Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the organizational form of an investment management firm affects the performance of the mutual funds under its operation. More explicitly, this study aims to test whether funds managed by publicly listed firms achieve different risk-adjusted performance when compared with funds operated by privately held investment firms.

This study uses Jensen's alpha to measure funds’ performance based on the Carhart’s (1997) benchmarks and market timing factors. The researchers test the relation between fund performance and organizational form using regressions. It alleviates the reverse causality and endogeneity using propensity score matching (PSM) methodology. The study investigates the difference in performance of funds managed by public firms on the post- vs pre- initial public offering (IPO) basis. Alternatively, this study tests the performance change post-public listing of the parent firm. It computes the difference for a matched sample of funds managed by private firms that were likely to go public but did not. The researchers match funds using PSM methodology.

This paper provides robust evidence that publicly traded management companies administer relatively under-performing mutual funds in comparison to those managed by privately held firms. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that confirms that organizational decision is endogenous to performance. The study finds that after a privately held company goes public, the performance of their mutual funds and the performance of the matched group funds, whose companies remained private at the same time, tends to decline, compared with companies prior to the public offering. However, the decline in mutual fund performance is larger for the companies who chose to pursue their IPO.

The contribution of this study to the literature is twofold. First, while there is a wealth of literature on the impact of ownership structures on corporate performance, there are very few studies focused on mutual fund markets, despite the evidence that supports a generally mixed effect. This study confirms that the performance of mutual funds managed by publicly traded investments firms is lower than that of funds managed by privately held firms. Second, the organizational decision (private vs public) is not exogenous but depends on the actual funds’ performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the various segments of the managed funds market to establish if there is any significant difference in the way the assets are allocated into various asset categories and if investors base their investment decisions based on the past performance of the fund.

An average investor who does not possess superior investment knowledge may base their investment decision on the past performance of funds resulting in flow based on past performance. This study uses a panel regression model to test the relationship between net flows and past excess returns.

Significant differences are found in asset allocation between the retail and wholesale segments. Retail investors prefer less risky investments compared to wholesale investors and have lower preference for overseas investments. The results indicate that investors base their investment decisions on the past performance of funds, with the retail segment showing a higher level of influence of past performance, as compared to the wholesale segment. The results further show less evidence of a reaction to risk among the managed investment categories.

Fund managers use fund performance for marketing purposes and results of the study may be of importance to the managers and investors in understanding this objective. The findings are also of significance for policy makers in terms of understanding investor behaviour.

This is the first study of the Australian managed funds industry (including wholesale and retail funds) that tests the link between past performance and fund flows. The study includes data until June 2008, which includes a period when a number of policy changes occurred in Australian superannuation industry.

This paper aims to assess the ability of New Zealand (NZ) actively managed funds to generate risk-adjusted outperformance using portfolio holdings data. Focusing on domestic equity allocations addresses the benchmark selection issue, particularly for funds with national and international exposures.

The authors assess performance using several asset pricing models including the CAPM, three-factor and four-factor models. The authors also assess performance across funds with different characteristics such as fund size, size of local holdings, type of fund provider, past returns and fees. The authors further examine whether funds engage in any stock-picking or market timing by considering the active share and tracking error.

The returns on NZ equity holdings of NZ actively managed funds from 2010 to 2017 provide little evidence of risk-adjusted outperformance and stock-picking skill. These exposures yield pre-cost returns that have a nearly perfect correlation with the market index and an insignificant alpha. Funds show little tendency to bet on any of the main characteristics known to predict stock returns, such as size, book-to-market and momentum. In addition, the authors show that the average active shares and tracking errors are low, suggesting that the majority of funds hold NZ equity portfolios that closely mimic the market index.

Existing studies rely on returns data which aggregate performance across all asset classes with varying exposures. This may lead to benchmark selection issues (particularly for funds with international exposures) which may obscure the fund manager’s true stock-picking skills. Assessment using holdings data would enable suitable performance measurement by researchers and industry analysts.

This paper aims to contribute the existing finance literature by examining whether the ratings of Morningstar in Australia provide useful information for an investor by way of investigating the efficiency of domestic Australian equity funds that received a rating as at November 2005.

This paper proposes the application of a simulation approach to stochastic data envelopment analysis (SDEA) based on Excel/@RISK, which was first proposed by Premachandra et al. in 1998. The analysis provides a variety of informative statistical information about the stochastic properties of the efficiency figure. Efficiency is measured by looking at fund performance, fund cost, fund risk exposure and manager ability over the period December 1990‐November 2005.

The introduction to portfolio performance evaluation of a new tool for evaluating fund performance (namely, the efficiency rating) is recommended. From a sample of Australian domestic equity managed funds we find that evidence exists to suggest that efficient funds are likely to receive an upgrade in rating in the medium to long term.

The benefit of the present paper for investors and fund managers is the improved efficiency of managed funds in terms of expense and risk.

The present paper further contributes to the literature by reinforcing the importance of SDEA as a tool for measuring the efficiency of decision‐making units within investment fund markets.

In Australia, the A$2.2 trillion managed funds industry including the large pension funds (known locally as superannuation funds) are the dominant institutional property investors. While statistical information on the level of Australian managed fund investments in property assets is widely available, comprehensive practical evidence on property asset allocation decision-making process is underdeveloped. The purpose of this research is to identify Australian fund manager's property asset allocation strategies and decision-making frameworks at strategic level.

The research was undertaken in May-August 2011 using an in-depth semi-structured questionnaire administered by mail. The survey was targeted at 130 leading managed funds and asset consultants within Australia.

The evaluation of the 79 survey respondents indicated that Australian fund manager's property allocation decision-making process is an interactive, sequential and continuous process involving multiple decision-makers (internal and external) complete with feedback loops. It involves a combination of quantitative analysis (mainly mean-variance analysis) and qualitative overlay (mainly judgement, or “gut-feeling”, and experience). In addition, the research provided evidence that the property allocation decision-making process varies depending on the size and type of managed fund.

This research makes important contributions to both practical and academic fields. Information on strategic property allocation models and variables is not widely available, and there is little guiding theory related to the subject. Therefore, the conceptual frameworks developed from the research will help enhance academic theory and understanding in the area of property allocation decision making. Furthermore, the research provides small fund managers and industry practitioners with a platform from which to improve their own property allocation processes.

In contrast to previous property decision-making research in Australia which has mainly focused on strategies at the property fund investment level, this research investigates the institutional property allocation decision-making process from a strategic position involving all major groups in the Australian managed funds industry.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to study if actively managed exchange-traded funds (AMETFs) and actively managed mutual funds (AMMFs) are complements or substitutes. It also tests if there are tax or liquidity clientele effects.

The study investigates the relation between individual AMMF flows and aggregate AMETF flows as well as individual AMETF flows and aggregate AMMF flows. A 2013 tax change is used to analyze if a tax clientele effect exists between the AMETF and AMMF markets. The authors use differences in investor groups for institutional vs retail fund share classes to test for liquidity clientele effects.

The authors find that equity and mixed AMETFs and AMMFs are substitutes, although not perfect substitutes. Taxation-related differences between the two products create a clientele effect for fixed income and mixed funds where tax-sensitive investors are more likely to substitute AMETFs for AMMFs surrounding tax increases. There is weak evidence that institutional investors may prefer AMETFs more than retail investors because of their enhanced liquidity.

This is the first study to investigate the flow relation between AMETFs and AMMFs. The fast-paced growth of the AMETF area coupled with the substitutability between the two products and tax advantages of AMETFs has the capability to gain significant market share from AMMFs in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to document and compare the characteristics of two student-managed investment funds at the University.

This study uses a case study approach to achieve this purpose.

Consistent with other studies, this study finds considerable differences in funding, oversight and the structure of the courses in which the students manage the portfolios. This is the case even though the portfolios are managed by students in courses offered by the same department at the same university.

This study presents different possible ways of obtaining funds and structuring courses in which the students manage investment portfolios.

We examine the benefits of active international mutual fund management. Is there an advantage to active fund management over investing in index funds? Previous research has found that for domestic funds, active fund management can not outperform index funds. But there has been no clear conclusion as to active international mutual fund management. We utilize Morningstar Mutual Fund data to analyze five international mutual fund categories, and overall, for a sample of 831 funds with 4,835 annual return data points. We find the difference in mean return (index minus fund return) is negative for all fund categories, except for Europe funds. The difference is significant overall and for four of the five fund categories. The results from the multivariate regression show no relationship between total return and expense ratio, but there is a significant positive relationship between total return and turnover, and a significant positive relationship between total return and fund size (LN net assets). As opposed to domestic mutual funds, it appears to be beneficial to select actively managed international mutual funds over index funds.

The structure of the Malaysian fund market presents a unique setting in which to examine behavioural and cultural differences in the performance of fund managers. The purpose of this paper is to utilise Taylor's extension of the tournament model of Brown et al. who argued that using an exogenous (endogenous) benchmark induces losing (winning) managers to gamble. This presents two competing testable hypotheses that are investigated in the current study.

The authors use a sample of Malaysian unit trusts covering the period 1982 to 2010, applying the non‐parametric cross‐product ratio methodology to test all Malaysian funds and determine whether there is empirical evidence of tournament behaviour. The authors separate Malaysian funds into two main categories (conventional and Islamic) to find out whether different fund types affect the behaviour of the funds as a whole.

Overall, Taylor's theory does not hold in the Malaysian fund market, as conventional funds display tournament behaviour regardless of the benchmark used. However, Islamic funds do not display any significant tournament behaviour.

The current study uses a non‐parametric approach to look for evidence of tournament (gaming) behaviour in the performance of fund managers in Malaysia. In doing so, the authors extend the tournaments literature by examining the performance of three data sets pertaining to the performance and evidence of tournament behaviour in: all managed funds in Malaysia; Islamic funds; and conventional funds. A major motivation for choosing the Malaysian data of unit trusts is to investigate and examine the behaviour of funds operating in an economy that is an emerging market in the rapidly expanding Asian economy; is a market that has a reporting period in line with the calendar year; and is an economy with a strong presence of Islamic funds (Shariah) and Muslim population.