Why investors should not be cautious about the academic approach to testing for stock market anomalies
The ability of investors to implement seasonal strategies implied by academic papers has been widely criticized, most recently by Hudson et al. (Applied Financial Economics, 12, 681-86, 2002). This paper addresses these concerns, and provides an example of a strategy derived from academic papers that indicates how and to what profitability such a strategy can be implemented. In particular, the pre-holiday anomaly is examined, where returns tend to be higher on the day before a holiday. After checking that the pre-holiday return compensates market frictions, the existence and the changing nature of such anomaly is tested. Finally, the profitability of the pre-holiday trading strategy in an out-of-the-sample period is assessed by checking that the pre-holiday profit is clearly different from the result an investor would obtain on a set of randomly selected days. This evidence is provided for three large stocks and an index in two different markets, Spain and Ireland.
Volume (Year): 15 (2005)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAFE20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAFE20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Robert Hudson & Kevin Keasey & Kevin Littler, 2002. "Why investors should be cautious of the academic approach to testing for stock market anomalies," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(9), pages 681-686.
- David Hirshleifer & Tyler Shumway, 2003.
"Good Day Sunshine: Stock Returns and the Weather,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 58(3), pages 1009-1032, 06.
- Paul Brockman & David Michayluk, 1998. "The persistent holiday effect: additional evidence," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 205-209.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:apfiec:v:15:y:2005:i:3:p:165-171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.