Abstract
U.S. stock portfolios sorted on size; momentum; transaction costs; market-to-book, investment-to-assets, and return-on-assets (ROA) ratios; and industry classification show considerable levels and variation of return predictability, inconsistent with asset pricing models. This means that a predictable risk premium is not equal to compensation for systematic risk as implied by asset pricing theory. We show that introducing market frictions relaxes these asset pricing moments from a strict equality to a range. Empirically, it is not short sales constraints but transaction costs (below 35 basis points) that help to reconcile the observed predictability with linear portfolio return-based factor models, and partly with the durable consumption model. Across the sorts, predictability in industry returns can be reconciled with all models considered with only a 25 basis point transaction cost, whereas for momentum and ROA portfolios, up to 115 basis points are needed
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1916-1932 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Management Science |
| Volume | 58 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Bibliographical note
Presented at the 2009 WFA in San Diego.Research programs
- RSM F&A
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Asset Pricing Restrictions on Predictability: Frictions Matter'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver