MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410100113 · doi:10.1111/jfir.12466

Tournament effects in equity mutual funds: Impact of economic conditions and investment styles

2025· article· en· W4410100113 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Chrétien, Frank Coggins, Catherine Deslauriers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Financial Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTournamentEquity (law)Fund of fundsBusinessInvestment (military)EconomicsFinancePolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mutual funds engage in annual competitions to secure top positions in year‐end performance rankings. One effect implies that losing funds increase their risk more than winning funds, hoping to improve their rankings. Another effect involves a rational response by winning funds that anticipate the actions of losing funds and take more risk to maintain their position. We propose a novel testing approach that can better capture systematic risk shifting. We find evidence of a rational response when using traditional measures, but models that account for investment‐style variations weaken considerably the effects and detect more risk shifting by losing funds.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207