Abstract
One of the necessary features of markets to produce efficient pricing is competition between information-based investors who quickly impound new information into price. However, a significant proportion of funds invested in today’s equity markets are in the hands of managers who pursue a style that utilises little or none of the available information. We simulate such a market where the funds are being managed using the following three investment styles: fundamental, momentum and index. We confirm that the major pricing anomalies that have been highlighted previously in the literature are a natural consequence of competition between managers utilising these three investment styles. More importantly, we show that this situation is unlikely to change as long as markets continue to be dominated by costly active managers with clients who pursue outperformance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arthur WB (1995) Complexity in economic and financial markets. Complexity 1: 20–25
Beltratti A, Margarita S (1992) Evolution of trading strategies among heterogeneous artificial economic agents. In: Meyer JA, Roitblat HL, Wilson SW (eds) From animals to Animats 2. MIT Press, Cambridge
Berk JB, Green RC (2004) Mutual fund flows and performance in rational markets. J Polit Econ 112(6): 1269–1295
Bird R, He X, Thosar S, Woolley P (2005) The case for market efficiency: investment style and market pricing. J Asset Manag 5: 365–388
Brock WA, Hommes CH (1997) A rational route to randomness. Econometrica 65: 1059–1095
Brock WA, Hommes CH (1998) Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model. J Econ Dyn Control 22: 1235–1274
Brock WA, LeBaron B (1996) A structural model for stock return volatility and trading volume. Rev Econ Stat 78: 94–110
Bu Q, Lacey N (2008) Do mutual funds exhibit a smart money effect?. Quart J Finance Account 47: 5368
Chiarella C, He X, Hommes C (2006) A dynamic analysis of moving average rules. J Econ Dyn Control 30(9–10): 1729–1753
Cont R (2001) Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quant Finance 1: 223–236
Day RH, Huang W (1990) Bulls, bears and market sheep. J Econ Behav Organ 14: 299–329
Deloitte (2010) Super system review: default fund costs under the MySuper proposals, mimeo, 19 april 2010. Available at http://www.supersystemreview.gov.au/content/downloads/mysuper_paper/Deloitte_report.pdf
Fama EF (1970) Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. J Finance 25: 383–417
Farmer JD, Joshi S (2002) The price dynamics of common trading strategies. J Econ Behav Organ 49: 149–171
Figlewski S (1978) Market “efficiency” in a market with heterogeneous information. J Polit Econ 86(4): 581–597
Grossman SJ (1976) On the efficiency of competitive stock markets where traders have different information. J Finance 31: 573–585
Grossman SJ (1977) The existence of future markets, noisy rational expectations and informational externalities. Rev Econ Stud 44(3): 431–449
Grossman SJ, Stiglitz JE (1980) On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets. Am Econ Rev 70: 393–408
Gruber MJ (1996) Another puzzle: the growth in actively managed mutual funds. J Finance 51(3): 783–810
He X, Li Y (2008) Heterogeneity, profitability and autocorrelations. Quant Finance 8(1): 59–79
Hommes CH (2001) Financial markets as nonlinear adaptive evolutionary systems. Quant Finance 1: 149–167
Hong H, Stein JC (1999) A unified theory of underreaction, momentum trading and overreaction in asset markets. J Finance 54: 2143–2184
Iori G (2002) A microsimulation of traders’ activity in the stock market: the role of heterogeneity, agents’ interactions and trade frictions. J Econ Behav Organ 49: 269–285
Lettau M (1997) Explaining the facts with adaptive agents: the case of mutual fund flows. J Econ Dyn Control 21: 1117–1148
Lux T (1995) Herd behaviour, bubbles and crashes. The Economic Journal 105: 881–896
Lux T (1998) The socio-economic dynamics of speculative markets: interacting agents, chaos, and the fat tails of return distribution. J Econ Behav Organ 33: 143–165
Lux T, Marchesi M (1999) Scaling and criticality in a stochastic multi-agent model of a financial market. Nature 397: 498–500
Lux T, Marchesi M (2000) Volatility clustering in financial markets: a micro-simulation of interacting agents. Int J Theor Appl Finance 3: 675–702
Pagan A (1996) The econometrics of financial markets. J Empir Finance 3: 15–102
Sapp T, Tiwarim A (2004) Does stock return momentum explain the “Smart money” effect?. J Finance 59: 26052622
Sargent TJ (1993) Bounded rationality in macroeconomics. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Soffer L, Walther B (1999) Returns momentum, returns reversals and earnings surprises University of Illinois at Chicago. Technical report
Zheng L (1999) Is money smart? a study of mutual fund investors’ fund selection ability. J Finance 54: 901–904
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bird, R., Casavecchia, L., Pellizzari, P. et al. The impact on the pricing process of costly active management and performance chasing clients. J Econ Interact Coord 6, 61–82 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-010-0076-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-010-0076-4