The Influence of Primary Study Characteristics on the Performance Differential Between Socially Responsible and Conventional Investment Funds: A Meta-Analysis

Empirical studies, which analyze the performance of socially responsible investment (SRI) funds relative to conventional funds, find contradictory results. The aim of this paper is to investigate, with the help of a meta-analysis, how selected primary study characteristics influence the probability of a significant under- or outperformance of SRI funds compared with conventional funds. 25 studies with more than 500 observations are included in the meta-analysis. The results of this paper suggest that the consideration of the survivorship bias in a study increases (decreases) the probability of a significant outperformance (underperformance) of SRI funds relative to conventional funds. The focus on United States (US) SRI funds increases (decreases) the probability of a significant outperformance (underperformance) too. The time period influences the probability of a significant under- and outperformance of SRI funds as well, but based on the results of this paper, it is not possible to draw general conclusions on this variable.

[1]  John E. Hunter,et al.  Methods of Meta-Analysis , 1989 .

[2]  G. Heal.  When Principles Pay: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Bottom Line , 2008 .

[3]  Rob Bauer,et al.  Ethical Investing in Australia; Is there a Financial Penalty? , 2004 .

[4]  F. Schmidt,et al.  Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis , 2003 .

[5]  M. C. Jensen.  The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945-1964 , 1967 .

[6]  J. García‐Quevedo.  Do Public Subsidies Complement Business R&D? A Meta-Analysis of the Econometric Evidence , 2004 .

[7]  R. Scholz,et al.  Environmental Impacts of Conventional and Sustainable Investment Funds Compared Using Input‐Output Life‐Cycle Assessment , 2007 .

[8]  T. Gössling,et al.  The Worth of Values – A Literature Review on the Relation Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance , 2008 .

[9]  Nicolas P. B. Bollen,et al.  Mutual Fund Attributes and Investor Behavior , 2007, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[10]  Mohamed A. Ayadi,et al.  Luck Versus Skill in the Cross-Section of Ethical Mutual Funds , 2011 .

[11]  Rob Bauer,et al.  International Evidence on Ethical Mutual Fund Performance and Investment Style , 2002 .

[12]  A. Gregory,et al.  Performance and Performance Persistence of Ethical Unit Trusts in the UK , 2007 .

[13]  Rob Bauer,et al.  The Ethical Mutual Fund Performance Debate: New Evidence from Canada , 2007 .

[14]  Alexander Kempf,et al.  SRI Funds: Nomen Est Omen , 2007 .

[15]  William N. Goetzmann,et al.  Survivorship Bias in Performance Studies , 1992 .

[16]  K. Koedijk,et al.  Socially Responsible Fixed-Income Funds , 2008 .

[17]  Jacquelyn E. Humphrey,et al.  Australian Socially Responsible Funds: Performance, Risk and Screening Intensity , 2011 .

[18]  The Performance of Socially Responsible Mutual Funds: The Role of Fees And Management Companies , 2008 .

[19]  Chendi Zhang,et al.  The price of ethics and stakeholder governance: The performance of socially responsible mutual funds , 2008 .

[20]  Peter E. Kennedy,et al.  The Use (and Abuse) of Meta-analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: an Assessment , 2022 .

[21]  Andreas G. F. Hoepner,et al.  Research on 'Responsible Investment': An Influential Literature Analysis Comprising a Rating, Characterisation, Categorisation and Investigation , 2009 .

[22]  Zakri Y. Bello.  Socially Responsible Investing And Portfolio Diversification , 2005 .

[23]  C. Cowton,et al.  The Maturing of Socially Responsible Investment: A Review of the Developing Link with Corporate Social Responsibility , 2004 .

[24]  C. Louche,et al.  Socially responsible investment: differences between Europe and United States , 2006 .

[25]  Jacquelyn E. Humphrey,et al.  Do Socially Responsible Fund Managers Really Invest Differently? , 2006 .

[26]  John Matatko,et al.  Ethical Unit Trust Financial Performance: Small Company Effects and Fund Size Effects , 1997 .

[27]  C. Edward Chang,et al.  Performance Evaluation of U.S. Socially Responsible Mutual Funds: Revisiting Doing Good and Doing Well , 2010 .

[28]  L. Renneboog,et al.  Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior , 2008 .

[29]  John E. Hunter,et al.  Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings , 1991 .

[30]  M. Statman,et al.  Socially Responsible Mutual Funds (corrected) , 2000 .

[31]  S. A. Mueller.  The Opportunity Cost of Discipleship: Ethical Mutual Funds and Their Returns , 1991 .

[32]  C. D. Sinclair,et al.  Evaluating the Performance of Ethical and Non-Ethical Funds: A Matched Pair Analysis , 2005 .

[33]  L. Liedekerke,et al.  Risk-Return of Belgian SRI Funds , 2007 .

[34]  M. Statman,et al.  Doing Well While Doing Good? The Investment Performance of Socially Responsible Mutual Funds , 1993 .

[35]  Gunther Capelle-Blancard,et al.  The Performance of Socially Responsible Funds: Does the Screening Process Matter? , 2010 .

[36]  Nicholas Capaldi,et al.  Corporate social responsibility and the bottom line , 2005 .

[37]  Mark M. Carhart.  On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance , 1997 .

[38]  Eva Horváthová,et al.  Does environmental performance affect financial performance? A meta-analysis , 2010 .

[39]  Wayne E. Ferson,et al.  Measuring Fund Strategy and Performance in Changing Economic Conditions , 1996 .

[40]  J. David Diltz,et al.  The performance of socially responsible mutual funds: incorporating sociopolitical information in portfolio selection , 1999 .

[41]  Nelson Areal,et al.  The Performance of European Socially Responsible Funds , 2009 .

[42]  L. Hedges,et al.  Introduction to Meta‐Analysis , 2009, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[43]  Bert Scholtens,et al.  Assessing SRI fund performance research: Best practices in empirical analysis , 2011 .

[44]  Elias Bengtsson.  A History of Scandinavian Socially Responsible Investing , 2008 .