Performance Measures: European Mutual Funds in 2001-2015

Abstract

Mutual funds performance evaluation measures allow to establish rankings and play an essential role for investors who want to make investment decisions. The choice of suitable measure should take into account the risk preference of investors. This paper compares the different risk-adjusted measures, such Sharpe, MM, Treynor, Jensen, RORAC, information, Ivar, Sortino, UPR, Omega, Fouse and Alfa Sharpe indexes. The objectives of this study are to test the consistency between the measurements, to study the correlation between measures and the risk preferences and look for measures that simulate the Morningstar rating. To perform this study the data was obtained at Yahoo finance, with the sample consisting of 28 funds of European shares, from September 2001 to September 2015. It was concluded that the measures produce identical rankings, so there is a high correlation between them excluding RORAC and the Information indexes. This study shows that the classification of investment funds varies depending on whether or not the indicator assumes high income volatility. Sharpe and MM indexes showed greater explanatory power in relation to Morningstar rating and also have a high correlation with the quadratic utility function and the value function from prospect theory. The degree of correlation decreases as increases the risk aversion coefficient, with measures based on downside risk (Sortino ratio and omega) maintaining a good correlation with all preference levels, both in the overall period and in sub-periods.