Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Applied Asset and Risk Management pp 175–244Cite as

Stock Market Anomalies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Management for Professionals ((MANAGPROF))

Abstract

This chapter provides a summary of the most important stock market anomalies, i.e., the weekend effect, the January effect, the turn-of-the-month and holiday effect, the S&P 500 effect, trading by insiders, the momentum of industry portfolio, home bias, the Value Line enigma and the expiry of IPO lockups. These anomalies cannot be explained by traditional finance theory and, since they show persistency, do not constitute arbitrage opportunities. Each anomaly is described, evidence is supplied and explanations are provided when available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Fama (1970).

  2. 2.

    Basu has shown that low P/E stocks tend to outperform both the market and high P/E stocks. In What Works on Wall Street, O’Shaughnessy found that the P/E ratio is particularly relevant for large stocks. However, he argued that the price-to-sales ratio is an even better indicator of excessive returns. Fama and French find that market and size factors in earnings help explain the P/E ratio effect . See O’Shaughnessy (1998, p. 16), Basu (1977) and Fama and French (1995).

  3. 3.

    Chen and Singal (2003, p. 80).

  4. 4.

    French (1980, p. 56).

  5. 5.

    Singal (2006, p. 45).

  6. 6.

    Kamara (1997).

  7. 7.

    Agrawal and Tandon (1994, p. 101)

  8. 8.

    Steeley (2001).

  9. 9.

    Liu and Li (2010).

  10. 10.

    Chen and Singal (2003).

  11. 11.

    Singal (2006, p. 48).

  12. 12.

    Singal (2006, p. 48).

  13. 13.

    Sias and Starks (1995, p. 66).

  14. 14.

    The bid-ask bounce is the process that on Fridays, the asset is traded at Friday’s ask price at the close of trading, whereas on Mondays, it trades at Fridays’ bid price at the start of the trading session.

  15. 15.

    Damodaran (1989, p. 607).

  16. 16.

    Damodaran (1989, p. 616).

  17. 17.

    Patel (2012, p. 109).

  18. 18.

    Singal (2006, p. 47).

  19. 19.

    Singal (2006, p. 42).

  20. 20.

    Rozeff and Kinney, Jr. (1976, p. 349).

  21. 21.

    Rozeff and Kinney, Jr. (1976, p. 349).

  22. 22.

    Donald Keim received his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in 1983. He is very well known and widely cited for the discovery of the January effect. Currently, he is teaching at Wharton University as John B. Neff Professor of Finance.

  23. 23.

    Keim (1983).

  24. 24.

    Bhardwaj and Brooks (1992) and Eleswarapu and Reinganum (1993).

  25. 25.

    Haugen and Jorion (1996, p. 27).

  26. 26.

    Chang and Pinegar (1986).

  27. 27.

    Investment grade bonds are bonds audited by rating agencies like Moody’s or Fitch Rating. An investment grade is any rate between AAA and BBB- or Aaa and Baa. Non-investment grade (also known as junk ) spans from BB (or Ba) to D (default). They help to evaluate the default risk associated with a bond and are used by investors to assess the credit worthiness of a corporate or sovereign bond. See Maxwell (1998).

  28. 28.

    Honghui Chen is an assistant professor at the University of Central Florida, Orlando. Vijay Singal, CFA, is J. Gray Professor of Finance at Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg.

  29. 29.

    Chen and Singal (2003).

  30. 30.

    Bhabra et al. (1999).

  31. 31.

    Singal (2006, p. 33).

  32. 32.

    Singal (2006, p. 37).

  33. 33.

    Kunkel and Compton (1998, p. 207), Ziemba (1991, p. 119) and Hensel and Ziemba (1996, p. 17).

  34. 34.

    Scott (2003).

  35. 35.

    Lakonishok and Smidt (1988).

  36. 36.

    Ariel (1987).

  37. 37.

    Ziemba (1991).

  38. 38.

    Hensel and Ziemba (1996, p. 21).

  39. 39.

    Kunkel and Compton (1998).

  40. 40.

    Cadsby and Ratner (1992).

  41. 41.

    Russell Investment Group website: http://www.russell.com/us/education_center. See alsoGonzalez (1996).

  42. 42.

    Lakonishok and Smidt (1988), Ariel (1990), Cadsby and Ratner (1992).

  43. 43.

    The acronyms stand for New York Stock Exchange, American Stock Exchange and National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations.

  44. 44.

    Kim and Park (1994).

  45. 45.

    Brockman and Michayluk (1998, p. 205).

  46. 46.

    Russel and Torbey (2002).

  47. 47.

    Singal (2006, p. 47).

  48. 48.

    Source: http://www.spindices.com/indices/equity/sp-500.

  49. 49.

    Singal (2006, p. 165).

  50. 50.

    Harris and Gurel (1986, p. 815) and Shleifer (1986, p. 583).

  51. 51.

    Arbel (1985, p. 4) and Chen, Noronha, and Singal (2003, pp. 1901–1902).

  52. 52.

    Denis, McConnell, Ovtchinnikov, and Yu (2003, p. 52).

  53. 53.

    Shleifer (1986, p. 579).

  54. 54.

    Chang and Suk (1998).

  55. 55.

    Wurgler and Zhuravskaya (2002, p. 583).

  56. 56.

    Hegde and McDermott (2003).

  57. 57.

    Singal (2006, p. 171).

  58. 58.

    Kaul, Mehrotra, and Morck (2000).

  59. 59.

    Harris and Gurel (1986).

  60. 60.

    Singal (2006, p. 172).

  61. 61.

    Singal (2006, pp. 171–173).

  62. 62.

    Bos (2000).

  63. 63.

    Dash (2002).

  64. 64.

    Blume and Edelen (2002, p. 1).

  65. 65.

    SEC stands for Unites States Securities and Exchange Commission. Their mission is to monitor and control investment activities.

  66. 66.

    Singal (2006, p. 135).

  67. 67.

    Lakonishok and Lee (2001).

  68. 68.

    Eckbo and Smith (1998).

  69. 69.

    Damodaran and Liu (1993).

  70. 70.

    Kahle (2000).

  71. 71.

    Seyhun (1992, p. 1303).

  72. 72.

    Lakonishok and Lee (2001, pp. 89–96).

  73. 73.

    Singal (2006, p. 139).

  74. 74.

    Singal (2006, p. 155).

  75. 75.

    Roth and Saporoschenko (1999).

  76. 76.

    Barclay and Warner (1993).

  77. 77.

    Kahle (2000).

  78. 78.

    Singal (2006, p. 142).

  79. 79.

    Lakonishok and Lee (2001).

  80. 80.

    Lakonishok and Lee (2001, p. 93).

  81. 81.

    Benesh and Pari (1987).

  82. 82.

    Singal (2006, p. 158).

  83. 83.

    Bettis, Vickrey, and Vickrey (1997).

  84. 84.

    Friederich, Gregory, Matatko, and Tonks (2002).

  85. 85.

    Market timing is the strategy of making buy or sell decisions of financial assets by attempting to predict future market price movements, in this specific case short-term movements.

  86. 86.

    A re-release is a piece of information that has already been given public. The Wall Street Journal in this case publishes once again an information that is already public on the market.

  87. 87.

    Ferreira and Brooks (2000).

  88. 88.

    Chang and Suk (1998).

  89. 89.

    Benesh and Pari (1987).

  90. 90.

    Singal (2006, pp. 137–138).

  91. 91.

    The stock momentum is calculated based on the change in the value of stocks between two dates. The intra-industry momentum is calculated based on the change in the value of stocks in a specific industry index multiplied by the aggregate trading volume occurring within the index components. The cross-industry momentum is calculated based on the change in the value of an industry index multiplied by the aggregate trading volume occurring within the selected industries used as benchmark.

  92. 92.

    Singal (2006, p. 78).

  93. 93.

    A company in the upstream part of a supply chain is one of the final customers of the product. If for instance, Goodyear, which produces tires for the car industry, is the upstream company, then the corporation owning the trees which supply the raw material would be a downstream company in the supply chain. See Menzly and Ozbas (2004).

  94. 94.

    Menzly and Ozbas (2004, p. 9).

  95. 95.

    Menzly and Ozbas (2004, p. 12).

  96. 96.

    Moskowitz and Grinblatt (1999).

  97. 97.

    Grundy and Martin (2001, pp. 1, 22 and 31).

  98. 98.

    Moskowitz and Grinblatt (1999).

  99. 99.

    O’Neal (2000, p. 37).

  100. 100.

    O’Neal (2000, p. 37).

  101. 101.

    Chan, Jegadeesh, and Lakonishok (1999).

  102. 102.

    Jegadeesh and Titman (1993).

  103. 103.

    Jegadeesh and Titman (1993, p. 89).

  104. 104.

    Jegadeesh and Titman (1993, p. 89).

  105. 105.

    Moskowitz and Grinblatt (1999).

  106. 106.

    Menzly and Ozbas (2004) and Holden and Subrahmanyam (2002).

  107. 107.

    Singal (2006, p. 83).

  108. 108.

    Singal (2006, p. 83).

  109. 109.

    Hong and Stein (1999).

  110. 110.

    Hong and Stein (1999, p. 2143).

  111. 111.

    A real estate investment trust is a security that sells like a stock on the major exchanges and invests in real estate directly, either through properties or mortgages. REITs receive special tax considerations and typically offer investors high yields, as well as a highly liquid method of investing in real estate.

  112. 112.

    Daniel, Hirshleifer, and Subrahmanyam (1998, p. 363) and Hong and Stein (1999).

  113. 113.

    Chui, Titman, and Wei (2003).

  114. 114.

    Sell-side analysts analyze a small amount of stocks in a specific industry and try to sell their report stating a given expected return in the upcoming period.

  115. 115.

    Singal (2006, p. 83).

  116. 116.

    Gao (2006).

  117. 117.

    Jegadeesh and Titman (1993, p. 90).

  118. 118.

    Jegadeesh and Titman (1993, p. 65).

  119. 119.

    Grinblatt, Titman, and Wermers (1995, pp. 1088 and 1093).

  120. 120.

    This paragraph was based on Chui et al. (2003).

  121. 121.

    Singal (2006, p. 87).

  122. 122.

    Feder, Just, and Schmitz (1980).

  123. 123.

    Johnson (2002).

  124. 124.

    Grundy and Martin (2001).

  125. 125.

    Grundy and Martin (2001, p. 29).

  126. 126.

    Grundy and Martin (2001, pp. 1 and 3).

  127. 127.

    Dellva, DeMaskey, and Smith (2001).

  128. 128.

    Dellva et al. (2001).

  129. 129.

    Lesmond, Schill, and Zhou (2004).

  130. 130.

    Lewis (1999).

  131. 131.

    Tesar and Werner (1995).

  132. 132.

    French and Poterba (1991).

  133. 133.

    French and Poterba (1991, p. 223).

  134. 134.

    The home share was computed using market capitalization data from the International Federation of Stock Exchanges (FIBV), and the international investment positions were provided by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) . See Jeske (2001, p. 33).

  135. 135.

    Lintner (1965, p. 13).

  136. 136.

    A market clearing price is the price of a good or service at which the quantity supplied is equal to the quantity demanded. It is sometimes referred to as equilibrium price.

  137. 137.

    French and Poterba (1991).

  138. 138.

    Monthly returns are annualized. Nominal returns for countries’ equity markets were taken from MSCI (http://www.msci.com). Returns were then deflated by countries’ CPI (consumer price index) data (from International Financial Statistics) and converted into the corresponding country’s home currency. See Jeske (2001).

  139. 139.

    French and Poterba (1991).

  140. 140.

    Kim and Singal (1997).

  141. 141.

    Kim and Singal (1997).

  142. 142.

    Sarkar and Li (2002).

  143. 143.

    Sarkar and Li (2002, p. 3).

  144. 144.

    International Finance Corporation (1997, p. 55).

  145. 145.

    All the figures presented are extracted from International Finance Corporation (1997, p. 55).

  146. 146.

    Clarke and Tullis (1999).

  147. 147.

    Clarke and Tullis (1999, p. 33).

  148. 148.

    The acronym EAFE stands for Europe, Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), and the Far East.

  149. 149.

    Singal (2006, p. 239).

  150. 150.

    Adverse selection, anti-selection or negative selection is a term used in economics. It refers to a market process in which undesired results occur when buyers and sellers have asymmetric information (access to different information); the bad products or services are more likely to be selected.

  151. 151.

    Coval and Moskowitz (1999).

  152. 152.

    Coval and Moskowitz (1999).

  153. 153.

    Huberman (2001).

  154. 154.

    Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOC) are the result of what is called United States v. AT & T, the U.S. Department of Justice antitrust suit against the former American Telephone & Telegraph Company (later known as AT&T Corp.). On January 8, 1982, AT&T Corp. settled the suit and agreed to divest its local exchange service operating companies. Many local firms emerged from the AT&T split into regional companies.

  155. 155.

    Mutual funds that invest internationally probably will have higher costs than funds that invest only in U.S. stocks. They are also liable to investment style risk: although the fund prospectuses mandate the percentages and limits of where and what to invest in, the latitude can still allow for some wide variances in style and strategy.

  156. 156.

    An ADR is a registered security issued by a U.S. bank representing shares of a foreign stock. ADRs trade on U.S. stock exchanges and on the over-the-counter market. The price of an ADR corresponds to the price of the foreign stock in its home market, with some adjustments.

  157. 157.

    iShares are index funds that trade like stocks. They are similar in fashion to ETFs (equity traded funds). Shares are available for both U.S. and international equity indexes. The key difference between iShares and mutual fund index funds is that mutual fund trades are executed at the end of the day (market close). iShares trade throughout the day whenever the market is open.

  158. 158.

    Although in the U.S. markets most foreign stocks trade as ADRs, some foreign stocks trade in the same form as in their local market. International investing can be more expensive than investing in U.S. companies. In smaller markets, there may be a premium for purchasing shares of popular companies. In some countries, there may be unexpected taxes or transaction costs such as fees or broker commissions. Taxes are often higher than in U.S. markets. Mutual funds that invest abroad often have higher fees and expenses than funds that invest in U.S. stocks, in part because of the extra expense of trading in foreign markets.

  159. 159.

    Jeske (2001, p. 31).

  160. 160.

    Jeske (2001, pp. 35–36).

  161. 161.

    Jeske (2001, pp. 35–36).

  162. 162.

    Coën (2001).

  163. 163.

    Deadweight cost is the extent to which the direct impact of an increase or reduction in tax (or subsidies) is lessened by its indirect effect. For instance, a corporate tax hike will boost government revenue but may also cause companies to go broke, which would have a negative impact on government finances.

  164. 164.

    French and Poterba (1991).

  165. 165.

    Hasan and Simaan (2000).

  166. 166.

    Overconfidence arises from the belief that one’s knowledge is of great quality in spite of conflicting evidence. An in-depth explanation is proposed in Sect. 5.3.5 which introduces behavioral finance in order to explain stock market crashes.

  167. 167.

    Herding is an attitude of individuals who follow a trend rather than higher quality information which they possess in the context of finance for instance. See Sect. 5.3.3 for an in-depth explanation.

  168. 168.

    Goetzmann and Kumar (2001).

  169. 169.

    Ryan and Siebens (2012, p. 2).

  170. 170.

    Goetzmann and Kumar (2001).

  171. 171.

    Coën (2001).

  172. 172.

    Schoenmaker and Bosch (2008).

  173. 173.

    http://www.valueline.com/About/Ranking_System.aspx.

  174. 174.

    http://www.valueline.com/About/Ranking_System.aspx.

  175. 175.

    http://www.valueline.com/About/Ranking_System.aspx.

  176. 176.

    Source: Bloomberg (ticker: INDU:IND).

  177. 177.

    Source: http://www.fedprimerate.com/dow-jones-industrial-average-history-djia.htm.

  178. 178.

    This is the weighting average for rank 1 and 2 stocks, given that there are 100 stocks in rank 1 and 300 stocks in rank 2, we then have to multiple their relative weight by their respective performance.

  179. 179.

    Source: Own, based on historical data. Large differences are still observed even starting in 1900 or in 1982 until 2013.

  180. 180.

    http://www.valueline.com/About/Ranking_System.aspx.

  181. 181.

    Porras and Griswold (2000).

  182. 182.

    Black and Kaplan (1973).

  183. 183.

    Copeland and Mayers (1982).

  184. 184.

    Stickel (1985).

  185. 185.

    Porras and Griswold (2000, p. 39).

  186. 186.

    Leinweber (1995, p. 2).

  187. 187.

    Porras and Griswold (2000, p. 40).

  188. 188.

    Affleck-Graves and Mendenhall (1992).

  189. 189.

    Stickel (1985, p. 121).

  190. 190.

    Choi (2000) and Peterson (1995).

  191. 191.

    Copeland and Mayers (1982).

  192. 192.

    Peterson (1995).

  193. 193.

    Zhang, Nguyen, and Le (2010) reaches the same conclusion, see p. 372.

  194. 194.

    Choi (2000).

  195. 195.

    Porras and Griswold (2000).

  196. 196.

    Porras and Griswold (2000).

  197. 197.

    Lustig and Leinbach (1983, p. 46).

  198. 198.

    Huberman and Kandel (1987).

  199. 199.

    Stickel (1985, p. 121).

  200. 200.

    Huberman and Kandel (1990, p. 187).

  201. 201.

    Black and Kaplan (1973).

  202. 202.

    Leinweber (1995, p. 2).

  203. 203.

    Perold (1988).

  204. 204.

    Choi (2000).

  205. 205.

    Leinweber (1995, p. 41).

  206. 206.

    Leinweber (1995, p. 42).

  207. 207.

    Salomon Jr. (1998).

  208. 208.

    Porras and Griswold (2000, p. 40).

  209. 209.

    Zhang et al. (2010).

  210. 210.

    Zhang et al. (2010, p. 362).

  211. 211.

    Reilly and Hatfield (1969) and Stoll and Curley (1970).

  212. 212.

    Ritter and Welch (2002, Table 1, p. 4).

  213. 213.

    Field and Hanka (2001, p. 472).

  214. 214.

    Healtheon was a dotcom startup company. Healtheon’s business plan was to streamline communication and paperwork in the United States health care system. They developed software that placed their company between physicians, patients, and health care institutions, eliminating unnecessary paperwork and facilitating networking and communication amongst the three.

  215. 215.

    Field and Hanka (2001, p. 472).

  216. 216.

    Facebook is a social networking service launched in February 2004. In 2012, Facebook had over one billion active users.

  217. 217.

    Source: Bloomberg (ticker: FB:US).

  218. 218.

    Ritter (1991).

  219. 219.

    Loughran and Ritter (1995, p. 30).

  220. 220.

    Loughran and Ritter (1995, p. 49).

  221. 221.

    Aggarwal and Rivoli (1990).

  222. 222.

    Field and Hanka (2001, Table IV, p. 482).

  223. 223.

    Field and Hanka (2001, Table IV, p. 482).

  224. 224.

    Bradley et al. (2001, p. 14).

  225. 225.

    Field and Hanka (2001, p. 473).

  226. 226.

    Rule 144 allows the public resale of restricted and controlled securities if a number of conditions are met. For example, holding period, adequate stock information, personal information and trading volume are criteria limiting the resale. The complete rule set is available at the following website: http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/rule144.htm. Also see Keasler (2001).

  227. 227.

    Adverse selection, anti-selection, or negative selection is a term used in economics. It refers to a market process in which undesired results occur when buyers and sellers have asymmetric information (access to different information); the bad products or services are more likely to be selected.

  228. 228.

    Brau et al. (2005).

  229. 229.

    Brav and Gompers (2003).

  230. 230.

    Aggarwal, Krigman, and Womack (2002).

  231. 231.

    Aggarwal et al. (2002).

  232. 232.

    Field and Hanka (2001, p. 473).

  233. 233.

    Ofek and Richardson (2000).

  234. 234.

    Ofek and Richardson (2000, p. 2).

  235. 235.

    Closing ask price on the previous day can be taken as today’s bid price. While creating no abnormal return, the anomaly would be related to normal market frictions between bought and sold stocks.

  236. 236.

    Investors prefer liquid assets and pay a premium for them. Illiquid assets perform less well.

  237. 237.

    Large demand or supply expectations are a fear factor for investors. In the case of not knowing the appropriate expectation, a small drift toward the correct stock price can be observed.

  238. 238.

    Ofek and Richardson (2000).

  239. 239.

    The shift in supply can be explained by the fact that on the IPO date, company owners typically sell 15–20 % of their stock. On lockup expiry, more shares can be sold.

  240. 240.

    Field and Hanka (2001).

References

  • Affleck-Graves, J., & Mendenhall, R. R. (1992). The relation between the Value Line enigma and post-earnings-announcement drift. Journal of Financial Economics, 31(1), 75–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aggarwal, R. K., Krigman, L., & Womack, K. L. (2002). Strategic IPO underpricing, information momentum, and lockup expiration selling. Journal of Financial Economics, 66, 105–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aggarwal, R. K., & Rivoli, P. (1990). Fads in the initial public offering market? Financial Management, 19(4), 45–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal, A., & Tandon, K. (1994). Anomalies or illusions? Evidence from stock markets in eighteen countries. Journal of International Money and Finance, 13(1), 83–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbel, A. (1985). Generic stocks: An old product in a new package. Journal of Portfolio Management, 11(4), 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariel, R. A. (1987). A monthly effect in stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 18(1), 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariel, R. A. (1990, December). High stock returns before holidays: Existence and evidence on possible causes. Journal of Finance, 45(5), 1611–1626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barclay, M. J., & Warner, J. B. (1993). Stealth trading and volatility: Which trades move prices? Journal of Financial Economics, 34(3), 281–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu, S. (1977). Investment performance of common stocks in relation to their price-earnings ratios: A test of the efficient market hypothesis. Journal of Finance, 32(3), 663–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benesh, G. A., & Pari, R. A. (1987). Performance of stocks recommended on the basis of insider trading activity. Financial Review, 22(1), 145–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, C., Vickrey, D., & Vickrey, D. W. (1997). Mimickers of corporate insiders who make large-volume trades. Financial Analyst Journal, 53(5), 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhabra, H. S., Dhillon, U. S., & Ramirez, G. G. (1999). A November effect? Revisiting the tax-loss-selling hypothesis. Financial Management, 28(4), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhardwaj, R. K., & Brooks, L. D. (1992, June). The January anomaly: Effects of low share price, transaction costs, and bid-ask bias. Journal of Finance, 47(2), 553–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, F. S., & Kaplan, R. S. (1973). Yes, Virginia, there is hope: Tests of the Value Line ranking system. Financial Analysts Journal, 29(5), 10, 12, 14 and 92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blume, M. E., & Edelen, R. M. (2002, April). On replicating the S&P 500 index. Working Paper 08-02. Philadelphia: The Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research, Department of Finance, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bos, R. (2000, September). Quantifying the effect of being added to an S&P index. New York: Standard & Poor’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, D. J., Jordan, B. D., Roten, I. C., & Yi, H. C. (2001). Venture capital and IPO lockup expiration: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Research, 24(4), 465–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brau, J. C., Lambson, V. E., & McQueen, G. (2005). Lockups revisited. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40(3), 519–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brav, A., & Gompers, P. A. (2003). The role of lockups in initial public offerings. Review of Financial Studies, 16(1), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockman, P., & Michayluk, D. (1998). The persistent holiday effect: Additional evidence. Applied Economic Letters, 5(4), 205–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadsby, C. B., & Ratner, M. (1992, June). Turn-of-month and pre-holiday effects on stock returns: Some international evidence. Journal of Banking and Finance, 16(3), 497–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, L. K. C., Jegadeesh, N., & Lakonishok, J. (1999). The profitability of momentum strategies. Financial Analyst Journal, 55(6), 80–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, E. C., & Pinegar, J. M. (1986). Return seasonality and tax-loss selling in the market for long-term government and corporate bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 17, 391–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S., & Suk, D. Y. (1998). Stock prices and the secondary dissemination of information: The Wall Street Journal’s “Insider Trading Spotlight” column. Financial Review, 33(3), 115–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Noronha, G., & Singal, V. (2003). The price response to S&P 500 index additions and deletions: Evidence of asymmetry and a new explanation. Journal of Finance, 59(4), 1901–1930.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., & Singal, V. (2003, July/August). A December effect with tax-gain selling. Financial Analysts Journal, 59(4), 78–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, J. J. (2000). The Value Line enigma: The sum of known parts. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 35(3), 485–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chui, A. C. W., Titman, S., & Wei, K. C. J. (2003). Intra-industry momentum: The case of REITs. Journal of Financial Markets, 6(3), 363–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, R. G., & Tullis, R. M. (1999). How much international exposure is advantageous in a domestic portfolio? Journal of Portfolio Management, 25(2), 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coën, A. (2001). Home bias and international capital asset pricing model with human capital. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 11(4–5), 497–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland, T. E., & Mayers, D. (1982). The Value Line enigma (1965–1978): A case study of performance evaluation issues. Journal of Financial Economics, 10, 289–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coval, J. D., & Moskowitz, T. J. (1999). Home bias at home: Local equity preference in domestic portfolios. Journal of Finance, 54(6), 2045–2073.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damodaran, A. (1989). The weekend effect in information releases: A study of earnings and dividend announcements. Review of Financial Studies, 2(4), 607–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damodaran, A., & Liu, C. H. (1993). Insider trading as a signal of private information. Review of Financial Studies, 6(1), 79–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D., & Subrahmanyam, A. (1998). Investor psychology and security market under- and overreactions. Journal of Finance, 53(6), 1839–1885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dash, S. (2002, July). Price changes associated with S&P 500 deletions. Standard & Poor’s. http://www.spglobal.com/070902pricechanges.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2013.

  • Dellva, W. L., DeMaskey, A. L.,& Smith, C. A. (2001). Selectivity and market timing performance of fidelity sector mutual funds. Financial Review, 36(1), 39–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis, D. K., McConnell, J., Ovtchinnikov, A. V., & Yu, Y. (2003). S&P 500 index additions and earnings expectations. Journal of Finance, 58(5), 1821–1840.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckbo, B. E., & Smith, D. C. (1998). The conditional performance of insider trades. Journal of Finance, 53(2), 467–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eleswarapu, V. R., & Reinganum, M. R. (1993). The seasonal behavior of the liquidity premium in asset pricing. Journal of Financial Economics, 34, 373–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1995). Size and book-to-market factors in earnings and returns. Journal of Finance, 50(1), 131–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feder, G., Just, R. E., & Schmitz, A. (1980). Futures markets and the theory of the firm under price uncertainty. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 94(2), 317–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, E. J., & Brooks, L.D. (2000). Re-released information in the Wall Street Journal’s “Insider Trading Spotlight” column. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 39(1), 22–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, L. C., & Hanka, G. (2001, April). The expiration of IPO share lockups. Journal of Finance, 56(2), 471–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, K. R. (1980). Stock returns and the weekend effect. Journal of Financial Economics, 8, 55–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, K. R., & Poterba, J. M. (1991). Investor diversification and international equity markets. American Economic Review, 81(2), 222–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederich, S., Gregory, A., Matatko, J., & Tonks, I. (2002). Short-run returns around the trades of corporate insiders on the London stock exchange. European Financial Management, 8(1), 7–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, P. (2006, December 18). Herding, information aggregation and momentum effects. Working Paper. Chicago, IL: Kellogg School of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetzmann, W. N., & Kumar, A. (2001, December). Equity portfolio diversification. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Working Paper No. 8686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, M. (1996, April 5). In investing, timing could be everything. Chicago Tribune. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-04-05/business/9604050033_1_birinyi-associates-stock-market-retirement-funds. Accessed 4 Jan 2014.

  • Grinblatt, M., Titman, S., & Wermers, R. (1995). Momentum investment strategies, portfolio performance and herding: A study of mutual fund behavior. American Economic Review, 85(5), 1088–1105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundy, B. D., & Martin, J. S. (2001). Understanding the nature of the risks and the source of the rewards to momentum investing. Review of Financial Studies, 14(1), 29–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, L., & Gurel, E. (1986). Price and volume effects associated with changes in the S&P 500 list: New evidence for the existence of price pressures. Journal of Finance, 41(4), 815–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasan, I., & Simaan, Y. (2000). A rational explanation for home country bias. Journal of International Money and Finance, 19(3), 331–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, R. A., & Jorion, P. (1996). The January effect: Still there after all these years. Financial Analysts Journal, 52(1), 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde, S. P., & McDermott, J. B. (2003). The liquidity effects of revisions to the S&P 500 index: An empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Markets, 6(3), 413–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensel, C. R., & Ziemba, W. T. (1996). Investment results from exploiting turn-of-the-month effects. Journal of Portfolio Management, 22(3), 17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, C. W., & Subrahmanyam, A. (2002). News events, information acquisition, and serial correlation. Journal of Business, 75(1), 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, H., & Stein, J. C. (1999, December). A unified theory of underreaction momentum trading, and overreaction in asset markets. Journal of Finance, 54(6), 2143–2184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G. (2001). Familiarity breeds investment. Review of Financial Studies, 14(3), 659–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G., & Kandel, S. (1987). Value Line rank and firm size. Journal of Business, 60(4), 577–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, G., & Kandel, S. (1990). Market efficiency and Value Line’s record. Journal of Business, 63(2), 187–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Finance Corporation. (1997). Emerging stock markets factbook 1997. Washington, DC: International Finance Corporation, Subsidiary of the World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications for stock market efficiency. Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeske, K. (2001). Equity home bias: Can information cost explain the puzzle? Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Economic Review (Third Quarter), 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, T. C. (2002, April). Rational momentum effects. Journal of Finance, 57(2), 585–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahle, K. M. (2000). Insider trading and the long-run performance of new security issues. Journal of Corporate Finance, 6, 25–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamara, A. (1997). New evidence on the Monday seasonal in stock returns. Journal of Business, 70(1), 63–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaul, A., Mehrotra, V., & Morck, R. (2000). Demand curves for stocks do slope down: New evidence from an index weights adjustment. Journal of Finance, 55(2), 893–912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keasler, T. R. (2001). Underwriter lock-up releases, initial public offerings and after-market performance. Financial Review, 37, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keim, D. B. (1983). Size-related anomalies and stock return seasonality: Further empirical evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 12(1), 13–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C. W., & Park, J. (1994, March). Holiday effects and stock returns: Further evidence. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 29(1), 145–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E. H., & Singal, V. (1997, Fall). Are open markets good for foreign investors and emerging nations? Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 10(3), 18–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunkel, R. A., & Compton, W. S. (1998). A tax-free exploitation of the tun-of-the-month effect: C.R.E.F., Financial Services Review, 7(1), 11–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakonishok, J., & Lee, I. (2001). Are insider trades informative? Review of Financial Studies, 14(1), 79–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakonishok, J., & Smidt, S. (1988, Winter). Are seasonal anomalies real? A ninety-year perspective. Review of Financial Studies, 1(4), 403–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinweber, D. J. (1995). Using information from trading in trading portfolio management 10 years later. Journal of Investing, 4(2), 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesmond, D. A., Schill, M. J., & Zhou, C. (2004). The illusory nature of momentum profits. Journal of Financial Economics, 71(2), 349–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, K. K. (1999). Trying to explain home bias in equities and consumption. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(2), 571–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lintner, J. (1965). The valuation of risk assets and selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(1), 13–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, B., & Li, B. (2010). Day-of-the-week effects: Another evidence from top 50 Australian stocks. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 24, 78–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, T., & Ritter, J. R. (1995, March). The new issue puzzle. Journal of Finance, 50(1), 23–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lustig, I. L., & Leinbach, P. A. (1983). The small firm effect. Financial Analysts Journal, 39(3), 46–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, W. F. (1998, Summer). The January effect in the corporate bond market: A systematic examination. Financial Management, 27(2), 18–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzly, L., & Ozbas, O. (2004, December). Cross-industry momentum. Working Paper. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, T. J., & Grinblatt, M. (1999). Do industries explain momentum? Journal of Finance, 54(4), 1249–1290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofek, E., & Richardson, M. (2000, January). The IPO lock-up period: Implications for market efficiency and downward sloping demand curves. Working Paper FIN-99-054. New York, NY: Stern School of Business. https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/27072. Accessed 11 Feb 2014.

  • O’Neal, E. S. (2000). Industry momentum and sector mutual funds. Financial Analysts Journal, 56(4), 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Shaughnessy, J. P. (1998). What works on Wall Street: A guide to the best performing investment strategies of all time (rev. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, J. B. (2012). A reexamination of the effect of daylight saving time changes on U.S. stock returns. Journal of Academy of Business and Economics, 12(2), 109–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perold, A. F. (1988). The implementation shortfall: Paper versus reality. Journal of Portfolio Management, 14(3), 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, D. R. (1995, December). The informative role of the Value Line investment survey: Evidence from stock highlights. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 30(4), 607–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porras, D., & Griswold, M. (2000). The Value Line enigma revisited. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 39(4), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, F. K., & Hatfield, K. (1969). Investor experience with new stock issues. Financial Analysts Journal, 25(5), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, J. R. (1991, March). The long-run performance of initial public offerings. Journal of Finance, 46(1), 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, J. R., & Welch, I. (2002, February). A review of IPO activity, pricing and allocations. Working Paper No. 8805. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, G., & Saporoschenko, A. (1999). The informational effects of large insider stock purchases. Managerial Finance, 25(1), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozeff, M. S., & Kinney, W. R., Jr. (1976). Capital market seasonality: The case of stock returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 379–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russel, P. S., & Torbey, V. M. (2002). The efficient market hypothesis on trial: A survey. Business Quest. School of Business Administration at Philadelphia University and School of Business at Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia. http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/2002/market.htm. Accessed 29 Dec 2013.

  • Ryan, C. I., & Siebens, J. (2012, February). Educational attainment in the United States 2009: Population characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, R. S., Jr. (1998, June 15). Value Line’s self-defeating success. Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0615/6112294a.html. Accessed 4 Jan 2014.

  • Sarkar, A., & Li, K. (2002). Should U.S. investors hold foreign stocks? Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Current Issues in Economics and Finance, 8(3), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenmaker, D., & Bosch, T. (2008). Is the home bias in equities and bonds declining in Europe? Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 5(4), 90–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulmerich, M. (2014). Stock market anomalies - An overview. State Street Global Advisors. SSgA Capital Insights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, D. L. (2003). Wall Street words: An A to Z guide to investment terms for today’s investor. (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyhun, H. N. (1992). Why does aggregate insider trading predict future stock returns? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(4), 1303–1031. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2118390?uid=3737952&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103293169113. Accessed 8 Feb 2014.

  • Shleifer, A. (1986). Do demand curves for stocks slope down? Journal of Finance, 41(3), 570–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sias, R. W., & Starks, L. T. (1995). Day-of-the-week anomaly: The role of institutional investors. Financial Analyst Journal, 51(3), 58–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singal, V. (2006). Beyond the random walk. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steeley, J. M. (2001). A note on information seasonality and the disappearance of the weekend effect in the U.K. stock market. Journal of Banking and Finance, 25, 1941–1956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stickel, S. E. (1985). The effect of Value Line investment survey rank changes on common stock prices. Journal of Financial Economics, 14, 121–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll, H. R., & Curley, A. J. (1970, September). Small business and the new issues market for equities. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 5(3), 309–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesar, L. L., & Werner, I. M. (1995). Home bias and high turnover. Journal of International Money and Finance, 14(4), 467–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2013, March). The World Bank: Indicators. Worldbank Online. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/CM.MKT.LCAP.CD. Accessed 18 Feb 2014.

  • Wurgler, J., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2002). Does arbitrage flatten demand curves for stocks? Journal of Business, 75(4), 583–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Nguyen, G. X., & Le, S. V. (2010). Yes, the Value Line enigma is still alive: Evidence from online timeliness rank changes. Financial Review, 45(2), 355–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziemba, W. T. (1991). Japanese security market regularities: Monthly, turn-of-the-month and year, holiday and golden week effects. Japan and the World Economy, 3, 119–146.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Street Global Advisors (SSgA), Munich, Germany

    Marcus Schulmerich

  2. Crédit Agricole, Paris, France

    Yves-Michel Leporcher

  3. Deutsche Bank, London, UK

    Ching-Hwa Eu

Authors
  1. Marcus Schulmerich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yves-Michel Leporcher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ching-Hwa Eu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schulmerich, M., Leporcher, YM., Eu, CH. (2015). Stock Market Anomalies. In: Applied Asset and Risk Management. Management for Professionals. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55444-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55444-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-55443-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-55444-5

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation