How Did Morningstar’s New Ranking System Fare in 2012?

Josh here – you might remember Morningstar’s launch a bit more than a year ago of qualitative rankings for mutual funds. The big knock on Morningstar’s star ranking system has historically been that it is extremely backward-looking and overly focused on past performance – which offered little in the way of forward guidance for investors who don’t own time machines. And so Morningstar assigned some analysts to screen for more than just prior performance in an effort to make some judgments about which funds might be able to perform well in the future.

Wall Street Ranter, a financial professional who blogs here has done the below post-mortem on how this ranking system has done after its first full year. There are some interesting observations here, I wonder what Morningstar thinks of this internally….

***

Last year I wrote about Morningstar’s new analyst ratings for mutual funds (here as well). These are different from their Star Ratings in the fact that these are meant to be “forward looking”. From Morningstar (bold added by me)

“The Analyst Rating is based on the analyst’s conviction in the fund’s ability to outperform its peer group and/or relevant benchmark on a risk-adjusted basis over the long term. If a fund receives a positive rating of Gold, Silver, or Bronze, it means Morningstar analysts think highly of the fund and expect it to outperform over a full market cycle of at least five years.

Now it should be clear that these ratings are longer-term in nature so take the following breakdown with a grain of salt but I said I would follow-up on these so I am.

First lets start with a review of what the distribution of Morningstar’s Analyst Ratings looked like at the start of 2012

Chart

While the distribution of ratings has gotten a little better it remains a mystery why Morningstar has an allergic reaction to assigning negative ratings. As of the start of 2013 they have now rated 1069 funds but only 52 (or less then 5%) have negative ratings. Although the neutral ratings have increased to 28%, Bronze to 25%, Silver is down to 24% and Gold down to about 18%.

Without further ado, below is how the rated funds performed in 2012. These only include funds rated at thestart of 2012.

Chart

Not much really stands out after the first year. While their was a slight positive result for Gold and Silver rated funds, Neutral rated funds did even better. As for Bronze and Negative rated funds, outperformance was pretty much a coin flip.

Below is the Average Rank for each, as you can see Neutral rated funds performed the best and Negatively rated funds performed the worst.

Chart

Take this for what it’s worth, which at this point is not much because full market cycles are indeed a better measuring stick. For instance, in 1999 and 2006/2007 a lot of bad managers did good thinking the unsustainable was in fact sustainable while a lot of good managers did bad as they realized irrationality when they saw it. However, this is at least a starting point for looking at the performance of these Analyst Ratings.

***

Source:

Wall Street Rant

Follow @WallStreet_Rant on Twitter

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. how to seal diamond painting commented on Sep 18

    … [Trackback]

    […] Info on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  2. vous pouvez les essayer commented on Sep 22

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  3. bitcoin loophole reviews 2020 commented on Sep 27

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Information here to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  4. bitcoin loophole commented on Sep 30

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More here to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  5. window washing commented on Oct 03

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  6. Horse and Camels commented on Nov 26

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  7. Study in Uganda commented on Dec 28

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Information here on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  8. replica name brand watches commented on Dec 30

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]

  9. KIU-Library commented on Jan 06

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More here to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2013/02/18/how-did-morningstars-new-ranking-system-fare-in-2012/ […]