Mutual Fund Flows and Investor Disappointment
SSRN Electronic Journal
2024
- 3,265Usage
- 7Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage3,265
- Abstract Views2,629
- 2,585
- Downloads636
- 636
- Captures7
- Readers7
- SSRN5
Article Description
Increased mutual fund flows after high returns are partially reversed at longer horizons, attributable to greater outflows not reduced inflows. We test theories with potential to explain this reversal: investment lifecycles, tax loss selling, and a “disappointment” hypothesis that is based on overreactions by some investors to recent positive returns. While tax loss selling contributes to explaining outflows, the evidence supports a role for investor disappointment. As predicted, outflow coefficients are positive when recent returns are normal, and outflow magnitudes depend on recent returns relative to the prior returns that attracted inflows, after allowing for direct effects of recent returns.
Bibliographic Details
https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=4421632; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4421632; https://scholar.smu.edu/business_finance_research/249; https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1249&context=business_finance_research; https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4421632; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4421632; https://ssrn.com/abstract=4421632
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know