Key Takeaways
- • Retail investors prioritize past absolute returns when selecting real estate mutual funds, while institutional investors weight risk-adjusted performance metrics more heavily in allocation decisions.
- • Research by Elon University associate professor Thibaut Morillon analyzed 28 years of real estate mutual fund data (1995–2022) to identify performance measure preferences across investor segments, revealing divergent evaluation frameworks.
- • Complex performance metrics—beyond raw returns and Morningstar ratings—showed limited influence on fund flows for both retail and institutional investors, suggesting information accessibility and interpretability constraints.
- • The behavioral gap between retail and institutional investor decision-making may incentivize fund managers to emphasize different marketing narratives and performance communication strategies depending on target investor base.
- • Findings indicate real estate fund managers face conflicting pressures: catering to retail investors' return-chasing behavior versus institutional demands for risk-conscious benchmarking and transparency.
Summary
Research by Thibaut Morillon, associate professor of finance at Elon University's Martha and Spencer Love School of Business, reveals material differences in how retail and institutional investors evaluate real estate mutual funds. The study, co-authored with colleagues and titled "What Performance Measures Do Real Estate Mutual Fund Investors Chase?", examined fund performance data spanning nearly three decades (1995–2022) to correlate various performance metrics with subsequent investor capital flows.
The research identified a clear performance-measure hierarchy. Retail-oriented funds demonstrated strongest responsiveness to trailing returns—the absolute gain or loss a fund had generated. By contrast, institutional investors demonstrated more sophisticated evaluation frameworks, incorporating risk-adjusted performance measures that account for volatility and downside risk alongside returns. This divergence suggests institutional allocators view real estate fund selection through a portfolio construction lens, whereas retail investors rely on simpler, more intuitive performance signals.
Notably, more complex performance measures—including sophisticated risk-adjusted methodologies beyond standard Morningstar ratings—showed minimal correlation with fund inflows across both investor segments. This finding has practical implications for real estate fund managers and product developers: elaborate risk metrics may not translate into competitive advantage if end-users lack the tools, expertise, or attention span to process them meaningfully. The limited uptake of complex metrics suggests an information gap between what institutional research teams produce and what drives actual allocation decisions at the portfolio management level.
The divergence between retail and institutional investor preferences carries strategic consequences. Fund managers must navigate competing incentive structures: optimizing for retail capital may require emphasizing short-term performance and simplistic return narratives, while institutional fundraising demands rigorous risk communication and benchmarking credibility. This tension may influence product design, fee structures, and distribution strategy within the real estate mutual fund industry.
The research identified a clear performance-measure hierarchy. Retail-oriented funds demonstrated strongest responsiveness to trailing returns—the absolute gain or loss a fund had generated. By contrast, institutional investors demonstrated more sophisticated evaluation frameworks, incorporating risk-adjusted performance measures that account for volatility and downside risk alongside returns. This divergence suggests institutional allocators view real estate fund selection through a portfolio construction lens, whereas retail investors rely on simpler, more intuitive performance signals.
Notably, more complex performance measures—including sophisticated risk-adjusted methodologies beyond standard Morningstar ratings—showed minimal correlation with fund inflows across both investor segments. This finding has practical implications for real estate fund managers and product developers: elaborate risk metrics may not translate into competitive advantage if end-users lack the tools, expertise, or attention span to process them meaningfully. The limited uptake of complex metrics suggests an information gap between what institutional research teams produce and what drives actual allocation decisions at the portfolio management level.
The divergence between retail and institutional investor preferences carries strategic consequences. Fund managers must navigate competing incentive structures: optimizing for retail capital may require emphasizing short-term performance and simplistic return narratives, while institutional fundraising demands rigorous risk communication and benchmarking credibility. This tension may influence product design, fee structures, and distribution strategy within the real estate mutual fund industry.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.