IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/empfin/v84y2025ics0927539825000775.html

Mutual fund performance and flow-performance relationship under ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Gu, Ariel
  • Yoo, Hong Il

Abstract

Since the exact probability distribution of asset returns is often unknown, the type of uncertainty affecting financial assets may be better characterized as ambiguity rather than risk. Using data from the U.S. mutual fund market, we examine the relationships between mutual funds’ ambiguity exposure, risk-adjusted performance, and investment flows. We introduce a novel measure of ambiguity exposure based on the smooth ambiguity model, which provides insight into how funds are priced in the presence of ambiguity. We find that risk-adjusted fund returns include a positive premium that compensates for greater ambiguity exposure in the fund’s asset holdings. The flow analysis, however, suggests that fund investors pursue positive risk-adjusted returns overall, regardless of whether seemingly superior returns are driven by the ambiguity premium. This behavior indicates that fund investors are primarily attracted to performance outcomes and less concerned with whether these reflect managerial expertise or increased ambiguity exposure.

Suggested Citation

  • Gu, Ariel & Yoo, Hong Il, 2025. "Mutual fund performance and flow-performance relationship under ambiguity," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:empfin:v:84:y:2025:i:c:s0927539825000775
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jempfin.2025.101655
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539825000775
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jempfin.2025.101655?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hal:journl:halshs-04192630 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Susan E. K. Christoffersen & Mikhail Simutin, 2017. "On the Demand for High-Beta Stocks: Evidence from Mutual Funds," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 30(8), pages 2596-2620.
    3. Johanna Etner & Meglena Jeleva & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2012. "Decision Theory Under Ambiguity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 234-270, April.
    4. Sujoy Mukerji & Han N. Ozsoylev & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2023. "Trading Ambiguity: A Tale Of Two Heterogeneities," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1127-1164, August.
    5. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Peter Klibanoff & Lætitia Placido, 2015. "Experiments on Compound Risk in Relation to Simple Risk and to Ambiguity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1306-1322, June.
    6. Dale O. Stah, 2014. "Heterogeneity of Ambiguity Preferences," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(4), pages 609-617, October.
    7. repec:hal:journl:halshs-04213388 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Gu, Ariel & Yoo, Hong Il, 2021. "Prospect Theory and Mutual Fund Flows," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Chen Li & Peter P. Wakker, 2025. "Source Theory: A Tractable and Positive Ambiguity Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(10), pages 8767-8782, October.
    10. James J. Choi & Adriana Z. Robertson, 2020. "What Matters to Individual Investors? Evidence from the Horse's Mouth," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(4), pages 1965-2020, August.
    11. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Aurelien Baillon & Laetitia Placido & Peter P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 695-723, April.
    12. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    13. Kyle Jurado & Sydney C. Ludvigson & Serena Ng, 2015. "Measuring Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 1177-1216, March.
    14. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2005. "A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 1849-1892, November.
    15. Olivier l’Haridon & Ferdinand M. Vieider & Diego Aycinena & Agustinus Bandur & Alexis Belianin & Lubomír Cingl & Amit Kothiyal & Peter Martinsson, 2018. "Off the Charts: Massive Unexplained Heterogeneity in a Global Study of Ambiguity Attitudes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(4), pages 664-677, October.
    16. David Ahn & Syngjoo Choi & Douglas Gale & Shachar Kariv, 2014. "Estimating ambiguity aversion in a portfolio choice experiment," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5, pages 195-223, July.
    17. Sebastian Ebert & Daniel Wiesen, 2011. "Testing for Prudence and Skewness Seeking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1334-1349, July.
    18. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    19. Jennifer Huang & Clemens Sialm & Hanjiang Zhang, 2011. "Risk Shifting and Mutual Fund Performance," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(8), pages 2575-2616.
    20. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:5:p:1589-1622 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Aurélien Baillon & Zhenxing Huang & Asli Selim & Peter P. Wakker, 2018. "Measuring Ambiguity Attitudes for All (Natural) Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1839-1858, September.
    22. Frazzini, Andrea & Pedersen, Lasse Heje, 2014. "Betting against beta," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 1-25.
    23. Richard B Evans & Yang Sun & Lauren Cohen, 2021. "Models or Stars: The Role of Asset Pricing Models and Heuristics in Investor Risk Adjustment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 67-107.
    24. C. Wei Li & Ashish Tiwari & Lin Tong, 2017. "Investment Decisions Under Ambiguity: Evidence from Mutual Fund Investor Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(8), pages 2509-2528, August.
    25. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Doriana Ruffino, 2013. "Alpha as Ambiguity: Robust Mean‐Variance Portfolio Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(3), pages 1075-1113, May.
    26. Richard B Evans & Yang Sun, 2021. "Models or Stars: The Role of Asset Pricing Models and Heuristics in Investor Risk Adjustment [Which factors matter to investors? evidence from mutual fund flows]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(1), pages 67-107.
    27. repec:hal:pseptp:halshs-04192630 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Stephen G. Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Peter P. Wakker, 2016. "Ambiguity Attitudes in a Large Representative Sample," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1363-1380, May.
    29. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    30. Bali, Turan G. & Brown, Stephen J. & Tang, Yi, 2017. "Is economic uncertainty priced in the cross-section of stock returns?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 471-489.
    31. Nicholas Barberis & Abhiroop Mukherjee & Baolian Wang, 2016. "Prospect Theory and Stock Returns: An Empirical Test," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(11), pages 3068-3107.
    32. Zhong, Xiaoling & Wang, Junbo, 2018. "Prospect theory and corporate bond returns: An empirical study," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-48.
    33. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Kuilen, Gijs van de, 2018. "Higher order risk attitudes: A review of experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 108-124.
    34. repec:hal:pseptp:halshs-04213388 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00643580 is not listed on IDEAS
    36. Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kanin Anantanasuwong & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S. Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2024. "Ambiguity attitudes for real-world sources: field evidence from a large sample of investors," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(3), pages 548-581, July.
    2. Gandhi, Amit & Samek, Anya & Serrano-Padial, Ricardo, 2025. "Attitudes Toward Uncertain Risks: Evidence from a Representative Survey," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    3. Christoph Bühren & Fabian Meier & Marco Pleßner, 2023. "Ambiguity aversion: bibliometric analysis and literature review of the last 60 years," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 495-525, June.
    4. Yu Gao & Zhenxing Huang & Ning Liu & Jia Yang, 2024. "Are physicians rational under ambiguity?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 183-203, April.
    5. Li, Jiangyan & Fairley, Kim & Fenneman, Achiel, 2024. "Does it matter how we produce ambiguity in experiments?," MPRA Paper 122336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Li, Wenhui & Wilde, Christian, 2021. "Separating the effects of beliefs and attitudes on pricing under ambiguity," SAFE Working Paper Series 311, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    7. Georgalos, Konstantinos, 2021. "Dynamic decision making under ambiguity: An experimental investigation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 28-46.
    8. Milo Bianchi & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2019. "Ambiguity Preferences and Portfolio Choices: Evidence from the Field," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1486-1501, April.
    9. Robin Cubitt & Gijs Kuilen & Sujoy Mukerji, 2018. "The strength of sensitivity to ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 275-302, October.
    10. Aurélien Baillon & Yoram Halevy & Chen Li, 2022. "Experimental elicitation of ambiguity attitude using the random incentive system," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1002-1023, June.
    11. Stephen Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2015. "Estimating ambiguity preferences and perceptions in multiple prior models: Evidence from the field," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 219-244, December.
    12. Konstantinos Georgalos, 2019. "An experimental test of the predictive power of dynamic ambiguity models," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 51-83, August.
    13. Li, Wenhui & Ockenfels, Peter & Wilde, Christian, 2021. "The effect of ambiguity on price formation and trading behavior in financial markets," SAFE Working Paper Series 326, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    14. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    15. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.
    16. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2023. "Three Layers of Uncertainty," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 2209-2236.
    17. Aurélien Baillon & Harris Schlesinger & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2018. "Measuring higher order ambiguity preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(2), pages 233-256, June.
    18. Baillon, Aurélien & Placido, Lætitia, 2019. "Testing constant absolute and relative ambiguity aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 309-332.
    19. Matthias Lang, 2017. "First-Order and Second-Order Ambiguity Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 1254-1269, April.
    20. repec:hal:journl:hal-03031751 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Li, Chen & Turmunkh, Uyanga & Wakker, Peter P., 2020. "Social and strategic ambiguity versus betrayal aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 272-287.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets

    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:eee:empfin:v:84:y:2025:i:c:s0927539825000775. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jempfin .

    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.