Skip to main content

Mutual Fund Performance Report Card - The Grades

As a new parent, I'm already gauging my child's development for rolling over, sitting up, speaking her first word -- 'dadas' just last week! -- and more against guidelines in the plethora of parenting books I have. This relative comparison gives my wife and I feedback as to how our little bundle of joy is doing. Later, we'll get this relative comparison and feedback from her school grades and achievement tests among other sources.
 
Investors however tend to be more simplistic in their feedback mechanisms. They often define success as "My account went up last month. That's great!" Or conversely, "My account went down. It was a bad month." What's missing from this is a relative comparison asking the question, "Did my account go up or down as much as it should have given how much risk I am taking?" This involves a relative comparison against a representative benchmark.
 
The S&P Indices Versus Active (SPIVA®) report measures the performance of actively managed funds against their relevant S&P index benchmarks. While not adjusted for risk, this comparison is still a good one, as the comparisons are done within the same category, e.g. large cap stock fund versus large cap stock index and risk levels are roughly equivalent. 
 
The 2013 SPIVA year-end report recently came out. It further illustrates how using an active management portfolio strategy is a low probability method in attempts to achieve higher investment returns.
 
Some highlights are below:  
  • According to the figures for 2013, 55.8% of large-cap managers and 68.09% of small-cap managers underperformed the benchmarks over the past 12 months ending Dec. 31, 2013.
  • The picture is equally unfavorable when reviewing the performance over the longer-term three- and five-year investment horizons. The results show that the majority of the active managers across all the domestic equities categories failed to deliver returns higher than their respective benchmarks. 
  • Small-cap equities, as measured by the S&P SmallCap 600, had their best year since the index launch in 1994. Nevertheless, a significant percentage of small-cap active managers achieved returns that were lower than those of the benchmark. It is commonly believed that active management works best in inefficient markets such as small-cap or emerging markets—an argument that we find to be unconvincing. In fact, rolling five-year analysis of the performance figures over the past five years shows that the majority of small-cap active managers have been consistently underperforming the benchmark. 
  • The results for international equities were mixed. Most managers in the international developed and international small-cap categories delivered higher returns than the respective benchmarks whereas 54.09% of global equity and 57.48% of emerging markets equity managers failed to outperform the benchmarks. Regardless of the measurement time horizon, international small-cap equity remains the only category that has shown persistent outperformance by active managers. 
  • 2013 was not kind to fixed income. The turmoil in the fixed income markets is reflected in the declines of benchmark indices in the rate-sensitive and credit-sensitive sectors. Amidst uncertain monetary policy, active fixed income managers in a few categories posted better performance than the benchmarks over the past 12 months ending December 31. Most active fixed income managers in the longer-term government, longer-term investment-grade and global income categories outperformed the corresponding benchmarks. At the same time, the one-year data also demonstrates the difficulty in predicting future interest rates. 
  • Funds disappear at a meaningful rate. Over the past five years, nearly 26% of domestic equity funds, 24% of global/international equity funds and 21% of fixed income funds have been merged or liquidated. The finding highlights the importance of addressing survivorship bias in mutual fund analysis.

If you cannot sleep at night:
 
 
 
Best Regards,
 
Kevin Kroskey, CFP, MBA
 

Popular posts from this blog

Don't File Your Taxes Too Soon

I'd like to remind everyone to not be too anxious to file your taxes. Many taxpayers rush to file their tax returns as quickly as possible. Ordinarily, that’s fine. But if you own mutual funds, don’t file your tax return before March 1. In past years, revised 1099s were often issued, reclassifying distributions and/or their amounts. This was a huge headache for the investors who had already filed tax returns based on the original documentation. These hapless consumers found themselves forced to redo their returns and file amended tax returns, adjusting the amount they owed or were due in refunds - and paying their tax preparer additional fees to do the extra work. It looks like 2010 may be the same. Therefore, if you own mutual funds, do not file your tax return before March 1. By then, any amended IRS forms are likely to arrive, potentially helping you avoid the hassle and costs of filing an amended return. Kevin Kroskey, CFP, MBA

Bangladesh Butter Production Predicts U.S. Stock Returns

After reading the title of this post, my hope is that a look of disbelief is cast on your face. Of course butter production in Bangladesh has nothing to do with prediction of US stock market returns. However, through data mining all sorts of 'relationships' can be demonstrated. Many mutual funds, ETFs, and trading strategies are built upon these data mining strategies--most often to the harm of investors that utilize them. As Jason Zweig describes in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, entitled Data Mining Isn't a Good Bet For Stock-Market Predictions , "The stock market generates such vast quantities of information that, if you plow through enough of it for long enough, you can always find some relationship that appears to generate spectacular returns -- by coincidence alone . This sham is known as data mining." I recall in from my business statistics course in grad school, how I was able to show that ice cream consumption was correlated to the murder ra

Paying for College and Getting Your Money's Worth

According to the Student Loan Marketing Association (more commonly known as Sallie Mae Bank), the average tuition, room and board at a private college comes to $43,921. Public tuition for in-state students at state colleges amounted to $19,548 (about half of which is room and board), with out-of-state students paying an average of $34,031. How are parents and students finding the cash to afford this expense? Sallie Mae breaks it down as follows: 34% from scholarships and grants that don’t have to be paid back, coming from the college itself or the state or federal government, often based on need and academic performance. Parents typically pay 29% of the total bill (an average of $7,000) out of savings or income, and other family members (think: grandparents) are paying another 5%. The students themselves are paying for 12% of the cost, on average. The rest, roughly 20% of the total, is made up of loans.  The federal government’s loan program offers up to $5,500 a year fo