Is the risk-return paradox still alive?
To date, the validity of empirical Bowman's paradox papers that employ mean-variance approach for testing the risk/return relationship are inherently unverifiable and their results cannot be generalized. However, this problem can be overcome by developing an econometric model with two fundamental characteristics. The first one is the use of a time series model for each firm, avoiding the traditional cross-sectional analysis. The other one is to estimate a model with a single variable (the firm rate of return), but whose expectation and variance are mathematically related according to behavioral theories hypotheses, forming a heterocedastic model similar to "GARCH". Our results agree with behavioral theories and show that these theories can also be carry out with market measures.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2002|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.business.uc3m.es/es/index|
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.:
- 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.
- 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.
- Josef Lakonishok & Robert W. Vishny & Andrei Shleifer, 1993. "Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," NBER Working Papers 4360, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Josef Lakonishok & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1993. "Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 84, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- March, James G., 1988. "Variable risk preferences and adaptive aspirations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 5-24, January.
- Timothy W. Ruefli, 1991. "Reply to Bromiley's Comment and Further Results: Paradox Lost Becomes Dilemma Found," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(9), pages 1210-1215, September.
- Ernst R. Berndt & Bronwyn H. Hall & Robert E. Hall & Jerry A. Hausman, 1974. "Estimation and Inference in Nonlinear Structural Models," NBER Chapters,in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 3, number 4, pages 653-665 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Timothy W. Ruefli, 1990. "Mean-Variance Approaches to Risk-Return Relationships in Strategy: Paradox Lost," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 368-380, March.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Johannes M. Lehner, 2000. "Shifts of Reference Points for Framing of Strategic Decisions and Changing Risk-Return Associations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 63-76, January.
- Fiegenbaum, Avi, 1990. "Prospect theory and the risk-return association : An empirical examination in 85 industries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 187-203, October.
- Gooding, Richard Z. & Goel, Sanjay & Wiseman, Robert M., 1996. "Fixed versus variable reference points in the risk-return relationship," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 331-350, March.
- Nickel, Manuel Núñez & Rodriguez, Manuel Cano, 2002. "A review of research on the negative accounting relationship between risk and return: Bowman's paradox," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-18, February.
- repec:sae:ilrrev:v:43:y:1990:i:3:p:52-73 is not listed on IDEAS
- Jegadeesh, Narasimhan & Titman, Sheridan, 1993. " Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(1), pages 65-91, March.
- Thomas H. Naylor & Francis Tapon, 1982. "The Capital Asset Pricing Model: An Evaluation of its Potential as a Strategic Planning Tool," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(10), pages 1166-1173, October.
- Sinha, Tapen, 1994. "Prospect theory and the risk return association: Another look," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 225-231, July. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cte:wbrepe:wb024818. 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: (Ana Poveda)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.