Financial Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Sunday, May 04, 2003

Investment World
Features
Stocks
Port Info
Archives

Group Sites

Investment World - Insight
Markets - Mutual Funds
Columns - Comment


Peer comparison beats benchmarks

A CURSORY look at the performance of balanced funds and income funds will tell you that almost all of them have outperformed their respective benchmarks. However, the benchmarks do not seem to be proving useful.

Sample this. Alliance 95 generated returns of around 3.3 per cent. HDFC Balanced Fund generated returns of around 6.03 per cent. Both beat the benchmark — Crisil Balanced Fund Index, which gained 3.1 per cent.

In the case of Income funds, Alliance Income Fund generated returns of 5.9 per cent while HDFC Income Fund returned 7.1 per cent. Both, again, outperformed their benchmark, Crisil Composite Bond Fund Index, which gained 5.2 per cent. In short, the benchmarks are proving too easy a hurdle to overcome for the asset management companies.

Some time back, the Association of Mutual Funds of India and Crisil embarked on the practice of calculating the values of the various indices after adjusting for management expenses and cash proportion. Theoretically, if index values are adjusted for management expenses and cash proportion, then it should be a comparatively easier index to beat. The disclosures of half-yearly financial results only confirm that perception.

In particular, the extent of outperformance of the income funds is disconcerting. World over, beating bond indices has proved a tough exercise. In India, however, funds have outperformed their benchmarks by 18-36 per cent.

In addition, the disclosures themselves are causing confusion. The performance of the benchmark — Crisil Composite Bond Fund Index — is given as 2.78 per cent in DSP Merrill Lynch's disclosures. However, most other asset management companies suggest it is 5.2 per cent.

Similarly, Alliance has indicated that Crisil MIP Blended Index delivered returns of about 6.9 per cent. This is in contrast to the 4.7 per cent indicated by Birla and 4.8 per cent by SBI.

In the end, peer comparison continues to be more useful for evaluating performance than the benchmarks themselves. Something for SEBI and AMFI to ponder.

Suresh Krishnamurthy

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication

Stories in this Section
BSNL's new tariff plans: Getting to the pulse of the consumer


Pricing of long distance calls
MF asset information: AMFI must make them comparable
Peer comparison beats benchmarks
SEBI must borrow the SEC stick
Steel revival package: Recasting to strengthen
Alliance MIP and Templeton MIP-Growth: No match for income schemes
Income fund expenses: Investors stuck with high costs
Tata Life Sciences and Technology: Pare exposures
Investing in fund of funds
Birla Equity Plan: Pare exposures
HDFC Tax Plan 2000: Hold/Avoid fresh exposures
Alfa Laval: Buy
Grasim: Buy
MICO: Book profit and re-enter at lower levels
Ashok Leyland: Hold
Cipla: Hold
Sundram Fasteners: Book profit
Deferred tax accounting: Debit companies, credit investors
Why account for deferred taxes?
Grand Vitara XL-7: Maruti times luxury drive right
Tata AIG's Assure Educare
Positive outlook for ITC, Infy
Bullish trend in HDFC Bank
Nasdaq: Uptrend may persist
Futures in backwardation
Capturing dividend using options
Puts: Protected downside
Options guide
M&M Financial Services: Ride on
`Efficiency, cost-control key to viability' — Mr Anil Singhvi, Executive Director (Finance), Gujarat Ambuja Cements
Cipla sheds 10 pc on disappointing results
Handling short-term capital losses
NRI deposits and capital gains


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line