Practical Applications of Analyzing the Evidence: Are Multiclass Mutual Funds the Right Choice?

Jonathan Handy, Jonathan T. Ricketts, Thomas I. Smythe
{"title":"Practical Applications of Analyzing the Evidence: Are Multiclass Mutual Funds the Right Choice?","authors":"Jonathan Handy, Jonathan T. Ricketts, Thomas I. Smythe","doi":"10.3905/pa.8.2.407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Practical Applications Summary In Analyzing the Evidence: Are Multiclass Mutual Funds the Right Choice? in the Spring 2020 edition of The Journal of Index Investing, Jonathan Handy of Western Kentucky University, Jonathan Ricketts of Furman University, and Thomas Smythe of Florida Gulf Coast University review the empirical and academic literature on multiclass mutual funds and draw conclusions about the suitability of such funds for investors. The authors trace the history of these investment products and examine the considerable body of evidence that multiclass funds have governance issues and incur substantial, if not excessive, expenses. Although the multiclass framework may broaden investor options, it also inherently leads to agency problems. Fund advisors often face conflicts of interest between themselves and their clients. They may be motivated to recommend a class of mutual fund shares that is inappropriate for a client but may be the most profitable for the advisor to sell. Moreover, investors are confused by the categorization schemes of multiclass funds and their associated fees. Advisors and fund managers themselves are often not fully conversant with the characteristics of the multiclass funds they are touting. The systemic weaknesses of the multiclass-fund framework should prompt reconsideration or even eschewal of these products by investors and advisors alike. TOPICS: Financial crises and financial market history, mutual fund performance","PeriodicalId":179835,"journal":{"name":"Practical Application","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Application","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/pa.8.2.407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Practical Applications Summary In Analyzing the Evidence: Are Multiclass Mutual Funds the Right Choice? in the Spring 2020 edition of The Journal of Index Investing, Jonathan Handy of Western Kentucky University, Jonathan Ricketts of Furman University, and Thomas Smythe of Florida Gulf Coast University review the empirical and academic literature on multiclass mutual funds and draw conclusions about the suitability of such funds for investors. The authors trace the history of these investment products and examine the considerable body of evidence that multiclass funds have governance issues and incur substantial, if not excessive, expenses. Although the multiclass framework may broaden investor options, it also inherently leads to agency problems. Fund advisors often face conflicts of interest between themselves and their clients. They may be motivated to recommend a class of mutual fund shares that is inappropriate for a client but may be the most profitable for the advisor to sell. Moreover, investors are confused by the categorization schemes of multiclass funds and their associated fees. Advisors and fund managers themselves are often not fully conversant with the characteristics of the multiclass funds they are touting. The systemic weaknesses of the multiclass-fund framework should prompt reconsideration or even eschewal of these products by investors and advisors alike. TOPICS: Financial crises and financial market history, mutual fund performance
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实证分析的实际应用:多类别共同基金是正确的选择吗?
实证分析中的实际应用总结:多类别共同基金是正确的选择吗?在2020年春季版的《指数投资杂志》上,西肯塔基大学的乔纳森·汉迪(Jonathan Handy)、弗曼大学的乔纳森·里基茨(Jonathan Ricketts)和佛罗里达墨西哥湾沿岸大学的托马斯·斯迈思(Thomas Smythe)回顾了关于多类别共同基金的实证和学术文献,并得出了这些基金对投资者的适用性的结论。作者追溯了这些投资产品的历史,并研究了大量证据,证明多类别基金存在治理问题,并产生了大量(如果不是过度的话)费用。尽管多类别框架可能扩大投资者的选择,但它也固有地导致代理问题。基金顾问经常面临自己与客户之间的利益冲突。他们可能会有动机推荐某一类共同基金股票,这类股票不适合客户,但对顾问来说可能是最有利可图的。此外,投资者对多类别基金的分类方案及其相关费用感到困惑。投资顾问和基金经理本身往往并不完全熟悉他们所兜售的多类别基金的特点。多类别基金框架的系统性弱点,应促使投资者和顾问重新考虑甚至回避这些产品。主题:金融危机和金融市场历史,共同基金表现
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Practical Applications of Joanne Hill – Conversation with Frank Fabozzi Practical Applications of The Life Journey of Wealthy Women: Evolving Experiences Around Money, Work, Family, and Life Choices of Ultrawealthy Women Practical Applications of Sales Dispersion: A Robust Factor to Consider to Achieve Alpha Practical Applications of The Free Boundary of the American Put Practical Applications of The Evolution of Private Equity Fund Value
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1