IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dij/wpfarg/1110701.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Existe-t-il un univers de benchmarks pour les Hedge Funds?

Author

Listed:
  • Kamel Laaradh

    () (Université de Bourgogne - LEG/FARGO UMR Cnrs 5118)

  • Nesrine Samet

    (LARGEPA - Laboratoire de recherche en sciences de gestion Panthéon-Assas)

Abstract

(VF)Les hedge funds mettent généralement en avant une politique dite d'«absolute return». Mais rendement absolu ne signifie pas absence de références. Ainsi, les indices de hedge funds ont connu une croissance importante au cours des années passés, reflétant à la fois la croissance générale de l’industrie des hedge funds et le renforcement de la position des indices par rapport à d’autres véhicules d’investissement, tels que les fonds de fonds. L’objectif de cet article est double : le premier est de mettre en évidence le problème de choix d’indices lorsqu’on décide d’investir dans un hedge funds. Le second est de montrer, pour une stratégie donnée, l’impact du changement de base de données et de l’application des mesures alternatives sur le classement des indices. Dans notre étude, nous utilisons 18 mesures de performance pour évaluer la performance de cinq indices provenant de quatre fournisseurs différents.Nos résultats montrent que les indices d’une même stratégie de hedge fund diffèrent dans leur composition d’un fournisseur de données à l’autre. Par conséquent, ils offrent des performances disparates mettant l’investisseur face au choix non seulement de la stratégie d’investissement mais aussi de la base de données permettant de mesurer la performance des hedge funds. Ainsi, cet article confirme qu’il n’existe pas d’indice universel pouvant représenter le monde des hedge funds et particulièrement leurs stratégies.(VA)Hedge funds fall into the category of « absolute return ». But absolute return does not mean lack of references. Thus, hedge funds indices have grown significantly over the past years, reflecting both the overall growth of the hedge fund industry and strengthening the position of the indices relative to other investment vehicles such as funds of funds.The aim of this paper is twofold: first, to highlight the problem of selecting indexes if we decide to invest in hedge funds. The second is to show the impact of the Index Provider on the strategy performance. In our study, we use 18 performance measures to evaluate the performance of five indices from four different index providers.Our results show that the indices of a single strategy hedge fund are different in their composition of a data provider to another. Therefore, they offer the investor putting disparate performance across a choice not only of the strategy in which to invest but also the index provider. Thus, this paper confirms that there is no universal index that can represent the world of hedge funds and in particular strategies indices.

Suggested Citation

  • Kamel Laaradh & Nesrine Samet, 2011. "Existe-t-il un univers de benchmarks pour les Hedge Funds?," Working Papers CREGO 1110701, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
  • Handle: RePEc:dij:wpfarg:1110701
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crego.u-bourgogne.fr/images/stories/wp/1110701.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ittner, Christopher D. & Lambert, Richard A. & Larcker, David F., 2003. "The structure and performance consequences of equity grants to employees of new economy firms," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-3), pages 89-127, January.
    2. Shlomo Benartzi, 2001. "Excessive Extrapolation and the Allocation of 401(k) Accounts to Company Stock," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(5), pages 1747-1764, October.
    3. Oyer, Paul & Schaefer, Scott, 2005. "Why do some firms give stock options to all employees?: An empirical examination of alternative theories," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 99-133, April.
    4. Smith, Clifford Jr. & Watts, Ross L., 1992. "The investment opportunity set and corporate financing, dividend, and compensation policies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 263-292, December.
    5. Chaplinsky, Susan & Niehaus, Greg, 1994. " The Role of ESOPs in Takeover Contests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1451-1470, September.
    6. Gur Huberman & Paul Sengmueller, 2004. "Performance and Employer Stock in 401(k) Plans," Review of Finance, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 403-443.
    7. Stulz, ReneM., 1988. "Managerial control of voting rights : Financing policies and the market for corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-2), pages 25-54, January.
    8. Melissa B. Frye, 2004. "Equity-Based Compensation for Employees: Firm Performance and Determinants," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 27(1), pages 31-54.
    9. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    10. Chang, Saeyoung & Mayers, David, 1992. "Managerial vote ownership and shareholder wealth *1: Evidence from employee stock ownership plans," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 103-131, August.
    11. Brown, Jeffrey R. & Liang, Nellie & Weisbenner, Scott, 2006. "401(k) matching contributions in company stock: Costs and benefits for firms and workers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 1315-1346.
    12. M. Pagano & P. F. Volpin, 2005. "Managers, Workers, and Corporate Control," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 841-868, April.
    13. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    14. Faleye, Olubunmi & Mehrotra, Vikas & Morck, Randall, 2006. "When Labor Has a Voice in Corporate Governance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(03), pages 489-510, September.
    15. Mitchell A. Petersen, 2009. "Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 435-480, January.
    16. Gamble, John E., 2000. "Management commitment to innovation and esop stock concentration," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(5-6), pages 433-447.
    17. Hillegeist, Stephen A. & Peñalva, Fernando, 2004. "Stock option incentives and firm performance," IESE Research Papers D/535, IESE Business School.
    18. Harry Markowitz & Joseph Blasi & Douglas Kruse, 2010. "Employee stock ownership and diversification," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 95-107, April.
    19. Carine Girard, 2001. "Une typologie de l'activisme des actionnaires minoritaires en France," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 4(3), pages 123-146, September.
    20. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 08-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    21. Joseph Blasi & Michael Conte & Douglas Kruse, 1996. "Employee Stock Ownership and Corporate Performance among Public Companies," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 50(1), pages 60-79, October.
    22. Benartzi, Shlomo & Thaler, Richard H & Utkus, Stephen P & Sunstein, Cass R, 2007. "The Law and Economics of Company Stock in 401(k) Plans," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 45-79, February.
    23. Smith, Stephen C., 1991. "On the economic rationale for codetermination law," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 261-281, December.
    24. Robert O’brien, 2007. "A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 673-690, October.
    25. Rauh, Joshua D., 2006. "Own company stock in defined contribution pension plans: A takeover defense?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 379-410, August.
    26. Hervé Alexandre & Mathieu Paquerot, 2000. "Efficacité des structures de contrôle et enracinement des dirigeants," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 3(2), pages 5-29, June.
    27. Andrew Pendleton & Nicholas Wilson & Mike Wright, 1998. "The Perception and Effects of Share Ownership: Empirical Evidence from Employee Buy-Outs," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 99-123, March.
    28. Demsetz, Harold, 1983. "The Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 375-390, June.
    29. Fama, Eugene F, 1980. "Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(2), pages 288-307, April.
    30. Héla Gharbi & Xavier Lepers, 2008. "Actionnariat salarié et enracinement des dirigeants : un essai de compréhension," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 121-146.
    31. Bergman, Nittai K. & Jenter, Dirk, 2007. "Employee sentiment and stock option compensation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 667-712, June.
    32. Ricardo-Campbell, Rita, 1983. "Comments on the Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 391-393, June.
    33. Core, John E. & Guay, Wayne R., 2001. "Stock option plans for non-executive employees," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 253-287, August.
    34. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6186 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. Carine Girard, 2001. "Une typologie de l'activisme des actionnaires minoritaires en France," Working Papers CREGO 1010101, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    36. William N. Pugh & Sharon L. Oswald & John S. Jahera Jr., 2000. "The effect of ESOP adoptions on corporate performance: are there really performance changes?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(5), pages 167-180.
    37. Gordon, Lilli A. & Pound, John, 1990. "ESOPs and corporate control," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 525-555, October.
    38. Anup Agrawal & Charles R. Knoeber, "undated". "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders (Revision of 29-94)," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 8-96, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    39. Beatty, Anne, 1995. "The cash flow and informational effects of employee stock ownership plans," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 211-240, June.
    40. Sesil, James C. & Kruse, Douglas L. & Blasi, Joseph R., 2001. "Sharing Ownership via Employee Stock Ownership," WIDER Working Paper Series 025, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    41. Ulrich Kohler & Frauke Kreuter, 2009. "Data Analysis using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number daus2, November.
    42. Agrawal, Anup & Knoeber, Charles R., 1996. "Firm Performance and Mechanisms to Control Agency Problems between Managers and Shareholders," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(03), pages 377-397, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    hedge funds; indices de marchés; mesures de performance; gestion alternative; benchmarks; performance measurement; alternative management.;

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • C32 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes; State Space Models

    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:dij:wpfarg:1110701. See general 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: (Angèle RENAUD). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.