IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/sefpps/sef-05-2017-0120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do mutual fund ratings provide valuable information for retail investors?

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Oehler
  • Andreas Höfer
  • Matthias Horn
  • Stefan Wendt

Abstract

Purpose - Retail investors use information provided by mutual fund rating agencies to make investment decisions. This paper aims to examine whether the ratings provide useful information to retail investors by analyzing the rating migration and closure risk of mutual funds that received Morningstar’s mutual fund ratings from 2005 to 2012. Design/methodology/approach - The research design differentiates between buy-and-hold investment strategies and dynamic investment strategies. To assess the information content of mutual fund ratings for buy-and-hold investment strategies, the rating migration based on the first and the last mutual fund rating during two-, four-, six- and eight-year horizons is determined. With respect to dynamic investment strategies, the number of rating changes per fund on a monthly basis during these time horizons is calculated. Findings - Mutual fund rating persistence is low or even inexistent, in particular, during longer time periods. Only for lower-rated funds, the rating appears to indicate higher risk of fund closure. In addition, mutual funds face a large number of up to 38 monthly rating changes in the eight-year window. Originality/value - Mutual fund rating persistence has hardly been analyzed for funds offered to retail investors so far. This paper clearly points out that because of the extensive rating migration and the high number of monthly rating changes, retail investors barely benefit from using mutual fund ratings.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Oehler & Andreas Höfer & Matthias Horn & Stefan Wendt, 2018. "Do mutual fund ratings provide valuable information for retail investors?," Studies in Economics and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(1), pages 137-152, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:sefpps:sef-05-2017-0120
    DOI: 10.1108/SEF-05-2017-0120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/SEF-05-2017-0120/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/SEF-05-2017-0120/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/SEF-05-2017-0120?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Otero-González, Luis & Durán-Santomil, Pablo, 2021. "Is quantitative and qualitative information relevant for choosing mutual funds?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 476-488.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mutual funds; Investor information; Mutual fund ratings; Rating migration; Rating persistence; G11; G14; G24;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G24 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Investment Banking; Venture Capital; Brokerage

    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:eme:sefpps:sef-05-2017-0120. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.