Authors : Dr. D. Rajagopal; Dr. B. Shailaja

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 4 - April

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/5ddpfmz8

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/y8djzbaa

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr120

Google Scholar

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 15 to 20 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study examines the risk-adjusted returns of large-cap, mid-cap, and small-cap mutual funds to provide insights for investors seeking optimal portfolio allocation. Using key performance metrics such as the Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, and Jensen’s alpha, the analysis evaluates the risk-return tradeoff across different market capitalizations. Findings indicate that while small-cap funds tend to offer higher absolute returns, they exhibit greater volatility, whereas large-cap funds provide more stability with lower risk-adjusted performance. Mid-cap funds balance risk and return but demonstrate varying performance across market cycles. The study's results have significant implications for investors aiming to optimize diversification strategies based on risk tolerance and investment objectives. In summary, large-cap funds provide safety, mid-cap funds offer balanced growth, and small-cap funds deliver the highest return potential but with elevated risk. Investors should select funds based on their risk tolerance, with large caps for stability, mid caps for moderate risk-reward, and small caps for aggressive growth.

Keywords : Risk-Adjusted Returns, Mutual Funds, Sharpe Ratio, Treynor Ratio, Jensen’s Alpha, Portfolio Allocation, Investment Strategies, Market Capitalization.

References :

1. Banz, R. W. (1981). The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics, 9(1), 3-18.
2. Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2000). Trading is hazardous to your wealth: The common stock investment performance of individual investors. The Journal of Finance, 55(2), 773-806.
3. Bailey, W., & Chen, X. (2008). Exchange rate movements, global funds, and performance. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(2), 257-269.
4. Carhart, M. M. (1997). On persistence in mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57-82.
5. Chan, L. K., & Lakonishok, J. (1992). Value and growth investing: Review and update. Financial Analysts Journal, 48(1), 71-86.
6. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1992). The cross-section of expected stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 47(2), 427-465.
7. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33(1), 3-56.
8. Jensen, M. C. (1968). The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945-1964. The Journal of Finance, 23(2), 389-416.
9. Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications for stock market efficiency. The Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65-91.
10. Loughran, T. (1997). Book-to-market across firm size, exchange, and seasonality: Is there an effect? Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 32(3), 249-268.
11. Malkiel, B. G. (1995). Returns from investing in equity mutual funds 1971 to 1991. The Journal of Finance, 50(2), 549-572.
12. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91.
13. Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual fund performance. The Journal of Business, 39(1), 119-138.
14. Treynor, J. L. (1965). How to rate management of investment funds. Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 63-75.