Fiduciary Duty and Sin Stocks: Is Vice Really Nice?

Handbook of Institutional Investment and Fiduciary Duty, 2014

37 Pages Posted: 10 Oct 2009 Last revised: 21 Apr 2015

See all articles by Andreas G. F. Hoepner

Andreas G. F. Hoepner

Smurfit Graduate Business School, University College Dublin; Stockholm School of Economics - Mistra Financial Systems (MFS); European Commission's Technical Expert Group for Sustainable Finance

Stefan Zeume

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Date Written: June 3, 2013

Abstract

Several recent studies led by Hong & Kacperzcyk (2009, Journal of Financial Economics) document that companies in industries perceived as sinful - so called sin stocks (i.e. alcohol, tobacco, gambling) - deliver a significant and positive abnormal stock market performance. This potentially attractive characteristics make these sin stocks a relevant investment opportunity for pension funds. In fact, following a rather conservative interpretation of pension funds' fiduciary duty, one might argue that pension funds have to investment overproportionally in sin stocks due to their seemingly superior returns to act in the best financial interest of their beneficiaries. This best financial interest, however, is unlikely the best interest of the beneficiary from a wider wellbeing perspective as, for instance, investments in tobacco companies are unlikely supportive of public health and hence beneficiaries' life expectancy. Before one dives into this legal paradoxon it is worth considering the practicalities of investing in these so called sin stocks, as the academic studies documenting their preferential characteristics used nearly exclusively hypothetical portfolios and not actual investment funds. In fact, only one sin stock based investment fund exists to the best our of knowledge, the Vice Fund. In this chapter, we pursue the first in depth analysis of the financial attractiveness of the Vice Fund, which penalizes instead of rewards responsible corporations. Despite the financial potential of the Vice Fund’s underlying sin stocks has recently been indicated, we find the Vice Fund’s abnormal return to be statistically indistinguishable from zero. Interestingly, the Vice Fund managers possess significantly value destructing directional trading and crisis management skills. Consequently, we cannot see any practical reason why pension funds would have to invest overproportionally in sin stocks, as their actually realised investment performance is no better than ordinary. Our finding is not necessarily inconsistent with Hong and Kacperczyk (2009), as they regressed equal weighted sin stocks against a value weighted market benchmark and economy wide investment style controls, which means that their significant positive alphas could have resulted from a clever portfolio weighting instead of any sin characteristics (i.e. the overproportionally weighted small sin stocks could have outperformed the underproportionally weighted large sin stocks).

Keywords: Corporate Governance, Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Financial Performance, Socially Responsible Investment

JEL Classification: A13, D62, G11, L60, L70, M14, Z13

Suggested Citation

Hoepner, Andreas G. F. and Zeume, Stefan, Fiduciary Duty and Sin Stocks: Is Vice Really Nice? (June 3, 2013). Handbook of Institutional Investment and Fiduciary Duty, 2014. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1485846 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1485846

Andreas G. F. Hoepner (Contact Author)

Smurfit Graduate Business School, University College Dublin ( email )

Blackrock, Co. Dublin
Ireland

Stockholm School of Economics - Mistra Financial Systems (MFS) ( email )

MISUM
Box 6501, SE-113 83 Stockholm
Sweden

European Commission's Technical Expert Group for Sustainable Finance ( email )

2 Rue de Spa
Brussels, 1000
Belgium

Stefan Zeume

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ( email )

1206 South Sixth Street
Champaign, IL 61820
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
641
Abstract Views
4,085
rank
40,550
PlumX Metrics