18.
Suppose that finishing in the top half of all portfolio managers is purely luck, and
that the probability of doing so in any year is exactly ½.
Then the probability that
any particular manager would finish in the top half of the sample five years in a row
is (½)
5
= 1/32.
We would then expect to find that [350
×
(1/32)] = 11 managers
finish in the top half for each of the five consecutive years.
This is precisely what
we found.
Thus, we should not conclude that the consistent performance after five
years is proof of skill.
We would expect to find eleven managers exhibiting
precisely this level of "consistency" even if performance is due solely to luck.
44
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.
View Full Document
19.
a.
After two years, each dollar invested in a fund with a 4% load and a portfolio
return equal to r will grow to: $0.96
×
(1 + r – 0.005)
2
Each dollar invested in the bank CD will grow to: $1
×
1.06
2
If the mutual fund is to be the better investment, then the portfolio return (r)
must satisfy:
0.96
×
(1 + r – 0.005)
2
> 1.06
2
0.96
×
(1 + r – 0.005)
2
> 1.1236
(1 + r – 0.005)
2
> 1.1704
1 + r – 0.005 > 1.0819
1 + r > 1.0869
Therefore: r > 0.0869 = 8.69%
b.
If you invest for six years, then the portfolio return must satisfy:
0.96
×
(1 + r – 0.005)
6
> 1.06
6
= 1.4185
(1 + r – 0.005)
6
> 1.4776
1 + r – 0.005 > 1.0672
1 + r
> 1.0722
r > 7.22%
The cutoff rate of return is lower for the sixyear investment because the
“fixed cost” (i.e., the onetime frontend load) is spread out over a greater
number of years.
c.
With a 12b1 fee instead of a frontend load, the portfolio must earn a rate of
return (r) that satisfies:
1 + r – 0.005 – 0.0075 > 1.06
In this case, r must exceed 7.25% regardless of the investment horizon.
20.
The turnover rate is 50%.
This means that, on average, 50% of the portfolio is sold
and replaced with other securities each year.
Trading costs on the sell orders are
0.4%; and the buy orders to replace those securities entail another 0.4% in trading
costs.
Total trading costs will reduce portfolio returns by: 2
×
0.4%
×
0.50 = 0.4%
45
21.
For the bond fund, the fraction of portfolio income given up to fees is:
%
0
.
4
%
6
.
0
= 0.150 = 15.0%
For the equity fund, the fraction of investment earnings given up to fees is:
%
0
.
12
%
6
.
0
= 0.050 = 5.0%
Fees are a much higher fraction of expected earnings for the bond fund, and
therefore may be a more important factor in selecting the bond fund.
This may help to explain why unmanaged unit investment trusts are concentrated in
the fixed income market.
The advantages of unit investment trusts are low turnover
and low trading costs and management fees.
This is a more important concern to
bondmarket investors.
46
This is the end of the preview.
Sign up
to
access the rest of the document.
 Spring '13
 Ohk
 Class B shares, unit investment trusts, frontend load

Click to edit the document details