Research

Published & forthcoming

Peer reviewed

Where Active Management Adds Value for a Large Asset Owner

with Trond Døskeland

Abstract

We study how one large benchmarked asset owner allocated scarce active-risk budget across active functions, using evidence from Norway’s sovereign wealth fund. Using fund-level data from 1998 through 2025 and strategy-level evidence from 2013 through 2025, we find that the most consistent gains came from implementation-oriented activities that scaled well across a very large portfolio. Equity security selection also added value, though less uniformly. Discretionary allocation, by contrast, reduced benchmark-relative returns on average. Although Norway’s fund is institutionally distinctive, the evidence suggests that where investors share similar benchmark governance, scale, and implementation capacity, the strongest case for active management may lie in repeatable implementation advantages and selected forms of specialized security selection.

Forced to Be Active: Evidence From a Regulation Intervention

with Petter Bjerksund, Trond Døskeland and Andreas Ørpetveit

Publisher SSRN

Abstract

Mutual funds known as closet indexers are marketed as active, but actually operate as low-activity funds. Investors end up paying for full service, but only receiving a part of it. Supervisory authorities around the world are considering ways to regulate these funds. In this context, we examine the impact of regulatory interventions by Scandinavian regulators. We compare the scrutinized Scandinavian funds with similar unaffected European funds. The findings suggest that the regulated Scandinavian funds preferred increased activity over fee reduction. Consequently, fund managers adopted more active management strategies, resulting in a significant 2% decrease in annual alpha. Therefore, the regulatory interventions resulted in unfavorable outcomes for investors.

Do Fees Matter? Investor’s Sensitivity to Active Management Fees

with Trond Døskeland and Andreas Ørpetveit

Publisher SSRN

Abstract

Following the framework established by Berk and Green (2004), mutual fund inflows and fees should be uncorrelated at equilibrium. We empirically explore this relationship by investigating the temporal changes in fund fees and flows. Our fee metrics focus on active management services rather than diversification. We analyze the additional fee compared to passive alternatives and additional fee per unit of active management, along with the traditionally used total fee. Our analysis of global data reveals a negative time series correlation between both measures of active management fee and fund flows.

Manuscripts being prepared

Working papers

Sustainable, But Not Price-Blind: Fee Sensitivity in ESG Mutual Fund Flows

SSRN

Two-Dimensional Activeness: Exploring the Interplay Between Active Ownership and Active Portfolio Management

with Trond Døskeland, Xuan Li and Andreas Ørpetveit