IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v34y1988i9p1067-1079.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation Risk and Incentive Contracts for Portfolio Managers

Author

Listed:
  • Susan I. Cohen

    (College of Commerce, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois 61820)

  • Laura T. Starks

    (Department of Finance, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712)

Abstract

The fiduciary relationship between portfolio managers and the investors they represent may be viewed as a principal-agent relationship, and therefore we have used the methodology from the agency literature in economics and finance to study the impact of existing compensation arrangements on the conflicts of interest between these two groups. In this paper we employ the assumptions of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and of estimation risk concerning beta to develop a model in which portfolio managers can, through effort, choose the parameters of the beta distribution. Our model entails moral hazard because the investor cannot observe the manager's action. Given certain utility functions we show that the presence of estimation risk leads the manager to choose a lower beta portfolio than otherwise and that no first best optimal contract exists. We also show that managerial divergent behavior is related to the divergence in risk preferences between the manager and the investor. By making slightly more stringent assumptions about preferences, we show that there exist some conditions under which the manager will provide more effort but also a riskier portfolio than the investor prefers. Finally we show that the investor will prefer a manager who is less risk averse than the investor.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan I. Cohen & Laura T. Starks, 1988. "Estimation Risk and Incentive Contracts for Portfolio Managers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(9), pages 1067-1079, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:34:y:1988:i:9:p:1067-1079
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.34.9.1067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.34.9.1067
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.34.9.1067?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Palomino, Frederic & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim, 2011. "Overconfidence and delegated portfolio management," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 159-177, April.
    2. Wang, Jian & Sheng, Jiliang & Yang, Jun, 2013. "Optimism bias and incentive contracts in portfolio delegation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 493-499.
    3. Juan-Pedro Gómez & Tridib Sharma, 2006. "Portfolio delegation under short-selling constraints," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(1), pages 173-196, May.
    4. Ching-Chang Wang & Jerry Yu, 2018. "The holdings markup behavior of mutual funds: evidence from an emerging market," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 393-414, February.
    5. Palomino, Frederic & Prat, Andrea, 2003. "Risk Taking and Optimal Contracts for Money Managers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 113-137, Spring.
    6. Golec, Joseph H., 1996. "The effects of mutual fund managers' characteristics on their portfolio performance, risk and fees," Financial Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 133-147.
    7. Najand, Mohammad & Prather, Larry J., 1999. "The risk level discriminatory power of mutual fund investment objectives: Additional evidence," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 307-328, August.
    8. Danilo Drago & Valter Lazzari & Marco Navone, 2010. "Mutual Fund Incentive Fees: Determinants and Effects," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(1), pages 365-392, March.
    9. T. S. Raghu & P. K. Sen & H. R. Rao, 2003. "Relative Performance of Incentive Mechanisms: Computational Modeling and Simulation of Delegated Investment Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(2), pages 160-178, February.
    10. Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon & King, Stephen P., 1999. "On relative performance contracts and fund manager's incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 135-161, January.
    11. Golec, Joseph & Starks, Laura, 2004. "Performance fee contract change and mutual fund risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 93-118, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:34:y:1988:i:9:p:1067-1079. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.