Appendix Tables for: A Flow-Based Explanation for Return Predictability. Dong Lou London School of Economics

Similar documents
Internet Appendix to Is Information Risk Priced? Evidence from Abnormal Idiosyncratic Volatility

Institutional Ownership and Return Predictability Across Economically Unrelated Stocks Internet Appendix: Robustness Checks

Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance: Analysis of Holdings Returns

Revisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns. Fatma Sonmez 1

Internet Appendix. Table A1: Determinants of VOIB

Realization Utility: Explaining Volatility and Skewness Preferences

Asubstantial portion of the academic

Supplementary Appendix for Outsourcing Mutual Fund Management: Firm Boundaries, Incentives and Performance

Internet Appendix to The Booms and Busts of Beta Arbitrage

Volatility Appendix. B.1 Firm-Specific Uncertainty and Aggregate Volatility

Daily Winners and Losers by Alok Kumar, Stefan Ruenzi, and Michael Ungeheuer

Liquidity Variation and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns *

Momentum, Business Cycle, and Time-varying Expected Returns

Climate Risks and Market Efficiency

The cross section of expected stock returns

An Online Appendix of Technical Trading: A Trend Factor

Return Reversals, Idiosyncratic Risk and Expected Returns

Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Climate Risks and Market Efficiency

Size, Beta, Average Stock Return Relationship, 19 th century Evidence

Daily Data is Bad for Beta: Opacity and Frequency-Dependent Betas Online Appendix

A Multifactor Explanation of Post-Earnings Announcement Drift

Networks of Common Asset Holdings : Aggregation and Measures of Vulnerability

Climate Risks and Market Efficiency

Investor Sophistication and the Mispricing of Accruals

Recency Bias and Post-Earnings Announcement Drift * Qingzhong Ma California State University, Chico. David A. Whidbee Washington State University

Online Appendix. Do Funds Make More When They Trade More?

Trading Costs of Asset Pricing Anomalies Appendix: Additional Empirical Results

Discussion Paper No. DP 07/02

Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Volatility Jump Risk in the Cross-Section of Stock Returns. Yu Li University of Houston. September 29, 2017

Institutional Ownership and Return Predictability Across Economically Unrelated Stocks

Monetary Economics Risk and Return, Part 2. Gerald P. Dwyer Fall 2015

Table 1a (Robustness) Event study of stock returns surrounding announcements of Fortune ranking scores

The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: A Behavioral Explanation

The Effect of Fund Size on Performance:The Evidence from Active Equity Mutual Funds in Thailand

Online Appendix for Overpriced Winners

High Idiosyncratic Volatility and Low Returns: International and Further U.S. Evidence

Market Frictions, Price Delay, and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Internet Appendix Arbitrage Trading: the Long and the Short of It

Online Appendix for. Short-Run and Long-Run Consumption Risks, Dividend Processes, and Asset Returns

Turnover: Liquidity or Uncertainty?

Common Risk Factors in the Cross-Section of Corporate Bond Returns

Crowded Trading. Dong Lou. London School of Economics. Conference on Frontiers of Financial Research. September 8th, 2015

A Portrait of Hedge Fund Investors: Flows, Performance and Smart Money

Internet Appendix for The Joint Cross Section of Stocks and Options *

Industry Concentration and Mutual Fund Performance

Liquidity skewness premium

Online Appendix. Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle

The V-shaped Disposition Effect

Some Features of the Three- and Four- -factor Models for the Selected Portfolios of the Stocks Listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange,

What Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Tell Us About Future Stock Returns? Supplementary Online Appendix

The Information Content of Idiosyncratic Volatility

The Effect of Arbitrage Activity in Low Volatility Strategies

GDP, Share Prices, and Share Returns: Australian and New Zealand Evidence

Master Thesis Finance THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF AN INVESTMENT STRATEGY BASED ON SKEWNESS: SELLING LOTTERY TICKETS IN FINANCIAL MARKETS

A Lottery Demand-Based Explanation of the Beta Anomaly. Online Appendix

Underreaction, Trading Volume, and Momentum Profits in Taiwan Stock Market

Betting against Beta or Demand for Lottery

Cross Sectional Variation of Stock Returns: Idiosyncratic Risk and Liquidity

ARTICLE IN PRESS. Journal of Financial Economics

Earnings Dispersion and Aggregate Stock Returns

Betting Against Betting Against Beta

Medium-term and Long-term Momentum and Contrarian Effects. on China during

Sector Fund Performance

Supplementary Results For Greenwood and Hanson 2009, Catering to Characteristics Last revision: June 2009

Preference for Skewness and Market Anomalies

Using Pitman Closeness to Compare Stock Return Models

Liquidity and IPO performance in the last decade

A Tug of War: Overnight Versus Intraday Expected Returns

PROFITABILITY OF CAPM MOMENTUM STRATEGIES IN THE US STOCK MARKET

MUTUAL FUND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS PRE AND POST FINANCIAL CRISIS OF 2008

Fund raw return and future performance

Decomposing Momentum Spread

The Rational Part of Momentum

Double Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance *

Fresh Momentum. Engin Kose. Washington University in St. Louis. First version: October 2009

Style-related Comovement: Fundamentals or Labels?

A Comparison of the Results in Barber, Odean, and Zhu (2006) and Hvidkjaer (2006)

Regression Discontinuity and. the Price Effects of Stock Market Indexing

Predicting Corporate Distributions*

Another Look at Market Responses to Tangible and Intangible Information

Identifying Skilled Mutual Fund Managers by their Ability to Forecast Earnings

Private Equity Performance: Returns, Persistence, and Capital Flows

Investor Clienteles and Asset Pricing Anomalies *

AN ALTERNATIVE THREE-FACTOR MODEL FOR INTERNATIONAL MARKETS: EVIDENCE FROM THE EUROPEAN MONETARY UNION

Economic Policy Uncertainty and Momentum

Online Appendix to Do Short-Sellers. Trade on Private Information or False. Information?

Attention Spillover Effect in Asset Pricing

Modern Fool s Gold: Alpha in Recessions

Empirical Research of Asset Growth and Future Stock Returns Based on China Stock Market

Individuals Return Predictability in Market and Limit Trades*

Robustness Checks for Idiosyncratic Volatility, Growth Options, and the Cross-Section of Returns

Portfolio strategies based on stock

A Tug of War: Overnight Versus Intraday Expected Returns. By Dong Lou, Christopher Polk and Spyros Skouras

Characterizing the Risk of IPO Long-Run Returns: The Impact of Momentum, Liquidity, Skewness, and Investment

Determinants of Capital Structure: A Long Term Perspective

Gross Profit Surprises and Future Stock Returns. Peng-Chia Chiu The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Abnormal Trading Volume, Stock Returns and the Momentum Effects

What explains the distress risk puzzle: death or glory?

Transcription:

Appendix Tables for: A Flow-Based Explanation for Return Predictability Dong Lou London School of Economics

Table A1: A Horse Race between Two Definitions of This table reports Fama-MacBeth stocks regressions. The dependent variable in columns 1 through 4 is the monthly stock in quarter, while that in columns 5 through 8 is the monthly stock in quarters +5 to +12. The main independent variables are, aggregate flowinduced trading across all mutual funds in quarter scaled by lagged total shares held mutual funds, and, flow-induced trading scaled by lagged shares outstanding. Both variables are standardized to have a standard deviation of one. The set of control variables includes the logarithm of firms size ( ), book-to-market ratio ( ), cumulative stock over one year ( ), idiosyncratic volatility ( ), proportion of institutional holdings ( ), and share turnover ( ). Regression coefficients are estimated using the Fama-MacBeth approach. T-statistics, shown in parentheses, are computed based on standard errors with Newey-West corrections of twelve lags. Estimates significant at the 5% level are indicated in bold. Monthly stock s in quarter (contemporaneous) Monthly stock s in quarters +5 to +12 (X100) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 0.985 0.616 0.404-0.116-0.088-0.061 (9.64) (5.50) (4.50) (-3.69) (-3.26) (-2.82) 0.671 0.388 0.245-0.070-0.044-0.039 (7.83) (3.38) (2.47) (-3.29) (-1.94) (-1.92) -0.120-0.030 (-2.99) (-1.57) 0.160 0.170 (1.61) (3.04) 0.490-0.120 (2.73) (-1.75) -0.270-0.012 (-2.52) (-0.31) 0.110 0.090 (0.48) (1.24) -0.020-0.040 (-1.30) (-1.68) Adj-R 2 0.83% 0.49% 0.94% 3.16% 0.26% 0.18% 0.30% 1.03% # Obs. 624,998 624,998 624,998 624,998 4,059,176 4,059,176 4,059,176 4,059,176

Table A2: The Return Pattern of Annual This table reports equal-weighted and value-weighted monthly portfolio s to the hedge portfolio that goes long in stocks in the top decile and goes short in stocks in the bottom decile ranked by annual flow-induced trading ( ). Annual is calculated as the sum of quarterly (i.e., aggregate flow-induced trading across all mutual funds scaled by lagged total shares held by mutual funds) over the previous four quarters. The portfolios are rebalanced every quarter and are held for two years. To deal with overlapping portfolios in each holding month, I follow Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) to take the equal-weighted average across portfolios formed in different quarters. Monthly portfolio s with different risk-adjustments are reported: the in of the riskfree rate, CAPM, and Fama-French three-factor. The first three columns report equalweighted portfolio s, while the next three columns value-weighted portfolio s. T-statistics, shown in parentheses, are computed based on standard errors with Newey-West corrections of twelve lags. Estimates significant at the 5% level are indicated in bold. Equal-weighted portfolios Value-weighted portfolios 1-factor 3-factor 1-factor 3-factor Qtr 1-0.18% -0.29% -0.20% -0.41% -0.57% -0.31% (-0.69) (-1.02) (-0.82) (-1.28) (-1.63) (-0.99) Qtr 2-0.36% -0.46% -0.25% -0.61% -0.77% -0.62% (-1.41) (-1.61) (-1.01) (-1.90) (-2.11) (-1.83) Qtr 3-0.46% -0.57% -0.31% -0.85% -1.03% -0.70% (-1.87) (-2.07) (-1.19) (-2.60) (-2.77) (-2.03) Qtr 4-0.45% -0.55% -0.54% -0.86% -1.02% -0.74% (-1.93) (-2.13) (-2.19) (-2.70) (-2.95) (-2.15) Qtr 5-0.45% -0.53% -0.57% -0.78% -0.90% -0.87% (-1.95) (-2.25) (-2.34) (-2.54) (-2.89) (-2.69) Qtr 6-0.58% -0.65% -0.47% -0.79% -0.91% -0.54% (-2.73) (-3.06) (-2.16) (-2.68) (-3.21) (-2.13) Qtr 7-0.54% -0.62% -0.34% -0.49% -0.57% -0.28% (-2.60) (-2.83) (-1.50) (-2.02) (-2.27) (-1.28) Qtr 8-0.39% -0.47% -0.18% -0.25% -0.32% -0.22% (-1.90) (-2.30) (-0.84) (-1.07) (-1.31) (-0.95) Qtrs 1-4 -0.36% -0.47% -0.33% -0.68% -0.84% -0.60% (-1.64) (-1.92) (-1.53) (-2.39) (-2.59) (-1.94) Qtrs 5-8 -0.49% -0.56% -0.39% -0.58% -0.68% -0.47% (-2.62) (-2.99) (-2.32) (-2.51) (-2.77) (-2.22) Qtrs 1-8 -0.42% -0.51% -0.36% -0.63% -0.76% -0.54% (-2.74) (-3.05) (-2.19) (-2.93) (-3.42) (-2.52)

Table A3: Subsample Robustness Checks This table reports equal-weighted portfolio s to the decile portfolios ranked by expected flowinduced trading ( ). is the aggregate expected flow-induced trading across all mutual funds scaled by total shares held by mutual funds. Expected capital flows to each mutual fund are estimated from the four-factor fund in the previous year. The portfolios are rebalanced every quarter and are held for one quarter. To deal with overlapping portfolios in each holding month, I follow Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) to take the equal-weighted average across portfolios formed in different quarters. Monthly portfolio s with different risk-adjustments are reported: the Fama-French three-factor and Carhart four-factor. The first four columns report monthly portfolio s for two sub-periods: 1980-1993 vs. 1994-2006, while the next four columns report monthly portfolio s for two sub-periods within each year: the first calendar quarter vs. the other three quarters. T-statistics, shown in parentheses, are computed based on standard errors with Newey-West corrections of twelve lags. Estimates significant at the 5% level are indicated in bold. decile Subsamples robustness checks 1980-1993 1994-2006 First Qtr Other Qtrs 1-0.17% -0.08% -0.67% -0.36% -0.49% -0.39% -0.37% -0.13% (low) (-1.38) (-0.63) (-2.69) (-1.57) (-1.44) (-1.44) (-2.26) (-0.85) 2-0.12% -0.07% -0.50% -0.29% -0.35% -0.29% -0.31% -0.16% (-1.34) (-0.69) (-2.93) (-2.00) (-1.24) (-1.19) (-2.70) (-1.55) 3-0.16% -0.10% -0.39% -0.23% -0.27% -0.21% -0.28% -0.17% (-1.94) (-1.13) (-2.48) (-1.64) (-1.26) (-1.24) (-2.69) (-1.76) 4-0.07% -0.03% -0.19% -0.08% -0.03% 0.01% -0.15% -0.09% (-1.05) (-0.46) (-1.41) (-0.61) (-0.19) (0.10) (-1.76) (-1.17) 5-0.03% 0.01% -0.08% 0.00% -0.08% -0.03% -0.05% -0.04% (-0.39) (0.13) (-0.65) (-0.01) (-0.48) (-0.21) (-0.63) (-0.47) 6-0.15% -0.12% -0.12% 0.01% -0.16% -0.09% -0.12% -0.09% (-2.28) (-1.60) (-0.92) (0.11) (-0.71) (-0.52) (-1.78) (-1.28) 7-0.01% 0.08% 0.08% 0.10% 0.16% 0.20% 0.01% 0.01% (-0.07) (1.05) (0.68) (0.90) (1.05) (1.33) (0.19) (0.11) 8 0.15% 0.20% 0.25% 0.24% 0.27% 0.27% 0.17% 0.14% (2.01) (2.76) (2.09) (2.01) (1.56) (1.56) (2.04) (1.66) 9 0.11% 0.10% 0.28% 0.25% 0.30% 0.32% 0.15% 0.05% (1.42) (1.26) (1.90) (1.68) (1.25) (1.30) (1.49) (0.48) 10 0.46% 0.40% 0.52% 0.36% 0.74% 0.69% 0.39% 0.29% (high) (3.78) (3.65) (3.13) (2.27) (2.89) (2.89) (3.45) (2.48) 10-1 0.63% 0.48% 1.19% 0.71% 1.23% 1.08% 0.75% 0.42% (3.48) (2.92) (3.37) (3.32) (2.45) (2.77) (3.39) (1.97)

Table A4: Mutual Fund Performance Persistence This table reports monthly portfolio s to mutual fund portfolios ranked by the Carhart fourfactor fund in the previous year. The portfolios are rebalanced every quarter and are held for three years. To deal with overlapping portfolios in each holding month, I follow Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) to take the equal-weighted average across portfolios formed in different quarters. Monthly portfolio s with different risk-adjustments are reported: the in of the riskfree rate, Fama-French three-factor, and Carhart four-factor. T-statistics, shown in parentheses, are computed based on standard errors with Newey-West corrections of twelve lags. Estimates significant at the 5% level are indicated in bold. Decile Mutual funds ranked by annual fund 3-factor 4-factor 3-factor 4-factor 3-factor 3-factor Qtr 1 Qtrs 1-4 Qtrs 5-8 Qtrs 5-12 1 0.58% -0.13% -0.09% 0.63% -0.09% -0.10% 0.75% 0.15% 0.72% 0.13% (low) (1.96) (-1.48) (-0.95) (2.20) (-1.38) (-1.37) (2.61) (2.41) (2.57) (2.41) 2 0.65% -0.05% -0.03% 0.67% -0.03% -0.05% 0.67% 0.07% 0.66% 0.06% (2.35) (-0.81) (-0.54) (2.48) (-0.66) (-0.89) (2.48) (1.41) (2.51) (1.32) 3 0.66% -0.04% -0.02% 0.69% -0.01% -0.02% 0.61% 0.01% 0.62% 0.01% (2.44) (-0.69) (-0.39) (2.64) (-0.12) (-0.35) (2.35) (0.27) (2.46) (0.21) 4 0.69% 0.01% 0.02% 0.70% 0.01% 0.00% 0.63% 0.02% 0.63% 0.02% (2.60) (0.28) (0.34) (2.70) (0.14) (-0.01) (2.43) (0.65) (2.55) (0.60) 5 0.71% 0.04% 0.04% 0.70% 0.02% 0.02% 0.63% 0.02% 0.63% 0.02% (2.71) (0.83) (0.80) (2.74) (0.45) (0.38) (2.47) (0.66) (2.58) (0.49) 6 0.70% 0.02% 0.01% 0.73% 0.05% 0.04% 0.64% 0.03% 0.62% 0.01% (2.64) (0.55) (0.30) (2.82) (1.42) (1.07) (2.50) (0.90) (2.53) (0.24) 7 0.73% 0.06% 0.05% 0.76% 0.07% 0.07% 0.66% 0.05% 0.65% 0.03% (2.74) (1.39) (1.16) (2.92) (1.86) (1.71) (2.58) (1.52) (2.63) (0.83) 8 0.78% 0.12% 0.09% 0.78% 0.11% 0.10% 0.65% 0.03% 0.66% 0.04% (2.81) (2.57) (1.96) (2.94) (2.55) (2.28) (2.46) (0.73) (2.62) (0.92) 9 0.83% 0.17% 0.14% 0.82% 0.15% 0.13% 0.68% 0.08% 0.66% 0.04% (2.87) (3.35) (2.52) (2.94) (3.17) (2.65) (2.50) (1.58) (2.52) (0.83) 10 1.04% 0.40% 0.30% 0.98% 0.33% 0.27% 0.66% 0.09% 0.67% 0.07% (high) (2.98) (4.28) (3.05) (2.95) (4.47) (3.39) (2.08) (1.16) (2.23) (0.97) 10-1 0.46% 0.52% 0.39% 0.35% 0.42% 0.37% -0.08% -0.06% -0.05% -0.07% (3.36) (4.00) (3.19) (3.32) (4.51) (3.89) (-0.95) (-0.68) (-0.74) (-0.76)

Table A5: The Smart Money Effect This table reports monthly portfolio s to mutual fund portfolios ranked by capital flows (as a fraction of lagged total net assets) in the previous quarter. The portfolios are rebalanced every quarter and are held for three years. To deal with overlapping portfolios in each holding month, I follow Jegadeesh and Titman (1993) to take the equal-weighted average across portfolios formed in different quarters. Monthly portfolio s with different risk-adjustments are reported: the in of the risk-free rate, Fama-French three-factor, and Carhart four-factor. T- statistics, shown in parentheses, are computed based on standard errors with Newey-West corrections of twelve lags. Estimates significant at the 5% level are indicated in bold. Decile Mutual funds ranked by quarterly 3-factor 4-factor 3-factor 4-factor 3-factor 3-factor Qtr 1 Qtrs 1-4 Qtrs 5-8 Qtrs 5-12 1 0.69% -0.06% -0.05% 0.79% 0.05% 0.02% 0.75% 0.14% 0.73% 0.12% (low) (2.40) (-0.82) (-0.67) (2.84) (0.82) (0.27) (2.69) (2.79) (2.70) (2.66) 2 0.69% -0.01% 0.02% 0.73% 0.02% 0.00% 0.73% 0.12% 0.70% 0.09% (2.52) (-0.20) (0.33) (2.73) (0.40) (0.07) (2.70) (2.71) (2.66) (2.16) 3 0.71% 0.01% 0.03% 0.72% 0.02% 0.01% 0.67% 0.05% 0.66% 0.04% (2.61) (0.21) (0.48) (2.75) (0.41) (0.10) (2.55) (1.36) (2.60) (1.14) 4 0.72% 0.04% 0.06% 0.72% 0.04% 0.04% 0.62% 0.01% 0.63% 0.01% (2.67) (0.97) (1.22) (2.76) (0.97) (0.99) (2.40) (0.24) (2.50) (0.17) 5 0.72% 0.04% 0.05% 0.72% 0.04% 0.04% 0.64% 0.03% 0.63% 0.02% (2.65) (1.02) (1.16) (2.73) (0.91) (0.85) (2.45) (0.92) (2.52) (0.52) 6 0.70% 0.04% 0.02% 0.72% 0.04% 0.03% 0.62% 0.02% 0.61% 0.01% (2.54) (0.81) (0.49) (2.70) (1.08) (0.76) (2.36) (0.49) (2.44) (0.17) 7 0.71% 0.03% 0.01% 0.72% 0.03% 0.02% 0.65% 0.04% 0.63% 0.02% (2.56) (0.73) (0.12) (2.68) (0.80) (0.54) (2.47) (1.11) (2.47) (0.40) 8 0.73% 0.07% 0.03% 0.74% 0.06% 0.04% 0.64% 0.02% 0.65% 0.02% (2.61) (1.51) (0.60) (2.70) (1.49) (0.88) (2.38) (0.51) (2.51) (0.60) 9 0.78% 0.11% 0.06% 0.75% 0.06% 0.03% 0.61% 0.00% 0.63% 0.00% (2.70) (2.34) (0.82) (2.68) (1.39) (0.66) (2.24) (0.03) (2.42) (0.08) 10 0.86% 0.22% 0.10% 0.78% 0.12% 0.06% 0.60% -0.01% 0.61% -0.01% (high) (2.85) (3.29) (1.25) (2.71) (2.39) (0.97) (2.12) (-0.19) (2.27) (-0.18) 10-1 0.17% 0.28% 0.15% -0.01% 0.08% 0.04% -0.15% -0.15% -0.13% -0.13% (1.72) (2.74) (1.58) (-0.08) (1.27) (0.61) (-3.05) (-2.63) (-3.26) (-2.68)