← Back
Evidence source 4990Spot Checked

Does Peer-Reviewed Research Help Predict Stock Returns?

Unknown venue2022-12-20Paper
Executive summary

Study compares peer-reviewed research and data mining in predicting stock returns, finding similar post-sample performance.

What it examines

The paper investigates whether peer-reviewed research helps predict stock returns compared to naive data mining. It constructs empirical counterparts by matching 200 published predictors to data-mined benchmarks from 29,000 accounting ratios, examining post-sample returns to assess predictability.

What it concludes

The research implies that data mining is undervalued in asset pricing, as it can uncover substantial out-of-sample returns. Future research should explore integrating data mining with economic theories to enhance predictability. Potential applications include improving investment strategies and financial modeling.

Extracted from this source

Evidence objects

Evidence 361778% extraction confidence
The research implies that data mining is undervalued in asset pricing, as it can uncover substantial out-of-sample returns. Future research should explore integrating data mining with economic theories to enhance predictability. Potential applications include improving investment strategies and financial modeling.

key_findings bullet 1 · key_findings · validation V0

Raw abstract and provenance

Abstract: Mining 29,000 accounting ratios for t-statistics over 2.0 leads to cross-sectional return predictability similar to the peer review process. For both methods, about 50% of predictability remains after the original sample periods. Predictors supported by peer-reviewed risk explanations or equilibrium models underperform other predictors post-sample, suggesting peer review systematically mislabels m… ▽ More Mining 29,000 accounting ratios for t-statistics over 2.0 leads to cross-sectional return predictability similar to the peer review process. For both methods, about 50% of predictability remains after the original sample periods. Predictors supported by peer-reviewed risk explanations or equilibrium models underperform other predictors post-sample, suggesting peer review systematically mislabels mispricing as risk, though only 20% of predictors are labelled as risk. Data mining generates other features of peer review including the rise in returns as original sample periods end and the speed of post-sample decay. It also uncovers themes like investment, issuance, and accruals -- decades before they are published. △ Less

Source row: 639 · abstract type: unknown