Joop Huij

Cross-sectional learning and short-run persistence in mutual fund performance

Using monthly return data of more than 6,400 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.

On the performance of emerging market equity mutual funds

We document persistence in the performance of emerging market equity funds and find some notable differences compared to US funds. First, the contribution of winner funds to the return spread between winner and losers is substantially larger for emerging market funds. Second, only a small portion of the return spread between winners and losers can be attributed to momentum effects in emerging markets. Third, while US winner funds have been documented to underperform benchmark factors correcting for size, value and momentum effects by the magnitude of their expenses, winner funds in emerging markets generate returns that are sufficiently large enough to cover their expenses. Overall, our findings suggest that emerging market funds generally display better performance than US funds.

The Performance of European Index Funds and Exchange-Traded Funds: European Index Funds and Exchange-Traded Funds

European index funds and exchange-traded funds underperform their benchmarks by 50 to 150 basis points per annum. The explanatory power of dividend withholding taxes as a determinant of this underperformance is at least on par with fund expenses. Dividend taxes also explain performance differences between funds that track different benchmarks and time variation in fund performance. Our results imply that not only fund expenses, but also dividend taxes can result in a substantial drag on mutual fund performance.

Academic Knowledge Dissemination in the Mutual Fund Industry: Can Mutual Funds Successfully Adopt Factor Investing Strategies?

In this study, we investigate if investors that have adopted investment strategies based on asset pricing anomalies documented in the academic literature (i.e., the low-beta, small cap, value, momentum, short-term reversal, and long-term reversal factors) consistently earn positive abnormal returns. For this purpose we evaluate the performance of a large sample of U.S. equity mutual funds over the period 1990 to 2010. We find evidence supporting the value added of investors adopting factor investing strategies: low-beta, small cap, and value funds earn significant excess returns. We also find that these excess returns are sustainable and have not disappeared after the public dissemination of the anomalies when more asset managers have started to adopt factor investing strategies. We propose some criteria that might be helpful to determine the successful application of academic insights in the context of investment strategies. Our findings have significant implications for the role of academic research and knowledge management in the investment management industry.

Short-Term Residual Reversal

Conventional short-term reversal strategies exhibit dynamic exposures to the Fama and French (1993) factors. We develop a novel reversal strategy based on residual stock returns that does not exhibit these exposures and consequently earns risk-adjusted returns that are twice as large as those of a conventional reversal strategy. Residual reversal strategies generate statistically and economically significant profits net of trading costs, even when we restrict our sample to large-cap stocks over the post-1990 period. Our results are inconsistent with the notion that reversal effects are the result of trading frictions or non-synchronous trading of stocks and pose a serious challenge to rational asset pricing models. & 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. JEL classification: G11; G12; G14

Mutual Fund Performance Persistence, Market Efficiency, and Breadth

In this study we use a comprehensive database of mutual funds and study performance persistence across different styles, regions, and asset classes. While we find strong evidence of performance persistence for some markets, there is weak or no evidence for other markets. Contrary to popular belief, we find no relation between performance persistence and market efficiency. Performance persistence appears to be positively related to market breadth. Our results are inconsistent with anecdotal evidence that the added value of active management is concentrated in less efficient markets. Instead, our results indicate that managerial skill is more pronounced in markets that offer more investment opportunities.

Another Look at the Performance of Actively Managed Equity Mutual Funds

In this study we evaluate the performance of actively managed equity mutual funds against a set of passively managed index funds. We find that the return spread between the best performing actively managed funds and a factor-mimicking portfolio of passive funds is positive and as large as 3 to 5 percent per annum. Our findings are inconsistent with the view that active funds have little or no incremental economic value over low-cost index funds.

Are the Fama-French Factors Really Compensations for Distress Risk?

In this paper, we revisit the question whether the Fama-French factors are manifestations of distress risk premiums. To this end, we develop new tests specifically aimed at dissecting the Fama-French factor returns from a distress risk premium. While we find that small-cap and value exposures are typically associated with distress risk, our results also indicate that distress risk is not priced and that the small-cap and value premiums are priced beyond distress risk. Moreover, the distress risk exposures of common small-cap and value factors do not have explanatory power in asset pricing tests. Our results have important implications for investors engaging in small-cap and value strategies.

Return Persistence, Risk Dynamics and Momentum Exposures of Equity and Bond Mutual Funds

To analyze persistence in mutual fund performance, it is common practice to construct portfolios of funds based on past fund returns. Using a large sample of equity and bond funds, we show that this approach introduces dynamic exposures to common stock and bond risk factors. Correcting for risk dynamics substantially reduces the level of persistence in risk-adjusted performance and drives out the explanatory power of stock and bond momentum factors.

Managerial Turnover and the Behavior of Mutual Fund Investors

Using a sample of domestic U.S. equity mutual funds, we find strong evidence that investors respond to managerial replacements. We find that the top performing funds that have a change in management subsequently have lower flows compared to funds of which the manager is retained. On top of that, we find that funds replacing their bad performing manager subsequently have lower flows compared to bad performing funds with a continuing manager. This latter finding is inconsistent with a world of rational expectations. The finding is, however, in line with a signaling hypothesis, even though we find evidence that the signals mutual fund investors perceive from managerial turnover is not justified as fund performance increases following the replacement of bad performing managers. Interestingly, the results are very similar for institutional funds and retail funds. Our finding cannot be explained by differences in fund characteristics such as the age of a fund, size, or expenses, or by differences in portfolio risks.