IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/raaexx/v30y2023i2p514-530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evaluation and comparison of three benchmark asset pricing models with daily data: supplementary evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Qi Shi
  • bin li

Abstract

Recent studies advocate two new benchmark models (the Fama-French five-factor model and the Hou, Xue and Zhang four-factor model) with monthly data. Our daily data approach provides considerable supplement to the monthly data approach presented in recent studies. We adopt the advanced bootstrap methodology by replicating the original data sample, and this approach should effectively alleviate the problem of too much noise in the data of daily return. A two-pass cross-sectional regression and GMM with several useful testing statistics are used to more thoroughly diagnose the specifications of the model. The following consistency is observed when using different frequencies of sample data: the evidence indicates that the two newer benchmark models (the Fama-French five-factor model and the Hou, Xue and Zhang four-factor model) outperform the Fama-French three-factor model in estimating a few well-known portfolios (formed on different anomalies). However, several specification tests do not robustly accept the correct specifications of the Fama-French five-factor model and the Hou, Xue and Zhang four-factor model.

Suggested Citation

  • Qi Shi & bin li, 2023. "The evaluation and comparison of three benchmark asset pricing models with daily data: supplementary evidence," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 514-530, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:raaexx:v:30:y:2023:i:2:p:514-530
    DOI: 10.1080/16081625.2020.1787851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/16081625.2020.1787851
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/16081625.2020.1787851?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:raaexx:v:30:y:2023:i:2:p:514-530. 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/raae20 .

    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.