IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fau/wpaper/wp2018_15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does the Source of Fundamental Data Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Onrej Tobek

    (University of Cambridge, Department of Economics, Austin Robinson Building, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 9DD, UK)

  • Martin Hronec

    (Institute of Economic Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague, Smetanovo nabrezi 6, 111 01 Prague 1, Czech Republic)

Abstract

We study the role of the choice of a fundamental database on the portfolio returns of a set of 74 fundamental anomalies. We benchmark Compustat by comparing it to Datastream in the US and find systematic differences in the raw financial statements across the databases. These differences only have a small effect on the returns of anomalies when they are constructed on stock-months existing in both databases. Different stock coverage across the databases, however, leads to large statistically and economically significant disparities in the returns. Profitability anomalies yield negative returns on the Datastream universe.

Suggested Citation

  • Onrej Tobek & Martin Hronec, 2018. "Does the Source of Fundamental Data Matter?," Working Papers IES 2018/15, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, revised Aug 2018.
    • Handle: RePEc:fau:wpaper:wp2018_15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ies.fsv.cuni.cz/sci/publication/show/id/5857/lang/cs
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam, 2023. "Recency bias and the cross-section of international stock returns," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    2. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam, 2022. "Salience theory and the cross-section of stock returns: International and further evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 689-725.
    3. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam, 2021. "Who should be afraid of infections? Pandemic exposure and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 72(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. Jacobs, Heiko & Müller, Sebastian, 2020. "Anomalies across the globe: Once public, no longer existent?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 213-230.
    6. Mbengue, Mohamed Lamine & Ndiaye, Bara & Sy, Oumar, 2023. "Which factors explain African stock returns?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    7. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam, 2021. "Liquidity and the cross-section of international stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Sadok El Ghoul & Omrane Guedhami & Sattar A. Mansi & Oumar Sy, 2023. "Event studies in international finance research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(2), pages 344-364, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • G15 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - International Financial Markets

    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:fau:wpaper:wp2018_15. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Natalie Svarcova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icunicz.html .

    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.