便宜并不好:谈高费用共同基金的“优越”表现

IF 2.2 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Review of Asset Pricing Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-21 DOI:10.1093/rapstu/raac019
Jinfei Sheng, Mikhail Simutin, Terry Zhang
{"title":"便宜并不好:谈高费用共同基金的“优越”表现","authors":"Jinfei Sheng, Mikhail Simutin, Terry Zhang","doi":"10.1093/rapstu/raac019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In contrast with theoretical predictions, high-fee active equity funds generate worse net-of-expenses performance. We show that this fee-performance puzzle is driven by the preference of high-fee funds for stocks with low operating profitability and high investment rates, characteristics associated with low expected returns. After controlling for exposures to profitability and investment factors, we find high-fee funds significantly outperform low-fee funds before expenses and achieve similarly poor net-of-fees performance. In resolving the fee-performance puzzle, our findings provide support to the theoretical prediction that net alphas are unrelated to fees and challenge the common advice to prefer low-fee funds over high-fee counterparts.","PeriodicalId":21144,"journal":{"name":"Review of Asset Pricing Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cheaper Is Not Better: On the ‘Superior’ Performance of High-Fee Mutual Funds\",\"authors\":\"Jinfei Sheng, Mikhail Simutin, Terry Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/rapstu/raac019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In contrast with theoretical predictions, high-fee active equity funds generate worse net-of-expenses performance. We show that this fee-performance puzzle is driven by the preference of high-fee funds for stocks with low operating profitability and high investment rates, characteristics associated with low expected returns. After controlling for exposures to profitability and investment factors, we find high-fee funds significantly outperform low-fee funds before expenses and achieve similarly poor net-of-fees performance. In resolving the fee-performance puzzle, our findings provide support to the theoretical prediction that net alphas are unrelated to fees and challenge the common advice to prefer low-fee funds over high-fee counterparts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21144,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Asset Pricing Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Asset Pricing Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/raac019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Asset Pricing Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rapstu/raac019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与理论预测相反,高费用主动型股票基金的净费用表现更差。我们的研究表明,这种收费绩效难题是由高收费基金对低运营盈利能力和高投资率的股票的偏好所驱动的,这些股票的特征与低预期回报有关。在控制了盈利能力和投资因素的风险敞口后,我们发现高收费基金在扣除费用前的表现明显优于低收费基金,并且实现了同样糟糕的净收费业绩。在解决费用-业绩难题时,我们的研究结果为净阿尔法与费用无关的理论预测提供了支持,并挑战了低费用基金比高费用基金更受青睐的普遍建议。
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
Cheaper Is Not Better: On the ‘Superior’ Performance of High-Fee Mutual Funds
In contrast with theoretical predictions, high-fee active equity funds generate worse net-of-expenses performance. We show that this fee-performance puzzle is driven by the preference of high-fee funds for stocks with low operating profitability and high investment rates, characteristics associated with low expected returns. After controlling for exposures to profitability and investment factors, we find high-fee funds significantly outperform low-fee funds before expenses and achieve similarly poor net-of-fees performance. In resolving the fee-performance puzzle, our findings provide support to the theoretical prediction that net alphas are unrelated to fees and challenge the common advice to prefer low-fee funds over high-fee counterparts.
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
Review of Asset Pricing Studies
Review of Asset Pricing Studies BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
19.80
自引率
0.80%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The Review of Asset Pricing Studies (RAPS) is a journal that aims to publish high-quality research in asset pricing. It evaluates papers based on their original contribution to the understanding of asset pricing. The topics covered in RAPS include theoretical and empirical models of asset prices and returns, empirical methodology, macro-finance, financial institutions and asset prices, information and liquidity in asset markets, behavioral investment studies, asset market structure and microstructure, risk analysis, hedge funds, mutual funds, alternative investments, and other related topics. Manuscripts submitted to RAPS must be exclusive to the journal and should not have been previously published. Starting in 2020, RAPS will publish three issues per year, owing to an increasing number of high-quality submissions. The journal is indexed in EconLit, Emerging Sources Citation IndexTM, RePEc (Research Papers in Economics), and Scopus.
期刊最新文献
Shorting the Dollar When Global Stock Markets Roar: The Equity Hedging Channel of Exchange Rate Determination A Survey of Short-Selling Regulations Systematic Skewness and Stock Returns Estimating Probability Weighting Functions through Option Pricing Bounds Predicting the Equity Premium with Combination Forecasts: A Reappraisal
×
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