Inside the Minds of Expected Stock Returns
SSRN Electronic Journal
2023
- 2,347Usage
- 4Captures
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
Our paper examines sell-side analyst reports and online stock opinion articles, which recommend that investors buy stocks that, based on prior literature, trade at comparatively high prices and earn low future returns. We conduct textual analysis and test whether the justifications provided in these buy recommendations mostly (1) emphasize a stock’s safe-haven quality, (2) indicate general investor exuberance, or (3) point to a specific preference for stocks with high upside potential. We find that the buy recommendations mostly emphasize stocks’ upside potential. Our results suggest that non-traditional investor preferences play a material role in explaining the cross-section of expected stock returns.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know