IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsarxx/v15y2001i2p99-109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recent evidence on the persistence of fund performance—A note

Author

Listed:
  • D Bradfield
  • J Swartz

Abstract

This note highlights recent evidence on the persistence of fund performance in South Africa, throwing new light on the 1985–1995 study conducted by Meyer (1997). Our analysis on the persistence of South African fund performance is based on the General Equity category of unit trusts over the period 1995-August 2001. Examining performance persistence across consecutive years, we found evidence of fund performance persistence. This latest evidence seems to be primarily driven by the consistently superior performance of some top performers (rather than persistent poor performers). It seems that there are managers who have significant skill, to the extent that they have systematically been able to outperform their peers. Interestingly this evidence is similar to evidence forthcoming from studies conducted in the USA.As a confirming exercise, we considered the impact of investing in historical top quartile performers, second quartile performers etc., rebalancing annually and accumulating returns during the subsequent year of “unseen” performance data. The results are indeed surprising and compelling. Contrary to popular local belief, selecting historical top quartile performers yielded vastly superior performance results to a wide range of alternate combinations. Interestingly the second best strategy was that of a passive peergoup benchmarking approach.

Suggested Citation

  • D Bradfield & J Swartz, 2001. "Recent evidence on the persistence of fund performance—A note," South African Journal of Accounting Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 99-109, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsarxx:v:15:y:2001:i:2:p:99-109
    DOI: 10.1080/10291954.2001.11461410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10291954.2001.11461410
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10291954.2001.11461410?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
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:taf:rsarxx:v:15:y:2001:i:2:p:99-109. 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsar .

    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.