Effective delays in portfolio disclosure

Seung Hee Choi and Maneesh Chhabria

Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 2012, vol. 20, issue 2, 196-211

Abstract: Purpose - The timeliness of portfolio holdings information disclosure has been of interest among regulators, academics and practitioners since the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Securities Exchange Commission has been trying to strike a balance between investors' interest in timely disclosure and the potential costs associated with revealing the strategies of investment managers. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether current rules regarding the delay in disclosure adequately protect investors, and prevent the formation of copycat portfolios that can profit from the research of the original portfolio manager. Design/methodology/approach - The paper examine the effectiveness of different delays (30, 60 or 90 days) in disclosure of holdings for a sample of large‐cap, actively‐managed mutual funds. Copycat portfolios are constructed based on the holdings of the original portfolios, and their returns compared against the returns (net of expenses) of the original portfolios over the corresponding time frames. Findings - The results indicate that the current delay of 60 days is sufficient to prevent such free‐riding; however, shortening the delay to 30 days would adversely affect mutual fund investors. Originality/value - The paper aims to provide an answer to those debates on the effective delays in portfolio disclosure among academics and practitioners based on quantitative evidence. It also contributes to leave a guideline for regulators since the patterns of over‐ or under‐performance of the original portfolio returnsvis‐à‐visthe copycat portfolio returns over varying delays provide important insights about possible effects of changes in disclosure regulations.

Keywords: United States of America; Disclosure; Portfolio investment; Fund management; Mutual fund; Portfolio disclosure; Fund performance; Financial regulation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:jfrcpp:v:20:y:2012:i:2:p:196-211

DOI: 10.1108/13581981211218379

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance is currently edited by Prof John Ashton

More articles in Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().