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

    • January 2022 (Revised January 2022)
    • Faculty Research

    The Impact Developers Fund

    By: Malcolm Baker, Samuel Gregory Hanson, Jonathan Wallen and Zach Komes
    • December 2021 (Revised December 2021)
    • Faculty Research

    Thrive Earlier Detection

    By: Malcolm Baker and William Vrattos
    • August 2020
    • Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis

    Leverage and the Beta Anomaly

    By: Malcolm Baker, Mathias F. Hoeyer and Jeffrey Wurgler
More from the Authors
  • The Impact Developers Fund By: Malcolm Baker, Samuel Gregory Hanson, Jonathan Wallen and Zach Komes
  • Thrive Earlier Detection By: Malcolm Baker and William Vrattos
  • Leverage and the Beta Anomaly By: Malcolm Baker, Mathias F. Hoeyer and Jeffrey Wurgler
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