.     

Benchmark Invariancy,Seasonality and APM-Free Portfolio Performance Measures

The Jobson-Korkie (1981) Z score and the positive period weighting (PPW) score of Grinblatt and Titman (1989) are applied to various benchmarks of market and mimicking portfolios to study the benchmark invariancy problem. Significantly different portfolio performance inferences are found for a sample of 146 equity mutual funds depending on the mean-variance efficiency of the portfolio benchmarks (mimicking portfolios versus market indices). Portfolio performance inferences are affected significantly by the number of factors, nonsynchronous trading adjustment, and the sizes of the firms used for factor extraction. The returns of the portfolio benchmarks exhibit significant monthly seasonalities, which, in turn, significantly influence mutual fund performance inferences.     

Commonalities in investment strategy and the determinants of performance in mutual fund mergers

This paper examines the determinants of cross-sectional variation in post-merger mutual fund performance. Mergers between funds with similar management objectives, as reflected by average portfolio book-to-market ratio, price–earnings ratio, beta and market capitalization values, outperform mergers between funds with dissimilar strategies. This superior performance transcends lower portfolio rebalancing costs which might be realized between merging funds which hold more assets in common. These results suggest that mutual fund mergers create collaborative benefits between funds with similar strategies. We also examine if fund governance structures influence the fund pairing process, testing if stronger fund oversight mitigates pairing mismatches. We find that less independent boards of trustees and boards with higher compensation are related to greater strategic mismatches between funds. These results suggest that more entrenched boards are more tolerant of fund mismatches which benefit the investment company, yet are not in investor’s best interests.     

The Corporate Governance Premium,Returns, and Mutual Funds

Mutual funds with a preference for strong corporate governance (CG) have performance similar to mutual funds with a preference for weak CG. We find a direct relation between overall mutual fund CG preference and the corporate governance premium (CGP). Furthermore, the investment preferences of mutual funds forecast the change in the CGP. We provide evidence that the investment activities of institutional investors can affect stock performance, and that shifts by institutional investors in CG preference impact the appearance of the CGP.     

Size and performance of Chinese mutual funds: The role of economy of scale and liquidity

Using a detailed stockholding for a comprehensive sample of Chinese open-end equity mutual funds from 2004 to the first half of 2010, we investigated the effect of economy of scale and liquidity on the relationship between fund size and performance. We find that an inverted U-shape relationship exists between fund size and performance as measured by various performance benchmarks. Both economy of scale and liquidity play important roles in Chinese mutual funds. Furthermore, their combined effect explains the inverted U-shape relationship of size and performance reasonably well.     

The Only Fund in Town? Geographic Segmentation in the US Mutual Fund Industry

We find that mutual funds located in regions with more competing funds charge lower management fees, but higher fees related to sales and distribution (12b‐1 fees), sales loads, and other nonmanagement fee expenses. There is some evidence that funds in more competitive regions have higher total expense ratios than similar funds in less competitive regions. Our results indicate that while increased competition drives down fund profits, it creates a negative externality by way of increased sales expenses. Overall, our results suggest the mutual fund industry is characterized by monopolistic competition determined at the local level.     

The Relation between Price and Performance in the Mutual Fund Industry

Gruber (1996) drew attention to the puzzle that investors buy actively managed equity mutual funds, even though on average such funds underperform index funds. We uncover another puzzling fact about the market for equity mutual funds: Funds with worse before-fee performance charge higher fees. This negative relation between fees and performance is robust and can be explained as the outcome of strategic fee-setting by mutual funds in the presence of investors with different degrees of sensitivity to performance. We also find some evidence that better fund governance may bring fees more in line with performance.     

The Asset Management Industry in Asia: Dynamics of Growth,Structure, and Performance

We examine the industrial organization and institutional development of the asset management industry in Asian developing economies—specifically in China, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, and Thailand. We focus on the size and growth of the buy‐side of the respective financial markets, asset allocation, the regulatory environment, and the state of internationalization of the fund management industry in its key components—mutual funds, pension funds, and asset management for high net worth individuals. We link the evolution of professional asset management in these environments to the development of the respective capital markets and to the evolution of corporate governance. We find that the fund management industry occupies a very small niche in domestic financial systems that are dominated by banks. At the same time, we find that its growth has been very rapid in the early 2000s and we suggest that this is likely to persist as the demand for professional management of financial wealth in the region develops and as the pension fund sectors of the respective economies are liberalized to allow larger portions of assets to be invested in collective investment schemes.