Survivorship bias and attrition effects in measures of performance persistence
AbstractWe generate samples of fund returns calibrated to match the U.S. mutual fund industry and simulate standard tests of performance persistence. We consider a variety of alternative return generating processes, survival criteria, and test methodologies. When survival depends on performance over several periods, survivorship bias induces spurious reversals, despite the presence of cross-sectional heteroskedasticity in performance. In samples which are largely free of survivorship bias, look-ahead biased methodologies and missing returns still affect statistics. In samples with no true persistence, the spurious persistence caused by survivorship bias in the presence of single-period survival criteria never reaches the magnitude found in recent empirical studies. When fund returns are truly persistent, the simulations reveal an attrition effect, distinct from survivorship bias. The systematic disappearance of poor performers causes mean persistence measures to differ from those in a hypothetical sample in which funds never disappear, even in tests which incorporate all data on disappearing funds. The magnitude and direction of this effect depends on the return generating process. We also examine the specification and power of the persistence tests. The t-test for the difference between top and bottom portfolios ranked by past performance is the best specified under the null and among the most powerful against the alternatives we consider.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Financial Economics.
Volume (Year): 54 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505576
Other versions of this item:
- Jennifer Carpenter & Anthony Lynch, 1998. "Survivorship Bias and Attrition Effects in Measures of Performance Persistence," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 98-077, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Elton, Edwin J & Gruber, Martin J & Blake, Christopher R, 1996. "The Persistence of Risk-Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(2), pages 133-57, April.
- Grinblatt, Mark & Titman, Sheridan, 1992. " The Persistence of Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(5), pages 1977-84, December.
- Shumway, Tyler, 1997. " The Delisting Bias in CRSP Data," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 327-40, March.
- Elton, Edwin J & Gruber, Martin J & Blake, Christopher R, 1996. "Survivorship Bias and Mutual Fund Performance," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(4), pages 1097-1120.
- Brown, Stephen J, et al, 1992. "Survivorship Bias in Performance Studies," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 5(4), pages 553-80.
- Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1996. " Multifactor Explanations of Asset Pricing Anomalies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 55-84, March.
- De Bondt, Werner F M & Thaler, Richard, 1985. " Does the Stock Market Overreact?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 793-805, July.
- Darryll Hendricks & Jayendu Patel & Richard Zeckhauser, 1997. "The J-Shape Of Performance Persistence Given Survivorship Bias," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 161-166, May.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.