This paper is the first to systematically test the significance of survivorship bias using a comprehensive database and to test the significance of the differences of survivorship biases resulting from different methodical approaches. We apply the various methods most commonly used in the literature on a uniform dataset. In addition, we analyze the performance of closed funds as the driver of survivorship bias and the performance of new funds as the driver of incubation bias. Our main findings are: i) Ignoring closed funds leads to a significantly positive survivorship bias. This is in line with previous research. ii) The choice of methods leads to statistically and economically significant differences in survivorship bias estimates. We are able to suggest a bias-minimizing combination of methods if survivorship bias-free data is not available. iii) The performance of closed funds drives survivorship bias since these funds underperform surviving funds years before they are closed. iv) We find evidence for incubation bias in our data but its impact is rather small and clearly depends on the methods applied.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.