Search results

This paper aims to provide a comparative study of the Islamic versus conventional banking sector risk by using market data generated from the sample of publicly listed Islamic and conventional banks in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region.

The authors introduce a market-based measure of bank stress and test this indicator against the Tier 1 Capital Ratio using Granger causality tests.

The authors find that the market-based measure is a leading indicator of banking stress when compared to the accounting-based Tier 1 ratio and thus is relevant to the Basel regulation’s Pillar 3.

This paper only looks at Islamic vs conventional banks in the Gulf region, and the authors would like to extend this analysis to a broader range of financial institutions, especially in the European and North American markets.

Developing a measure that signals bank stress ahead of typically used measures can help regulators, bank management and investors identify oncoming problems and issues before these become too big to manage.

The results from this analysis provides insight into the offsetting impact from two drivers (beta and book-to-market ratio) of the cost of equity capital for the conventional vs Islamic banking sectors.

This study aims to examine the performance and volatility of Turkey Real Estate Investment Trusts (Turkish REITs) as the world is adjusting to the new normal situation in every aspect of REITs' business activities.

The prices of REITs were acquired from 26 Turkish REITs in this study, but owing to autocorrelation difficulties, 14 Turkish REITs were employed in the analysis. The ten-year long-term bond of the Turkish Government was also utilized and the period of data obtained was based on availability. The performance of Turkish REITs was evaluated using Sharpe's ratio and Treynor's ratio, and the volatility was assessed using MGARCH-BEKK.

The authors found out that Turkish REITs are constantly underperforming and the REITs' returns remain highly volatile and persistent. In addition, findings showed evidence of volatility clustering and the asymmetric impact of shocks. This study further revealed the uniqueness of each of the Turkish REITs due to the lack of evidence of multicollinearity.

However, the limitation of this study is the constraint in obtaining more macro-economic variables of more than ten-years of Turkey's Government bond and the study focused mainly on Turkish REITs.

The result suggests that since Turkish REITs are not mandatory to payout 90% of taxable earnings as dividends, high performance and an appropriate risk management approach are expected. The need for timely revealing performance of T-REITs and associated uncertainty may trigger better performance as discussed in the relationship between disclosure and performance which is recently emphasized in a recent study by Koelbl (2020). With current performance and associated uncertainty in Turkish REITs, the need to protect Turkish REITs investors is highly essential. The result further educates REIT investors that diversification benefits of REITs tend to reduce in extremely risky situations.

This is the first study in the context of Turkish REITs that comprehensively integrated market capitalization of REITs and simultaneous evaluation of performance and the volatility of the Turkish REITs as the world adjusts to the new normal.

For a number of reasons ranging from their more recent introduction to their perceived lesser excitement relative to stock-based peers, there have been few studies of fixed income (mainly bond) exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The purpose of this paper is to fill the void by comparing performance measures of fixed income ETFs to fixed income closed-end funds (CEFs).

This paper examines operating characteristics as well as risk and performance measures of all available fixed income ETFs and CEFs in the USA over the last five and ten years ending on December 31, 2014. Operating characteristics include expense ratios, annual turnover rates, tax cost ratios, and tracking error ratios. Performance measures include average annual returns, risks (measured by standard deviations), and risk-adjusted returns (measured by Sharpe ratios and Sortino ratios).

This study finds material and significant difference in a variety of expenses, return measures, and risk measures. Sharpe and Sortino ratio significance is highly dependent on whether net asset values or market values serve as the dependent variable. ETFs would be the preferred choice of fixed income investors who are presumed to be focussing on market-based return measures.

This paper empirically compares operating characteristics as well as risk and performance measures of US fixed income ETFs and fixed income CEFs in the same Morningstar categories over the last five and ten years.

This paper aims to study manipulation and performance persistence in equity mutual funds. To this end, Manipulation-Proof Performance Measure (MPPM) and Doubt Ratio, along with a number of current performance measures are used to evaluate the performance of equity mutual funds in Iran.

The authors investigate performance manipulation by 1) comparing the results of the MPPM with the current performance measures, 2) checking the Doubt Ratio to detect suspicious funds. Additionally, the authors investigate performance persistence by forming and evaluating portfolios of the equity mutual funds at several time horizons.

The authors conclude that there is no evidence of performance manipulation in the equity mutual funds. Additionally, when comparing the performance of the upper (top) tertile portfolios and the lower tertile portfolios, in all of the studied 1, 3, 6 and 12-month horizons, the authors find performance persistence in the equity mutual funds.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first study to investigate the performance manipulation in the Iranian equity mutual funds, and also is the first study in Iran that uses the MPPM and the Doubt Ratio in addition to a number of current performance measures to investigate the performance persistence in the equity mutual funds at several time horizons.

Management is sometimes challenged by investors to justify the financial benefits of voluntary disclosure and transparency related to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Researchers have found inconsistent results when examining the relationship between CSR reporting and financial performance. The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between voluntary CSR reporting and financial performance. Specifically, this paper addresses three questions. First, is there a significant difference in Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting level for firms in a high environmental risk sector compared to those in a low environmental risk sector? Second, does GRI reporting level significantly influence financial performance measures, such as the risk ratios and information ratio? And third, does the relationship between GRI reporting level and financial performance measures differ significantly based on sector environmental risk? These questions are particularly relevant to the Indian business environment, where CSR is not just voluntary but mandated by regulation since 2013. The Indian Government is the first to do so and is ahead of many nations in collaborating with businesses to address not just environmental impacts but also social effects of industry on the community.

This study examined the relationship between GRI reporting level and financial performance for 173 firms with different levels of environmental risk. ANOVA and MANOVA were used to examine for differences in GRI reporting level and financial performance for firms from the various sectors and also to determine if there were significant relationships between GRI level and certain financial risk ratios.

Results indicate that firms in sectors with high environmental risk adopt GRI framework at a higher level than firms with low environmental risk. There is no significant relationship found between GRI reporting and financial performance at an aggregate level. However, environmental risk is found to moderate the relationship between GRI reporting and financial reporting, such that firms with high risk experience a more significant relationship between the GRI level that is adopted and financial performance.

CSR is quickly becoming a pathway to sustainable competitive advantage for businesses today. Such CSR efforts can lead to both reputational and financial performance implications. Organizations not only adopt CSR in response to regulatory requirements, but also frequently do so voluntarily to address stakeholder concerns. This study sheds valuable insight on the positive effects of CSR reporting, which provides important implications for Indian organizations.

This study aims to comparatively analyze the performance of Islamic and conventional income and equity funds using various performance evaluation methods.

The authors comparatively analyze the performance of mutual funds using measures, such as tracking error, Sharpe ratio (1966), Treynor ratio (1965), M-square measure by Modigliani and Modigliani (1997) and information ratio. The authors also use market timing and selection measures, such as Treynor and Mazuy model (1966), Henriksson and Merton (1981) model and Fama’s decomposition approach (1973).

The authors find that Islamic equity funds are as much competitive as conventional equity funds. All Islamic equity funds have positive Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio and net selectivity measure. Islamic equity funds are slightly less risky in general. Islamic equity and income funds generally have positive Jensen's Alpha and a positive market timing ability. However, the authors find that Islamic income funds generally underperform the market due to less Shari’ah-compliant investment class assets in the market.

It will help the industry players to assess their strategic positioning with regard to the commercial competitiveness of Islamic investments.

The authors take considerably large sample of 60 funds in Pakistan as compared to previous studies and also cover recent period (2006-16). For income funds, the authors construct an original benchmark index based on price and dividend data and use that in performance assessment.

Mutual fund ratings are extremely popular among mutual fund investors, with over 8,000 mutual funds currently available to them and a huge increase in privately managed retirement accounts. Morningstar introduced the star-rating system to mutual funds, grading them on a range of one to five stars, with one star being the lowest and five stars being the highest. Because of its simplicity and resemblance to the ratings of so many other products we buy, the star-rating system has become an intrinsic element of mutual fund jargon. Morningstar experts award 5-star funds a gold, silver, or bronze medal ranking based on their instinctual analysis. This research investigates whether all gold-medal winning five-star mutual funds are equally efficient in terms of risk-adjusted performance. When total return, adjusted expense ratio, standard deviation, tax cost ratio, Sharpe ratio, and fund alpha are all considered, we discovered that not all “gold medal” mutual funds are equally efficient. Investors should take care even among “gold medal” funds since some are more efficient than others.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and compare performances of three Nordic (Sweden, Denmark, Finland) and three Baltic (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) exchanges.

Portfolio performance is estimated using two different approaches: traditional measures – Sharpe, Sortino and Treynor ratios; and alternative measures – reward to value‐at‐risk and reward to expected tail loss (RETL).

The findings highlight the differences and similarities in Nordic and Baltic stock exchanges and their performance trends after creation of common marketplace OMX. Returns of Baltic, like Nordic, exchanges are normally distributed. During the period of 2000‐2006, Baltic exchanges outperformed Nordic exchanges.

The research is limited to six stock exchanges that are members of common marketplace OMX. Proposed alternative performance measures did not diverge from traditional approaches, because, apparently, Baltic exchanges offer normally distributed returns and should not be considered emerging markets. These measures should be further tested in developing and emerging markets.

The findings have both theoretical and practical implications. To the authors' best knowledge, it is the first public attempt to estimate performance of Baltic and Nordic exchanges in the context of modern portfolio theory and, alternatively, new science of risk management (value at risk and expected tail loss). The paper argues for the usage of an alternative measure for performance valuation – RETL. Furthermore, the paper discuses merits and limitations of different approaches to risk and performance measurement.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the operating characteristics as well as risk and performance measures of all available self-proclaimed socially responsible funds (hereafter SRFs) in the USA over the ten-year (2007–2016) period. The first research question addressed is: Do SRFs perform as well as the average of all mutual funds in their respective categories? The second research question addressed is: Are SRF expense ratios correlated with fund performance?

This study analyzes all socially responsible equity mutual funds, as self-reported to Morningstar. This paper empirically compares operating characteristics and performance measures of SRFs relative to category averages in the US mutual fund industry. Operating characteristics include expense ratios and annual turnover rates. Performance measures include conventional return, risk and risk-adjusted return measures.

Although prior research suggests that socially responsible investing (SRI) indexes and SRI-friendly stocks have favorable returns, this study finds that these self-proclaimed SRFs underperform the average of all mutual funds in matched equity categories. However, this study demonstrates that a simple filter based on expense ratios can identify those SRFs that will enable investors to do quite well while doing good.

The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, the authors report that self-proclaimed SRFs, as a whole, have not generated competitive returns relative to other mutual funds in the same categories over the past ten years. This result contradicts the notion that socially responsible investors do not give up return performance when investing with their conscience. Second, the authors find that those SRFs with expense ratios in the lowest quartile of their respective category have significantly higher risk-adjusted returns and significantly lower turnover than category averages. Thus, by focusing on SRFs with low-expense ratios, socially responsible investors can do quite well while doing good.

The purpose of this paper is to examine operating characteristics, risk and performance measures of all available vehicles for index investing in US bond funds during the 15‐year period from April, 1994 to March, 2009. The results shed light on the important issue of bond index mutual funds (BIMFs) and bond exchange‐traded funds (BETFs) performance compared with average of all bond mutual funds.

Data were obtained from Morningstar Principia. Operating characteristics include expense ratios, annual turnover rates, and tax cost ratios. Performance measures include average annual returns and return percentile rank in category, risks (measured by standard deviation) and risk‐adjusted returns (measured by the Sharpe ratio).

BIMFs and BETFs have significantly lower expense ratios and annual turnover rates than category averages. Their returns and risk‐adjusted returns are significantly higher than bond category averages.

Future studies will be able to benefit from a larger sample size, longer performance records, and the strength of bond index funds in foreign markets.

Both BIMFs and bond exchange‐traded mutual funds have significantly lower expense and annual turnover rates, making them preferred investment choices.

Efforts by active bond mutual fund managers to beat index benchmarks have largely failed. Investors should be wary of bond mutual fund managers touting their ability to beat the average or a bond index.

The advantage of investment in BIMFs and BETFs is clear.