Search results

Risk and return are the most important components in the financial and investment world and the existence of a better balance between them with the goal of the best solution for investing in different assets has always been studied and discussed by researchers. For this purpose in this study introduced the Hybrid Balanced Justified Treynor ratio (HBJTR) criterion.

This study introduced the HBJTR criterion, which has three major attributes, including combination of both the frequency and severity of the risk using Markov regime switching model which was modeled on the Justified Beta (Jßi). The second is the merger of data of both the cycles of boom and recession, which was modeled on the Hybrid Justified Treynor Ratio (HJTR). The third was the balancing act in two periods of boom and recession, which was introduced on the HBJTR model.

Based on a weighted averaging of the Justified Treynor ratio of both the cycles of boom and recession, which was introduced by the HJTR term in this study, the superiority in the first grade related to the two indexes were sugar index (0.0096) and insurance index (0.0053). Finally, using the final model in this study, namely HBJTR, the overall advantage was the defensive index, i.e. the insurance index of 1.23.

In other words, the HBJTRi criterion consists of three steps: first, the Justified Beta (Jßi) and Justified Treynor ratio of each index using two regimes of Markov switching model were calculated for each of the cycles of boom and recession separately according to formulas 8 and 9. In the second step, the weighted average was taken from both Justified Treynor ratios of boom and recession cycles, which was called the HJTR. In the third step, to calculate the HBJTR criterion

The purpose of this paper is to examine the performance of 19 Malaysian Real Estate Investment Trusts (M-REITs) over the period 1999 to 2014, following the implementation of dividend tax reforms announced in the 2007, 2009 and 2012 budgets.

Sharpe index, Treynor index and Jensen α are utilized to compare the performance of M-REITs against a newly developed tax-adjusted value-weighted M-REITs index, equity market, property sector and three month Malaysia Treasury Bills (T-Bills). The calculation of M-REITs returns has been adjusted to take into account the dividend tax reforms which have never been considered in previous studies.

Most M-REITs outperform the tax-adjusted value-weighted REITs index, equity market, property sector and three month T-Bills. Property sector performs worst during those periods. Some of the M-REITs have a higher standard deviation than the equity market and the tax-adjusted value-weighted M-REITs index. Most M-REITs have a lower total risk than the property sector. Further analysis shows that before (after) the tax reforms, most M-REITs underperform (outperform) the other sectors. The introduction of the tax reforms benefits both REITs and investors. A significant positive Jensen α for some M-REITs indicates that fund managers are able to time the market or to select undervalued assets.

Findings of the study would enable investors to evaluate the performance of all REITs in comparison to other financial assets during the period of study for better investment decision making. A more accurate assessment on REITs performance that take into account the tax reforms, is available for investors and fund managers to decide on the investment mix to be included in their portfolio. Moreover, fund managers’ performance can be assessed whether they perform better or worse than the equity market, property sector and three month T-Bills.

This study contributes to the scant literature on dividend tax reforms and their implication toward REITs performance. It is the first study to thoroughly assess the returns of REITs by taking into account the changes on dividend tax rates announced in the 2007, 2009 and 2012 budgets.

Assesses the 1995‐1998 performance of 17 equity mutual funds operating in the Greek financial market, explains the calculations involved and reviews relevant research. Ranks the funds by daily, weekly, monthly and total return for the period and compares them with the general Athens Stock Exchange index. Goes on to rank them by total risk, coefficient of variation and systematic risk before applying Treynor’s index, Sharpe’s index and Jensen’s approach. Presents the results in detail and summarizes the main findings.

This study aims to empirically compare the performance of Islamic indices vis-à-vis to their conventional counterparts in India.

The performance of the Islamic and selected conventional indices is evaluated using various risk-adjusted performance measures such as Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, M-square (M²) ratio, information ratio, capital asset pricing model (CAPM), Fama-French three-factor model and Carhart four-factor model in India context. The period of study is from December 2006 to 2018.

The risk-adjusted performance measures based on the Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, information ratio, the M² ratio show that the return of Islamic indices provides slightly superior performance. However, performance investigated using CAPM, Fama-French and Carhart benchmarks produce a statistically insignificant differences in return of the Islamic and conventional benchmarks.

The Sharīʿah-compliant indices can provide a viable, ethical and alternative investment avenue for faith-based investors as it will not make them worse off in comparison to the conventional benchmarks. This also offers opportunity to conventional investors for portfolio diversification. The promotion of faith-based investment can serve as a tool for financial inclusion to attract a huge segment of Indian population in the formal financial system. The findings of the study suffer from the limitation of small sample size and empirical methods used.

This study contributes to the literature on the comparative performance of Islamic and conventional indices in general and emerging markets, in particular, using most recent data and covering a relatively long span of time. To the best of the knowledge, this is the first comprehensive study examining the performance of Islamic indices, using multiple Islamic indices and various risk-adjusted measures in the Indian context.

The present article aims to evaluate the performance of sixteen equity mutual funds operating in the Greek financial market over the period 1/1/1995‐31/12/1999. In doing so, the sample mutual funds were ranked on the basis of their return, total risk, coefficient of variation, systematic risk, and the techniques of Treynor, and Sharpe. Four mutual funds achieved lower return than the General Index of the Athens Stock Exchange (ASE). All sixteen mutual funds showed lower total risk, and risk‐return coefficient than the General Index of the ASE. In all mutual funds the beta coefficient was statistically significant at 5 per cent level of significance. The alpha coefficient was also statistically significant at 5 per cent level of significance in eight mutual funds. The movements of the General Index of the ASE explain more than 80 per cent of the variation in return in all sixteen mutual funds. Eight mutual funds were ranked in the same order on either Treynor’s or Sharpe’s technique.

Assesses the 1995‐1998 performance of ten domestic balanced mutual funds in the Greek financial market using daily net asset value per unit. Ranks them on the basis of daily average return, total risk, coefficient of variation, systematic risk, Treynor’s index, Sharpe’s index and Jensen’s alpha. Shows that their risks and returns were lower than the Athens Stock Exchange index, that they followed defensive investment policies, that some achieved high returns with low risk and that there was some variation of ranking according to the techniques used.

The present article aims to evaluate the performance of ten domestic balanced mutual funds operating in the Greek financial market over the period 1/1/1995‐31/12/1998. In doing so, the sample mutual funds were ranked on the basis of their return, total risk, coefficient of variation, systematic risk, and the techniques of Treynor, Sharpe and Jensen. The ten mutual funds achieved lower return than the General Index of the Athens Stock Exchange (ASE). However, the mutual funds achieved satisfactory return in relation to the total and systematic risk undertaken. The sample mutual funds followed defensive investment policy that was in line with their objectives. The General Index of the ASE appeared to be a close approximation of the market portfolio. To some extent the ranking of the mutual funds varied among the techniques of Treynor, Sharpe and Jensen, although certain mutual funds were ranked in the same order regardless of the technique used. According to Jensen, seven mutual funds had superior performance, while the remaining three demonstrated poor performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the risk-adjusted performance of rated funds and determine the usefulness of Lipper Leader rating of unit trusts in Malaysia during the period 2000 to 2010.

The paper utilizes the Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, Jensen’s alpha and Fama-French three-factor model to measure performance.

During the period of study, the performance of the market index and risk-free rate outperformed that of 68 equity unit trust funds in the 3-year, 5-year and 10-year investment horizons. The ranking, based on four performance measures, corresponds to Lipper rating for the lowest rated and leader funds, but not for the three- and four-key rated funds. Further, there is a significant difference in the performance of the five-key, four-key and three-key rated funds which outperform the lowest rated funds, indicating that Lipper rating is able to distinguish superior and inferior unit trust funds.

Some of the limitations in this study are that the indexes could be self-constructed. The existing index might not represent the asset allocation of the funds concerned. Additional variables might have to be considered when examining fund performance as they should correspond to the characteristics of a fund.

The results indicate that Lipper rating classification could identify the highest and lowest performing funds. Therefore, investors could use this rating to make informed investment decisions without undertaking time-consuming analysis to ascertain the good- and bad-quality funds in the market.

The findings of this study could be used by the academia as another source of reference to enhance their understanding of the applicability of Lipper rating for unit trust funds in an emerging market.

The contribution of this study is that it analyzes the effectiveness and capability of Lipper Leader rating in identifying quality funds in the context of an emerging market. Performance comparison between Lipper Leader rating and methods used in the portfolio theory bridges the theory-practice gap between practitioners and academics. To date, there have been no attempts to study and compare the ratings of advisory firms with theoretical performance measures, particularly in the context of Malaysia.

Stirred by scant regard for market phases in portfolio performance assessments, the current paper investigates the active versus passive investment strategies under the bull and bear market conditions in emerging markets focusing on South Africa as a case study.

Methodologically, the measures of Jensen's alpha and Treynor index are applied to the monthly returns of 20 funds from January 2010 to June 2022.

The results are enlightening; though they contradict developed market evidence, they are consistent with emerging market trends. The findings show that actively managed funds outperform the market benchmark and passive investing style under bear and normal market conditions. Passive investment strategy outperforms both market benchmark and actively investing style under bull market conditions.

In the face of improved market efficiency, increased liquidity and recent technological impact, the findings of this study have practical application. The study outcomes should inform and update global investors, especially asset managers interested in emerging markets; however, the limitations of the study should also be considered.

While limited studies consider market conditions when comparing and contrasting the performance of passive versus active investing, such consideration is lacking in emerging markets. The current study corrects this literature imbalance.

The purpose of this paper is to consider compromise solutions of multiple attribute decision-making methods (TOPSIS, VIKOR, and similarity-based approach) in order to evaluate and rank mutual funds and to compare the capabilities of different approaches based on the different traditional indices of mutual funds assessment. In addition, a new algorithm for ranking mutual funds was proposed subsequently.

In this research, three groups of indices including general, risk-modified performance evaluation, and risk-modified performance evaluation indices using semivariance were used in the mutual funds assessment, which led to the comparison between selected mutual funds, using three mentioned methods and three different groups of criteria. The results of this comparison were compiled and synthesized with linear assignment method. At the end, an algorithm for decision making and investing in mutual funds for professional and unprofessional investors was proposed.

Using different methods and different criteria proved that the results of similarity-based approach as a MADM technique have the ability to rank and evaluate mutual funds regardless of the criteria used compared to TOPSIS and VIKOR. Furthermore, the authors propose the algorithm of this research as a new model of mutual funds evaluation which considers a wide range of variables with respect to amateur and professional points of view.

The originality of this paper is threefold: first, different criteria were considered to make the evaluation more comprehensive. Second, four different approaches were used to make the results more authentic. Third, a holistic algorithm with its implication was proposed.