Scholarlink

<p>In this study, we examine the performance difference between robo-advisors of young enterprises and those from established investment firms. We find that robo-advisors from young enterprises underperform compared to their counterparts from established firms, whether using raw returns or risk-adjusted returns as performance measures. The superior performance of established firms’ robo-advisors may be explained by the synergy between machines and experienced asset managers. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, robo-advisors of young enterprises outperformed, which could be explained by their flexibility, adaptability, and innovative capabilities. These findings provide new insights into the dynamics of robo-advisory services and their implications for investors and the financial industry. Our empirical analysis focuses exclusively on companies operating in the United States; therefore, the conclusions should be interpreted within the U.S. institutional and regulatory context.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Robo-advisors of young enterprises vs. robo-advisors of established investment companies: evidence from well-known robo-advisors

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月20日

查看全文
  • Wei Gao,
  • Ming Ju,
  • Shane Landue

摘要

In this study, we examine the performance difference between robo-advisors of young enterprises and those from established investment firms. We find that robo-advisors from young enterprises underperform compared to their counterparts from established firms, whether using raw returns or risk-adjusted returns as performance measures. The superior performance of established firms’ robo-advisors may be explained by the synergy between machines and experienced asset managers. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, robo-advisors of young enterprises outperformed, which could be explained by their flexibility, adaptability, and innovative capabilities. These findings provide new insights into the dynamics of robo-advisory services and their implications for investors and the financial industry. Our empirical analysis focuses exclusively on companies operating in the United States; therefore, the conclusions should be interpreted within the U.S. institutional and regulatory context.