Closed‐End Fund Discounts and Expected Investment Performance

This article provides empirical support for the theory that closed‐end fund discounts reflect expected investment performance. Evidence is presented to explain how equity closed‐end fund initial public offerings (IPOs) can sell at a premium when existing funds sell at a discount and why the initial IPO premiums decay after the IPO. Relative premium decay data are presented. Tests on (1) the relation between relative premium changes and investment performance following IPOs, (2) relative premium mean‐reversion following management changes, and (3) net redemptions following closed‐end fund open‐endings for funds trading at pre‐open‐ending announcement discounts individually support and collectively strongly support the theory.     

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.     

Security Concentration and Active Fund Management: Do Focused Funds Offer Superior Performance?

We examine gross fund returns based on the number of securities held and find no evidence that focused funds outperform diversified funds. After deducting expenses, focused funds significantly underperform. Controlling for various fund characteristics, fund performance is positively related to the fund's number of holdings both before and after expenses. We find evidence linking focused fund underperformance to agency and liquidity problems. Finally, the attrition rate of focused funds is higher than that of diversified funds. These results do not support the view that managers holding focused portfolios have superior stock‐picking skills or that focused funds provide value to investors.     

How Informative Is Floating NAV When Securities Trade Infrequently?

We examine if a floating net asset value (NAV) increases the transparency of risk for investors. Using closed‐income fixed income funds we find little evidence that a floating NAV helps investors better understand the value and risk of a fund when a fund's assets trade infrequently. This potentially informs the debate regarding the adoption of a floating NAV in the money market industry. Our results suggest that it is unlikely that the benefits of floating NAV will outweigh the costs.     

Family Matters: Rankings Within Fund Families and Fund Inflows

Abstract:  This paper examines the influence of the position of a fund within its family on its subsequent net-inflows. Our empirical study of the US equity mutual fund market shows that reaching a top position within the family leads to large inflows. These inflows accrue beyond those expected, given the performance of the fund in its respective market segment. The effect is much stronger in large families than in small families. We also find that inflows significantly increase if a fund moves into the top positions within its family from one year to another. These results lead to competition within the fund family and to important risk taking incentives for fund managers.     

Fund Manager Allocation

We show that fund families allocate their most skilled managers to market segments in which manager skill is rewarded best. In efficient markets, even skilled managers cannot generate excess returns. In less efficient markets, skilled managers can exploit inefficiencies and generate higher performance than unskilled managers. Fund families seem to be aware of the relation between skill, efficiency, and performance, and allocate more skilled managers to inefficient markets. They pursue this strategy when hiring new fund managers and when reassigning managers to funds within the family. Overall, we conclude that fund families allocate fund managers in an efficient way.