Investing in Stock Market Anomalies
SSRN Electronic Journal
2012
- 3Citations
- 3,551Usage
- 31Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
For the last three decades, one of the most extensively investigated topics in financial economics is the crosssectional variation in stock returns. There are certain patterns in equity portfolios that are considered as anomalies because they cannot be explained by well-known asset pricing models. Each year billions of dollars are invested in portfolios based on anomalies which identify undervalued assets with high expected returns and overvalued assets with low expected returns. However, classical selection rules in financial economics fail to explain this investment behavior. This paper utilizes the almost dominance rules to examine the practice of investing in stock market anomalies. The results indicate that popular investment choices such as value and small stocks do not dominate growth and big stocks, whereas, the short-term reversal and momentum strategies create efficient investment alternatives. The relative strength of undervalued assets becomes more prevalent when the time-varying conditional distributions and broader portfolio comparisons are examined. Hence, the paper solves the wide inconsistency between the common practice in mutual and hedge funds’ asset allocation decision and modern portfolio theory by providing an explanation of investing in an expected utility paradigm.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know