改进的性能保证

I. Ayres, Quinn D. Curtis
{"title":"改进的性能保证","authors":"I. Ayres, Quinn D. Curtis","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2375842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many mutual fund shareholders invest in funds with supra-competitive fees that reduce their expected return even though lower cost alternatives are available. While financial arbitrage could address this problem, conventional arbitrage is difficult to implement in the mutual fund market. This article proposes legal reform to our system of mutual fund regulation that responds to the problem of high-cost funds by providing the investors who are making the most substantial mistakes with salient and transparent market information about the existence of superior investment alternatives. We first consider ways that regulation could be reformed to facilitate what we call \"short redemption,\" the mutual fund analog to \"short selling\" of securities. A vibrant market for short redemptions would allow smart money to arbitrage fee differences by selling (redeeming) short high fee funds while buying comparable low-fee funds. But because of predictable resistance from the shorted funds and the difficulty of obtaining shares to borrow, we conclude that the short redemption is unlikely to be sufficient arbitrage discipline of inefficient high fee funds. Instead, we propose regulatory reform that would encourage low fee funds to offer \"improved performance guarantees.\" An improved performance guarantee promises that the consumer will achieve a better net financial outcome if she switches from a current provider to a competitor product. The core notion is to guarantee to the consumer an improvement in relative performance. The guarantee functions as an arbitrage of high fee funds that would improve price competition in the mutual fund market. Our central claim is that lawmakers and regulators can enhance competition in mutual funds by enabling sophisticated investors to arbitrage supra-competitive fees.","PeriodicalId":431402,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improved Performance Guarantees\",\"authors\":\"I. Ayres, Quinn D. Curtis\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2375842\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many mutual fund shareholders invest in funds with supra-competitive fees that reduce their expected return even though lower cost alternatives are available. While financial arbitrage could address this problem, conventional arbitrage is difficult to implement in the mutual fund market. This article proposes legal reform to our system of mutual fund regulation that responds to the problem of high-cost funds by providing the investors who are making the most substantial mistakes with salient and transparent market information about the existence of superior investment alternatives. We first consider ways that regulation could be reformed to facilitate what we call \\\"short redemption,\\\" the mutual fund analog to \\\"short selling\\\" of securities. A vibrant market for short redemptions would allow smart money to arbitrage fee differences by selling (redeeming) short high fee funds while buying comparable low-fee funds. But because of predictable resistance from the shorted funds and the difficulty of obtaining shares to borrow, we conclude that the short redemption is unlikely to be sufficient arbitrage discipline of inefficient high fee funds. Instead, we propose regulatory reform that would encourage low fee funds to offer \\\"improved performance guarantees.\\\" An improved performance guarantee promises that the consumer will achieve a better net financial outcome if she switches from a current provider to a competitor product. The core notion is to guarantee to the consumer an improvement in relative performance. The guarantee functions as an arbitrage of high fee funds that would improve price competition in the mutual fund market. Our central claim is that lawmakers and regulators can enhance competition in mutual funds by enabling sophisticated investors to arbitrage supra-competitive fees.\",\"PeriodicalId\":431402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2375842\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Securities Law: U.S. (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2375842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多共同基金股东投资于收费极具竞争力的基金,这降低了他们的预期回报,尽管有成本更低的替代基金可供选择。虽然金融套利可以解决这一问题,但传统套利在共同基金市场上很难实施。本文建议对我国的共同基金监管制度进行法律改革,通过向犯下最严重错误的投资者提供关于存在优质投资选择的突出和透明的市场信息,来应对高成本基金的问题。我们首先考虑改革监管的方式,以促进我们所谓的“卖空赎回”,这是类似于证券“卖空”的共同基金。一个充满活力的空头赎回市场将允许聪明的资金通过卖出(赎回)高费用的空头基金,同时买入类似的低费用基金,来套利费用差异。但由于可预见的空头资金的阻力和获得股份借款的难度,我们得出结论,空头赎回不太可能成为低效高费用基金的充分套利纪律。相反,我们建议进行监管改革,鼓励低收费基金提供“更好的业绩保证”。改进的性能保证承诺,如果消费者从当前供应商切换到竞争对手的产品,将获得更好的净财务结果。核心理念是保证消费者相对性能的提高。担保的作用是对高收费基金进行套利,从而改善共同基金市场的价格竞争。我们的核心主张是,立法机构和监管机构可以通过允许老练的投资者对超竞争性费用进行套利,从而增强共同基金的竞争。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Improved Performance Guarantees
Many mutual fund shareholders invest in funds with supra-competitive fees that reduce their expected return even though lower cost alternatives are available. While financial arbitrage could address this problem, conventional arbitrage is difficult to implement in the mutual fund market. This article proposes legal reform to our system of mutual fund regulation that responds to the problem of high-cost funds by providing the investors who are making the most substantial mistakes with salient and transparent market information about the existence of superior investment alternatives. We first consider ways that regulation could be reformed to facilitate what we call "short redemption," the mutual fund analog to "short selling" of securities. A vibrant market for short redemptions would allow smart money to arbitrage fee differences by selling (redeeming) short high fee funds while buying comparable low-fee funds. But because of predictable resistance from the shorted funds and the difficulty of obtaining shares to borrow, we conclude that the short redemption is unlikely to be sufficient arbitrage discipline of inefficient high fee funds. Instead, we propose regulatory reform that would encourage low fee funds to offer "improved performance guarantees." An improved performance guarantee promises that the consumer will achieve a better net financial outcome if she switches from a current provider to a competitor product. The core notion is to guarantee to the consumer an improvement in relative performance. The guarantee functions as an arbitrage of high fee funds that would improve price competition in the mutual fund market. Our central claim is that lawmakers and regulators can enhance competition in mutual funds by enabling sophisticated investors to arbitrage supra-competitive fees.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Raiders, Activists, and the Risk of Mistargeting The Economics of Securities Regulation: A Survey Autonomous Vehicles, Moral Hazards & the "AV Problem" Regulatory transparency and the alignment of private and public enforcement: Evidence from the public disclosure of SEC comment letters The '7% Solution' and IPO (Under)Pricing
×
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