Intresset för fondsparformen har ökat de senaste åren och med tanke på att åtta av tio svenskar sparar i fonder är det viktigt att undersöka vad det är som påverkar hur en fond presterar utifrån vem som förvaltar fonden.    Syftet med studien är att bidra med ökad kunskap kring vad det är som påverkar en fondförvaltares prestationer. Studien avser först att undersöka den enskilda fondförvaltarens prestation i form av riskjusterad avkastning utifrån de demografiska aspekterna. Därefter undersöks om grupper presterar bättre eller sämre riskjusterad avkastning än enskild individer och slutligen undersökes om gruppers diversitet, utifrån de demografiska aspekterna, påverkar fondens prestation också mätt i riskjusterad avkastning.   Studien utgår från ett positivistiskt synsätt och en forskningsstrategi med en deduktiv ansats. Metodvalet karaktäriseras av ett kvantitativt tillvägagångssätt där empirin grundar sig på icke-indexfonder i Morningstars kategorisering Sverigefonder.   Studiens övergripande slutsatser är att de olika demografiska aspekterna har olika påverkan på den riskjusterade avkastningen. Grupper presterar generellt sämre än enskilda individer och ju mer diversifierad gruppen är desto sämre blir också resultatet. / The interest of saving in funds has risen in recent years. Since eight of ten Swedes have got savings in funds it’s important to investigate what affects the funds’ performance, based on who manages the fund.   The purpose of the study is to contribute with increased knowledge about what affects the performance of fund managers. The focus of the study is firstly on different demographic aspects and how they affect the risk-adjusted returns. Secondly the study examines whether group performances are superior to individuals. Lastly the study also examines whether more diverse groups perform better than less diverse groups.   The study is based on a positivistic approach and a research strategy with a deductive approach. The method selection is characterized by a quantitative approach where data is based on non-index funds in the Morningstar categorization of Sverigefonder.   The overall conclusions of the study is that different demographical aspects have different effects on the risk-adjusted returns. Groups generally perform worse than individuals and the study also concludes that the more diversified the group gets, the worse the results will be.

Syftet med studien är att undersöka och jämföra hur svenska hållbara aktiefonder och svenska traditionella aktiefonder har presterat inom premiepensionssystemet under perioden 2015-2019. Detta görs eftersom att intresset för hållbara investeringar har ökat markant både hos privatpersoner och företag de senaste åren. Premiepensionssystemet väljs eftersom att varje privatperson som arbetar och betalar skatt i Sverige får en del av sin inkomst placerad i detta system, och sedan 2018/2019 läggs det otroligt mycket fokus på ökad transparens och medvetenhet hos Pensionsmyndigheten på fondplaceringar och att de kan erbjuda hållbara investeringar eftersom efterfrågan ökar. Författaren kan heller inte identifiera någon liknande studie som gjorts angående premiepension efter det att fondtorget gjorts om. Studien innehåller ett urval på totalt 5 hållbara fonder och 24 traditionella fonder. Studien har inriktat sig på den svenska marknaden, det vill säga fonder som placerar i svenska företag och som återfinns på den svenska marknaden samt uteslutande aktiefonder. Historisk data har insamlats från Pensionsmyndigheten och Morningstar för att sedan ligga till grund för beräkningar med hjälp av olika ekonomiska modeller och prestationsmått som Sharpekvot, Jensen’s alfa och Treynors kvot. Dessa mått mäter den riskjusterade avkastningen. Författaren väljer också att titta på faktisk avkastning, nettoavkastning för att se vad som presterat bäst för en privatperson som investerare. Därutöver görs statistiska beräkningar av statistiska mått i form av t-test för att beräkna p-värde och således kunna se om det finns någon statistisk signifikans för att antingen kunna acceptera eller förkasta en formulerad nollhypotes. Studiens resultat visar ingen större skillnad i prestation mellan hållbara och traditionella fonder, om än en marginell fördel för de traditionella i faktisk nettoavkastning. Studien erhåller heller ingen statistisk signifikans på 5-procentsnivån vilket indikerar på att vi inte kan förkasta nollhypotesen. / The purpose of the study is to investigate and compare how Swedish sustainable equity funds and Swedish traditional equity funds have performed within the premium pension system during the period 2015-2019. This is because the interest in sustainable investments has increased markedly among both individuals and companies in recent years. The premium pension system is chosen because every private person who works and pays tax in Sweden gets part of their income placed in this system, and since 2018/2019 there is an incredible amount of focus on increased transparency and awareness at the Swedish Pensions Agency on fund investments and that they can offer sustainable investments as demand increases. The author can also not identify any similar study that has been done regarding premium pensions after the fund market has been redesigned. The study contains a selection of a total of 5 sustainable funds and 24 traditional funds. The study has focused on the Swedish market, i.e. funds that invest in Swedish companies and that are found on the Swedish market, as well as exclusively equity funds. Historical data has been collected from the Swedish Pensions Agency and Morningstar to then form the basis for calculations using various economic models and performance measures such as Sharpe quota, Jensen's alpha and Treynor's quota and these measures measure the risk-adjusted return. The author also chooses to look at actual returns, net returns to see what has performed best for an individual as an investor. In addition, statistical calculations are made of statistical measures in the form of a t-test to calculate the p-value and thus be able to see if there is any statistical significance for either being able to accept or reject a formulated null hypothesis. The results of the t-statistics show that there is not significant differences in performance between sustainable and traditional funds, although a marginal advantage over the traditional ones in actual net returns. The study also receives no statistical significance at the 5% level, which indicates that we cannot reject the null hypothesis.

If more people are starting to invest, then the focus on the effective markethypothesis will increase. The hypothesis's basic idea is that stock pricesalready reflect all available information and outperforming the marketthrough investment strategies is not possible. This study presents how twoinvestment strategies, CAN SLIM and Peter Lynch, has performed on andagainst the S&P 500 under a 10 year period. The result of the study showsthat the efficient market hypothesis does not hold and that an excess returncompared to the market is possible. Between the investment strategies therewas a comparison and analysis regarding the Sharpe ratio and the CapitalAsset Pricing Model. Conclusively, the study shows that CAN SLIM is thestrategy that has performed the best under the period that the study is basedon.

Förvaltning och avkastning hos fonder har forskats om i flera studier runt om i världen. Tidigare forskning har gett varierande resultat, där vissa studier visar på att det föreligger ett samband mellan en fonds avgift och avkastning, medan andra inte kan säkerställa ett sådant resultat. Då de svenska hushållen idag sparar mer än någonsin, visar det på att fondsparande är ett aktuellt ämne för ytterligare forskning. Statistik från 2020 visar att fondförmögenheten i Sverige totalt uppgick till 4 554 miljarder kronor och har visat på en fortsatt ökande trend de senaste åren. Dock har endast få studier genomförts på den svenska kapitalmarknaden och de har i huvudsak analyserat ämnet på kort sikt, med en tidsperiod om fem år. Eftersom avgifternas påverkan på fonder är tydligast på lång sikt, ger det utrymme för fortsatt forskning inom ämnet. Syftet med följande forskning är att studera sambandet mellan svenska aktiefonders avkastning och avgift på lång sikt i förhållande till fondernas risk. Studien avgränsas till att undersöka svenska aktiefonder som har varit verksamma i minst tio år, mellan åren 2011-2020. Forskningen antar en kvantitativ forskningsmetod, vilket syftar till att testa teorier. Tillvägagångssätt sker genom en analys av urvalets regression och korrelation i samband med hypotesprövning, där variabler undersöks för att ge underlag till studiens analys av resultat. Studiens resultat visar att svenska aktiefonder i genomsnitt underpresterar den svenska marknaden på lång sikt. Forskningen visar även varierande resultat gällande korrelation mellan riskjusterad avkastning och avgift på lång sikt. Resultaten indikerar att den svenska kapitalmarknaden har en relativ marknadseffektivitet av svag form. I tillägg verkar aktivt förvaltade fonder kunna utnyttja tillfällig trendidentifiering och informationsasymmetri för att uppnå en överavkastning. Forskningen avslutas med slutsatsen att högavgiftsfonder, vilka är mer aktivt förvaltade, indikeras vara ett bättre investeringsalternativ för att uppnå en god långsiktig prestation i jämförelse med passiva fonder. / The management and return of funds have been researched in many studies around the world. Previous research has yielded varied results, with some studies showing that there is a link between a fund's fee and return, while others cannot ensure such a result. As Swedish households save more today than ever, it shows that fund saving is a current topic for further research. Statistics from 2020 show that fund assets in Sweden are 4 554 billion swedish crowns in total, a number that has continuously grown in the past years. However, only a few studies have been conducted on the Swedish capital market where the existing studies have mainly analyzed the subject in the short term, with a time period of five years. Since the impact of fund fees is most noticeable in the long term, the subject can be further explored.  The aim of this research is to study the correlation between returns and fees of Swedish equity funds in the long term in relation to the funds risk. The study is limited to examining Swedish equity funds that have been active for at least ten years, between the years 2011-2020. The study adopts a quantitative research method, which aims to test theories. This research utilizes a regression and correlation analysis in conjunction with hypothesis testing, where variables are examined to provide a basis for the study's analysis of results. The results of this study show that Swedish equity funds on average underperform the Swedish market in the long term. The research also shows varying results regarding the correlation between risk-adjusted return and fee in the long term. The results of this study indicate that the Swedish capital market has a relative weak form of market efficiency. In addition, actively managed funds seem to be able to utilize occasional trend identification and information asymmetry to achieve an excess return. The research concludes that high-fee funds, which are more actively managed, indicate to be a better investment alternative for achieving long-term performance in comparison to passive funds.

Hållbarhet har kommit att bli en av denna generations största utmaningar och som ett resultat av ett globalt växande klimatfokus har regeringar och mellanstatliga organisationer utformat allt mer omfattande regleringar och initiativ för att möta samhällets krav på en hållbar utveckling. Att företag ska engagera sig i hållbarhetsarbete och ta socialt ansvar anses allt mer som en självklarhet och följaktligen har hållbarhetsfrågor inte enbart fått större inslag inom företag och dess ledningsgrupper, utan även hos investerare. Denna studie har som syfte att analysera huruvida ESG påverkar den justerade avkastningen på fonder i Sverige och Norden. För att analysera detta förhållande fokuserar studien på fonders hållbarhetsbetyg grundade på hållbarhetsparametrarna miljö, socialt ansvar och bolagsstyrning (ESG). I denna studie utforskar vi den övergripande frågan om konceptet ESG och för en diskussion kring dess inverkan på fondpriser. Metoden som används innefattar de finansiella kvoterna Sharpe, Sortino och Treynor samt Jensens Alfa, vars värden i sin tur jämfördes mot urvalet av fonder i studien som rangordnats efter Morningstars hållbarhetsbetyg. Studiens resultat leder till slutsatsen att det inte finns något tydligt positivt eller negativt samband mellan fonders riskjusterade avkastning och dess hållbarhetsbetyg. / Sustainability has become one of the biggest challenges for the current living generation and as a result of the increased focus on the climate issue, governments and intergovernmental organizations have designed increasingly comprehensive regulations and initiatives in order to meet society's demands for sustainable development. That companies should become more involved in sustainability work and take social responsibility is increasingly regarded as a matter of course, and consequently sustainability issues have not only gained greater importance within companies and its management groups, but also with investors. The purpose of this study is to analyse whether ESG affects the adjusted returns for funds in Sweden and the Nordics. In order to analyse this relationship the study focuses on the sustainability rating of mutual funds that are based on the sustainability parameters environmental, social and corporate governance, together referred to as ESG. In this study, we explore the overall concept of ESG and discuss its impact on fund prices. The method being used includes the financial quotas Sharpe, Sortino, Treynor and Jensen's Alpha, whose values in turn was compared against the selection of funds in the study ranked according to their respective Morningstar sustainability rating. The results of the study lead to the conclusion that there is no clear correlation, neither positive nor negative, between the funds risk-adjusted returns and its sustainability rating.

During the past few decades, social responsible investing (SRI) has rapidly grown to become a renowned investment strategy. Because of the contradictory findings on how successful this strategy is in terms of financial return, the aim of this thesis is to compare the performance of sustainable and conventional funds in four different geographical areas during the last three years. With the use of regression analysis, the correlation between the Portfolio Sustainability Score of a fund, which is a Morningstar-provided rating that represents how well a fund incorporates ESG, and its risk-adjusted return is determined. The final results of this analysis varies among the four geographical regions. The correlation between the two variables is positive in USA and Asia ex-Japan, whereas a negative relationship is found in Europe and the Nordic region. However, the obtained findings are not of statistical significance, implying that there is no difference between the risk-adjusted returns of sustainable versus conventional funds. / Under de senaste årtionden har hållbara investeringar ökat och på senare tid även blivit en väletablerad investeringsstrategi. Då tidigare studier inom området uppvisat motstridiga resultat gällande hur effektiv denna strategi är inom värdeskapande, fokuserar denna rapport på att klargöra ifall hållbara alternativt vanliga fonder är fördelaktiga utifrån ett finansiellt perspektiv. Mer specifikt undersöks fyra geografiska områden över en tidsperiod på tre år. Genom regressionsanalys bestäms korrelationen mellan en fonds Portfolio Sustainability Score, ett betyg som erhålls av Morningstar som representerar hur väl den specifika fonden inkorporerar ESG, och dess riskjusterade avkastning. De slutgiltiga resultaten av denna analys varierar i de fyra geografiska områdena. I USA och Asien där Japan exkluderas är korrelationen positiv medan en negativ korrelation råder i Europa och Norden. Dock är resultaten inte av statistisk signifikans vilket indikerar att det inte är någon skillnad i den riskjusterade avkastningen mellan hållbara och vanliga fonder.

This study examines the total cumulative return and the total risk-adjusted return for OMXSPI and the two investment strategies The Magic Formula and The Acquirer’s Multiple. The aim is to find out if it’s possible to beat the market over time in contradiction to the efficient market hypothesis. Data has been collected to cover a 15-year period between 2005 and 2020. The results end up challenging the efficient market hypothesis with higher total cumulative returns, but also fairly convincingly higher risk-adjusted returns from the strategies. The study also found that the Acquirer’s Multiple outperformed the Magic Formula with regards to both measures.

Value investing as a strategy has a well-established history and has undergone extensive testing and studies within financial economics. Through the use of the strategy, studies and investors have demonstrated a positive return, where in many cases it has managed to generate excess returns compared to the market. The problem arises from the fact that the strategy should not be able to consistently generate excess returns compared to the market as it is not supported by the efficient market hypothesis (EMH). The purpose of the study is to investigate whether value investing as a strategy succeeds in generating excess returns on the Stockholm Stock Exchange. The method is based on a screening process, followed by a ranking system inspired by Joel Greenblatt’s value investment strategy "The Magic Formula". The method aims to systematically identify undervalued stocks based on the combination of two key ratios. Based on the applied method, two fictional portfolios were created with 15 stocks in each, based on value investing as a strategy. Historical data between 2013-2023 was collected to create the portfolios, with restructuring taking place each year based on set criteria. During this period, one of the portfolios showed a total return of 284.49%, which was an excess return compared to all benchmark indices in the study. The observed excess return suggests market inefficiency, where there may be opportunities for investors to identify and take advantage of undervalued stocks in the market. However, this excess return was not statistically significant when adjusted for risk, which in turn supports the EMH. Despite the strategy's success in generating excess returns compared to the market, it is therefore difficult to determine the level of efficiency at which the Swedish market has operated during the investigated period.

Aim:The purpose of this study is to investigate whether an investor will have to s acrifice their expectations of return by investing in a responsible way. Theory: The thesis is based on the efficient market hypothesis through the modern portfolio theory to make it possible to test whether the investor will have to sacrifice return after taking into account of the risk. To measure the risk-adjusted return we used Sharpe ratio, the Modigliani-Modigliani (M2), Jensen's alpha, which later on is the basis for the study's results and conclusion. Method: The study is a quantitative survey with a deductive approach where the selected theories determined what data is collected. Based on these theories we construct a hypothesis that this study later intended to test. Data was collected from Bloomberg. Conclusion: The study shows that several ethical indexes have a higher return while at the same time showing a higher risk-adjusted return. This higher risk-adjusted return is not statistically significant except for a few of the measured markets. The study also shows that the ethical indexes generally have a lower 𝛽, which can be interpreted as a lower systematic risk. Meanwhile the tracking error / active risk is higher and the screened indexes therefore should not be compared with say, index funds. When taken into account the longer period active risk levels match actively managed funds. As in previous studies, this study did not show any significant difference in risk-adjusted returns but a higher risk.

Background: In 1999 the Swedish pension system was reformed with an aim to create a stable and high return on pension assets. First, Second, Third and Fourth general pension funds, hereby referred to as AP1-AP4, had an important part in the reform. AP1-AP4, also called the buffer funds, was assigned to secure long-term, big parts of the pension capital. The funds objective is by law, to manage the fund's assets in a manner that provides maximum benefit for the state pension. The funds will also invest pension assets with an overall low level of risk while achieving a sustainable high return. Aim: The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the First-Fourth AP-Funds is meeting its objectives regarding risk and return according to Swedish law. The aim is also to see how AP1-AP4 risk-adjusted returns compare to the four Sweden funds risk-adjusted returns according to modern portfolio theory. Theory: Morningstar Rating, Treynor ratio, Sharpe ratio, Jensen's Alpha, Standard Deviation, Beta. Conclusion: The risk-adjusted performance measures used in this study shows that there are clear differences between the two fund groups, where the AP-funds performed worse than the Sweden funds in every measurement. The study shows that the pension funds do not reach their goals over the five-year period, in four of the five time intervals listed in the study. In summary, the study shows that pension funds have a lower risk-adjusted return than the four bank Sweden funds and that the pension funds have not achieved their goals.