The effect of the business cycle on the performance of socially responsible equity mutual funds

The current study applies a two-state switching regression model to examine the behavior of a hypothetical portfolio of ten socially responsible (SRI) equity mutual funds during the expansion and contraction phases of US business cycles between April 1991 and June 2009, based on the Carhart four-factor model, using monthly data. The model identified a business cycle effect on the performance of SRI equity mutual funds. Fund returns were less volatile during expansion/peaks than during contraction/troughs, as indicated by the standard deviation of returns. During contraction/troughs, fund excess returns were explained by the differential in returns between small and large companies, the difference between the returns on stocks trading at high and low Book-to-Market Value, the market excess return over the risk-free rate, and fund objective. During contraction/troughs, smaller companies offered higher returns than larger companies (ci = 0.26, p = 0.01), undervalued stocks out-performed high growth stocks (h i = 0.39, p <0.0001), and funds with growth objectives out-performed funds with other objectives (oi = 0.01, p = 0.02). The hypothetical SRI portfolio was less risky than the market (bi = 0.74, p <0.0001). During expansion/peaks, fund excess returns were explained by the market excess return over the risk-free rate, and fund objective. Funds with other objectives, such as balanced funds and income funds out-performed funds with growth objectives (oi = −0.01, p = 0.03). The hypothetical SRI portfolio exhibited similar risk as the market (bi = 0.93, p <0.0001). The SRI investor adds a third criterion to the risk and return trade-off of traditional portfolio theory. This constraint is social performance. The research suggests that managers of SRI equity mutual funds may diminish value by using social and ethical criteria to select stocks, but add value by superior stock selection. The result is that the performance of SRI mutual funds is very similar to that of the market. There was no difference in the value added among secular SRI, religious SRI, and vice screens.

Does core strength training influence kinetic efficiency, lower extremity stability, and 5000m performance in runners?

Context: Core strength training (CST) has been popular in the fitness industry for a decade. Although strong core muscles are believed to enhance athletic performance, only few scientific studies have been conducted to identify the effectiveness of CST on improving athletic performance. Objective: Identify the effects of a 6-wk CST on running kinetics, lower extremity stability, and running performance in recreational and competitive runners. Design and Setting: A test-retest, randomized control design was used to assess the effect of CST and no CST on ground reaction force (GRF), lower extremity stability scores, and running performance. Participants: Twenty-eight healthy adults (age, 36.9+9.4yrs, height, 168.4+9.6cm, mass, 70.1+15.3kg) were recruited and randomly divided into two groups. Main outcome Measures: GRF was determined by calculating peak impact vertical GRF (vGRF), peak active vGRF, duration of the breaking or horizontal GRF (hGRF), and duration of the propulsive hGRF as measured while running across a force plate. Lower extremity stability in three directions (anterior, posterior, lateral) was assessed using the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT). Running performance was determined by 5000 meter run measured on selected outdoor tracks. Six 2 (time) X 2 (condition) mixed-design ANOVA were used to determine if CST influences on each dependent variable, p < .05. Results: No significant interactions were found for any kinetic variables and SEBT score, p>.05. But 5000m run time showed significant interaction, p < .05. SEBT scores improved in both groups, but more in the experimental group. Conclusion: CST did not significantly influence kinetic efficiency and lower extremity stability, but did influence running performance.