To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
2 results ✕ Clear filters

Detecting Repeatable Performance

Review of Financial Studies 2018 31(7), 2499-2552
Past fund performance does a poor job of predicting future outcomes. The reason is noise. Using a random effects framework, we reduce the noise by pooling information from the cross-sectional alpha distribution to make density forecasts for each individual fund’s alpha. In simulations, we show that our method generates parameter estimates that outperform alternative methods, both at the population and at the individual fund level. An out-of-sample forecasting exercise also shows that our method generates improved alpha forecasts. Received November 23, 2016; editorial decision November 1, 2017 by Editor Andrew Karolyi.

… and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Review of Financial Studies 2016 29(1), 5-68 open access
Hundreds of papers and factors attempt to explain the cross-section of expected returns. Given this extensive data mining, it does not make sense to use the usual criteria for establishing significance. Which hurdle should be used for current research? Our paper introduces a new multiple testing framework and provides historical cutoffs from the first empirical tests in 1967 to today. A new factor needs to clear a much higher hurdle, with a t-statistic greater than 3.0. We argue that most claimed research findings in financial economics are likely false.