The MFWire
Manage Email Alerts | Sponsorships | About MFWire | Who We Are

Subscribe to MFWire.com's News Alerts [click]

Rating:Fund Firms Take Interest In New Performance Measure Not Rated 0.0 Email Routing List Email & Route  Print Print
Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Fund Firms Take Interest In New Performance Measure

by: Armie Margaret Lee

A new way of evaluating mutual fund performance is catching the attention of a number of major fund firms, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Mutual funds are typically ranked based on their past performance against a set benchmark. A new method, contained in a study by Marcin Kacpercyzk of the University of British Columbia and Clemens Sialm and Lu Zheng of the University of Michigan, is taking a different tack.

To assess performance, the new approach calls for the comparison of the fund return versus returns of its past holdings. It looks at statistics such as stock trades and transaction costs to measure a portfolio manager's stockpicking skills.

In addition, the method attempts to determine the impact of factors such as the exact timing of stock trades, transaction prices and costs.

The study, which covered monthly return data for over 2,500 US equity funds from 1984 to 2003, zeroed in on the concept of a return gap, or the difference between a fund's current returns to investors and returns on a holdings portfolio. To arrive at the return gap, expenses are deducted from the holdings portfolio.

"Many mutual-fund studies use holdings data to analyze the performance and strategies of mutual funds," the authors said. "We show that a large amount of information is lost by only considering the holdings. The return gap between investor and holdings return is persistent and helps predict future performance."

The method has drawn interested glances from fund managers at major companies in the US and Canada, including the Vanguard Group, Kacpercyk told The Journal.

Not everyone is impressed with the method, however. Russell Kinnel, director of mutual-fund research at Morningstar, said the approach "sounds pretty flawed" because the study looks mainly at short-term trading results.  

Stay ahead of the news ... Sign up for our email alerts now

 Do You Recommend This Story?

Return to Top
 News Archives
2023: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2022: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2021: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2020: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2019: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2018: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2017: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2016: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2015: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2014: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2013: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2012: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2011: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2010: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2009: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2008: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2007: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2006: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2005: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2004: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2003: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2002: Q4Q3Q2Q1
 Subscribe via RSS:
Add to My Yahoo!
follow us in feedly

©All rights reserved to InvestmentWires, Inc. 1997-2023
14 Wall Street | 20th Floor | New York, NY 10005 | P: 212-331-8968 | F: 212-331-8998
Privacy Policy :: Terms of Use