Benchmarking Money Manager Performance: Issues and Evidence

   (625 K)

Academic and practitioner research yields a proliferation of methods using size and value/growth attributes or factors to evaluate portfolio performance. We assess the relative merits of several of the most widely-used procedures, including variants of matched-characteristic benchmark portfolios and time-series return regressions, by applying them to a sample of active money managers and passive indexes. Estimated abnormal returns display large variation across approaches. The benchmarks most widely used in academic research --- attribute-matched portfolios from independent sorts, the conventional three-factor time series model, and cross-sectional regressions of returns on stock characteristics --- have poor ability to track returns. Simple alterations are provided that improve the performance of the methods.

Published: Louis K. C. Chan & Stephen G. Dimmock & Josef Lakonishok, 2009. "Benchmarking Money Manager Performance: Issues and Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(11), pages 4553-4599, November.

This paper is available as PDF (625 K) or via email.

Acknowledgments

Machine-readable bibliographic record - MARC, RIS, BibTeX