Recent papers which have examined unit trusts have controlled either for a 'fund size effect' or for the 'small firms effect' in the investment portfolio. The contribution of this paper is an analysis of the 'small firms effect' whilst simultaneously controlling for the 'fund size effect'. We show that the ethical unit trusts have significantly greater exposure than general unit trusts to the 'small firms effect', and that net of this there is no significant evidence of over or under performance by ethical trusts using an adjusted Jensen measure. Using two cross-sectional approaches, we demonstrate that whilst a 'small firms effect' has a role to play in explaining unit trust performance, fund size is not correlated with the financial performance of unit trusts. This cross-sectional analysis also provides some evidence that ethical unit trusts may perform less well than general unit trusts. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997.

Examines the impact on investment returns of stated non‐financial criteria by utilizing information on UK “ethical” unit trusts. Over a limited period of observation there was weak evidence of some overperformance on a risk‐adjusted basis by “ethical” unit trusts. Suggests arguments that might intuitively explain overperformance or underperformance. There is clear evidence that the “ethical” trusts have UK investment portfolios more skewed towards companies with low market capitalization than the market as a whole. Associated with this, they tend to be invested in low dividend yield companies. The degree of international diversification varies and a suitable international benchmark may be needed to separate out any “ethical” effect.

Previous work examined the long-run profitability of strategies mimicking the trades company directors in the shares of their own company, as a way of testing for market efficiency. The current paper examines patterns in abnormal returns in the days around these trades on the London Stock Exchange.We find movements in returns that are consistent with directors engaging in shortterm market timing. We also report that some types of trades have superior predictive content over future returns. In particular, medium-sized trades are more informative for short-term returns than large ones, consistent with Barclay and Warner's (1993)`stealth trading' hypothesis whereby informed traders avoid trading in blocks.Another contribution of this study is to properly adjust the abnormal return estimates for microstructure (spread) transactions costs using daily bid-ask spread data. On a net basis, we find that abnormal returns all but disappear.

No abstract

There have been three empirical studies examining the share price reaction following trades by directors of UK companies (King and Poell, 1988; Pope, Morris and Peel, 1990; and Gregory, Matatko, Tonks and Pukiss, 1994). All three of these UK studies used different definitions of 'buy' and 'sell' signals resulting from the transactions of directors and employ different controls to detect the presence of any 'size effects'. We investigate whether the signal definition explains the different conclusions drawn by these earlier studies, and examine whether or not any observed abnormal returns are explicable by the small companies effect. We also investigate trading strategies based on holding a long portfolio of shares purchased or a short portfolio of shares sold by directors held until the end of the study period or until a 'reserving event' (e.g. a sale following a purchase by director[s] is observed). Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997.