We investigate the activity and performance of 64 Swedish registered mutual equity funds available in the Swedish Premium Pension System from October 2002 to December 2011. Fund activity is measured by applying the holdings based analysis Active Share combined with Tracking Error Volatility (TEV). Active Share is a relatively new measure that compares a fund’s holdings with its benchmark index constituents (Cremers & Petajisto, 2009; Petajisto, 2013). This is used as a proxy for the fund’s stock selection strategy. As a complement, TEV is used as a proxy for the factor timing strategy. Performance are measured by using Jensen’s (1968) model, Fama and French’s (1993) model and Carhart’s (1997) model. We document that Swedish funds in the Premium Pension System are relatively passive in term of Active Share compared to US funds. We attribute this finding to the relative number of stocks held by a fund compared to the market. Swedish equity funds hold a relatively larger share of the number of stocks in the Swedish market while US funds hold a relatively smaller share of the stocks in the US market. We run a panel regression analysis to test the relation between Active Share and various variables. We find that funds with higher TER fees and fewer stocks on average have higher Active Share. There are also indications that TEV is positively related to Active Share. However, the overall explanatory power of the variables is low. We attribute this as evidence that Active Share is an independent measure of fund activity. Overall, we find neutral performance for an equally weighted portfolio of all funds in the PPS. To examine the performance differences between different levels of activity, we sort funds into five portfolios based on Active Share and TEV. The results show that, given a medium-to-low TEV, funds with high Active Share significantly outperform funds with low Active Share. Furthermore, it appears that the fee rebate in the Premium Pension System is important especially for the passive funds. Without the rebate, the passive funds underperform significantly. We run a panel regression analysis on the future fund performance to test the predictive abilities of Active Share and TEV. The results indicate that Active Share does not explain future performance differences. Conversely, TEV is negatively related to future performance which can be explained by fund managers being overconfident

The fund market has grown substantially during the past decades and the majority of Swedish citizens are invested in funds directly or through pension savings. There is mixed evidence on the performance of Swedish equity funds depending on the method employed and the time period studied. In this study, we set out to estimate abnormal performance using acknowledged methods during a time-period that is both longer and more recent than previous studies. Our sample is survivorship-free and consists of 150 mutual equity funds during January 1993 to December 2011. We use a four-factor model to estimate abnormal performance compared to an index and additional risk factors. We find that the average performance is neutral net of costs and that funds outperform with 1.7 percent before costs, the difference is approximately the average management fee. Over time, we find that the average abnormal performance and the share of funds that have significant outperformance have decreased while the share of significant underperformance has increased. Since the study of fund performance started in the 1960's the twin questions has been; does funds outperform the market and is this a result of pure chance or are managers skilled? Since we observe funds with significant positive and negative abnormal performance, we want to know if the results can attributed to luck or skill. We employ the latest technique, a bootstrap simulation, to test for skill or luck. This is the first study to employ the bootstrap to distinguish skill from luck in sample of Swedish funds. By ranking funds on performance after costs, we find that the performance of the majority of funds can be attributed to skill or "bad skill". The evidence is strongest in the top 95th percentile and above, and from the bottom 50th percentile and below.

Syfte: Syftet med studien är att analysera och utvärdera Carharts fyrfaktormodells och Fama- Frenchs trefaktormodells prestanda vid portföljavkastning på den svenska aktiemarknaden, under perioden 2011–2020. Teori: Denna studie grundar sig i den effektiva marknadshypotesen, Fama och Frenchs trefaktormodell samt Carharts fyrfaktormodell. Metod: En kvantitativ studie med ett deduktivt förhållningssätt. Undersökningen utför tester på den svenska aktiemarknaden under perioden 2011–2020 genom en regressionsanalys. Upptäckter: Carharts fyrfaktormodell har en högre justerad förklaringsgrad än trefaktormodellen, vilket drivs av modellens förmåga att förklara avkastning på portföljer sorterade efter storlek och momentum. Originalitet: Studien särskiljer sig på grund av avsaknaden av forskning på den svenska aktiemarknaden. Vidare bidrar studien till ett forskningsområde för små öppna ekonomier, där den svenska aktiemarknaden ingår. / Purpose: The purpose of the study is to analyze and evaluate Carhart's four-factor model’s and Fama-French's three-factor model's performance in portfolio returns on the Swedish stock market, during the period 2011–2020. Theory: This study is based on the effective market hypothesis, Fama and French's three- factor model and Carhart's four-factor model. Method: A quantitative study with a deductive approach. The survey performs tests on the Swedish stock market between the period 2011-2020 through a regression analysis. Findings: Carhart's four-factor model has a higher adjusted degree of explanation than the three-factor model, which is driven by the model's ability to explain returns on portfolios sorted by size and momentum. Originality: The study differs due to the lack of research on the Swedish stock market. Furthermore, the study contributes to a research area for small open economies, where the Swedish stock market is included.

Subject background and discussion: In recent decades, issues of human rights, labor and environmental change has been hot topics world wide, which also has influenced the financial market. More and more investors use socially responsible investing (SRI) screens when constructing their portfolios. One form of SRI screen is to choose companies that have satisfied employees. Existing theory says that employee satisfaction is an intangible asset to the firm that will positively affect a firm’s performance in the future. Intangible assets are often unrecognized by the market and thereby not incorporated in the stock price. The efficient market hypothesis has been studied and debated for several decades. Proponents of the EMH argue that all available information is incorporated in the stock price, thus it is not possible to systematically beat the market. However, EMH is controversial, since research has shown different results regarding the possibility to make abnormal return from various investing strategy. Research question: Is it possible to make abnormal returns by investing in a portfolio of worldwide firms with top scores on the SRI screen employee satisfaction? Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to examine investor’s possibility to make abnormal return with controls for multiple risk factors by investing in worldwide firms with top scores in employee satisfaction. One sub-purpose is to examine how the market values intangibles depending on the degree of market efficiency. Another sub-purpose of the study is to test two different portfolio weighting methodologies, equally- and value weighted, and observe the differences between them. Theory: This study deals with the efficient market hypothesis and the concepts of SRI, employee satisfaction, intangible assets and several risk-adjusted measurements. Method: We have chosen to perform a quantitative study with a deductive approach to answer our research question. We used a sample size of 696 firms based on “Great Place to Works”- lists of companies with high employee satisfaction to construct sex portfolios with different holding periods and strategies. These portfolios have been explored and tested significantly with both equally and value weighted methods. Result/Analysis: The study finds significant evidence of an average annual abnormal return of 3,66% and 2,43% for our main portfolio over the market for equally- and value weighted, respectively, using the three-factor model. When adjusting for momentum, thus employing the four-factor model, all the predictive variables still identify strong persistence in the abnormal return, with statistical significance. Conclusion: The results show that it is possible to make abnormal returns, during the observed time period, regardless of the weighing methodology, although the equally weighted received higher abnormal returns. Thus, the market efficiency appears to be in weak form and does not fully value intangibles.

Using three different models, we examine the determinants of average stock returns on the Stockholm Stock Exchange during 2012-2016. By using time-series data, we find that a Fama-French three-factor model (directed at capturing size and book-to-market ratio) functions quite well in the Swedish stock market and is able to explain the variation in returns better than the traditional CAPM. Additionally, we investigated if the addition of a Price/Earning variable to the Fama-French model would increase the explanatory power of the expected returns of the different dependent variables portfolios. We conclude that the P/E ratio does not influence the expected returns in the sample we used.