Bakgrund: Historiskt har många faktorer spelat roll för investerare vid val av investering, framförallt betydande har varit faktorerna finansiell prestation och finansiella prognoser. Under de senaste åren har en rad nya faktorer tagit mer plats och ESG-faktorer har blivit några av de viktigaste aspekterna, både för investerare och andra intressenter. ESG står för Environmental, Social och Governance och är ett mått på investeringens hållbarhet. Även om det ofta diskuteras om ESG som ett helhetsbetyg, så är det mer sällan man diskuterar varje kriterium var för sig. I denna studie har E, S och G separerats för att undersöka om det är hållbarhet inom ett visst område som är mer gynnsamt än ett annat för att uppnå högst riskjusterad avkastning. Syfte: Syftet med denna studie är att undersöka vilket kriterium av E, S och G som genererar högst riskjusterad avkastning på OMXSPI. Metod: Studien har en deduktiv forskningsansats och grundas på en kvantitativ undersökningsmetod. All data har inhämtats från Refinitiv Eikon och man har sedan använt statistiska metoder och skapat regressionsanalyser för att undersöka variablernas samband. Variabeln som används för att mäta riskjusterad avkastning är sharpekvoten. Slutsats: Resultatet av denna studie visar att det finns ett statistiskt säkerställt positivt samband mellan betyget för S året 2018 och riskjusterad avkastning. Resterande år och kriterium finns det både positiva och negativa samband, men inget av dessa är signifikanta. / Background: Historically, many factors have played a role for investors when making decisions about an investment, especially significant have been the factors regarding financial performance and financial forecasts. In recent years, a number of new factors have become important, such as ESG factors. Those have become some of the most important aspects, both for investors and other stakeholders. ESG stands for Environmental, Social and Governance and is a measure of the sustainability of an investment. Although ESG often is discussed as an overall rating, it is less common to discuss each criterion separately. In this study, E, S and G have been separated to investigate whether sustainability focus in one specific area is more favorable than another to achieve the highest risk-adjusted return. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate which criterion of E, S and G that generates the highest risk-adjusted return on OMXSPI. Methodology: The study has a deductive research approach and is based on a quantitative research method. All data were obtained from Refinitiv Eikon and statistical methods with regression analysis were created to investigate the relationship of the variables. The variable used to measure risk-adjusted return is the sharpe ratio. Conclusion: The results of this study show that there is a statistically significant positive relationship between the grade for S year 2018 and risk-adjusted return. The remaining years and criteria have both positive and negative relationships, but none of these are significant.

Titel: Portföljförvaltarens kamp mot index Syftet: Syftet med denna studie är att beskriva och analysera aktiv fondförvaltning genomriskjusterad avkastning. Metod: En kvantitativ studie har genomförts för att uppfylla syftet och besvara studiensfrågeställning för undersökningsperioden 2018–2022. Riskjusterade prestationsmåtten somanvänds är jensens alfa, sharpe- och treynorkvoten. Empiriskt resultat: Studien är baserad på 21 aktivt förvaltade fonder som är registrerad iSverige. Vidare har dessa fonder placeringsinriktning på industrisektorn samt har 80% av sittinnehav på svenska aktier. Slutsats: Mer än hälften av alla fonder genererade ett positivt jensens alfa. Dock visar etttvåsidigt t-test att inget alfavärde var statistiskt signifikant med både 90% och 95%konfidensgrad.Nyckelord: Riskjusterad avkastning, Aktiv fondförvaltning, Treynokvot, Sharpekvot, Jensensalfa, Marknadsindex, Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) och Modern Portföljteori. / Title: Fund manager’s battle against index. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze active funds through riskadjusted returns. Methodology: The study uses a quantitative research method with data from secondarysources that contains fund’s net asset value (NAV). The research period of this study is 2018 to 2022. The study uses jensens alpha, treynor- and sharperatio as risk adjusted measurements. Empirical foundation: This study uses 21 active mutual funds that are registered in Sweden.The mutual funds that were obtained has an investment strategy that focuses on industry.Furthermore, these mutual funds have 80% holdings in Swedish stocks. Conclusion: More than half of the active mutual funds generated a positive jensens alpha.However, according to a two-sided t-test of a 90% and 95% confidence level, none of themutual fund’s alpha showed to be statistically significant and therefore no conclusions weremade.

Det ökade fokuset på hållbarhet har gjort miljö-, social- och styrningsfaktorer (ESG) till kritiska faktorer när man fattar investeringsbeslut. Denna studie beskriver och analyserar sambandet mellan ESG-screening och finansiella prestandan hos portföljer inom STOXX Europe 600-indexet mellan 2019 och 2023. Studien tillämpar en kvantitativ ram för att analysera tre portföljer, var och en med olika tröskelvärden för ESG-screening, och undersöker om högre ESG-rating korrelerar med högre avkastning. Genom att tillämpa CAPM tillsammans med Fama Frenchs trefaktormodell samt prestationsmått som Sharpekvoten, Beta och Jensens Alfa, syftar studien till att ge en fördjupad jämförelse av portföljer med olika ESG-kriterier mot det europeiska aktieindexet. Resultaten visar att ESG-screenade portföljer inom STOXX Europe 600 inte överträffade indexet i hänsyn till deras riskjusterade avkastning. Denna studie bidrar till diskussionen om de ekonomiska fördelarna med hållbara investeringar, genom att visa att även om ESG-screenade portföljerna har högre hållbarhetsgrad, leder de inte nödvändigtvis till förbättrade finansiella resultat på de europeiska marknaderna. / The increasing focus on sustainability has made Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors critical elements when making investment decisions. This study evaluates the relationship of ESG screening and the financial performance of portfolios within the STOXX Europe 600 index between 2019 and 2023. Using a quantitative framework, this study analyzed three portfolios – each with different ESG-screening thresholds – to investigate whether higher ESG-rating correlates with higher financial returns. By applying CAPM and the Fama-French three-factor model along with performance metrics such as the Sharpe ratio, Beta and Jensen’s Alpha, the study aims to provide an in-depth comparison of portfolios with ESG-criteria against the European stock index. The results indicate that ESG-screened portfolios within STOXX Europe 600 did not outperform the unscreened index, in terms of risk-adjusted returns.  This study adds to the ongoing discussion about the financial benefits of sustainable investing by showing that whilst ESG-screened portfolios have higher sustainability measures, they do not necessarily lead to improved financial results in the European markets.

Studien syftar till att undersöka vilken förvaltningsstrategi som är bäst, fonders prestation genom olika ekonomiska förhållanden samt persistens på den svenska fondmarknaden. Huvudsyftet är att undersöka om fonders föregående prestation kan användas för att förutsäga framtida avkastning. Genom att använda etablerade mått på förvaltningsprestation som Jensens Alfa, Sharpekvoten och Modiglianis riskjusterad prestation (𝑀2) jämförs fonders prestation. För att identifiera persistens jämförs fondernas avkastning med medianavkastning under en specifik period. Genom statistiska tester i form av Oddskvot, Chi-två-test och regressionsanalys fördjupas studien ytterligare. Resultaten från studien visar enskilda fall av persistens, men inga konsekventa mönster kan utläsas för alla fonder. Slutsatsen från studien är att det inte går att slå fast en överlägsen förvaltningsstrategi. Slutsatsen indikerar även att det inte finns några signifikanta indikationer på att det går att förutspå framtida avkastning utifrån föregående tidsperiods avkastning. / The study investigates which management strategy is superior, funds’ performance across different economic conditions and persistence in the Swedish fund market. The main objective is to examine whether past fund performance can be utilized to predict future returns. Through using established performance measures such as Jensen’s Alpha, The Sharpe Ratio and Modigliani’s risk- adjusted performance (𝑀2), we compare fund performance. To identify persistence, funds’ returns are compared with median returns over a specific period. Through statistical tests such as Odds Ratio, Chi-square test and regression analysis, the study is further elaborated. The results of the study reveal isolated instances of persistence, but no consistent patterns can be discerned across all funds. The conclusion drawn from the study is that no superior management strategy can be definitively established. Additionally, the findings suggest no significant indications that past period returns can predict future returns.

No description available.

No description available.

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.

Background: The Swedish fund savings have developed strongly over the past two decades. Together with this development, the knowledge that the earth's population is facing an extensive climate challenge has also increased. For many people today, living sustainably has become a central aspect of everyday life, and when it comes to investing their savings, the majority of Sweden's fund savers state that sustainability is something that is taken into account when choosing an investment. Investments in funds that based on measuring tools, show a high degree of sustainability have thus increased. This raises the question of whether these sustainable funds can generate a higher alpha and thus a better risk-adjusted return than the less sustainable alternatives available on the market. Previous studies have shown differences of opinion, which means that it is relevant to examine how these different types of funds perform against each other in the Swedish market.   Purpose: The aim of this study is to analyze whether fund savers that are investing in sustainable funds can generate a higher alpha and thereby a better risk adjusted return than fund savers that invests in less sustainable alternatives.   Methodology: The study was conducted with a quantitative method and a deductive approach. Sustainability ratings have been collected for 253 funds from a measuring institute. For these 253 funds, data in the form of net asset value have been collected between the period 2016 - 2020 monthly. These funds have then been evaluated based on risk-adjusted returns where regression analysis has been the groundwork for finding answers to whether alpha has been achieved compared to the market or not. Results obtained have then been statistically examined through various tests.   Conclusion: After completed study, there were no signs that studied sustainable funds have given rise to a better risk-adjusted return than the less sustainable alternatives available on the market. Of the 253 funds included in the study, only five funds showed a risk-adjusted return statistically different from zero, where three had a negative return and two a positive return. When the 253 funds were divided into four different quartiles based on sustainability ratings, it appeared that the funds with a positive risk-adjusted return were placed in quartile four, which was the one with the highest sustainability rating. However, this may be based on chance and a result of two in a sample of 253 gives clear indications that efficiency prevails in the market.