Over recent years, investors' attention on the environment, social responsibility, and governance (ESG) has been growing. At the same time, managers, investors, and regulators are interested in ascertaining whether mutual funds that invest in ESG‐compliant assets perform better than those with a low ESG commitment. The sustainability of funds' portfolios can be measured by ESG ratings, a measure of the financially material ESG factors of the securities held by a fund. Our study therefore aims to verify whether funds with high ESG ratings outperform funds with low ESG ratings, considering the risks taken, including higher moments, and costs borne by investors. Our analysis is carried out on a sample of 634 European mutual funds. By using data envelopment analysis, it provides evidence of the superior efficiency of funds investing in high ESG‐rated securities.

This study provides an empirical analysis back-testing the implementation of a dispersion trading strategy to verify its profitability. Dispersion trading is an arbitragelike technique based on the exploitation of the overpricing of index options, especially index puts, relative to individual stock options. The reasons behind this phenomenon have been traced in literature to the correlation risk premium hypothesis (i.e., the hedge of correlations drifts during market crises) and the market inefficiency hypothesis. This study is aimed at evaluating whether dispersion trading can be implemented with success, with a focus on the Standard & Poor's 100 options. The risk adjusted return of the strategy used in this empirical analysis has beaten a buy-and-hold alternative on the S&P 100 index, providing a significant over-performance and a low correlation with the stock market. The findings, therefore, provide an evidence of inefficiency in the US options market and the presence of a form of "free lunch" available to traders focusing on options mispricing.

In the last decades, risk-based portfolio construction techniques have enjoyed a widespread diffusion in the financial community. This study aims at evaluating how these portfolio construction techniques produce different results depending on whether the segmentation of the stock market investment universe is based on sectorial or geographical criteria. An empirical analysis, applied on the global equity market, is carried out by making use of the typical and most advanced statistical and financial evaluation measures. Geographical segmentation is carried out in relation to the listing market, while sectorial segmentation is made in relation to the productive sectors to which individual companies belong. Our comparative analysis provides substantially coherent results, demonstrating a significant preference for the sectorial criterion compared to the geographic one. In conclusion, this result can be attributed to the subdivision of the investment universe into sectorial indices characterized by greater internal coherence and better external differentiation, in addition to the lower concentration of sectorial segmentation compared to the geographical one.

No abstract