IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/6644.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fee Speech: Adverse Selection and the Regulation of Mutual Funds

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjiv Ranjan Das
  • Rangarajan K. Sundaram

Abstract

The Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (as amended in 1970) prohibits mutual funds in the US from offering their advisers asymmetric incentive fee' contracts in which the advisers are rewarded for superior performance via-a-vis a chosen index but are not correspondingly penalized for underperforming it. The rationale offered in defense of the regulation by both the SEC and Congress is that incentive fee structures of this sort encourage excessive' risk-taking by advisers. This paper uses an adverse selection model with multiple funds and multiple risky securities to study this issue. We find that incentive funds do, as alleged, lead to more (and suboptimal) risk-taking than do symmetric fulcrum fees.' Nevertheless, from the more important welfare angle, we find that investors may be strictly better off under asymmetric incentive fee structures. Thus, there appears to be little justification for this legislation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjiv Ranjan Das & Rangarajan K. Sundaram, 1998. "Fee Speech: Adverse Selection and the Regulation of Mutual Funds," NBER Working Papers 6644, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6644
    Note: AP
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6644.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Admati, Anat R & Pfleiderer, Paul, 1997. "Does It All Add Up? Benchmarks and the Compensation of Active Portfolio Managers," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(3), pages 323-350, July.
    2. William N. Goetzmann & Jonathan Ingersoll, Jr. & Stephen A. Ross, 1998. "High Water Marks," NBER Working Papers 6413, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Anthony W. Lynch & David K. Musto, 1997. "Understanding Fee Structures in the Asset Management Business," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 98-050, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
    4. Heinkel, Robert & Stoughton, Neal M, 1994. "The Dynamics of Portfolio Management Contracts," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 7(2), pages 351-387.
    5. Golec, Joseph H., 1992. "Empirical Tests of a Principal-Agent Model of the Investor-Investment Advisor Relationship," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 81-95, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bank for International Settlements, 2003. "Incentive structures in institutional asset management and their implications for financial markets," CGFS Papers, Bank for International Settlements, number 21, december.
    2. Goriaev, A.P. & Palomino, F.A. & Prat, A., 2000. "Mutual Fund Tournament : Risk Taking Incentives Induced by Ranking Objectives," Other publications TiSEM 41aeada1-3d53-4828-bfae-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Ana C. Díaz†Mendoza & Germán López†Espinosa & Miguel A. Martínez, 2014. "The Efficiency of Performance†Based Fee Funds," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(4), pages 825-855, September.
    4. Igan, Deniz & Pinheiro, Marcelo, 2012. "The effects of relative performance objectives on financial markets," MPRA Paper 43452, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Palomino, F.A. & Prat, A., 1998. "Dynamic incentives in the money management tournament," Discussion Paper 1998-107, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    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. Livio Stracca, 2006. "Delegated Portfolio Management: A Survey Of The Theoretical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 823-848, December.
    2. Cumming, Douglas & Johan, Sofia & Zhang, Yelin, 2019. "What is mutual fund flow?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 222-251.
    3. Agarwal, Vikas & Gómez, Juan-Pedro & Priestley, Richard, 2012. "Management compensation and market timing under portfolio constraints," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1600-1625.
    4. Juan-Pedro Gómez & Tridib Sharma, 2006. "Portfolio delegation under short-selling constraints," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(1), pages 173-196, May.
    5. Golec, Joseph & Starks, Laura, 2004. "Performance fee contract change and mutual fund risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 93-118, July.
    6. Markus Ibert & Ron Kaniel & Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh & Roine Vestman, 2018. "Are Mutual Fund Managers Paid for Investment Skill?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(2), pages 715-772.
    7. Holger Kraft & Ralf Korn, 2008. "Continuous-time delegated portfolio management with homogeneous expectations: can an agency conflict be avoided?," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 22(1), pages 67-90, March.
    8. He, Zhiguo & Xiong, Wei, 2013. "Delegated asset management, investment mandates, and capital immobility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 239-258.
    9. Palomino, Frederic & Prat, Andrea, 2003. "Risk Taking and Optimal Contracts for Money Managers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 113-137, Spring.
    10. Palomino, F.A. & Uhlig, H.F.H.V.S., 1999. "Should smart investors buy funds with high returns in the past," Discussion Paper 1999-69, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    11. Alexander Guembel, 2001. "Emerging Markets and Entry by Actively Managed Funds," Economics Series Working Papers 2001-FE-12, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Connie Becker & Wayne Ferson & David Myers & Michael Schill, 1998. "Conditional Market Timing with Benchmark Investors," NBER Working Papers 6434, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Saltuk Ozerturk, 2004. "Equilibrium Incentives to Acquire Precise Information in Delegated Portfolio Management," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 25(1), pages 25-36, February.
    14. Daniel N. Deli, 2002. "Mutual Fund Advisory Contracts: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(1), pages 109-133, February.
    15. Lütje, Torben, 2004. "To Be Good or To Be Better: Asset Managers Attitudes Towards Herding," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-297, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    16. Gumbel, Alexander, 2005. "Herding in delegated portfolio management: When is comparative performance information desirable?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 599-626, April.
    17. Uday Rajan & Sanjay Srivastava, 2000. "Portfolio Delegation with Limited Liability," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1503, Econometric Society.
    18. Emilio Barucci & Gaetano Bua & Daniele Marazzina, 2018. "On relative performance, remuneration and risk taking of asset managers," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 517-545, November.
    19. Diane Del Guercio & Paula A. Tkac, 2000. "The determinants of the flow of funds of managed portfolios: mutual funds versus pension funds," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2000-21, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    20. Raphaëlle Bellando, 2008. "Le conflit d'agence dans la gestion déléguée de portefeuille : une revue de littérature," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 118(3), pages 317-339.

    More about this item

    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:nbr:nberwo:6644. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.