The Street.com Ratings' Guide to Common Stocks: A Quarterly Compilation of Ratings and Analyses Covering Common Stocks Traded on the NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ; The Street.com Ratings' Guide to Stock Mutual Funds: A Quarterly Compilation of Investment Ratings and Analyses Covering Equity and Balanced Mutual Funds; The Street.com Ratings' Guide to Bond and Money Market Mutual Funds: A Quarterly Compilation of Investment Ratings and Analyses Covering Fixed Income Funds; The Street.com Ratings' Guide to Exchange-Traded Funds: A Quarterly Compilation of Investment Ratings and Analyses Covering ETFs and Other Closed-End Mutual Funds; The Street.com Ratings' Guide to Banks and Thrifts: A Quarterly Compilation of Financial Institutions Ratings and Analyses

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-528
Author(s):  
Doug Highsmith
1989 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun H. Lam ◽  
Rajat Deb ◽  
Tom Fomby

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 826-829
Author(s):  
Ir. Dewi Tamara ◽  
Shintia Revina

Mutual funds have existed since 1990 as an alternative investment in Indonesia. The objective of this research is to examine the existing classification of mutual funds database. The data of mutual funds is taken from Bloomberg through Portal Reksadana 2013 which covered 690 mutual funds. The existing classification consists of mutual funds fixed income (reksadana pendapatan tetap), equity (reksadana saham), money market (reksadana pasar uang) and structured (reksadana campuran). The existing financial attributes consists of the net asset value, percentage annualized return the last 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, 5 years and year-to-date. This paper uses K-means clustering to propose new classification of Indonesian mutual funds. The result reveals that mutual funds in equity and fixed income belong to its group. However, mutual funds money market is belong to mutual fund fixed income and mutual funds structures are identified to mutual funds equity. Furthermore, we find that in average 43% of Indonesian mutual funds are misclassified in accordance with their attributes. Finally, it is suggested to re-group the mutual funds into smaller classification, which has lower rates of misclassified mutual funds and possibility to achieve better performances in terms of its percentage annualized return.


1981 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Ferri ◽  
H. Dennis Oberhelman

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 225-247
Author(s):  
Vanessa Endrejat ◽  
Matthias Thiemann

At the heart of the last financial crisis stood the shadow banking system, a mesh of financial activities and entities that grew outside of bank balance sheets but with the support of the banking sector. These activities were not regulated or supervised like banks, and they were characterized by high maturity mismatches and leverage. Two prime elements were Money Market Mutual Funds and Asset-Backed Commercial Papers, which jointly performed bank-like functions. This paper sheds light on the fate of these entities post-crisis and the regulatory dynamics at play as policymakers shifted their focus from constraining their activities to drafting a European regulatory infrastructure that delivers both stability and growth. Based on expert interviews and document analysis, we show how European policymakers opened up to private experts during this shift to learn about the technical complexity of Money Market Mutual Funds and Asset-Backed Commercial Papers, but in the end were restricted in their efforts to craft such regulation due to competing national factions and the legislative time pressure at the European level. We argue that the process was heavily influenced by, first, nationally held visions about the future role of financial markets that came to the fore at pivotal moments during the negotiations, and, second, the specific European institutional set-up and its electoral cycle.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document