[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/wsi/wschap/9789811222634_0018.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Alternative Measures of Mutual Fund Performance: Ranking DFA, Fidelity, and Vanguard

In: HANDBOOK OF APPLIED INVESTMENT RESEARCH

Author

Listed:
  • Chong Li
  • Edward Tower
  • Rhona Zhang
Abstract
This chapter uses four alternative ways to evaluate mutual fund performance and rank the domestic equity funds of three leading mutual fund companies: DFA, Fidelity, and Vanguard, while splitting the Fidelity and Vanguard funds into indexed and managed portfolios.First, we use the Fama–French factors to show the extent to which various equally-weighted fund portfolios out-returned their empirically determined benchmarks, and characterize the funds according to size and book-to-market value. Our measure tweaks alpha, the extent to which a mutual fund outperforms its benchmark, and we offer a novel interpretation of alpha. Second, we use Sharpe’s (1962) style analysis to explore the robustness of our analysis. Third, we ask whether funds out-return the market. Fourth, we compare the fund returns with their published benchmarks and use Fama–French factors to adjust for bias in the benchmarks.Return relative to the stock market reflects style choice, benchmark choice, fees, transaction efficiency, and income from lending to short sellers. Fama–French and Sharpe style adjustment abstract from style choice. Comparison with style-adjusted published benchmarks further abstracts from benchmark choice. Each calculation answers a different question.The Fama–French and Sharpe methods, recorded in Table 6, show that after style adjustment for Fidelity 2001–2018 the indexed portfolio out-returned the managed portfolio. The indexed and managed portfolios from Vanguard and the managed portfolio from Fidelity 2001–2019 out-returned the U.S. stock market as did the Fidelity indexed portfolio 2005–2018. In comparison with the style-adjusted published benchmarks, the Vanguard managed portfolio is the best and the Fidelity managed portfolio is the worst.

Suggested Citation

  • Chong Li & Edward Tower & Rhona Zhang, 2020. "Alternative Measures of Mutual Fund Performance: Ranking DFA, Fidelity, and Vanguard," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John B Guerard & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF APPLIED INVESTMENT RESEARCH, chapter 18, pages 417-476, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789811222634_0018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789811222634_0018
    Download Restriction: Ebook Access is available upon purchase.
    File URL: https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/9789811222634_0018
    Download Restriction: Ebook Access is available upon purchase.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Applied Investments; Financial Forecasting; Portfolio Theory; Investment Strategies; Fundamental and Economic Anomalies; Behaviour of Investors;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G17 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Financial Forecasting and Simulation
    • G1 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789811222634_0018. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscientific.com/page/worldscibooks .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.