IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revfin/v24y2020i3p579-613..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Rational and Competitive Is the Market for Mutual Funds?

Author

Listed:
  • Markus Leippold
  • Roger Rueegg

Abstract

To explore the rationality and competitiveness of the mutual fund industry, we analyze the alpha of active and index mutual funds from a global sample of more than 60,000 equity and fixed income funds and test the null hypothesis that alphas to investors are zero. We distinguish between institutional and retail investors since there are significant differences in management fees, economies of scale, and information asymmetries between these two groups. Using a new robust statistical test, we cannot reject our null hypothesis for the majority of investment categories. We find that the average active fund has less exposure to traditional risk factors, but higher sensitivity to alternative risk premia. Fund persistence and the impact of size and fees add further support to our conclusion that the mutual fund industry is highly competitive, except for US domestic funds. This set of funds is excessively overfunded compared with other fund categories.

Suggested Citation

  • Markus Leippold & Roger Rueegg, 2020. "How Rational and Competitive Is the Market for Mutual Funds?," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 24(3), pages 579-613.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revfin:v:24:y:2020:i:3:p:579-613.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rof/rfz011
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. John Ammer & John Rogers & Gang Wang & Yang Yu, 2020. "Monetary Policy Expectations, Fund Managers, and Fund Returns: Evidence from China," International Finance Discussion Papers 1285, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    2. David R. Gallagher & Graham Harman & Camille H. Schmidt & Geoffrey J. Warren, 2022. "Global equity fund performance adjusted for equity and currency factors," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1535-1565, April.
    3. Hassanniakalager, Arman & Baker, Paul L. & Platanakis, Emmanouil, 2024. "A False Discovery Rate approach to optimal volatility forecasting model selection," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 881-902.
    4. Juan Carlos Matallín-Sáez & Amparo Soler-Domínguez & Diego Víctor Mingo-López, 2021. "On management risk and price in the mutual fund industry: style and performance distribution analysis," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 150-171, June.
    5. John Ammer & John Rogers & Gang Wang & Yang Yu, 2023. "Chinese Asset Managers’ Monetary Policy Forecasts and Fund Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 598-616, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Active investing; Index investing; Mutual funds; Robust alpha test;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G20 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - General
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:revfin:v:24:y:2020:i:3:p:579-613.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eufaaea.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.