This is an apparently (?) mainstream econ paper arguing that "value investment" strategies make money because they are contrarian to "naive" strategies, i.e. "dumb money" http://lsvasset.com/pdf/research-papers/Contrarian-Investment-Extrapolation-and-Risk.pdf … .
-
-
The "value effect" is pretty well-accepted in academic circles; some have tried to explain as a rational discount on value stocks, but that the effect exists is the modal view. (This strategy is also closing out one of its worst decades in history - is it still 11% per year?)
-
The paper was 1960’s-1990’s.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Echoing other comments that there is no way in hell this is still 11% a year even if it was true back in the day. If it's 1% that would be very surprising, and it could be an overdone trade due to ETFs and not even be good.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Unfortunately the market is a lot more efficient now. If forced to estimate I'd guess the premium is around 0.1% a year now. Still potentially worthwhile if implemented at scale, and combined with many other things, but nothing like what it was.
-
Even crazier is the momentum factor, which produced steady returns for ~65 years... and then approximately* nothing since (with two massive blow-ups in 2000 and 2009). *Maybe more clever constructions still have some merit, but there is p-hacking risk then.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.