Search results

This study aims to comparatively analyze the systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk exposure of both Islamic and conventional funds in Pakistan to see which of the funds has higher risk exposure.

The study analyzes different types of risks involved in both Islamic and conventional funds for the period from 2009 to 2016 by using different risk measures. For systematic and idiosyncratic risk single factor CAPM and multifactor models such as Fama French three factors model and Carhart four factors model are used. For downside risk analysis different measures such as downside beta, relative beta, value at risk and expected short fall are used.

The study finds that Islamic funds have lower risk exposure (including total, systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk) compared with their conventional counterparts in most of the sample years, and hence, making them appear more attractive for investment especially for Sharīʿah-compliant investors preferring low risk preferences.

As this study shows, Islamic mutual funds exhibit lower risk exposure than their conventional counterparts so investors with lower risk preferences can invest in these kinds of funds. In this way, this research provides the input to the individual investors (especially Sharīʿah-compliant investors who want to avoid interest based investment) to help them with their investment decisions as they can make a more diversified portfolio by considering Islamic funds as a mean for reducing the risk exposure.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first attempt at world level in looking at the comparative risk analysis of various types of the risks as follows: systematic, idiosyncratic and downside risk, for both Islamic and conventional funds, and thus, provides significant contribution in the literature of mutual funds.

One of the implications of Islamic investment principles is the availability of Islamic financial instruments in the financial market. The main aim of this research is to observe the differences in terms of performance between Islamic and conventional mutual fund in the context of Malaysian capital market.

To achieve the major objectives of this paper standard methods wereused for evaluating the mutual funds performance, for example, Sharpe index and adjusted Sharpe index, Jensen Alpha, Timing and selectivity ability. The scope of the paper is to measure the relative quantitative performance of funds which was managed based on two different approaches.

The basic finding of the paper is that Islamic funds performed better than the conventional funds during bearish economic trends while, conventional funds showed better performance than Islamic funds during bullish economic conditions. In addition to that finding, both conventional and Islamic funds were unable to achieve at least 50 per cent market diversification levels, though conventional funds are found to have a marginally better diversification level than the Islamic funds. The results also suggest that fund managers are unable to correctly identify good bargain stocks and to forecast the price movements of the general market.

The main limitation is that the samples of conventional and Islamic mutual funds were from one developing market. The findings could be better validated if the sample included the mutual funds from other developed and developing economies, where both Islamic and conventional funds are available.

The findings suggest that having Islamic mutual funds in an investment portfolio helps to hedge the downside risk in an adverse economic situation.

So far there is no published evidence on the relative performance of Islamic and conventional mutual funds in Malaysia as well as other developing countries. Therefore, this paper adds new knowledge to the mutual funds literature.

This paper seeks to review and extend previous research on the performance of Islamic mutual funds (IMFs) by evaluating the relative performance of IMFs and conventional funds during the global economic crisis in the context of the Saudi Arabian capital market.

This paper compares the market timing and stock selection abilities of 159 mutual funds listed on the Saudi Arabian stock market from 2007 to 2011 by using the CAPM regression and Treynor and Mazuy models. The paper addresses the benchmark problem from which most prior IMFs studies suffered by using appropriate regional benchmarks. As a robustness check, coefficients of IMFs and conventional funds are compared by using the differences in mean and standard deviation analysis obtained from the standard CAPM model on individual funds.

The empirical results show evidence of better performance of IMFs relative to conventional funds during periods of economic crisis. In addition, although there is no evidence of relative superiority in market timing ability, managers of IMFs appear to have better stock selection ability during times of economic crisis.

The combination of superior stock selection ability of IMFs and the negative market timing ability of conventional funds suggest that IMFs offer better hedging opportunities for investors during periods of economic downturn.

The findings of this paper suggest that IMFs can provide hedging benefits during adverse economic conditions – an issue of great importance due to the current and forecast insecurity surrounding the global capital markets. By holding a portion of their investment portfolio in IMFs, investors can experience a higher degree of confidence in terms of investment security, growth and returns. Similarly, managers of conventional funds can improve risk adjusted performance by following similar screening criteria as IMFs during economic slowdowns.

This paper represents the first comprehensive study on the comparative performance of Islamic and conventional mutual funds during the current financial crisis by including all fund managers listed on the Saudi Arabian stock market. The paper extends the knowledge of the emerging literature of Islamic finance and mutual fund performance.

This study aims to analyze the impact of different governance characteristics on the ratings of both Islamic and conventional mutual funds.

This study used panel data ordered probit regression model. Furthermore, to capture the mutual funds rating persistence effect and address the issue of endogeneity dynamic panel model is used and the results are estimated using the generalized method of the moment (GMM) technique.

The results indicated that amongst the corporate governance characteristics, board size, the board independence, directors and institutional ownership, and overall governance quality positively affect the ratings of both Islamic and conventional funds. However, chief executive officer (CEO) duality and board gender diversity did not show a significant impact on the ratings of these funds.

The current research provides input to the asset management firms as to how they can increase the fund ratings by implementing strong governance practises. Furthermore, the study also provides input to the rating agencies to account for governance characteristics along with financial indicators, when issuing the rating of any fund.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first attempt to analyze the impact of corporate governance characteristics on the rating of both Islamic and conventional mutual funds and hence provides a significant contribution to the literature.

The purpose of this study is to update the investment literature by providing latest evidence of performance of Islamic mutual funds by using global sample mutual funds data to support with empirical facts.

This study analyzes the comparative performance of Islamic and conventional mutual funds by using capital asset pricing model, Fama & French’s three-factor model and Carhart’s four-factor model. Further, the study tested the coskenwness effect by using data envelopment analysis approach.

The authors find evidence that when size of the funds is controlled, Islamic investment underperform the conventional mutual funds in four out of six models. The size of underperformance varies from model to model: from 32 basis points in the Carhart’s four-factor model with the skewness factor to two basis points at the Fama and French’s three-factor model. Also the study finds that alpha(s) are only insignificant for conventional mutual funds when the skewness factor is included in the regression. While comparing the loading on Islamic mutual funds, results show that Islamic mutual funds are less risky than conventional mutual funds when they are controlled for skewness.

This study uses the different factor models of performance evolution which help in overcoming weakness of measuring the Islamic mutual funds’ performance.

This study aims to test mutual fund superiority, comparing the performance of 646 Islamic mutual funds with 475 ethical funds and conventional proxies.

This study uses statistical methods including paired t-statistics of independent samples, one-way Bonferroni test–analysis of variance–F-statistic for testing means equality, the chi-squared test for median equality and regression models corrected for heteroscedasticity. These methods are used to identify superiority of mutual funds and to validate the significance of the results.

The findings confirm the superiority of conventional funds over ethical funds and ethical funds over Islamic funds. Both ethical and Islamic funds, however, outperform conventional proxies during some recessionary periods. Moreover, stronger performance is recorded for Islamic funds in Europe and North America regions and across age and asset allocation categories, but limited support for reversal fund size, composition focus and reversed price effect.

These findings should assist investors when deciding to invest and motivate Islamic and ethical funds to improve their portfolio formation and asset allocation strategies set by their professional managers.

The originality of this study is in its comprehensive approach in that it compares the performance of funds after accounting for such characteristics as fund objectives, size, age, asset allocation, geographical investment focus, fund composition focus, share price levels and the effect of global crises. This study approach is not only original and productive in documenting Islamic funds’ performance for the past three decades (1990–2022) but can also update the literature on these characteristics collectively and individually.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of Shariah guidelines on the performance of the Dow Jones Islamic Index (DJIM-US). Shariah or Islamic law is a set of rules that determines Islamic allowed activities including socially and ethically acceptable investments.

The authors apply four risk-adjusted methodologies and co-integration analysis to investigate whether limited asset universe Shariah investments limit investment opportunities and impose an opportunity cost on investors given the prediction of conventional portfolio theories.

In contrast to the prediction of conventional portfolio theories, the findings suggest no apparent opportunity cost for Shariah compatible investments. In particular, Dow Jones Islamic Mutual Funds do not under-perform the broader market US benchmarks nor do they have any co-integration with the broader indexes. Moreover, the authors find similar evidence in the studies of Islamic mutual funds in Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Kuwait.

The findings will be reinforced when the authors will look into long run performance of Shariah compliant funds in future. Using non-linear approach will add further clarity to the findings.

The results provide an insight suggesting that successful mutual fund managers are able to overcome Shariah restrictions and constraints through creative investment strategies. In the data set, the Amana Trust Growth fund and the Amana Trust Income fund were always the best performers with a highly significant abnormal return, no matter what the methodology was.

The performance of Islamic funds during the approximately seven-year period covered by the study is very promising. Popularity of Islamic Investment is expected to grow as Muslim population represents about 25 percent of the world population and the possibility for the Muslim funds to be considered as viable alternative by non-Shariah abiding or non-Muslim investors. The empirical results in the paper provide evidence that lack in diversification did not constrain the performance of Islamic funds.

This paper applied comprehensive risk-adjusted methodologies and co-integration analysis to Islamic Funds for a seven-year period for multiple countries. The findings confirm previously obtained results and highlight the fact that constrained Islamic Funds may not under-perform as per conventional portfolio theories.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of mutual funds during the COVID-19 pandemic with environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. The main research question is whether mutual fund performance differs with respect to the level of the mutual fund’s ESG score.

The data set contains global fund data, and mutual fund performance is analyzed using two types of data envelopment analysis (DEA) models: the DEA portfolio index (DPEI) and the range direction measure (RDM) DEA. Propensity score matching and logistic regression are also applied.

The results reveal that: nonequity mutual funds present significantly higher performance compared to the performance of equity mutual funds; mutual funds with high ESG scores are associated with significantly higher performance compared to those with low to medium ESG scores; funds with high ESG scores experience higher performance irrespective of their type; and efficiency scores derived from the RDM DEA are significantly higher than those derived from the DPEI model.

Investors, fund managers and market participants can benefit from the findings of this study and improve their investment decision-making process, including more sustainable funds in their portfolios. Regulators and policymakers should further promote or even require the inclusion of more sustainable investments in the financial products offered by institutional investors. The main limitation of the study is related to data availability regarding the ESG score of mutual funds.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that provides robust evidence in support of a positive association between ESG scores and mutual fund performance during the pandemic-induced crisis applying a DEA methodology.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the return performance and persistence of ethical and conventional mutual funds during two extreme events, the Asian and the global financial crises under Shariah constraints.

The overall sample comprises of 129 Islamic mutual funds (IMFs) and 350 conventional mutual funds (CMFs) in Malaysia, and the average monthly data cover two periods of market cycles, before and during a financial crisis. The net of all expenses data is obtained from the Morningstar Database. This study employs various market risk-adjusted performance measures (ratios) to estimate the funds’ overall performance during the crises, and then it uses CAPM model to estimate the parameters via panel data approach. Moreover, paper employs the two persistence performance measures on IMFs and CMFs through contingency tables. It tests for the performance persistence effects for IMFs, CMFs using repeat winner and the cross-product ratio (CPR) tests proposed by Malkiel (1995) and Brown and Goetzmann (1995), respectively.

The main findings of the paper are: on average, both funds IMF and the CMF outperform the market return during the entire sample period; none of the funds is better than the “others” during the financial crises and the pre-crisis periods; the ethical fund – IMF outperforms the CMF over the study period. This outcome also indicates that ethical funds are more persistent especially during and the pre-crisis AFC and the GFC periods.

The finding of this study is limited to only Malaysian data because the objective was to guideline investors and market players in Malaysia to prefer investing in Islamic ethical funds to diversify their investment portfolio.

Cautions to use existing ratio measures and CAPM model rather persistence measures may be used with existing methodologies in light of extreme events which influenced investor decision making for better returns at lower risks.

A class of ethical funds consists of religious sustainable, socially responsible and impact-investing (SRI) funds but Shariah implications of halal investment must be observed to avoid prohibited practices within the class of SRI funds.

The work done in this paper are original in the sense that the authors employed various ratios to measure fund performance in conjunction with CAPM model and then tested for two persistence performance measures; the repeat winner and CPR tests.

This paper evaluates the performance of actively managed conventional and Islamic equity funds in a developing economy with a focus to assess the performance-growth puzzle posited by Gruber (1993) (a.k.a Gruber’s puzzle). Under the context of an emerging market of Pakistan, this study explores if actively managed equity fund (AMEF) managers have been able to add value by outperforming the market in terms of stock-selection and market-timing abilities; and the comparative performance analysis of Islamic versus conventional AMEFs is also carried out.

We employ Sharpe and Treynor ratios, Capital asset pricing model, Fama–French three factors model (1993), Carhart four-factor model (1997) and Hendrickson (1981) market timing models on 45 equity funds comprising of 23 conventional and 22 Islamic equity funds operating in Pakistan for a period of 10 years. The overall sample period (2008–2018) is divided into two 5 years sub-periods (i.e. 2009–2013 and 2014–2018) and three 3 years sub-periods (2009–2011, 2012–2014 and 2015–2017) to be viewed in conjunction with the country's macro-economic condition.

We report that the actively managed equity funds (AMEFs) were unable to beat the market index with their stock selection or market timing capabilities. However, AMEFs depicted improved performance in the post-global financial crisis period where both conventional and Islamic AMEFs generated substantial rewards for the given amount of risk. Also, conventional AMEFs outperformed Islamic AMEFs potentially due to their holdings in highly leveraged value and large-cap stocks, while Islamic AMEFS invest more cautiously in small-cap and value firms. Analysis of market timing skills revealed that the funds have not been able to select the undervalued stocks and adopted a defensive strategy in the post-global financial crisis recovery period.

Our findings shed some interesting insights and raise some pertinent questions for research, policy, and practice – specifically for developing countries’ context. The no ‘return-growth’ configuration defies its fit with the ‘Gruber puzzle’ and somewhat presents a case of what we call the ‘Inverse Grubber puzzle’. This novel notion of the ‘Inverse Grubber puzzle’ should inform policy and practice to reflect on their practices, institutional arrangement, regulatory framework and policy design in developing economies characterized by lacklustre performance and growth of AMEFs. For example, the regulatory design may consider focusing on stimulating financial inclusion and deepening by motivating low-cost Index tracker funds (ITFs) – with lower fund management costs, while allocating the avoided cost to flow towards effective marketing campaigns driving greater awareness, financial deepening, and investor base diversification. For future research, financial development researchers may explore the implications and appropriateness of AMEFs versus ITFs in other developing economies.

The work reported in this paper is original and constitutes a valuable asset for ethno-religious-sensitive investors. The research has not been published in any capacity and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.