Approximate Factor Structures: Interpretations and Implications for Empirical Tests

This paper provides some new insights about approximate factor structures, as defined by Chamberlain and Rothschild [2], and their implications for empirical tests. First, we show that any economy that satisfies an approximate factor structure can be transformed, in a manner that does not alter the characteristics of investor portfolios, into an economy that satisfies an exact factor structure, as defined by Ross [9]. Second, we show that principal components analysis represents just one of many methods of forming groups of well-diversified portfolios with no idiosyncratic risk in large samples. Correct factor loadings will be obtained by regressing security returns on any group of these portfolios. Our interpretations of the Chamberlain and Rothschild results also provide additional insights into the testability of the Arbitrage Pricing Theory. We show that securities cannot be repackaged to hide factors in the manner suggested by Shanken [10] without the variance of some of the repackaged securities approaching infinity in large economies.     

An Empirical Test of the Arbitrage Pricing Theory on Australian Stock Returns 1974-85

This paper examines empirically, issues concerning the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT). Firstly, in the spirit of Chamberlain and Rothschild [1983], the existence of an approximate factor structure is explored. Secondly, following Beggs [1986] and employing a principal components approach, a test of arbitrage pricing and the importance of the error of approximation, is conducted. Finally, using a non nested framework, the APT and CAPM are tested against each other. The results show mixed support for the APT having up to 3 priced factors.     

Evaluating the Performance of Ethical and Non‐ethical Funds: A Matched Pair Analysis

Abstract:   This paper studies the performance of 60 European funds from four countries. The paper extends the UK matched pair approach for fund evaluation developed by Mallin et al. (1995) to a European setting. The findings suggest that there is no difference between ethical and non‐ethical funds according to the performance measures employed. Neither type of fund displayed any ability to time the market. Finally, the results indicate that the management fee is a significant explanatory variable for the Jensen measure as Chen et al. (1992) and Grinblatt and Titman (1994) suggested.     

Benchmark Invariancy,Seasonality and APM-Free Portfolio Performance Measures

The Jobson-Korkie (1981) Z score and the positive period weighting (PPW) score of Grinblatt and Titman (1989) are applied to various benchmarks of market and mimicking portfolios to study the benchmark invariancy problem. Significantly different portfolio performance inferences are found for a sample of 146 equity mutual funds depending on the mean-variance efficiency of the portfolio benchmarks (mimicking portfolios versus market indices). Portfolio performance inferences are affected significantly by the number of factors, nonsynchronous trading adjustment, and the sizes of the firms used for factor extraction. The returns of the portfolio benchmarks exhibit significant monthly seasonalities, which, in turn, significantly influence mutual fund performance inferences.     

The 52-week high momentum strategy in international stock markets

We study the 52-week high momentum strategy in international stock markets proposed by George and Hwang [George, T., Hwang, C.Y., 2004. The 52-week high and momentum investing. Journal of Finance 59, 2145-2176.]. This strategy produces profits in 18 of the 20 markets studied, and the profits are significant in 10 markets. The 52-week high momentum profits exist independently from the Jegadeesh and Titman [Jegadeesh, N., Titman, S., 1993. Returns to buying winners and selling losers: implications for market efficiency. Journal of Finance 48, 65-91.] individual stock and Moskowitz and Grinblatt [Moskowitz, T.J., Grinblatt, M., 1999. Do industries explain momentum? Journal of Finance 54, 1249-1290] industry momentum strategies. These profits do not show reversals in the long run. We find that the 52-week high is a better predictor of future returns than macroeconomic risk factors or the acquisition price. The individualism index, a proxy to the level of overconfidence, has no explanatory power to the variations of the 52-week high momentum profits across different markets. However, the profits are no longer significant in most markets once transaction costs are taken into account.     

Evaluating the Performance of International Mutual Funds

In this paper, we examine the performance of a sample of fifteen U.S.-based internationally diversified mutual funds between 1982 and 1988. Two performance measures are used, the Jensen measure and the positive period weighting measure proposed by Grinblatt and Titman. We find no evidence that the funds, either individually or as a whole, provide investors with performance that surpasses that of a broad, international equity index over this sample period.     

Conditional performance measurement using portfolio weights: evidence for pension funds

This paper combines the use of portfolio holdings data and conditioning information to create a new performance measure. Our conditional weight-based measure has several advantages. Using conditioning information avoids biases in weight-based measures as discussed by Grinblatt and Titman (J. Business 60 (1993)). When conditioning information is used, returns-based measures face a bias if managers can trade between observation dates. The new measures avoid this interim trading bias. We use the new measures to provide fresh insights about performance in a sample of U.S. equity pension fund managers.     

The Performance of Actively Managed International Mutual Funds

International mutual funds allow individual investors to diversify abroad at a reasonable cost. This paper tests whether international funds that actively engage in country and security selection outperform passive global benchmarks. We apply a mean-variance efficiency test that incorporates the practical prohibition against short sales of open-end mutual funds. Our tests reject the efficiency of the world equity market portfolio over the sample period, and our funds as a group outperform the inefficient world index. However, we find no evidence of security selectivity ability using a 12-country benchmark. We do find that active international funds provide global diversification benefits. Tests using the Positive Period Weight (PPW) measure of Grinblatt and Titman (1989), which is robust to nonlinearity in fund and benchmark returns, yield similar results.     

Asset Pricing Specification Errorsand Performance Evaluation

Many evaluation techniques typically measure performance as deviations of average returns on actively managed funds from those predicted by some asset pricing model. Empirical evidence, however,has so far suggested that all asset pricing models lack empiricalsupport, implying that the models contain mis-specification errors tovarious degrees. Evaluating mutual fund performance relative to any of these models thus becomes problematic.In this paper, we propose an approach to performancemeasurement that emphasizes minimizing explicitly the pricing error associated with an asset pricing function which isemployed to compute performance measures. This approachis henceforth called the minimum specification-error (MSE) method. We also discuss the statistical properties for implementing MSE performance measures.To demonstrate the significance of the pricing errorconfounded in evaluation measurement, we contrast our methodology with the Grinblatt and Titman (1989) period weighting approach and with the empirical implementation of Chen and Knez(1996). We find that the greater the pricing error ofpassive assets, the larger the performance measures. Given the average pricing error generated from a collection of 163 diverse passive portfolios used in this analysis, the performance values assigned to a large number of the funds become statistically and economically insignificant.     

Asset Pricing Specification Errors and Performance Evaluation

Many evaluation techniques typically measure performance asdeviations of average returns on actively managed funds fromthose predicted by some asset pricing model. Empirical evidence,however, has so far suggested that all asset pricing modelslack empirical support, implying that the models contain mis-specificationerrors to various degrees. Evaluating mutual fund performancerelative to any of these models thus becomes problematic. Inthis paper, we propose an approach to performance measurementthat emphasizes minimizing explicitly the pricing error associatedwith an asset pricing function which is employed to computeperformance measures. This approach is henceforth called theminimum specification-error (MSE) method. We also discuss thestatistical properties for implementing MSE performance measure.To demonstrate the significance of the pricing error confoundedin evaluation measurement, we contrast our methodology withthe Grinblatt and Titman (1989) period weighting approach andwith the empirical implementation of Chen and Knez (1996). Wefind that the greater the pricing error of passive assets, thelarger the performance measures. Given the average pricing errorgenerated from a collection of 163 diverse passive portfoliosused in this analysis the performance values assigned to a largenumber of the funds become statistically and economically insignificant.     

Does Stock Return Momentum Explain the “Smart Money” Effect?

Does the “smart money” effect documented by Gruber (1996) and Zheng (1999) reflect fund selection ability of mutual fund investors? We examine the finding that investors are able to predict mutual fund performance and invest accordingly. We show that the smart money effect is explained by the stock return momentum phenomenon documented by Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) . Further evidence suggests investors do not select funds based on a momentum investing style, but rather simply chase funds that were recent winners. Our finding that a common factor in stock returns explains the smart money effect offers no affirmation of investor fund selection ability.     

Stock Return Predictability of Residual‐Income‐Based Valuation: Risk or Mispricing?

In an influential paper, Frankel and Lee (1998) conclude that the stock return predictability of the value‐to‐price ratio (V/P) results from market mispricing. This paper confirms whether the V/P reflects the rational risk premiums associated with the V/P factor or is better explained by market inefficiency. Following Daniel and Titman (1997), this paper examines whether the V/P characteristics or the V/P factor loadings predict stock returns. The findings show that the V/P loadings are positively associated with average returns even after controlling for the V/P characteristics in both time series and cross‐sectional tests. The overall results suggest that the mispricing explanation of the V/P effect is premature.     

Informed momentum trading versus uninformed “naive” investors strategies

We construct a zero net-worth uninformed “naive investor” who uses a random portfolio allocation strategy. We then compare the returns of the momentum strategist to the return distribution of naive investors. For this purpose we reward momentum profits relative to the return percentiles of the naive investors with scores that are symmetric around the median. The score function thus constructed is invariant and robust to risk factor models. We find that the average scores of the momentum strategies are close to zero (the score of the median) and statistically insignificant over the sample period between 1926 and 2005, various sub-sample periods including the periods examined in [Jegadeesh and Titman, 1993] and [Jegadeesh and Titman, 2001] . The findings are robust with respect to sampling or period-specific effects, tightened score intervals, and the imposition of maximum-weight restrictions on the naive strategies to mitigate market friction considerations.     

Unravelling vs Unravelling: A Memo on Competitive Equilibriums and Trade in Insurance Markets

Both Akerlof (1970) and Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976) show that insurance markets may “unravel”. This memo clarifies the distinction between these two notions of unravelling in the context of a binary loss model of insurance. I show that the two concepts are mutually exclusive occurrences. Moreover, I provide a regularity condition under which the two concepts are exhaustive of the set of possible occurrences in the model. Akerlof unravelling characterises when there are no gains to trade; Rothschild and Stiglitz unravelling shows that the standard notion of competition (pure strategy Nash equilibrium) is inadequate to describe the workings of insurance markets when there are gains to trade.     

Sponsor Backing in Asian REIT IPOs

This paper tests the significance of sponsors in REIT IPOs viz-a-viz quality certification, signal of firm value, and commitment to alleviate moral hazard concerns. We model the REIT pricing and sponsor share retention decisions within a simultaneous decision framework as motivated by Grinblatt and Hwang (Journal of Finance 44:393–420, 1989). We find positive and significant bidirectional relationship between the fraction of shares held by the sponsor in IPO and underpricing which is consistent with Grinblatt and Hwang’s (Journal of Finance 44:393–420, 1989) signaling model. Our results also support the commitment hypothesis that developers that spin off REITs tend to hold more shares at IPO, possibly to compensate investors for the potential moral hazard problems in the aftermarket.     

UK Evidence on the Characteristics versus Covariance Debate

We evaluate the Fama–French three‐factor model in the UK using the approach of Daniel and Titman (1997) to determine whether characteristics or covariance risk better explains the size and value premiums. Across all three factors, we find that return premiums bear little relationship to the corresponding loadings. We show that small and value stocks earn higher returns irrespective of their return covariance. Our study contributes to the existing literature by reporting original findings on the Fama–French three‐factor model in the UK and by reporting results that complement existing evidence from similar studies in the USA and Japan.     

Buyer–Supplier Relationships and the Stakeholder Theory of Capital Structure

Firms in bilateral relationships are likely to produce or procure unique products—especially when they are in durable goods industries. Consistent with the arguments of Titman and Titman and Wessels, such firms are likely to maintain lower leverage. We compile a database of firms' principal customers (those that account for at least 10% of sales or are otherwise considered important for business) from the Business Information File of Compustat and find results consistent with the predictions of this theory.     

Momentum profits in the Australian equity market: A matched firm approach

This paper examines momentum trading strategies within the Australian equity market over the period 1990 to 2007, inclusive. We analyse excess returns employing both Jegadeesh and Titman's (Jegadeesh, N., Titman, S., 1993. “Returns to buying winners and selling losers: implications for stock market efficiency”. The Journal of Finance, 48:65–91) zero cost investment portfolio approach and a matched control firm approach. We also allow for short sale restrictions, liquidity constraints and transaction costs in the form of bid-ask spreads. Testing reveals that both the Jegadeesh and Titman (Jegadeesh, N., and Titman, S. (1993). “Returns to buying winners and selling losers: implications for stock market efficiency”. The Journal of Finance, 48:65–91.) zero cost investment portfolio approach and the matched control firm approach yield excess profits. While the implementation of short sale restraints increases momentum profitability, the subsequent inclusion of bid-ask spreads results in a reduction in these gains. Further, we find that executing a momentum strategy in Australia results in statistically significant dollar profits.     

A Comparison of the Efficacy of Liquidity,Momentum, Size and Book‐to‐Market Value Factors in Equity Pricing on a Heterogeneous Sample: Evidence from Asia

This paper compares the size and book‐to‐market value factors of Fama and French (1993) alongside Momentum of Jagadeesh and Titman ( 1993 ) with two Liu ( 2006 ) liquidity factors formed from 1 year rebalancing and 1 month rebalancing respectively. A heterogeneous and comprehensive sample of the top blue chip stocks of all national Asian equity markets with further differentiation undertaken between sub samples formed for Japan only and Asia excluding Japan for period January 2000 to August 2014. Our empirical results suggest that multifactor time invariant pricing models based on augmented capital asset pricing model (CAPM) framework are ineffective in explaining the cross section of stock returns in the presence of significant inter and intra‐market segmentation. However an alternative model specification based on a time varying parameter specification and using same sets of factors yields significant enhancements in explaining cross section of stock returns across universe. We find that momentum factor largely lacks significance while a time varying two factor model, based on CAPM plus liquidity factor, is optimal. The liquidity factor being that of Liu (2006) and annually rebalanced. Our findings are important for investment managers seeking appropriate factors and modelling techniques to hedge against risks as well as firm's financial managers seeking to reduce costs of equity capital.     

Momentum in Australian style portfolios: risk or inefficiency?

Momentum strategies have been reported to be successful across a range of different markets and asset classes. Three possible explanations for momentum have been hypothesised: risk, return continuation and excessive co‐movement of stock returns compared with dividends. Lewellen (2002) adds to this literature by providing evidence of strong momentum returns in style portfolios that can be explained by negative cross‐serial correlation, a result which supports the excess co‐movement hypothesis. We report robust evidence of style momentum in the Australian market and use the Jegadeesh and Titman (1995) return decomposition to show that this momentum strategy is predominately explained by positive autocorrelation. Our results support the return continuation hypothesis and confirm Chen and Hong's (2002) assertion that Lewellen's (2002) explanation of style momentum returns does not stand up out‐of‐sample.