Sentences with phrase «negative alpha»

There's a reason why billions of dollars flow into those slightly negative alpha index funds.

Think of it this way: For you to have positive alpha, the industry's term for risk - adjusted excess return, someone has to have negative alpha of the same amount.

Positive alpha numbers indicate positive returns compared to benchmark and negative alpha value indicates negative returns to benchmark.

Unfortunately, when a factor analysis shows negative alpha we know something is causing a drag on returns, but we can never be sure what that is.

If an investor is realizing investment returns less than the markets, then the portfolio manager is probably providing negative alpha.

Ironically, the pursuit of positive alpha, which leads to the regular switching of investment strategies and managers, is the very reason why mutual fund investors and pensions have earned negative alpha.

The first group, Group A, has been generating positive alphas (outperforming appropriate risk - adjusted benchmarks), while Group B has been underperforming (generating negative alphas).

In the case of an index fund like XIC, you should expect a slightly negative alpha because of the management fee.

In contrast, a negative alpha indicates a fund has underperformed, given the expectations established by the fund's beta.

A positive Alpha means a good return for the risk involved, while a negative Alpha means a poor return and not worth the risk.

You could have a negative alpha gliadin antibody test, but have a positive response against another form of gliadin.

When compared to the portfolio's beta, a positive alpha indicates better - than - expected portfolio performance and a negative alpha worse - than - expected portfolio performance.

A negative alpha would mean that over a down and up cycle the investor underperforms the market.

Black (1972) found that a pricing model in which borrowing is restricted was consistent with test results, reported by Jensen, Black, and Scholes (1972, p. 4), which indicated that high - beta stocks have negative alphas and low - beta stocks have positive alphas.

Indeed, the industry's focus on the «alpha» of managers appears to be a distraction from the «negative alpha» «earned» by investors.

Although the fund's beta coefficient was lower than one, it produced a negative alpha intercept.

With the dominant ETF in the reference portfolio (OEF) as benchmark, the fund produced a negative alpha in the CAPM:

Although not statistically significant (t - statistic much smaller than two), the negative alpha intercept indicates that the fund failed to outperform the ETF on a risk - adjusted basis.

Further, 11 large cap & 22 multi cap funds has negative alpha.

The only surprise here is the fund's negative alpha — and a pretty high one at that.

When a mutual fund manager has a statistically significant different performance than the fund's benchmark (i.e., a statistically significant positive or negative alpha), there are two possible explanations: skill or luck.

In fact, the majority of the funds had a negative alpha after controlling for market, size, and relative - price risk factors.