Abstract

ABSTRACT Using a sample free of survivor bias, I demonstrate that common factors in stock returns and investment expenses almost completely explain persistence in equity mutual funds' mean and risk‐adjusted returns. Hendricks, Patel and Zeckhauser's (1993) “hot hands” result is mostly driven by the one‐year momentum effect of Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) , but individual funds do not earn higher returns from following the momentum strategy in stocks. The only significant persistence not explained is concentrated in strong underperformance by the worst‐return mutual funds. The results do not support the existence of skilled or informed mutual fund portfolio managers.

Keywords

Mutual fundClosed-end fundOpen-end fundPortfolioEquity (law)Persistence (discontinuity)Fund of fundsEconomicsStock (firearms)Financial economicsMomentum (technical analysis)BusinessEconometricsMonetary economicsFinanceInstitutional investorCorporate governancePolitical scienceGeography

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

The New Issues Puzzle

ABSTRACT Companies issuing stock during 1970 to 1990, whether an initial public offering or a seasoned equity offering, have been poor long‐run investments for investors. During...

1995 The Journal of Finance 3369 citations

Publication Info

Year
1997
Type
article
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
57-82
Citations
16548
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

16548
OpenAlex

Cite This

Mark M. Carhart (1997). On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Finance , 52 (1) , 57-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x

Identifiers

DOI
10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x