Diseconomies of Scale in Active Management: Robust Evidence

Ľuboš Pástor, R. Stambaugh, Lucian A. Taylor, Min Zhu
{"title":"Diseconomies of Scale in Active Management: Robust Evidence","authors":"Ľuboš Pástor, R. Stambaugh, Lucian A. Taylor, Min Zhu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3886275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We take a deeper look at the robustness of evidence presented by Pastor, Stambaugh, and Taylor (2015) and Zhu (2018), who find that an actively managed mutual fund's returns relate negatively to both fund size and the size of the active mutual fund industry. When we apply robust regression methods, we confirm both studies' inferences about scale diseconomies at the fund and industry levels. Moreover, data errors play no role, as both studies' results are insensitive to applying various error screens and using alternative return benchmarks. We reject constant returns to scale even after dropping 25% of the most extreme return observations. Finally, we caution that asymmetric removal of influential observations delivers biased conclusions about diseconomies of scale.","PeriodicalId":260048,"journal":{"name":"Capital Markets: Market Efficiency eJournal","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Capital Markets: Market Efficiency eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3886275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

We take a deeper look at the robustness of evidence presented by Pastor, Stambaugh, and Taylor (2015) and Zhu (2018), who find that an actively managed mutual fund's returns relate negatively to both fund size and the size of the active mutual fund industry. When we apply robust regression methods, we confirm both studies' inferences about scale diseconomies at the fund and industry levels. Moreover, data errors play no role, as both studies' results are insensitive to applying various error screens and using alternative return benchmarks. We reject constant returns to scale even after dropping 25% of the most extreme return observations. Finally, we caution that asymmetric removal of influential observations delivers biased conclusions about diseconomies of scale.
主动管理中的规模不经济:强有力的证据
我们更深入地研究了Pastor、Stambaugh和Taylor(2015)以及Zhu(2018)提出的证据的稳健性,他们发现积极管理的共同基金的回报与基金规模和积极管理的共同基金行业的规模都呈负相关。当我们应用稳健回归方法时,我们证实了两项研究在基金和行业层面上关于规模不经济的推论。此外,数据误差不起作用,因为两项研究的结果对应用各种错误屏幕和使用替代回报基准不敏感。即使在最极端的回报观测值下降了25%之后,我们也拒绝按比例获得恒定回报。最后,我们警告说,不对称去除有影响力的观察结果会产生关于规模不经济的有偏见的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信