No abstract

The performance of pooled superannuation funds is analysed within a framework that recognises that risk management or ‘market timing’ is an important aspect of the fund manager's decision‐making. Two broad appraoches to the issue of ‘market timing’ are adopted: first, the performance evaluation model developed by Henriksson and Merton [1981] which allows for return differentials to arise from both security selection and market timing; and second, the recursive residuals methodology of Brown, Durbin and Evans [1975] which identifies points in chronological time when the risks of the funds underwent a change. The results indicate that only 5 out of 16 funds had significant shifts in their risk over the period of the study, all of which occurred in late 1986 to early 1987. It follows that the usual Jensen measure of performance is inappropriate for these funds since one component of their performance is due to market timing activities. The return performance of these market timing activities is significantly negative for 15 to 16 funds indicating that their timing ability is perverse. To some extent this is an artifact of the market crash of October 1987 and that all funds had a positive exposure to equities. However, due to their asset allocation policies all funds are assigned significantly positive security selection performance.

This paper contributes to the empirical literature which documents the existence of a positive association between unexpected earnings and/or dividend announcements and abnormal returns to equity. The paper addresses some of the methodological limitations evident in the literature. In particular, one methodological difficulty encountered by previous studies is that since earnings and dividend announcements are usually made contemporaneously it is difficult to assess the marginal effect of either announcement on security returns. This problem is dealt with by constructing portfolios of securities which are randomized with respect to unexpected earnings (dividends), but which are systematically ranked on unexpected dividends (earnings). The results indicate that unexpected earnings announcements have a significant marginal impact on abnormal returns. In addition, there is evidence of an impact of unexpected dividends on returns, but it is weaker than unexpected earnings.

In August 1976 the then Federal Treasurer foreshadowed the incorporation in the Income Tax Assessment Act, 1936 of a severely modified form of the Mathews Committee's (1975) recommendations on trading stock. This paper documents the existence of substantial “tax-free” capital gains to those invested in the equity of affected companies, in particular retailer-merchants, at the time of this announcement. The observed price response was immediate and consistent with subsequent realizations of the “trading stock valuation adjustment” – both of which would be expected if capital markets are efficient.

This paper examines the association between the timeliness of the half‐yearly report for Australian firms and the abnormal stock price behaviour around the time of the announcement. The results support the overseas evidence that reports containing ‘good’ news are released earlier than reports containing ‘bad’ news. The abnormal returns are consistent with the direction and magnitude of the earnings and dividend information. We find no evidence to support the Kross and Schroeder [1984] conclusion that timeliness per se is associated with abnormal returns once appropriate control is made for earnings/dividend information.