Advertisement

Annals of Finance

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 137–169 | Cite as

Mutual fund performance: false discoveries, bias, and power

  • Nik Tuzov
  • Frederi Viens
Research Article

Abstract

We analyze the performance of mutual funds from a multiple inference perspective. When the number of funds is large, random fluctuations will cause some funds falsely to appear to outperform the rest. To account for such “false discoveries,” a multiple inference approach is necessary. Performance evaluation measures are unlikely to be independent across mutual funds. At the same time, the data are typically not sufficient to estimate the dependence structure of performance measures. In addition, the performance evaluation model can be misspecified. We contribute to the existing literature by applying an empirical Bayes approach that offers a possible way to take these factors into account. We also look into the question of statistical power of the performance evaluation model, which has received little attention in mutual fund studies. We find that the assumption of independence of performance evaluation measures results in significant bias, such as over-estimating the number of outperforming mutual funds. Adjusting for the mutual fund investment objective is helpful, but it still does not result in the discovery of a significant number of successful funds. A detailed analysis reveals a very low power of the study. Even if outperformers are present in the sample, they might not be recognized as such and/or too many years of data might be required to single them out.

Keywords

Mutual fund Performance evaluation False discovery Multiple inference Statistical power 

JEL Classification

C10 G10 G20 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ammann M., Verhofen M.: The impact of prior performance on the risk-taking of mutual fund managers. Ann Financ 5, 69–90 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avellaneda, M., Lee, J.: Statistical Arbitrage in the U.S. equities market. SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1153505 (2008). Accessed 11 July 2008
  3. Barras L., Scaillet O., Wermers R.: False discoveries in mutual fund performance: measuring luck in estimated alphas. J Financ 65(1), 179–216 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benjamini Y., Hochberg Y.: Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Stat Soc 57(1), 289–300 (1995)Google Scholar
  5. Benjamini Y., Hochberg Y.: On the adaptive control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing with independent statistics. J Educ Behav Stat 25(1), 60–83 (2000)Google Scholar
  6. Benjamini Y., Yekutieli D.: The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Ann Stat 29(4), 1165–1188 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benjamini Y., Krieger A., Yekutieli D.: Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika 93(3), 491–507 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carhart M.: On persistence of mutual fund performance. J Financ 52(1), 57–82 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen H., Jegadeesh N., Wermers R.: The value of active mutual fund management: an examination of the stockholdings and trades of fund managers. J Financ Quant Anal 35, 343–368 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cornell B., Cvitanic J., Goukasian L.: Beliefs regarding fundamental value and optimal investing. Ann Financ 6, 83–105 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cuthbertson K., Nitzsche D., O’Sullivan N.: UK mutual fund performance: skill or luck?. J Empir Financ 15, 613–634 (2008a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cuthbertson, K., Nitzsche, D., O’Sullivan, N.: False discoveries: winners and losers in mutual fund performance. SSRN. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1093624 (2008b)
  13. Daniel K., Grinblatt M., Titman S., Wermers R.: Measuring mutual fund performance with characteristic-based benchmarks. J Financ 52(3), 1035–1058 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Efron B.: Empirical Bayes analysis of a microarray experiment. J Am Stat Assoc 96(456), 1151–1160 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Efron B., Tibshirani R.: Empirical Bayes methods and false discovery rates for microarrays. Genet Epidemiol 23, 70–86 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Efron B.: Large-scale simultaneous hypothesis testing: the choice of a null hypothesis. J Am Stat Assoc 99(465), 96–104 (2004a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Efron, B.: Selection and estimation for large-scale simultaneous inference. http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~ckirby/brad/papers/ (2004b). Accessed 25 Jan 2009
  18. Efron, B.: Local false discovery rates. http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~ckirby/brad/papers/ (2005) Accessed 25 Jan 2009
  19. Efron B.: Microarrays, empirical Bayes, and the two-groups model. Stat Sci 23(1), 1–22 (2008a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Efron B.: Testing the significance of sets of genes. Ann Appl Stat 1(1), 107–129 (2007a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Efron B.: Size, power, and false discovery rates. Ann Stat 35(4), 1351–1377 (2007b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Efron B.: Correlation and large-scale simultaneous significance testing. J Am Stat Assoc 102(477), 93–103 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Efron B.: Simultaneous inference: when should hypothesis testing problems be combined?. Ann Appl Stat 2(1), 197–223 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fan J., Fan Y., Lv J.: High dimensional covariance matrix estimation using a factor model. J Econom 147, 186–197 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jensen M.: The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945–1964. J Financ 23(2), 389–416 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones C., Shanken J.: Mutual fund performance with learning across funds. J Financ Econ 78, 507–552 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kosowski R., Timmermann A., Wermers R., White H.: Can mutual fund “Stars” really pick stocks? New evidence from a bootstrap analysis. J Financ 61(6), 2551–2596 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kothari S., Warner J.: Evaluating mutual fund performance. J Financ 56(5), 1985–2010 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mamaysky H., Spiegel M., Zhang H.: Improved forecasting of mutual fund alphas and betas. Rev Financ 11, 359–400 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Otamendi J., Doncel L., Grau P., Sainz J.: An evaluation on the true statistical relevance of Jensen’s alpha trough simulation: An application for Germany. Econ Bull 7(10), 1–9 (2008)Google Scholar
  31. Romano J., Wolf M.: Stepwise multiple testing as formalized data snooping. Econometrica 73, 1237–1282 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Romano, J., Shaikh, A., Wolf, M.: Control of the false discovery rate under dependence using the bootstrap and subsampling. University of Zurich, Working paper no. 337. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1025410 (2007)
  33. Romano J., Shaikh A., Wolf M.: Formalized data snooping based on generalized error rates. Economet Theor 24(2), 404–447 (2008)Google Scholar
  34. Storey J.: A direct approach to false discovery rates. J Roy Stat Soc B 64, 479–498 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Storey D.: The positive false discovery rate: a Bayesian interpretation and the q-value. Ann Stat. 31(6), 2013–2035 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Storey, D., Tibshirani, R.: Estimating false discovery rates under dependence, with applications to DNA microarrays. http://www.genomine.org/publications.html (2001). Accessed 25 Nov 2009
  37. Storey D., Tibshirani R.: Statistical Significance for genomewide studies. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 100, 9440 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Storey J., Taylor J., Siegmund D.: Strong control, conservative point estimation and simultaneous conser-vative consistency of false discovery rates: a unified approach. J Roy Stat Soc 66, 187 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Turnbull, B.: Optimal estimation of false discovery rates. http://www.stanford.edu/~bkatzen/ (2007). Accessed 25 Jan 2009
  40. van der Laan, M., Hubbard, A.: Quantile function based null distribution in resampling based multiple testing. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 5, article 14 (2005)Google Scholar
  41. White H.: A reality check for data snooping. Econometrica 68, 1097–1126 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yekutieli D., Benjamini Y.: Resampling-based false discovery rate controlling multiple test procedures for correlated test statistics. J Stat Plan Infer 82, 171 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsPurdue UniversityW. LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations