价格动量和52周高动量真正起作用的原因是什么?

Pedro Barroso, Haoxu Wang
{"title":"价格动量和52周高动量真正起作用的原因是什么?","authors":"Pedro Barroso, Haoxu Wang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3716786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After long being one of the main puzzles in asset pricing, momentum has ironically become a case of observational equivalence. It can now be explained both by factors proxying for mispricing and by the investment CAPM. On top of this, q-factor theory also explains the related 52-week-high anomaly. We note that all these recent tests are unconditional exercises while the bulk of momentum profits are predictable and occur after periods of low-volatility. Comparing asset pricing models conditionally, when the strategies actually work, we find the unconditional fit is misleading. The models fit well most of the time but not when the profits are produced. The investment CAPM implies time-varying loadings that are inconsistent with the data. We proxy underreaction with earnings announcement returns and analyst forecast errors and find that it markedly decreases with volatility. This supports an underreaction channel as closer to the heart of both anomalies.","PeriodicalId":377322,"journal":{"name":"Investments eJournal","volume":"278 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Explains Price Momentum and 52-Week High Momentum When They Really Work?\",\"authors\":\"Pedro Barroso, Haoxu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3716786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After long being one of the main puzzles in asset pricing, momentum has ironically become a case of observational equivalence. It can now be explained both by factors proxying for mispricing and by the investment CAPM. On top of this, q-factor theory also explains the related 52-week-high anomaly. We note that all these recent tests are unconditional exercises while the bulk of momentum profits are predictable and occur after periods of low-volatility. Comparing asset pricing models conditionally, when the strategies actually work, we find the unconditional fit is misleading. The models fit well most of the time but not when the profits are produced. The investment CAPM implies time-varying loadings that are inconsistent with the data. We proxy underreaction with earnings announcement returns and analyst forecast errors and find that it markedly decreases with volatility. This supports an underreaction channel as closer to the heart of both anomalies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":377322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Investments eJournal\",\"volume\":\"278 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Investments eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3716786\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investments eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3716786","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

长期以来,动量一直是资产定价的主要难题之一,但具有讽刺意味的是,动量已成为观察等效的一个例子。现在,它可以用定价错误的代理因素和投资CAPM来解释。除此之外,q因子理论也解释了相关的52周高异常。我们注意到,所有这些最近的测试都是无条件的练习,而大部分动量利润是可预测的,并且发生在低波动期之后。有条件地比较资产定价模型,当策略实际起作用时,我们发现无条件拟合具有误导性。这些模型在大多数情况下都适用,但在产生利润的时候就不适用了。投资CAPM隐含与数据不一致的时变负荷。我们用收益公告回报和分析师预测误差来代替反应不足,发现它随波动性显著降低。这支持反应不足通道更接近两个异常的中心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What Explains Price Momentum and 52-Week High Momentum When They Really Work?
After long being one of the main puzzles in asset pricing, momentum has ironically become a case of observational equivalence. It can now be explained both by factors proxying for mispricing and by the investment CAPM. On top of this, q-factor theory also explains the related 52-week-high anomaly. We note that all these recent tests are unconditional exercises while the bulk of momentum profits are predictable and occur after periods of low-volatility. Comparing asset pricing models conditionally, when the strategies actually work, we find the unconditional fit is misleading. The models fit well most of the time but not when the profits are produced. The investment CAPM implies time-varying loadings that are inconsistent with the data. We proxy underreaction with earnings announcement returns and analyst forecast errors and find that it markedly decreases with volatility. This supports an underreaction channel as closer to the heart of both anomalies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信