Review of Accounting Studies

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 692–730 | Cite as

The supraview of return predictive signals

  • Jeremiah Green
  • John R. M. Hand
  • X. Frank Zhang


This study seeks to inform investment academics and practitioners by describing and analyzing the population of return predictive signals (RPS) publicly identified over the 40-year period 1970–2010. Our supraview brings to light new facts about RPS, including that more than 330 signals have been reported; the properties of newly discovered RPS are stable over time; and RPS with higher mean returns have larger standard deviations of returns and also higher Sharpe ratios. Using a sample of 39 readily programmed RPS, we estimate that the average cross-correlation of RPS returns is close to zero and that the average correlation between RPS returns and the market is reliably negative. Abstracting from implementation costs, this implies that portfolios of RPS either on their own or in combination with the market will tend to have quite high Sharpe ratios. For academics who seek to document that they have found a genuinely new RPS, we show that the probability that a randomly chosen RPS has a positive alpha after being orthogonalized against five (25) other randomly chosen RPS is 62 % (32 %), suggesting that the returns of a potentially new RPS need to be orthogonalized against the returns of some but not all pre-existing RPS. Finally, we posit that our findings pose a challenge to investment academics in that they imply that either US stock markets are pervasively inefficient, or there exist a much larger number of rationally priced sources of risk in equity returns than previously thought.


Supraview Return prediction Academic discovery 

JEL Classification

G12 G14 



We appreciate valuable comments from Peter Algert, Suresh Govindaraj, Gilad Livne, Russell Lundholm, Jim Ohlson, Panos Patatoukas, Peter Pope, an anonymous referee, and workshop participants at City University London, the 2012 Citi Global Quant Conference, and the 2012 Review of Accounting Studies Conference. A full listing of the papers referenced in and used by this study is available from the authors on request.


  1. Ang, A., Hodrick, R. J., Xing, Y., & Zhang, X. (2006). The cross-section of volatility and expected returns. Journal of Finance, 61(1), 259–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asness, C. S., Porter, R. B., & Stevens, R. L. (2000). Predicting stock returns using industry-relative firm characteristics. Working paper, University of Florida.Google Scholar
  3. Bailey, D. H., & López de Prado, M. M. (2012). The Sharpe indifference curve. Working paper, Tudor Investment Corp.Google Scholar
  4. Balakrishnan, K., Bartov, E., & Faurel, L. (2010). Post loss/profit announcement drift. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 50, 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bali, T. G., Cakici, N., & Whitelaw, R. F. (2011). Maxing out: Stocks as lotteries and the cross-section of expected returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 99(2), 427–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandyopadhyay, S. P., Huang, A. G., & Wirjanto, T. S. (2010). The accrual volatility anomaly. Working paper, University of Waterloo.Google Scholar
  7. Banz, R. W. (1981). The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics, 9(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barberis, N., & Thaler, R. (2003). A survey of behavioral finance. In G. M. Constantinides, M. Harris, & R. Stulz (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of finance (pp. 1051–1121). Netherlands: Elsevier Science, B.V.Google Scholar
  9. Basu, S. (1977). Investment performance of common stocks in relation to their price-earnings ratios: A test of market efficiency. Journal of Finance, 32, 663–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bauman, W. S., & Dowen, R. (1988). Growth projections and common stock returns. Financial Analysts Journal, 44, 79–80.Google Scholar
  11. Bazdresch, S., Belo, F., & Lin, X. (2010). Labor hiring, investment, and stock return predictability in the cross-section. Working paper, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  12. Bernard, V. (1989). Capital markets research in accounting during the 1980’s: A critical review. In T. J. Frecka (Ed.), The state of accounting research as we enter the 1990s. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  13. Brandt, M. W., Kishore, R., Santa-Clara, P., & Venkatachalam, M. (2008). Earnings announcements are full of surprises. Working paper, Duke University.Google Scholar
  14. Brandt, M. W., Santa-Clara, P., & Valkanov, R. (2009). Parametric portfolio policies: Exploiting characteristics in the cross-section of equity returns. Review of Financial Studies, 22, 3411–3447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Browne, D. P., & Rowe, B. (2007). The productivity premium in equity returns. Working paper, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  16. Chandrashekar, S., & Rao, R. K. S. (2009). The productivity of corporate cash holdings and the cross-section of expected stock returns. Working paper, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  17. Chemmanur, T., & Yan, A. (2009). Advertising, attention and stock returns. Working paper, Boston College.Google Scholar
  18. Chen, L., & Zhang, L. (2010). A better three-factor model that explains more anomalies. Journal of Finance, 65(2), 563–595.Google Scholar
  19. Chordia, T., Subrahmanyam, A., & Anshuman, R. (2001). Trading activity and expected stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 59, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cooper, M. J., Gulen, H., & Schill, M. J. (2008). Asset growth and the cross-section of asset returns. Journal of Finance, 63(4), 1609–1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Datar, V. T., Naik, N. Y., & Radcliffe, R. (1998). Liquidity and stock returns: An alternative test. Journal of Financial Markets, 1(2), 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. DeMiguel, V., Garlappi, L., & Uppal, R. (2009). Optimal versus naïve diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy? Review of Financial Studies, 22(5), 1915–1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Diether, K. B., Malloy, C. J., & Scherbina, A. (2002). Differences of opinion and the cross-section of stock returns. Journal of Finance, 57(5), 2113–2141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eberhart, A. C., Maxwell, W. F., & Siddique, A. R. (2004). An examination of long-term abnormal stock returns and operating performance following R&D increases. Journal of Finance, 59(2), 623–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Frazzini, A., & Lamont, O. A. (2006). The earnings announcement premium and trading volume. Working paper, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  26. Gettleman, E., & Marks, J. M. (2006). Acceleration strategies. Working paper, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  27. Green, J., & Hand, J. R. M. (2011). The importance of accounting information in portfolio optimization. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 26(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Green, J., Hand, J. R. M., & Soliman, M. (2011). Going, going, gone? The demise of the accruals anomaly. Management Science, 57(5), 797–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hafzalla, N., Lundholm, R., & Van Winkle, M. (2007). Percent accruals. The Accounting Review, 86(1), 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hawkins, E. H., Chamberlain, S. C., & Daniel, W. E. (1984). Earnings expectations and security prices. Financial Analysts Journal, 40(5), 24–27; 30–38; 74.Google Scholar
  31. Hou, K., & Robinson, D. T. (2006). Industry concentration and average stock returns. Journal of Finance, 61(4), 1927–1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huang, A. G. (2009). The cross section of cashflow volatility and expected stock returns. Journal of Empirical Finance, 16(3), 409–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jegadeesh, N. (1990). Evidence of predictable behavior of security returns. Journal of Finance, 45, 881–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications for stock market efficiency. Journal of Finance, 48, 65–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Keim, D., & Ziemba, W. (2000). Security market imperfections in worldwide equity markets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kothari, S. P. (2001). Capital markets research in accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, 105–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lerman, A., Livnat, J., & Mendenhall, R. R. (2008). The high-volume return premium and post-earnings announcement drift. Working paper, New York University.Google Scholar
  38. Lev, B., & Ohlson, J. A. (1982). Market-based empirical research in accounting: A review, interpretation, and extension. Journal of Accounting Research, 20(Supplement), 249–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McLean, R. D., & Pontiff, J. (2012). Does academic research destroy stock return predictability? Working paper, University of Alberta.Google Scholar
  40. Novy-Marx, R. (2012). The other side of value: The gross profitability premium. Journal of Financial Economics (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  41. Pontiff, J., & Woodgate, A. (2008). Share issuance and cross-sectional returns. Journal of Finance, 63(2), 921–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rendleman, R. J., Jones, C. P., & Latané, H. A. (1982). Empirical anomalies based on unexpected earnings and the importance of risk adjustments. Journal of Financial Economics, 10(3), 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Richardson, S. A., Sloan, R. G., Soliman, M. T., & Tuna, I. (2005). Accrual reliability, earnings persistence and stock prices. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 39(3), 437–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Richardson, S., Tuna, I., & Wysocki, P. (2010). Accounting anomalies and fundamental analysis: A review of recent research advances. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50, 410–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rosenberg, B., Reid, K., & Lanstein, R. (1985). Journal of Portfolio Management, 11, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schwert, G. W. (2003). Anomalies and market efficiency. In G. M. Constantinides, M. Harris, & R. M. Stulz (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of finance (pp. 939–974). Netherlands: Elsevier Science, B.V.Google Scholar
  47. Sloan, R. (1996). Do stock prices fully reflect information in accruals and cash flows about future earnings? The Accounting Review, 71(3), 289–315.Google Scholar
  48. Soliman, M. T. (2008). The use of DuPont analysis by market participants. The Accounting Review, 83(3), 823–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Subrahmanyam, A. (2010). The cross-section of expected stock returns: What have we learned in the past twenty-five years of research? European Financial Management, 16(1), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thomas, J. K., & Zhang, H. (2002). Inventory changes and future returns. Review of Accounting Studies, 7(2–3), 163–187.Google Scholar
  51. Thomas, J., & Zhang, F. X. (2011). Tax expense momentum. Journal of Accounting Research, 49(3), 791–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeremiah Green
    • 1
  • John R. M. Hand
    • 2
  • X. Frank Zhang
    • 3
  1. 1.The Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.University of North Carolina–Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Yale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations