PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare the financial performance of green and traditional mutual funds in the USA.Design/methodology/approachA total of 131 green mutual funds identified by US SIF, were compared with the averages of all traditional mutual funds in their respective Morningstar categories. Performance measures analyzed included annualized rates of return, expense ratios, and Sharpe ratios, among others. Most data pertained to at least the past three years, while other data pertained to the most recent 5 to 15 years.FindingsThe results demonstrate that green mutual funds have generated lower returns and similar risks compared to traditional mutual funds in their respective Morningstar categories. Green mutual funds have underperformed on a risk‐adjusted basis.Research limitations/implicationsSince there is no formal definition of a green mutual fund, the researcher and investor must make a subjective call in assessing which funds invest “green”. However, at least in this early stage in the history of green investing, green mutual funds have underperformed their peers.Originality/valueResults confirm the limitations of green investing as suggested by various researchers, among them Sharpe, Rudd and Kurtz and DiBartolomeo. Results stand in contrast to Corson and Van Dyck and Statman, among others, which reported no significant underperformance for socially responsible investments.

PurposeThe purpose of this case study is to examine direct investment in commercial real estate from the perspective of the individual. While most research is dominated by studies concerning direct investment by institutions (REITs, pension funds, etc.), the bulk of direct investment in commercial property is still conducted by individuals.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents accounting and financial data from the original purchase, management and disposal of a small‐scale office building. Cash flows, returns and risks are measured and analyzed.FindingsThe case demonstrates that successful direct investments may be characterized by short‐term time horizons involving older, small‐scale properties.Practical implicationsThis case illustrates the non‐academic nature of real world direct investment in commercial property. The case demonstrates that emotion and good timing are just as important to a successful venture as are cash flows and thorough risk estimates. The case also shows that successful direct investment in commercial property may be limited to smaller, older properties held for short‐term time horizons.Originality/valueThis case study is unique because it identifies the property, the investor, the purchase price, the operating revenues and the sale price and net proceeds. Most case studies conceal many of these facts in order to preserve anonymity.

No abstract

This study assesses the financial knowledge of high school students prior to completing the Missouri public high school personal finance graduation requirement. The students consisted of upper division students at an unnamed public high school in Springfield. Students in this sample were preparing to take either a personal finance class or different business class. Characteristics of students in the sample appear to approximate most other students in Missouri public schools. Results indicate no statistically significant difference between genders for the overall measure of financial literacy. However, higher socioeconomic status, defined in this paper as not receiving free or reduced lunch, appears to be directly related to financial literacy.

This paper examines operating characteristics, risk and performance measures of all available vehicles for index investing in U.S. real estate funds during the ten-year period from April, 1999, to March, 2009. The authors of this study find real estate index mutual funds and exchange-traded funds exhibit lower Expense Ratios, lower Turnover Rates, and mostly lower Tax Cost Ratios than category averages. As newcomers, real estate exchange-traded funds have had a good start, with the lowest Expense Ratios, lowest Turnover Rates, and lowest Tax Cost Ratios. Vanguard’s four index mutual funds over the past ten years have outperformed their counterpart category averages with higher Returns, higher Risks, and higher Risk-Adjusted Returns. On the contrary, Wells’ four index mutual funds over the past ten years have underperformed their counterpart category averages with lower Returns, higher Risks, and mostly lower Risk-Adjusted Returns. Four ETFs with at least three-year track record, however, have collectively underperformed index mutual funds over the past five with lower Returns, mostly higher Risks, and mostly lower Risk-Adjusted Returns. Nonetheless, Vanguard’s ETF has been able to mostly outperform Vanguard’s index mutual funds with higher Returns, lower (or same) Risks, and higher (or same) Risk-Adjusted Returns since its inception.