Disclaimer

The information contained in the website is solely intended for professional investors. Some funds shown on this website fall outside the scope of the Dutch Act on the Financial Supervision (Wet op het financieel toezicht) and therefore do not (need to) have a license from the Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM).

The funds shown on this website may not be available in your country. Please select your country website (top right corner) to view the products that are available in your country.

Neither information nor any opinion expressed on the website constitutes a solicitation, an offer or a recommendation to buy, sell or dispose of any investment, to engage in any other transaction or to provide any investment advice or service. An investment in a Robeco product should only be made after reading the related legal documents such as management regulations, prospectuses, annual and semi-annual reports, which can be all be obtained free of charge at this website and at the Robeco offices in each country where Robeco has a presence.

By clicking Proceed I confirm that I am a professional investor and that I have read, understood and accept the terms of use for this website.

Decline
Rankings and risk-taking in the financial industry

Rankings and risk-taking in the financial industry

20-09-2017 | From the field
Rankings matter. For example, we already know that most money flows towards top-performing funds at a certain point in time. This encourages so called “tournament” behavior among mutual fund managers. At Robeco, we believe that although this pattern is understandable, it may distort asset prices, in particular driving up the prices of risky assets. In this study*, professor Utz Weitzel and his colleagues ran laboratory experiments with more than 1,000 participants, including students and investment professionals.
  • Pim  van Vliet, PhD
    Pim
    van Vliet, PhD
    Managing Director, Head of Conservative Equities - Pim van Vliet

They found that rankings and tournament incentives increase risk-taking among underperforming professionals, but not among students. One reason could be that professionals know that following a low-risk strategy does not increase the likelihood of a fund achieving high rankings, while a high-risk strategy makes more sense under these conditions. This behavior supports the persistence of the low-risk anomaly.

The paper is also of particular interest since most other empirical studies are based on samples of students, who might not be representative for professional investors. Many experiments involving students may underestimate the behavioral impact of incentives.

*‘Rankings and Risk-Taking in the Finance Industry’, Michael Kirchler, Florian Lindner and Utz Weitze, 2017.

Stay informed on Quant investing with monthly mail updates
Stay informed on Quant investing with monthly mail updates
Subscribe
From the field
From the field

Our researchers publish many whitepapers based on their own empirical studies; they also follow quantitative research done by others.

Read all articles