Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T20:57:46.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Liquidity, Investment Style, and the Relation between Fund Size and Fund Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Xuemin (Sterling) Yan
Xuemin (Sterling) Yan
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of Missouri-Columbia, College of Business, Department of Finance, 427 Cornell Hall, Columbia, MO 65211.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using stock transactions data along with detailed stockholdings for a comprehensive sample of U.S. actively managed equity mutual funds from 1993 to 2002, this paper empirically examines the effect of liquidity and investment style on the relation between fund size and fund performance. Consistent with Chen, Hong, Huang, and Kubik (2004), I find a significant inverse relation between fund size and fund performance. Further, this inverse relation is stronger among funds that hold less liquid portfolios. The inverse relation between fund size and fund performance is also more pronounced among growth and high turnover funds that tend to have high demands for immediacy. Overall, this paper's findings suggest that liquidity is an important reason why fund size erodes performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 741 - 767
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, S., and Vaughan, G.. “Small is Beautiful.” Journal of Portfolio Management, 28 (2001), 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berk, J., and Green, R.. “Mutual Fund Flows and Performance in Rational Markets.” Journal Political Economy, 112 (2004), 1269–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carhart, M. “On Persistence of Mutual Fund Performance.” Journal of Finance, 52 (1997), 57–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, J.; Edelen, R.; and Kadlec, G.. “On the Perils of Financial Intermediaries Setting Security Prices: the Mutual Fund Wild Card Option.” Journal of Finance, 56 (2001), 2209–2236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, H.; Faff, R.; Gallagher, D.; and Looi, A.. “Fund Size, Fund Flow, Transaction Costs and Performance: Size Matters!” Working Paper, University of New South Wales (2005).Google Scholar
Chan, L., and Lakonishok, J.. “The Behavior of Stock Prices around Institutional Trades.” Journal of Finance, 50 (1995), 1147–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J.; Hong, H.; Huang, M.; and Kubik, J.. “Does Fund Size Erode Performance? Liquidity, Organizational Diseconomies and Active Money Management.” American Economic Review, 94 (2004), 1276–1302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chordia, T.; Roll, R.; and Subrahmanyam, A.. “Market Liquidity and Trading Activity.” Journal of Finance, 56 (2001), 501–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chordia, T.; Roll, R.; and Subrahmanyam, A.. “Order Imbalance, Liquidity, and Market Returns.” Journal of Financial Economics, 65 (2002), 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelen, R. “Investor Flows and the Assessed Performance of Open-End Mutual Funds.” Journal of Financial Economics, 53 (1999), 439–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elton, E.; Gruber, M.; and Blake, C.. “A First Look at the Accuracy of the CRSP Mutual Fund Database and a Comparison of the CRSP and Morningstar Mutual Fund Databases.” Journal of Finance, 56 (2001), 2415–2430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. “Does Alpha Really Matter? Evidence from Mutual Fund Incubation, Termination and Manager Change.” Working Paper, Boston College (2006).Google Scholar
Fama, E., and French, K.. “Multifactor Explanations of Asset-Pricing Anomalies.” Journal of Finance, 51 (1996), 55–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, E., and MacBeth, J.. “Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests.” Journal of Political Economy, 81 (1973), 607–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferson, W., and Schadt, R.. “Measuring Fund Strategy and Performance in Changing Economic Conditions.” Journal of Finance, 51 (1996), 425–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaspar, J.; Massa, M.; and Matos, P.. “Favoritism in Mutual Fund Families? Evidence of Strategic Cross-Fund Subsidization.” Journal of Finance, 61 (2006), 73–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grinblatt, M., and Titman, S.. “Mutual Fund Performance: An Analysis of Quarterly Portfolio Holdings.” Journal of Business, 62 (1989), 393–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indro, D.; Jiang, C.; Hu, M.; and Lee, W.. “Mutual Fund Performance: Does Fund Size Matter?” Financial Analysts Journal, 55 (1999), 74–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. M. “A Century of Stock Market Liquidity and Trading Costs.” Working Paper, Columbia University (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keim, D., and Madhavan, A.. “Transactions Costs and Investment Style: An Inter-Exchange Analysis of Institutional Equity Trades.” Journal of Financial Economics, 46 (1997), 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C., and Ready, M.. “Inferring Trade Direction from Intraday Data.” Journal of Finance, 46 (1991), 733–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perold, A., and Salomon, R.. “The Right Amount of Assets under Management.” Financial Analysts Journal, 47 (1991), 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pozen, R.The Mutual Fund Business. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (2002).Google Scholar
Stein, J. “Information Production and Capital Allocation: Decentralized versus Hierarchical Firms.” Journal of Finance, 57 (2002), 1891–1921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufano, P., and Sevick, M.. “Board Structure and Fee-Setting in the Mutual Fund Industry.” Journal of Financial Economics, 46 (1997), 321–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wermers, R. “Mutual Fund Performance: An Empirical Decomposition into Stock-Picking Talent, Style, Transactions Costs, and Expenses.” Journal of Finance, 55 (2000), 1655–1695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar