| Year | 2017 50 Downloads |
| Volume/Issue/Review Month | Vol. - X | Issue I | January - June |
| Title | Do Mutual Funds Persist the Performance : Good or Bad? |
| Authors | Prof Manju Punia Chopra |
| Broad area | Do Mutual Funds Persist the Performance : Good or Bad? |
| Abstract | This research makes an attempt to determine persistence in the mutual fund returns. i.e. an effort has been made to determine the presence or absence of the ability of the mutual fund managers to select the right type of stock at the right time. The study utilizes a few selected techniques of performance evaluation on the sample of 36 equity diversified schemes of Indian mutual fund houses. The period of the study is from January 2001 till December 2014.The benchmark used for the study is S&P CNX NIFTY. Grinblatt and Titman’s persistence methodology is used by dividing the sample tenure of one hundred and sixty-eight months in two equal halves. The regression incorporating the alpha values generated by the Jensen’s Alpha model and beta values generated by Treynor-Mazuy as well as Merton-Henriksson model is run. The Jensen’s model, Treynor-Mazuy and Merton-Henriksson models do not give statistically significant evidence of persistence in stock selection ability which is evident from t-statistics value of 0.13923424, -0.342969074 and 0.76215211 respectively of alphas of the models at 5 per cent level of significance. The results of all the models are in sync with each other as well as the previous studies. The empirical results of Treynor-Mazuy and Merton-Henriksson models show no persistence in timing ability of the fund managers. The conclusion has come from t-statistics values of -0.725882517, -1.221886878 of beta of Treynor-Mazuy and Merton-Henriksson models respectively which is not significant at 5 per cent level of significance. But by expanding the level of significance to 10 per cent, the persistence in perverse market timing of the fund managers gets focused on. The findings of the study are consistent with existing studies done in emerging as well as the mature markets. Overall the evidence is in conformity with the efficient market hypothesis. In this study, the evaluation of persistence in fund performance has been studied not only owing to selectivity skills but also market timing. The results have implications for hedge funds and other managed portfolios that consistently follow “fund of funds” strategy in pursuit of extra-normal returns. |
| DOI | Mutual funds always put a lot of emphasis on their past performance while placing an advertisement. Various researchers have found that the primary determinant of flows of money into a particular fund is past performance of the mutual fund relative to tha |
| File | |
| Referenceses | w Alekhya P. A study on public and private sector funds in India.Asia pacific journal of marketing and management review. 2012, 1(2), 147-168 w Brown S. J. and W.N. Goetzmann. Performance persistence. Journal of Finance. 1995, 5,679-698 w Goetzman W. N. and R. G. Ibbotson. Do winners repeat? Patterns in mutual fund performance.Journal of Portfolio Management. 1994, 20(3), 9-18 w Grinblatt M. and S. Titman. Portfolio performance evaluation: Old issues and new insights.Review of Financial Studies. 1989, 2(3), 393-422 w Grinblatt M. and S. Titman. The persistence of mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance. 1992, 47(5), 1977-84 w Henriksson D. Roy and Robert C. Merton. On market timing and investment performance ii: Statistical procedures for evaluating forecasting skills. Journal of Business. 1981, 54(4), 513-534 w Jensen M C. Risk, the pricing of assets and the evaluation of investment portfolios.Journal of Business. 1969, 42(1), 167-247 w Morgan Stanley. Sustainable Reality: Understanding the performance of sustainable investment strategies. Morgan Stanley Institute of Sustainable Investing. March 2015 w Poornima S. and R.K. Sudhamati. Performance analysis of growth-oriented equity diversified mutual funds.Asia Pacific Journal of Research. 2013, 1(8), 27-35 w Treynor J, Mazuy K. Can mutual funds outguess the market?, Harvard Business Review. 1966, 63(2), pp. 52-59 |