This paper examines portfolio allocation across equity portfolios formed on the basis of characteristics like size and book-to-market. In particular, the paper assesses the impact of return predictability on portfolio choice for a multi-period investor with a coefficient of relative risk aversion of 4. Compared to the investor's allocation in her last period, return predictability with dividend yield causes the investor early in life to tilt her risky-asset portfolio away from high book-to-market stocks and away from small stocks. These results are explained using Merton's (Econometrica 41 (1973) 867) characterization of portfolio allocation by a multi-period investor in a continuous time setting. Abnormal returns relative to the investor's optimal early life portfolio are also calculated. These abnormal returns are found to exhibit the same cross-sectional patterns as abnormal returns calculated relative to the market portfolio: higher for small rather than large firms, and higher for high rather than low book-to-market firms. Thus, hedging demand may be a partial explanation for the high expected returns documented for small firms and high book-to-market firms. However, even with this hedging demand, the investor wants to sell short the low book-to market portfolio to hold the high book-to-market portfolio. The utility costs of using a value-weighted equity index or of ignoring predictability are also calculated. An investor using a value-weighted equity index would give up a much larger fraction of her wealth to have access to book-to-market portfolio than size portfolios. Finally, an investor would give up a much larger fraction of her wealth to have access to dividend yield information than term spread information.

Young agents with low wealth-income ratios counter factually hold more stock than young, rich agents and old agents using the standard portfolio choice model with i.i.d. stock returns and labor income. This paper matches the countercyclical volatility and procyclical mean of U.S. labor income and finds that, consistent with U.S. data, young, poor agents now hold less stock than both young, rich agents and old agents, and no stock a large fraction of the time. Our results suggest that the predictability of labor income growth at a business-cycle frequency, particularly the countercyclical variation in volatility, plays an important role in a young agent's decision making about her portfolio's stock holding.

We simulate standard tests of performance persistence using alternative return-generating processes, survival criteria, and test methodologies. When survival depends on performance over several periods, survivorship bias induces spurious reversals, despite the presence of cross-sectional heteroskedasticity in performance. Look-ahead biased methodologies and missing final returns typical of U.S. mutual fund datasets can also materially affect persistence measures. Our results reinforce previous findings that U.S. mutual fund performance is truly persistent. When fund performance is truly persistent, fund attrition affects persistence measures, even when the sample includes all nonsurvivor returns. We also examine the specification and power of the various persistence tests.