IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/hbhfxx/v15y2014i4p334-340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Credit Crisis and De Nova Mimicking in Security Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Cudd
  • Marcelo Eduardo
  • Lloyd Roberts

Abstract

The failure of the investment community in 2007 to foresee the systematic collapse of the credit default swap market significantly increased the complexity of security analysis and damaged the reputation of the security analyst community in general. submit that in response to the credit crisis, security analysts may have engaged in a de nova form of mimicking by increasing emphasis on general market factors and reducing emphasis on idiosyncratic factors in their valuations, driven by behavioral motives to achieve increased cost efficiency and avoid higher penalties for unfavorable outlier valuations. The result would be increased correlation among security valuations and therefore returns, and diminished benefits of diversification. We test this hypothesis by examining the patterns of security and portfolio returns surrounding the onset of the credit crisis in early 2007 and observe a significant postcrisis increase in the proportion of security and portfolio returns explained by market factors. The findings support the hypothesized shift in emphasis in security analyst valuation techniques, and provide results consistent with the hypothesized behavioral explanations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Cudd & Marcelo Eduardo & Lloyd Roberts, 2014. "The Credit Crisis and De Nova Mimicking in Security Analysis," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 334-340, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:hbhfxx:v:15:y:2014:i:4:p:334-340
    DOI: 10.1080/15427560.2014.968721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/15427560.2014.968721
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/15427560.2014.968721?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:hbhfxx:v:15:y:2014:i:4:p:334-340. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/hbhf .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.