Home | Register | Sign in | Contact Us | Sitemap |
   
14 Jun 2012 06:00 PM
Study claims US fund managers get worse with experience; owe their skill to luck 
Team Cafemutual
 

The study findings will surprise most Indians as many of India’s top fund managers continue to perform well despite being around for 2 decades! 

A study carried out by Bryant University’s Finance Professor Jack Trifts claims that a fund manager’s performance actually gets worse with more experience. According to a release, the study came up with these findings:

  1. Solo fund managers who survived more than 10 years were likely to have performed at or above the market in their first three years;
  2. Managers with tenure of 10 or more years are likely to have significantly poorer performance the longer they manage;
  3. Although each of the very best managers generated positive compounded annual market-adjusted returns following their first three years, the majority were not able to maintain that level of performance.

Trifts examined data spanning 80 years to identify the best solo fund managers. The study also examined the relationship between performance and tenure of 289 fund managers of 355 actively-managed funds. Trifts claims that the longer a manager runs a fund, the higher the likelihood of mean revision setting in. The study does not even spare Peter Lynch, arguably the best fund manager of all time.

However, this would come as a big surprise to most Indian observers as many of India’s top managers have managed to sustain their performance over two decades, in varying market conditions. Names like Prashant Jain, K. N. Siva Subramanian, R. Sukumar,  Apoorva Shah,  S. Naren, Mahesh Patil and Kenneth Andrade come immediately to mind.

But the Bryant University study paints a completely different picture of the approximately $3 trillion US fund industry. The findings reveal that even the best solo fund managers “seem to get worse at their craft the longer they practice it.” The study simply states that superior performance is really just random luck.

In fact, this latest study merely echoes the findings of similar studies carried out in the past. Eugene Fama (who developed the efficient market hypothesis in the 60s) and Kenneth French had come out with a study in 2009 which stated that it’s not possible to tell if actively managed funds which beat their benchmarks do so because of luck or skill.

For the US, the jury is out on this one. 

 
|
|
Cafemutual welcomes your comments. Any disagreements or criticisms must be expressed in a dignified manner. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Related Articles
NFO mobilisations reduced to a trickle since 2010
9 Indian funds among world’s 100 best performing funds in 2012: Lipper
Global funds yet to catch advisors fancy – Part II
Global funds yet to catch advisors fancy – Part I
Mid Cap Funds stood out in 2012: Morningstar
18% decline in Indian millionaires compared to last year, says a Capgemini-RBC study
Three interesting AMC websites which distributors will find useful
Fund houses find gold fund-of-funds route ideal to attract retail investors
Active Funds vs. ETFs - which is better?
Are changes fast paced?
 
About Us | Media | Advertise With Us | Editorial Policy | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Sitemap
© Cafemutal.com. All rights reserved. Reproduction of news articles, photos, videos or any other content in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of cafemutual.com is prohibited.
Best Viewed in I.E 7.0 and above. Resolution: 1024 * 768. Developed & Hosted by Accord Fintech Pvt. Ltd