Abstract
This paper analyzes persistence in US equity mutual fund performance over the period 1990–2015. We apply commonly used measures of persistence, which we test using a set of simulated passive funds. In the first stage we apply contingency tables and transition matrices in accordance with previous literature. Results show how these methodologies are biased towards finding evidence of persistence too easily. In the second stage, we take a recursive portfolio approach, which assesses the performance of investing by following recommendations based on past performance. Results show the importance of both estimating persistence by distinguishing among fund style groups, and considering the cross-sectional significance of recursive portfolios. In general, our results support evidence of persistence in mutual fund performance, especially for the case of the best mutual funds. However, this evidence does not hold for the most recent subperiod, 2008–2015. Empirical evidence of persistence is conditioned by the sample period, a result that could explain the inconclusive results found in the literature.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: The North American Journal of Economics and Finance
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.