是什么驱动异常回报?

Lars Lochstoer, Paul C. Tetlock
{"title":"是什么驱动异常回报?","authors":"Lars Lochstoer, Paul C. Tetlock","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2808182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We provide novel evidence on which theories best explain stock return anomalies. Our estimates reveal whether anomaly returns arise from variation in the underlying firms' cash flows or their discount rates. For each of five well-known anomalies, we find that cash flow shocks explain more variation in anomaly returns than discount rate shocks. The cash flow and discount rate components of each anomaly's returns are negatively correlated. Most correlations between anomaly and market return components are small. Our evidence is inconsistent with theories of time-varying risk aversion and theories of common shocks to investor sentiment. It is most consistent with theories in which investors overextrapolate firm-specific cash flow news and those in which firm risk increases following negative cash flow news.","PeriodicalId":365642,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Behavioral Finance (Microeconomics) (Topic)","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Drives Anomaly Returns?\",\"authors\":\"Lars Lochstoer, Paul C. Tetlock\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2808182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We provide novel evidence on which theories best explain stock return anomalies. Our estimates reveal whether anomaly returns arise from variation in the underlying firms' cash flows or their discount rates. For each of five well-known anomalies, we find that cash flow shocks explain more variation in anomaly returns than discount rate shocks. The cash flow and discount rate components of each anomaly's returns are negatively correlated. Most correlations between anomaly and market return components are small. Our evidence is inconsistent with theories of time-varying risk aversion and theories of common shocks to investor sentiment. It is most consistent with theories in which investors overextrapolate firm-specific cash flow news and those in which firm risk increases following negative cash flow news.\",\"PeriodicalId\":365642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Behavioral Finance (Microeconomics) (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"88 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Behavioral Finance (Microeconomics) (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2808182\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Behavioral Finance (Microeconomics) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2808182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

我们为哪些理论最能解释股票收益异常提供了新的证据。我们的估计揭示了异常回报是否来自基础公司现金流或其贴现率的变化。对于五种众所周知的异常,我们发现现金流冲击比贴现率冲击更能解释异常回报的变化。每个异常收益的现金流和贴现率成分呈负相关。大多数异常与市场回报成分之间的相关性很小。我们的证据与时变风险厌恶理论和投资者情绪共同冲击理论不一致。这与投资者过度推断公司特定现金流消息的理论以及负现金流消息后公司风险增加的理论最为一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What Drives Anomaly Returns?
We provide novel evidence on which theories best explain stock return anomalies. Our estimates reveal whether anomaly returns arise from variation in the underlying firms' cash flows or their discount rates. For each of five well-known anomalies, we find that cash flow shocks explain more variation in anomaly returns than discount rate shocks. The cash flow and discount rate components of each anomaly's returns are negatively correlated. Most correlations between anomaly and market return components are small. Our evidence is inconsistent with theories of time-varying risk aversion and theories of common shocks to investor sentiment. It is most consistent with theories in which investors overextrapolate firm-specific cash flow news and those in which firm risk increases following negative cash flow news.
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