Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Faculty & Research
  • Faculty
  • Research
  • Featured Topics
  • Academic Units
  • …→
  • Harvard Business School→
  • Faculty & Research→
Publications
Publications
  • 2018
  • Working Paper

Detecting Anomalies: The Relevance and Power of Standard Asset Pricing Tests

By: Malcolm Baker, Patrick Luo and Ryan Taliaferro
  • Format:Print
  • | Language:English
ShareBar

Abstract

The two standard approaches for identifying capital market anomalies are cross-sectional coefficient tests, in the spirit of Fama and MacBeth (1973), and time-series intercept tests, in the spirit of Jensen (1968). A new signal can pass the first test, which we label a “score anomaly,” it can pass the second test as a “factor anomaly,” or it can pass both. We demonstrate the relevance of each to a mean-variance optimizing investor facing simple transaction costs that are constant across stocks. For a risk-neutral investor facing transaction costs, only score anomalies are relevant. For a risk-averse investor facing no transaction costs, only factor anomalies are relevant. In the more general case of risk aversion and transaction costs, both tests matter. In extensions, we derive modified versions of the basic tests that net out anomaly execution costs for situations where the investor faces capital constraints, a multi-period portfolio choice problem, or transaction costs that vary across stocks. Next, we measure the econometric power of the two tests. Time-series factor tests have uniformly lower power than equivalent cross-sectional score tests, with the gap increasing in the in-sample Sharpe ratio of the incumbent factor model. New factor anomalies are successively harder to detect. There is a lower natural limit on the number of anomalies, after which new factors can no longer be verified. Meanwhile, for an investor facing transaction costs, where score anomalies are also applicable, there is a higher natural limit on the number of anomalies that can be statistically validated as relevant.

Keywords

Investment Management; Anomalies; Portfolio Construction; Transaction Costs; Investment; Management; Asset Pricing; Market Transactions; Cost

Citation

Baker, Malcolm, Patrick Luo, and Ryan Taliaferro. "Detecting Anomalies: The Relevance and Power of Standard Asset Pricing Tests." Working Paper, July 2018.
  • Read Now

About The Author

Malcolm P. Baker

Finance
→More Publications

More from the Authors

    • 2022
    • Annual Review of Financial Economics

    The Pricing and Ownership of U.S. Green Bonds

    By: Malcolm Baker, Daniel Bergstresser, George Serafeim and Jeffrey Wurgler
    • November 2022 (Revised May 2023)
    • Faculty Research

    Dicerna

    By: Malcolm Baker, Ishita Sen and Jonathan Wallen
    • 2022
    • Faculty Research

    How Do Investors Value ESG?

    By: Malcolm Baker, Mark Egan and Suproteem K. Sarkar
More from the Authors
  • The Pricing and Ownership of U.S. Green Bonds By: Malcolm Baker, Daniel Bergstresser, George Serafeim and Jeffrey Wurgler
  • Dicerna By: Malcolm Baker, Ishita Sen and Jonathan Wallen
  • How Do Investors Value ESG? By: Malcolm Baker, Mark Egan and Suproteem K. Sarkar
ǁ
Campus Map
Harvard Business School
Soldiers Field
Boston, MA 02163
→Map & Directions
→More Contact Information
  • Make a Gift
  • Site Map
  • Jobs
  • Harvard University
  • Trademarks
  • Policies
  • Accessibility
  • Digital Accessibility
Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College