We investigate the role of extreme positive payoffs in the distribution of monthly fund returns in investors’ mutual fund preferences. We document a positive and significant relationship between the maximum style-adjusted monthly return (MAX) and future fund flows. The relationship is robust to controlling for average performance, volatility, skewness, and various other fund characteristics. Our findings are consistent with the notion that fund investors overweight the probability of high payoff states in the past return distribution. We further show that MAX is not a useful predictor of future performance and that an increase in a fund’s visibility does not explain our findings.
In September 2011 Morningstar launched its qualitative forward-looking analyst ratings to supplement its widely followed backward-looking star ratings. This new system is designed to convey information about a mutual fund's future performance using a five-tier scale: Gold, Silver, Bronze, Neutral, and Negative. We examine both the investor response to analyst rating initiations and the out-of-sample performance of newly rated funds. We find that investors respond positively to Gold and Silver rated funds relative to other rated funds. We find little evidence that the new rating system identifies funds that outperform peer funds at horizons of up to 6 months. Overall, it appears that rating initiations influence investor allocation decisions, but it remains unclear whether the ratings provide valuable information regarding long-term, out-of-sample performance.
In September 2011 Morningstar launched its qualitative forward-looking analyst ratings to supplement its widely followed backward-looking star ratings. This new system is designed to convey information about a mutual fund's future performance using a five-tier scale: Gold, Silver, Bronze, Neutral, and Negative. We examine both the investor response to analyst rating initiations and the out-of-sample performance of newly rated funds. We find that investors respond positively to Gold and Silver rated funds relative to other rated funds. We find little evidence that the new rating system identifies funds that outperform peer funds at horizons of up to 6 months. Overall, it appears that rating initiations influence investor allocation decisions, but it remains unclear whether the ratings provide valuable information regarding long-term, out-of-sample performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.