IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/rqfnac/v55y2020i4d10.1007_s11156-020-00878-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection bias and pseudo discoveries on the constancy of stock return anomalies

Author

Listed:
  • Russell P. Robins

    (Tulane University)

  • Geoffrey Peter Smith

    (Arizona State University)

Abstract

There are now a large and rapidly growing number of studies that test the constancy of stock return anomalies. In this study, we produce new and convincing evidence that the standard constancy test is heavily influenced by selection bias. Backed by a carefully designed Monte Carlo simulation, we show that selection bias predisposes the standard constancy test to reject the null by a factor of five to 12 times more than normally expected. Failure to recognize this bias can result in publication of the type of pseudo discoveries that Harvey (J Finance 72(4):1399–1440, 2017) warns about in his Presidential Address to the American Finance Association. We then describe the Quandt/Andrews test, a correct and unbiased test for anomalies and changes in anomalies, and apply it to test the constancy of 15 well-known stock return anomalies.

Suggested Citation

  • Russell P. Robins & Geoffrey Peter Smith, 2020. "Selection bias and pseudo discoveries on the constancy of stock return anomalies," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1407-1426, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:55:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s11156-020-00878-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11156-020-00878-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-020-00878-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11156-020-00878-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. "The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    2. Lakonishok, Josef & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. "Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(5), pages 1541-1578, December.
    3. Zeileis, Achim & Leisch, Friedrich & Hornik, Kurt & Kleiber, Christian, 2002. "strucchange: An R Package for Testing for Structural Change in Linear Regression Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 7(i02).
    4. Novy-Marx, Robert, 2013. "The other side of value: The gross profitability premium," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-28.
    5. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Cohen, Alma & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2013. "Learning and the disappearing association between governance and returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 323-348.
    6. Juhani T Linnainmaa & Michael R Roberts, 2018. "The History of the Cross-Section of Stock Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2606-2649.
    7. Zeileis, Achim & Kleiber, Christian & Kramer, Walter & Hornik, Kurt, 2003. "Testing and dating of structural changes in practice," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 109-123, October.
    8. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 817-858, May.
    9. Schwert, G. William, 2003. "Anomalies and market efficiency," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 15, pages 939-974, Elsevier.
    10. Dan Ben-David & David H. Papell, 1998. "Slowdowns And Meltdowns: Postwar Growth Evidence From 74 Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 561-571, November.
    11. Margaret M. McConnell & Gabriel Perez-Quiros, 2000. "Output fluctuations in the United States: what has changed since the early 1980s?," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Mar.
    12. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan, 1990. "Evidence of Predictable Behavior of Security Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(3), pages 881-898, July.
    13. Donald W. K. Andrews, 2003. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point: A Corrigendum," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 395-397, January.
    14. Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 821-856, July.
    15. Campbell R. Harvey, 2017. "Presidential Address: The Scientific Outlook in Financial Economics," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1399-1440, August.
    16. Michael J. Cooper & Huseyin Gulen & Michael J. Schill, 2008. "Asset Growth and the Cross‐Section of Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1609-1651, August.
    17. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:6:p:2029-2057 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Haugen, Robert A. & Heins, A. James, 1975. "Risk and the Rate of Return on Financial Assets: Some Old Wine in New Bottles," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(5), pages 775-784, December.
    19. Robins, Russell P. & Smith, Geoffrey Peter, 2016. "No More Weekend Effect," Critical Finance Review, now publishers, vol. 5(2), pages 417-424, December.
    20. G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), 2003. "Handbook of the Economics of Finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    21. French, Kenneth R., 1980. "Stock returns and the weekend effect," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 55-69, March.
    22. Banz, Rolf W., 1981. "The relationship between return and market value of common stocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 3-18, March.
    23. Hansen, Bruce E, 1997. "Approximate Asymptotic P Values for Structural-Change Tests," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(1), pages 60-67, January.
    24. R. David Mclean & Jeffrey Pontiff, 2016. "Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(1), pages 5-32, February.
    25. Chordia, Tarun & Subrahmanyam, Avanidhar & Tong, Qing, 2014. "Have capital market anomalies attenuated in the recent era of high liquidity and trading activity?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 41-58.
    26. Bruce E. Hansen, 2001. "The New Econometrics of Structural Change: Dating Breaks in U.S. Labour Productivity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 117-128, Fall.
    27. Andrews, Donald W K & Ploberger, Werner, 1994. "Optimal Tests When a Nuisance Parameter Is Present Only under the Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1383-1414, November.
    28. De Bondt, Werner F M & Thaler, Richard, 1985. "Does the Stock Market Overreact?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 793-805, July.
    29. Andrew Ang & Robert J. Hodrick & Yuhang Xing & Xiaoyan Zhang, 2006. "The Cross‐Section of Volatility and Expected Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(1), pages 259-299, February.
    30. Greenstone, Michael & Oyer, Paul, 2000. "Are There Sectoral Anomalies Too? The Pitfalls of Unreported Multiple Hypothesis Testing and a Simple Solution," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 37-55, July.
    31. Stock, James H & Watson, Mark W, 1996. "Evidence on Structural Instability in Macroeconomic Time Series Relations," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 14(1), pages 11-30, January.
    32. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
    33. Basu, S, 1977. "Investment Performance of Common Stocks in Relation to Their Price-Earnings Ratios: A Test of the Efficient Market Hypothesis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(3), pages 663-682, June.
    34. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-636, May-June.
    35. Gibbons, Michael R & Hess, Patrick, 1981. "Day of the Week Effects and Asset Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 579-596, October.
    36. Eugene F. Fama & Kenneth R. French, 2016. "Dissecting Anomalies with a Five-Factor Model," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 69-103.
    37. Narasimhan Jegadeesh & Sheridan Titman, 2001. "Profitability of Momentum Strategies: An Evaluation of Alternative Explanations," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(2), pages 699-720, April.
    38. G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), 2003. "Handbook of the Economics of Finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 2.
    39. repec:bla:jfinan:v:44:y:1989:i:1:p:135-48 is not listed on IDEAS
    40. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan & Titman, Sheridan, 1993. "Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(1), pages 65-91, March.
    41. Debarati Bhattacharya & Wei-Hsien Li & Gokhan Sonaer, 2017. "Has momentum lost its momentum?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 191-218, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, July.
    2. Stephen A. Gorman & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2021. "The ABC’s of the alternative risk premium: academic roots," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(6), pages 405-436, October.
    3. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam & Bianchi, Robert J. & Pham, Nga, 2021. "False discoveries in the anomaly research: New insights from the Stock Exchange of Melbourne (1927–1987)," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Tobek, Ondrej & Hronec, Martin, 2021. "Does it pay to follow anomalies research? Machine learning approach with international evidence," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    5. Joachim Freyberger & Andreas Neuhierl & Michael Weber, 2020. "Dissecting Characteristics Nonparametrically," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(5), pages 2326-2377.
    6. Hou, Kewei & Xue, Chen & Zhang, Lu, 2017. "Replicating Anomalies," Working Paper Series 2017-10, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    7. Vincent, Kendro & Hsu, Yu-Chin & Lin, Hsiou-Wei, 2021. "Investment styles and the multiple testing of cross-sectional stock return predictability," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    8. Lou, Dong & Polk, Christopher & Skouras, Spyros, 2019. "A tug of war: Overnight versus intraday expected returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 192-213.
    9. Auer, Benjamin R. & Rottmann, Horst, 2019. "Have capital market anomalies worldwide attenuated in the recent era of high liquidity and trading activity?," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 61-79.
    10. Asness, Clifford & Frazzini, Andrea & Israel, Ronen & Moskowitz, Tobias J. & Pedersen, Lasse H., 2018. "Size matters, if you control your junk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 479-509.
    11. Amit Goyal, 2012. "Empirical cross-sectional asset pricing: a survey," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 26(1), pages 3-38, March.
    12. Kaplanski, Guy, 2023. "The race to exploit anomalies and the cost of slow trading," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    13. Doron Avramov & Guy Kaplanski & Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 2022. "Postfundamentals Price Drift in Capital Markets: A Regression Regularization Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(10), pages 7658-7681, October.
    14. Skočir, Matevž & Lončarski, Igor, 2018. "Multi-factor asset pricing models: Factor construction choices and the revisit of pricing factors," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 65-80.
    15. Nettayanun, Sampan, 2023. "Asset pricing in bull and bear markets," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    16. Jozef Barunik & Martin Hronec & Ondrej Tobek, 2024. "Predicting the distributions of stock returns around the globe in the era of big data and learning," Papers 2408.07497, arXiv.org.
    17. Jansen, Maarten & Swinkels, Laurens & Zhou, Weili, 2021. "Anomalies in the China A-share market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Hanauer, Matthias X. & Lauterbach, Jochim G., 2019. "The cross-section of emerging market stock returns," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 265-286.
    19. Waszczuk, Antonina, 2013. "A risk-based explanation of return patterns—Evidence from the Polish stock market," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 186-210.
    20. Hoang, Khoa & Cannavan, Damien & Gaunt, Clive & Huang, Ronghong, 2019. "Is that factor just lucky? Australian evidence," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Selection bias; Stock return anomaly; Constancy test;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G19 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:55:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s11156-020-00878-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.