Journal of Financial Services Marketing

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 88–96

The effect of distribution channels on mutual fund flows

Practice Paper

Abstract

The Morningstar fund rating has been reported to affect mutual fund flows in the US markets. This paper finds that flow patterns in Finnish bank-managed funds are significantly different from the patterns in the US. Specifically, non-bank funds attract flows in a manner similar to the US markets, that is Morningstar ratings affect fund flows. In contrast, Finnish bank-managed funds do not exhibit the same relationship between star ratings and flows. The results suggest that in Finland, five-star Morningstar ratings are not regarded as highly as in the US, where good performance attracts significantly higher flows. More significantly, our findings demonstrate the importance of banks' distribution channels in the Finnish financial market.

Keywords

mutual fund flow distribution 

References

  1. Del Guercio, D. and Tkac, P. (2005) ‘Star power: Assessing the effect of an information intermediary on mutual fund flows’, Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta/University of Oregon Department of Finance.Google Scholar
  2. Sirri, E. and Tufano, P. (1998) ‘Costly search and mutual fund flows’, Journal of Finance, Vol.53, pp.1589–1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carhart, M. M. (1997) ‘On persistence in mutual fund performance’, Journal of Finance, Vol.52, pp.56–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Shefrin, H. and Statman, M. (1985) ‘The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: Theory and evidence’, Journal of Finance, Vol.40, pp.777–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goetzmann, W. and Peles, N. (1997) ‘Cognitive dissonance and mutual fund investors’, Journal of Financial Research, Vol.20, pp.145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Del Guercio, D. and Tkac, P. (2002) ‘The determinants of the flows of funds of managed portfolios: Mutual funds vs. pension funds’, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol.37, pp.523–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Sawicki, J. (2000) ‘Investors’ response to performance of professional fund managers: Evidence from Australian funds wholesale market’, Australian Journal of Management, Vol.25, pp.47–67.Google Scholar
  8. Sawicki, J. (2001) ‘Investors’ differential response to managed fund performance’, Journal of Financial Research, Vol.24, pp.367–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bergstresser, D., Chalmers, J. M. R. and Tufano, P. (2004) ‘Assessing the costs and benefits of brokers in the mutual fund industry’, Working paper, Harvard Business School and University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  10. Otten, R. and Schweitzer, M. (2002) ‘A comparison between the European and the U.S. mutual fund industry’, Managerial Finance, Vol.28, No.1, pp.14–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Otten and Shweitzer note that they are not aware of any study that examines the effect of performance rankings on money in- and outflows in European markets. They suggest that it would be a fruitful venue for further research.Google Scholar
  12. The data are taken from 2002, which is the last year that Morningstar reported bank proprietary fund holdings for the US market.Google Scholar
  13. Korkeamaki, T. and Smythe, T. (2004) ‘Effects of market segmentation and bank concentration on mutual fund expenses and returns: Evidence from Finland’, European Financial Management, Vol.10, pp.413–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gil-Bazo and Martínez15 find strong evidence supporting the hypothesis that funds managed by companies belonging to banks are more expensive in terms of annual expenses and redemption fees, while examining Spanish mutual fund markets, which are also bank dominated.Google Scholar
  15. Gil-Bazo, H. and Martínez, M. (2003) ‘The black box of mutual fund fees’, Working Paper, Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Ecónomico II, Spain.Google Scholar
  16. Koppenhaver, G. (1999) ‘Circle unbroken: bank-affiliated money market mutual funds’, Proceedings of a Conference on Bank Structure and Competition, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (1999): pp.430–447.Google Scholar
  17. Frye, M. (2001) ‘The performance of bank-managed mutual funds’, Journal of Financial Research, Vol.24, pp.419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Korpela, M. and Puttonen, V. (2006) ‘Mutual fund expenses: Evidence on the effect of distribution channels’, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Vol.11, No.1, pp.17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. For example, in October 2005 the three major banks (Nordea, Sampo and Osuuspankki) had a 68 per cent market share in the Finnish fund market (Source: Finnish Financial Supervision).Google Scholar
  20. Del Guercio and Tkac illustrate the distribution of flows graphically. Diane Del Guercio kindly provided us with the exact percentages.Google Scholar
  21. Kasanen, Lipponen, and Puttonen22 do not find the performance–flow relationship in Finnish bank-managed mutual funds.Google Scholar
  22. Kasanen, E., Lipponen, V. and Puttonen, V. (2001) ‘What determines mutual fund growth: Evidence from Finland’, The Finnish Journal of Business Economics, Vol.50, pp.227–259.Google Scholar
  23. Blake, C. and Morey, M. (2000) ‘Morningstar ratings and mutual fund performance’, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol.35, pp.451–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Helsinki School of Economics, and Arvo Value Asset Management Ltd.HelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations