Journals / Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi / 2001 / Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2

EVALUATION OF PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE OF TURKISH INVESTMENT FUNDS

Cudi Tuncer Gürsoy(Doğuş University)
Yaman Ömer Erzurumlu(Doğuş University)
Pages
43–58
Publication Date
2001-07-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

But more importantly it was found that, the best investment over the entire analysis period as well as in the sub-periods was T-Bills, which was followed by ISE-100 index, Type B Funds, and Type A funds respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article attempts to measure performances of Type A and Type B funds relative to T-Bill rates and ISE-100 index in Turkey over the period of January 1998-June 2000 using Sharpe, Treynor, Jensen, and Graham&Harvey indices. 55 Type A, and 77 Type B Funds were included in the analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:But more importantly it was found that, the best investment over the entire analysis period as well as in the sub-periods was T-Bills, which was followed by ISE-100 index, Type B Funds, and Type A funds respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This finding makes the merits of the efforts spent by funds managers, over the analysis period, to outperform the market highly questionable.
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:A Tipi Fon · B Tipi Fon · Fon performansı

Abstract

This article attempts to measure performances of Type A and Type B funds relative to T-Bill rates and ISE-100 index in Turkey over the period of January 1998-June 2000 using Sharpe, Treynor, Jensen, and Graham&Harvey indices. 55 Type A, and 77 Type B Funds were included in the analysis. In order to test whether four different indices make similar ranking, Spearman rank correlation analysis was utilized. Secondly, Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test was applied to test the significance of the differences in Sharpe indices of alternative investment instruments included in the analysis. Analysis revealed that different criteria rank the portfolios similarly. But more importantly it was found that, the best investment over the entire analysis period as well as in the sub-periods was T-Bills, which was followed by ISE-100 index, Type B Funds, and Type A funds respectively. This finding makes the merits of the efforts spent by funds managers, over the analysis period, to outperform the market highly questionable.

Özet

Bu makale A ve B tipi fonların 1998 0cak-2000 Haziran dönemindeki per­formanslarını, Sharpe, Treynor, Jensen ve Graham&Harvey kriterlerini kullanarak Hazine bonosu ve İMKB-100 indeksine kıyasla ölçümlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ana­lize 55 A Tipi, 77 B tipi fon dahil edilmiştir. Bu kriterlerin fonları aynı şekilde sıra­layıp sıralamadığını görmek için Spearman dizi korelasyonundan yararlanılmıştır. İkinci olarak, dört farklı yatırım aracının ortalama Sharp katsayılarının birbirinden anlamlı ölçüde farklı olup olmadığı Wilcoxon İşaretli Sıra testiyle irdelenmiştir. Yapılan analizler portföy performansını değerlendirmede kullanılan dört kriterin fonları benzer şekilde sıraya koyduğunu göstermiştir. Ama daha önemlisi, gerek tüm analiz döneminde gerekse alt dönemlerde hazine bonosunun en iyi yatırım aracı olduğu, onu sırasıyla İMKB-100 endeksi, B Tipi fon ve A Tipi fonun izlediği görülmüştür. Bu sonuç, fon yöneticilerinin, analiz dönemi boyunca, pazar ortalamasından daha iyi fonlar oluşturma çabalarının yararı konusunda kuşku yaratmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gürsoy, C. T., Erzurumlu, Y. Ö. (2001). EVALUATION OF PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE OF TURKISH INVESTMENT FUNDS. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 43–58. https://ajindex.com/articles/1172574

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. FARRAR, E.D. and L. J. TREYNOR (1968). "Problems in Selection of Security Portfolios: Discussion", Journal of Finance Vol.23, Issue 2, (May), 417-419.
  2. GRAHAM, J. R. and C. R. HARVEY (1997). "Market Timing Ability and Volatility Implied Investment Newsletters’ Asset Allocation Recommendations" Journal of Financial Economics, Vol 42: 397-422.
  3. JENSEN, M. (1968). "The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945- 1964", Journal of Finance 23, No 2 ( May): 389-416.
  4. REILLY, F. R. (1992). Investments, The Dryden Press, Fort Worth, p. 620.
  5. SHARPE, W. F. (1966). "Mutual Fund Performance", Journal of Business, No 1, Part 2 (January): 119-138.
  6. SHARPE, W. F. (1967). "Portfolio Analysis", Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 2, Issue.2 (June), 76-84.
  7. TREYNOR J. L. (1965). "How To Rate Management of Investment Funds", Harvard Business Review, (January-February): 63-75.
  8. JENSEN, M. (1968). "The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945- 1964", Journal of Finance 23, No 2 ( May): 389-416.
  9. TREYNOR J. L. (1965). "How To Rate Management of Investment Funds", Harvard Business Review, (January-February): 63-75.