To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
10 results ✕ Clear filters

The Performance of Japanese Mutual Funds

Review of Financial Studies 1997 10(2), 237-273
We analyze the performance of Japanese open-type stock mutual funds for the 1981–1992 period. The results show that, regardless of the performance measures and benchmarks employed, most of the Japanese mutual funds underperform the benchmarks by between 3.6% and 10.8% per annum. These funds tend to invest more in large stocks with low book-to-market ratios. But this feature does not explain the underperformance. A potential explanation is the dilution effect caused by inflows of funds. In Japan, a new investor of an open-type fund only pays in the after-tax value of the net asset value. We conduct a bootstrap experiment to assess the magnitude of this dilution effect.

On Portfolio Optimization: Forecasting Covariances and Choosing the Risk Model

Review of Financial Studies 1999 12(5), 937-974
[We evaluate the performance of models for the covariance structure of stock returns, focusing on their use for optimal portfolio selection. We compare the models' forecasts of future covariances and the optimized portfolios' out-of-sample performance. A few factors capture the general covariance structure. Portfolio optimization helps for risk control, and a three-factor model is adequate for selecting the minimum-variance portfolio. Under a tracking error volatility criterion, which is widely used in practice, larger differences emerge across the models. In general more factors are necessary when the objective is to minimize tracking error volatility.]

On Portfolio Optimization: Forecasting Covariances and Choosing the Risk Model

Review of Financial Studies 1999 12(5), 937-974 open access
We evaluate the performance of models for the covariance structure of stock returns, focusing on their use for optimal portfolio selection. We compare the models' forecasts of future covariances and the optimized portfolios' out-of-sample performance. A few factors capture the general covariance structure. Portfolio optimization helps for risk control, and a three-factor model is adequate for selecting the minimum-variance portfolio. Under a tracking error volatility criterion, which is widely used in practice, larger differences emerge across the models. In general more factors are necessary when the objective is to minimize tracking error volatility.

Intraday Volatility in the Stock Index and Stock Index Futures Markets

Review of Financial Studies 1991 4(4), 657-684
[We examine the intraday relationship between returns and returns volatility in the stock index and stock index futures markets. Our results indicate a strong intermarket dependence in the volatility of the cash and futures returns. Price innovations that originate in either the stock or futures markets can predict the future volatility in the other market. We show that this relationship persists even during periods in which the dependence in the returns themselves appears to weaken. The findings are robust to controlling for potential market frictions such as asynchronous trading in the stock index. Our results have implications for understanding the pattern of information flows between the two markets.]

Benchmarking Money Manager Performance: Issues and Evidence

Review of Financial Studies 2009 22(11), 4553-4599
[Academic and practitioner research evaluates portfolio performance using size and value/growth attributes or factors. We assess the merits of popular evaluation procedures based on matched-characteristic benchmark portfolios or time-series return regressions by applying them to a sample of active money managers and passive indexes. Estimated abnormal returns display large variation across approaches. The benchmarks typically used in academic research—attribute-matched portfolios from independent sorts, the three-factor time-series model, and cross-sectional regressions of returns on stock characteristics—track returns poorly. Some simple alterations improve the performance of these methods.]

On Mutual Fund Investment Styles

Review of Financial Studies 2002 15(5), 1407-1437
Most mutual funds adopt investment styles that cluster around a broad market benchmark. Few funds take extreme positions away from the index, but those who do are more likely to favor growth stocks and past winners. The bias toward glamour and the tendency of poorly performing value funds to shift styles may reflect agency and behavioral considerations. After adjusting for style, there is evidence that growth managers on average outperform value managers. Though a fund's factor loadings and its portfolio characteristics generally yield similar conclusions about its style, an approach using portfolio characteristics predicts fund returns better.

Intraday Volatility in the Stock Index and Stock Index Futures Markets

Review of Financial Studies 1991 4(4), 657-684
We examine the intraday relationship between returns and returns volatility in the stock index and stock index futures markets. Our results indicate a strong intermarket dependence in the volatility of the cash and futures returns. Price innovations that originate in either the stock or futures markets can predict the future volatility in the other market. We show that this relationship persists even during periods in which the dependence in the returns themselves appears to weaken. The findings are robust to controlling for potential market frictions such as asynchronous trading in the stock index. Our results have implications for understanding the pattern of information flows between the two markets.

Benchmarking Money Manager Performance: Issues and Evidence

Review of Financial Studies 2009 22(11), 4553-4599
Academic and practitioner research evaluates portfolio performance using size and value/growth attributes or factors. We assess the merits of popular evaluation procedures based on matched-characteristic benchmark portfolios or time-series return regressions by applying them to a sample of active money managers and passive indexes. Estimated abnormal returns display large variation across approaches. The benchmarks typically used in academic research--attribute-matched portfolios from independent sorts, the three-factor time-series model, and cross-sectional regressions of returns on stock characteristics--track returns poorly. Some simple alterations improve the performance of these methods. The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: [email protected]., Oxford University Press.

On Mutual Fund Investment Styles

Review of Financial Studies 2002 15(5), 1407-1437
Most mutual funds adopt investment styles that cluster around a broad market benchmark. Few funds take extreme positions away from the index, but those who do are more likely to favor growth stocks and past winners. The bias toward glamour and the tendency of poorly performing value funds to shift styles may reflect agency and behavioral considerations. After adjusting for style, there is evidence that growth managers on average outperform value managers. Though a fund’s factor loadings and its portfolio characteristics generally yield similar conclusions about its style, an approach using portfolio characteristics predicts fund returns better.

The Performance of Japanese Mutual Funds

Review of Financial Studies 1997 10(2), 237-274
We analyze the performance of Japanese open-type stock mutual funds for the 1981–1992 period. The results show that, regardless of the performance measures and benchmarks employed, most of the Japanese mutual funds underperform the benchmarks by between 3.6% and 10.8% per annum. These funds tend to invest more in large stocks with low book-to-market ratios. But this feature does not explain the underperformance. A potential explanation is the dilution effect caused by inflows of funds. In Japan, a new investor of an open-type fund only pays in the after-tax value of the net asset value. We conduct a bootstrap experiment to assess the magnitude of this dilution effect.