Several studies report that abnormal returns associated with short-term reversal investment strategies diminish once trading costs are taken into account. We show that the impact of trading costs on the strategies\\' profitability can largely be attributed to excessively trading in small cap stocks. Limiting the stock universe to large cap stocks significantly reduces trading costs. Applying a more sophisticated portfolio construction algorithm to lower turnover reduces trading costs even further. Our finding that reversal strategies generate 30-50 basis points per week net of trading costs poses a serious challenge to standard rational asset pricing models. Our findings also have important implications for the understanding and practical implementation of reversal strategies.

This paper investigates the relation between portfolio concentration and the performance of global equity funds. Concentrated funds with higher levels of tracking error display better performance than their more broadly diversified counterparts. We show that the observed relation between portfolio concentration and performance is mostly driven by the breadth of the underlying fund strategies; not just by fund managers’ willingness to take big bets. Our results indicate that when investors strive to select the best-performing funds, they should not only consider fund managers’ tracking-error levels. More important is that they take into account the extent to which fund managers carefully allocate their risk budget across multiple investment strategies and have concentrated holdings in multiple market segments simultaneously.

We investigate persistence in the relative performance of 3549 bond mutual funds from 1990 to 2003. We show that bond funds that display strong (weak) performance over a past period continue to do so in future periods. The out-of-sample difference in risk-adjusted return between the top and bottom decile of funds ranked on past alpha exceeds 3.5percent per year. We demonstrate that a strategy based on past fund returns earns an economically and statistically significant abnormal return, suggesting that bond fund investors can exploit the observed persistence. Our results are robust to a wide range of model specifications and bootstrapped test statistics.

Using monthly return data of more than 6400 US equity mutual funds we investigate short-run performance persistence over the period 1984–2003. We sort funds into rank portfolios based on past performance, and evaluate the portfolios’ out-of-sample performance. To cope with short ranking periods, we employ an empirical Bayes approach to measure past performance more efficiently. Our main finding is that when funds are sorted into decile portfolios based on 12-month ranking periods, the top decile of funds earns a statistically significant, abnormal return of 0.26 percent per month. This effect persists beyond load fees, and is mainly concentrated in relatively young, small cap/growth funds.

High (low) quality stocks generate anomalously high (low) returns above and beyond expected returns based on betas, market sizes, valuations, and momentum. We provide a comprehensive overview of commonly used quality definitions and test their predictive power for stock returns. We show that quality measures predict stock returns if and only if they forecast earnings growth, and that this information is not contained in other characteristics that have been shown to drive expected stock returns. At the same time, we find that the quality premium is unrelated to different measures of distress risk, and therefore inconsistent with a risk-based interpretation. Finally, our results are robust across different regions and carry over to the corporate bond market.