IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rasset/v12y2022i2p543-592..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revealed Heuristics: Evidence from Investment Consultants’ Search Behavior
[Which factors matter to investors? Evidence from mutual fund flows]

Author

Listed:
  • Sudheer Chava
  • Soohun Kim
  • Daniel Weagley

Abstract

Using proprietary data from a major fund data provider, we analyze the screening activity of investment consultants (ICs). We find that ICs frequently shortlist funds using threshold screens clustered at $500MM for AUM, 0% for benchmark-adjusted return, and quartiles for return percentile rank screens. Funds just above the $500MM AUM threshold get 14%–18% more page views and 5–9 pp greater flows over the next year compared to similar funds just below the threshold. Our results are consistent with ICs using a two-stage consider-then-choose decision-making process and cognitive reference numbers in selecting screening thresholds. (JEL G41, G11, G14, G29)Received January 8, 2021; editorial decision September 3, 2021. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Suggested Citation

  • Sudheer Chava & Soohun Kim & Daniel Weagley, 2022. "Revealed Heuristics: Evidence from Investment Consultants’ Search Behavior [Which factors matter to investors? Evidence from mutual fund flows]," The Review of Asset Pricing Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 543-592.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rasset:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:543-592.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rapstu/raab028
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G29 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rasset:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:543-592.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/raps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.