IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apfiec/v16y2006i4p291-302.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disappearing anomalies: a dynamic analysis of the persistence of anomalies

Author

Listed:
  • Wessel Marquering
  • Johan Nisser
  • Toni Valla

Abstract

This study examines several well-known stock market anomalies before and after they were published. If the anomalies are a result of data snooping or data crunching, these are expected to disappear in the data soon after they have been reported. Moreover, increased awareness of anomalies among investors will diminish possible profits as more investors will trade based on these anomalies. Employing dynamic analyses, strong evidence is found that the weekend effect, the holiday effect, the time-of-the-month effect and the January effect have disappeared after these anomalies have been published. The turn-of-the-month effect seems still present, whereas the small firm effect has recently resurrected. The timing of disappearing or reappearing anomalies typically often coincides with the timing of academic publications.

Suggested Citation

  • Wessel Marquering & Johan Nisser & Toni Valla, 2006. "Disappearing anomalies: a dynamic analysis of the persistence of anomalies," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 291-302.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apfiec:v:16:y:2006:i:4:p:291-302
    DOI: 10.1080/09603100500400361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09603100500400361
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keim, Donald B & Stambaugh, Robert F, 1984. " A Further Investigation of the Weekend Effect in Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(3), pages 819-835, July.
    2. Fama, Eugene F & French, Kenneth R, 1992. " The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 427-465, June.
    3. Lakonishok, Josef & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. " Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(5), pages 1541-1578, December.
    4. Cadsby, Charles Bram & Ratner, Mitchell, 1992. "Turn-of-month and pre-holiday effects on stock returns: Some international evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 497-509, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Marquering, Wessel & Verbeek, Marno, 2004. "The Economic Value of Predicting Stock Index Returns and Volatility," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(02), pages 407-429, June.
    7. Chang, Eric C. & Michael Pinegar, J. & Ravichandran, R., 1998. "US day-of-the-week effects and asymmetric responses to macroeconomic news," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 513-534, May.
    8. Honghui Chen & Vijay Singal, 2003. "Role of Speculative Short Sales in Price Formation: The Case of the Weekend Effect," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 685-706, April.
    9. Brian Lucey & Angel Pardo, 2005. "Why investors should not be cautious about the academic approach to testing for stock market anomalies," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 165-171.
    10. Rozeff, Michael S. & Kinney, William Jr., 1976. "Capital market seasonality: The case of stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 379-402, October.
    11. Kunkel, Robert A. & Compton, William S. & Beyer, Scott, 2003. "The turn-of-the-month effect still lives: the international evidence," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 207-221.
    12. French, Kenneth R., 1980. "Stock returns and the weekend effect," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 55-69, March.
    13. Connolly, Robert A., 1989. "An Examination of the Robustness of the Weekend Effect," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(02), pages 133-169, June.
    14. Paul Brockman & David Michayluk, 1998. "The persistent holiday effect: additional evidence," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 205-209.
    15. Philip Hans Franses & Richard Paap, 2000. "Modelling day-of-the-week seasonality in the S&P 500 index," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 483-488.
    16. Gultekin, Mustafa N. & Gultekin, N. Bulent, 1983. "Stock market seasonality : International Evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 469-481, December.
    17. Ariel, Robert A., 1987. "A monthly effect in stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 161-174, March.
    18. Seyed Mehdian & Mark Perry, 2002. "Anomalies in US equity markets: a re-examination of the January effect," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 141-145.
    19. Kim, Chan-Wung & Park, Jinwoo, 1994. "Holiday Effects and Stock Returns: Further Evidence," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(01), pages 145-157, March.
    20. Gibbons, Michael R & Hess, Patrick, 1981. "Day of the Week Effects and Asset Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 579-596, October.
    21. Chang, Eric C. & Pinegar, J. Michael & Ravichandran, R., 1993. "International Evidence on the Robustness of the Day-of-the-Week Effect," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(04), pages 497-513, December.
    22. repec:hrv:faseco:30721347 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:apfiec:v:16:y:2006:i:4:p:291-302. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAFE20 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.