Abstract
Academic and practitioner research evaluates portfolio performance using size and value/growth attributes or factors. We assess the merits of popular evaluation procedures based on matched-characteristic benchmark portfolios or time-series return regressions by applying them to a sample of active money managers and passive indexes. Estimated abnormal returns display large variation across approaches. The benchmarks typically used in academic research - attribute-matched portfolios from independent sorts, the three-factor time-series model, and cross-sectional regressions of returns on stock characteristics - track returns poorly. Some simple alterations improve the performance of these methods.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 4553-4599 |
Number of pages | 47 |
Journal | Review of Financial Studies |
Volume | 22 |
Issue number | 11 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 2009 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Accounting
- Finance
- Economics and Econometrics