Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T18:44:49.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diseconomies of Scale in Quantitative and Fundamental Investment Styles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2022

Richard B. Evans Open the ORCID record for Richard B. Evans [Opens in a new window] ,
Martin Rohleder ,
Hendrik Tentesch  and
Marco Wilkens
Richard B. Evans*
Affiliation:
University of Virginia Darden School of Business
Martin Rohleder
Affiliation:
University of Augsburg Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Martin.Rohleder@Uni-A.de
Hendrik Tentesch
Affiliation:
Portfolio Manager for the Firm Tecta Invest GmbH Hendrik.Tentesch@Tecta-Invest.de
Marco Wilkens
Affiliation:
University of Augsburg Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Marco.Wilkens@Uni-A.de
*
EvansR@darden.virginia.edu (corresponding author)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We examine diseconomies of scale for two different investment approaches: quantitative and fundamental. Using separate account (SA) data where the investment approach is self-identified, we find that fundamental SAs exhibit greater diseconomies of scale than quantitative SAs. Looking at liquidity costs, we find that quantitative SAs hold more diversified portfolios of higher liquidity stocks than fundamental SAs, thereby reducing their expected liquidity costs. We also find that consistent with lower information processing/hierarchy costs, the speed of information diffusion is higher for quant SAs. Accounting for these differences helps to explain the differences in diseconomies of scale.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 58 , Issue 6 , September 2023 , pp. 2417 - 2445
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington

Footnotes

We thank an anonymous referee, Hendrik Bessembinder (the editor), Miguel Ferreira, Wayne Ferson, Juan Pedro Gomez, Viktoriya Lantushenko, Pedro Matos, John O’Brien, Melissa Prado, Otto Randl, Jue Ren, Esad Smajlbegovic, Günter Strobl, Z. Jay Wang, Mungo Wilson (a referee), Rafael Zambrana and participants of the 2017 Southern Finance Association conference, the 2018 Eastern Finance Association conference, the 2018 Financial Management Association European conference, 2019 European Retail Investment conference as well as seminar participants at the Darden School of Business, McIntire School of Commerce, Nova Universidade de Lisboa, University of Hagen, and the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management for very helpful comments and suggestions. All remaining errors are our own.

References

Abis, S. “Man vs. Machine: Quantitative and Discretionary Equity Management.” Working Paper, Columbia University (2020).Google Scholar
Akbas, F.; Armstrong, W.; Sorescu, S.; and Subrahmanyam, A.. “Capital Market Efficiency and Arbitrage Efficacy.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 51 (2016), 387–413.Google Scholar
Amihud, Y., and Goyenko, R.. “Mutual Fund’s R 2 as Predictor of Performance.” Review of Financial Studies, 23 (2013), 667–694.Google Scholar
Beggs, W.; Brograard, J.; and Hill-Kleespie, A.. “Quantitative Investing and Market Instability.” Working Paper, University of San Diego, University of Utah, University of North Texas (2021).Google Scholar
Berk, J. B., and Green, R. C.. “Mutual Fund Flows and Performance in Rational Markets.” Journal of Political Economy, 112 (2004), 1269–1295.Google Scholar
Bolton, P, and Dewatripont, M.. “The Firm as a Communication Network.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109 (1994), 809–839.Google Scholar
Carhart, M. M. “On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance.” Journal of Finance, 52 (1997), 57–82.Google Scholar
Chen, J.; Hong, H. G.; Huang, M.; and Kubik, J. D.. “Does Fund Size Erode Performance? The Role of Liquidity and Organization.” American Economic Review, 94 (2004), 1276–1303.Google Scholar
Cici, G.; Jaspersen, S.; and Kempf, A.. “Speed of Information Diffusion within Fund Families.” Review of Asset Pricing Studies, 7 (2017), 145–170.Google Scholar
Elton, E. J.; Gruber, M. J.; and Blake, C. R.. “The Performance of Separate Accounts and Collective Investment Trusts.” Review of Finance, 18 (2014), 1717–1742.Google Scholar
Evans, R. B., and Fahlenbrach, R. “Institutional Investors and Mutual Fund Governance: Evidence from Retail-institutional Twins.” Review of Financial Studies, 25 (2012), 3530–3571.Google Scholar
Fama, E. F., and French, K. R.. “Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds.” Journal of Financial Economics, 33 (1993), 3–56.Google Scholar
Grinblatt, M., and Titman, S.. “Mutual Fund Performance: An Analysis of Quarterly Portfolio Holdings.” Journal of Business, 62 (1989), 393–416.Google Scholar
Harvey, C. R.; Rattray, S.; Sinclair, A.; and Van Hemert, O.. “Man vs. Machine: Comparing Discretionary and Systematic Hedge Fund Performance.” Journal of Portfolio Management, 43 (2017), 55–69.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C. “The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945–1964.” Journal of Finance, 23 (1968), 389–416.Google Scholar
Liberti, J. M, and Petersen, M. A.. “Information: Hard and Soft.” Review of Corporate Finance Studies, 8 (2019), 1–41.Google Scholar
Pastor, L.; Stambaugh, R. F.; and Taylor, L. A.. “Scale and Skill in Active Management.” Journal of Financial Economics, 116 (2015), 23–45.Google Scholar
Pastor, L.; Stambaugh, R. F.; and Taylor, L. A.. “Fund Tradeoffs.” Journal of Financial Economics, 138 (2020), 614–634.Google Scholar
Pollet, J. M., and Wilson, M.. “How Does Size Affect Mutual Fund Behavior?” Journal of Finance, 63 (2008), 2941–2969.Google Scholar
Radner, R. “The Organization of Decentralized Information Processing.” Econometrica, 61 (1993), 119–1146.Google Scholar
Radner, R., and Van Zandt, T.. “Information Processing in Firms and Returns to Scale.” Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 25 (1992), 265–298.Google Scholar
Reuter, J., and Zitzewitz, E.. “How Much Does Size Erode Mutual Fund Performance? A Regression Discontinuity Approach.” Review of Finance, 25 (2021), 1395–1432.Google Scholar
Sharpe, W. F. “Mutual Fund Performance.” Journal of Business, 39 (1966), 119–138.Google Scholar
Sharpe, W. F. “Asset Allocation: Management Style and Performance Measurement.” Journal of Portfolio Management, 18 (1992), 7–19.Google Scholar
Sirri, E. R., and Tufano, P.. “Costly Search and Mutual Fund Flows.” Journal of Finance, 53 (1998), 1589–1622.Google Scholar
Stein, J. C. “Information Production and Capital Allocation: Decentralized versus Hierarchical Firms.” Journal of Finance, 57 (2002), 1891–1921.Google Scholar
Zhu, M. “Informative Fund Size, Managerial Skill, and Investor Rationality.” Journal of Financial Economics, 130 (2018), 114–134.Google Scholar