Search results

The strong performance of New Zealand’s equity market and the Government’s efforts to encourage small investors to invest in initial public offering (IPO) firms raises two questions: should retail investors invest in IPO offers and what types of IPOs are worth buying in the long term? The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors construct buy and hold equally weighted portfolios of IPOs and peers based on sales forecast, market capitalisation, and price-to-book ratio. The authors employ four benchmark-adjusted performance measures: cumulative average abnormal return (CAR), holding period return difference, wealth relative, and excess return (α).

IPOs underperform their peers over the medium and long term, with a five-year CAR ranging between −6.4 and −19.7 per cent. IPOs listed post-GFC show inferior benchmark-adjusted performance with a statistically significant average monthly CAPM α of −1.07 per cent (vs −0.13 per cent for pre-2009 IPOs). Over a five-year horizon, mature IPOs, IPOs with high market cap, high sales forecast, high leverage, low price-to-book ratio, and positive earnings forecast outperform other IPOs. Small IPOs or those with a small degree of leverage exhibit the worst five-year CAR ranging between −30.2 and −49.1 per cent. Of all IPOs examined, large firms, well-established firms, and value firms achieved positive five-year CARs of between 6.6 and 17.5 per cent.

The results are useful for retail investors and financial advisors in making sensible investment decisions.

This study is the first to utilise book-to-market and sales forecast to construct peer samples and to identify the red flags for IPO downfalls in New Zealand. It covers the longest sample period (1991-2015) in New Zealand’s context.

This paper aims to examine the performance and benchmark asset allocation policy of 70 KiwiSaver funds catergorised as growth, balanced or conservative over the period October 2007-June 2016. The study focuses on the sources for returns variability across time and returns variation among funds.

Each fund is benchmarked against a portfolio of eight indices representing eight invested asset classes. Three measures were used to examine the after-fee benchmark-adjusted performance of each fund: excess return, cumulative abnormal return and holding period returns difference. Tracking error and active share were used to capture manager’s benchmark deviation.

On average, funds underperform their respective benchmarks, with the mean quarterly excess return (after management fees) of −0.15 per cent (growth), −0.63 per cent (balanced) and −0.83 per cent (conservative). Benchmark returns variability, on average, explains 43-78 per cent of fund’s across-time returns variability, and this is primarily driven by fund’s exposures to global capital markets. Differences in benchmark policies, on average, account for 18.8-39.3 per cent of among-fund returns variation, while differences in fees and security selection may explain the rest. About 61 per cent of balanced and 47 per cent of Growth funds’ managers make selection bets against their benchmarks. There is no consistent evidence that more actively managed funds deliver higher after-fee risk-adjusted performance. Superior performance is often due to randomness.

This study makes use of a unique data set gathered directly from KiwiSaver managers and captures the long-term strategic asset allocation target which underlines the investment management process in reality. The study represents the first attempt to examine the impact of benchmark asset allocation policy on KiwiSaver fund’s returns variability across time and returns variation among funds.

This paper seeks to focus on examining unit trust performance in Malaysia over the period 1991‐2001.

The broad based study covers full economic cycles using 7 different performance measures: raw return, market adjusted return, Jensen's alpha, adjusted Jensen's alpha, Sharpe Index, adjusted Sharpe Index, and Treynor Index.

The results show that on average the performance of Malaysian unit trust falls below market portfolio and risk free returns. However, the variance of unit trust monthly returns is less than the market. Performance by type of funds indicates that bond funds show relatively superior performance, over and above the market and equity unit trusts. This is due to the high interest rate kept during the crisis period. Findings also suggest that there is no persistency in performance as there is no significant inter‐temporal correlation between past and current performance.

The issue of inferior performance needs further investigations to adjust for great importance placed on maintaining consistent dividend distribution. In addition, ill‐managed funds must be separately analysed to see if limited budget, less qualified managers, use of limited information and less sophisticated software could explain the poor performance.

A very useful source of information for potential investors and portfolio management companies looking for opportunities to invest.

The paper contributes to the present body of knowledge by offering broad based performance evidence from an emerging market with strong government back up for unit trusts investment.

The James Fund at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Lally School of Management is a small, recently established, course-driven student-managed investment fund (SMIF). The purpose of this paper is to provide insight to new and existing funds in improving individual fund operation and structure.

The James Fund seeks to outperform an 80/20 equity/fixed income benchmark by investing exclusively in exchange traded funds and to move primary emphasis away from idiosyncratic risk and individual equity valuation back toward asset allocation, the most significant driver of portfolio performance. Buy and sell decisions must receive a three-fifths majority in voting among students and adhere with the investment policy statement.

Groupthink, a common problem in student-managed funds, is observed in trade proposal and manager voting patterns.

Groupthink is partially addressed through the use of instructor feedback on individual student trade diaries. Student managers transition each semester; therefore, the portfolio must meet dormant period criteria limited to a specific list of broadly diversified ETFs, mitigating potential problems from knowledge transfer between management teams that are largely unexamined in the context of SMIFs.

This study examined Indian institutional investors' holding data to understand their investment strategy (Portfolio Concentration/Diversification) and explored whether their skills were associated with their portfolio strategy and performance. The study introduced a new proxy to identify skilled investors by forecasting abnormal returns. Moreover, the study also highlighted where skilled Indian investors put their money for long-term investment.

This study measures portfolio concentration based on the number of holdings, the Hirschman–Herfindahl index (HHI) and benchmarks adjusted industry concentration. The study introduced a new proxy to identify skilled investors. We measured Investors' performance with the help of Carhart's four factors model and examined the relationship between variables through various regression models.

The study concluded a negative relationship between portfolio concentration and performance. However, skilled Indian investors get rewards from portfolio concentration decisions. It was found that skilled investors with few stocks and an industry concentration in their portfolio show a positive association between concentration and fund performance. Additionally, this study found Indian investors showing their faith in the financial sector for long-term investment.

This study examined Indian institutional investors' portfolio concentration strategy and introduced a new proxy to measure investors' skills.

This study takes a novel approach to testing the efficacy of technical analysis. Rather than testing specific trading rules as is typically done in the literature, we rely on institutional portfolio managers’ statements about whether and how intensely they use technical analysis, irrespective of the form in which they implement it. In our sample of more than 10,000 portfolios, about one-third of actively managed equity and balanced funds use technical analysis. We compare the investment performance of funds that use technical analysis versus those that do not, using five metrics. Mean and median (3 and 4-factor) alpha values are generally slightly higher for a cross section of funds using technical analysis, but performance volatility is also higher. Benchmark-adjusted returns are also higher, particularly when market prices are declining. The most remarkable finding is that portfolios with greater reliance on technical analysis have elevated skewness and kurtosis levels relative to portfolios that do not use technical analysis. Funds using technical analysis appear to have provided a meaningful advantage to their investors, albeit in an unexpected way.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of governance quality on firms with multiple voting structures.

The sample includes 487 acquisitions undertaken by dual-class firms from 1996 to 2009. The author used event studies (Patell, 1976) for short-term performance analysis around merger announcement dates; Berkovitch and Narayanan (1993) methods to identify the motive behind these transactions; and standard benchmark adjusted return on assets (and return on sales) (Barber and Lyon, 1996) and BHAR (Mitchell and Stafford, 2000) to analyze long-term post-acquisition performance.

First, dual-class acquirers with better governance quality show stronger performance around takeovers which indicates that these firms make better acquisition decisions. These results hold even after controlling for different firm and deal characteristics. Second, transactions undertaken by acquirers with good governance show little or no sign of agency motive. This reinforces the findings in first. Third, the author reports that acquirers with above-median governance quality display stronger long-term post-acquisition operating as well as stock performances. These results are robust to different benchmarks used for this study.

This paper expands the literature on dual-class firms by showing the impact of governance quality on acquisition activities undertaken by these firms. This is the first study to show that despite agency issues inherent in the dual-class structure, improving governance quality would have a positive impact, at least in the case of corporate takeovers.

Although the solid empirical proof of momentum is documented in various stock markets, there are many debates among academics with respect to the source of momentum profit. The first aim of this paper is intensively re-examine the momentum profit in Vietnam, an important emerging market. Secondly, the authors study the return predictability of a measure of investors’ overreaction, then examine whether the momentum effect in Vietnam is explained by overreaction.

Using the weekly data of more than 300 non-financial Vietnamese stocks during 2009–2019, the authors build a measure of investors’ overreaction, which is based on trading volume and the sign of stock returns. Consequently, to investigate whether momentum exits after controlling for overreaction, the authors carefully compare trading strategies based on overreaction with price momentum strategies using adjusted returns and double sorts on past returns and levels of overreaction.

The article makes three main findings. Firstly, the authors discover the empirical evidence of momentum in the Vietnamese equity market. Secondly, the measure of overreaction could be a predictor of Vietnamese stock returns. Stocks that have experienced a stronger upward overreaction provide a higher average return. Finally, returns on trading strategies based on overreaction are robust after adjusting for momentum, while returns on momentum portfolios become insignificant after adjusting for overreaction. By double-sorting, the authors document that holding past returns constant, the average returns of portfolios rise monotonically with their measure of overreaction. Hence, the momentum profit in Vietnam arises from investors’ overreaction.

The paper extends previous research on the behavioral explanation of momentum in emerging stock markets, which has not been fully exploited in the literature.

This paper has two main purposes. First, this paper aims to examine whether pre-initial public offering (IPO) franchising activity of issuing firms is priced in the financial markets and results in pricing differential between franchising and non-franchising firms at the time of IPO. Second, the paper aims to find out whether firms with pre-IPO franchising achieve better post-IPO stock performance compared to non-franchising firms.

To test research hypotheses, empirical models were developed and tested through ordinary least square regression analysis. Several data sources were used including Thomson One Banker’s SDC database, Compustat/CRSP and IPO prospectuses.

The paper provides further insights to the underpricing phenomenon surrounding IPOs and long-run performance of IPO shares subsequent to listing. Particularly, the study reveals that franchising firms underprice their issues to a higher degree compared to non-franchising firms, and franchising positively affects the post-IPO benchmark adjusted cumulative abnormal returns (CARs) over a three-year observation period.

Because the study tests the proposed hypotheses using data only from the restaurant industry, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test similar hypotheses using larger sample sizes from other industries.

The study’s findings have important implications both for IPO issuers in positioning their offering and for IPO investors in comparing IPO stocks and forming long-run portfolios.

This paper contributes both to the IPO and franchising literatures by providing primary insights about how investors perceive pre-IPO franchising and incorporate their perception into their pricing at an IPO.

This paper examines the relationship between the extent and quality of the four dimensions of corporate social responsibility disclosure (CSRD) namely community, environment, workplace and marketplace with the long-run share price performance of Malaysian initial public offering (IPO) companies.

This study utilised secondary data by the content analysis of the annual reports and Datastream of 115 IPOs listed from 2007 to 2015 in Malaysia. The IPO’s performance was determined by calculating the return measures under the equally weighted and value-weighted schemes of the mean abnormal returns and buy-and-hold abnormal returns covering the three years post-listing using the event-time approach.

The findings demonstrate that Malaysian IPOs experience substantial overperformance and underperformance when both the IPO performance measures are benchmarked against the matched companies and market. The results indicated that the extent and quality of the community and environment CSRD dimensions are positively and significantly correlated to the IPO’s performance. On the other hand, the extent and quality of the workplace and marketplace CSRD dimensions are negatively and significantly correlated to the IPO performance.

Malaysian regulators could benefit from these findings in their endeavour to carry out a reform process on CSRD to improve its quality. The results of this study are important to investors, regulators, non-government organisations, communities and policymakers. They also enhance the understanding of companies about the importance of disclosing greater CSR information to improve their performance and profitability.

To the researchers' best knowledge, this study provides new insights into the association between CSRD and the performance of Malaysian IPO companies, which is considered important.