The Performance Evaluation of Hedge Funds: A Comparison of Different Approaches Using European Data

Abstract

The standard approach to the evaluation of funds assumes a normal return distribution and uses the variance as a measure of the funds risk. A few characteristics of hedge funds, such as the remuneration mechanism of the portfolio manager, make this assumption unacceptable and the traditional approach of Risk Adjusted Performance (RAP) must be revised before applying it to hedge funds. Some authors define a number of different RAP measures that attempt to overcome the problem related to the lack of normality: new RAPs are characterized by a more detailed return distribution analysis that does not consider only the first two moments of the distribution. A higher computational complexity may only be reasonable if selections founded on new RAPs permit to identify better investment opportunities than those selected with standard RAPs. This work analyses different approaches proposed with a view to calculating the RAP for hedge funds and evaluates advantages and limits of each proposed measure. An application of these measures to the European hedge funds market is proposed in order to demonstrate the usefulness of new approaches. An empirical analysis studies differences in funds classification based on different measures and demonstrates that the standard RAP approach is unable to identify the best performing hedge funds.