Zaremba, Adam and Shemer, Jacob 2017. Country Asset Allocation.
Cao, Jie and Han, Bing 2016. Idiosyncratic risk, costly arbitrage, and the cross-section of stock returns. Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol. 73, p. 1.
DeLisle, R. Jared McTier, Brian C. and Smedema, Adam R. 2016. Systematic limited arbitrage and the cross-section of stock returns: Evidence from exchange traded funds. Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol. 70, p. 118.
Hao, Ying Chu, Hsiang-Hui Ko, Kuan-Cheng and Lin, Lin 2016. Momentum Strategies and Investor Sentiment in the REIT Market. International Review of Finance, Vol. 16, Issue. 1, p. 41.
Lakatos, Máté 2016. A befektetői túlreagálás empirikus vizsgálata a Budapesti Értéktőzsdén. Közgazdasági Szemle, Vol. 63, Issue. 7-8, p. 762.
Li, Xiafei and Luo, Di 2016. Investor Sentiment, Limited Arbitrage, and the Cash Holding Effect. Review of Finance, p. rfw031.
MCLEAN, R. DAVID and PONTIFF, JEFFREY 2016. Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability?. The Journal of Finance, Vol. 71, Issue. 1, p. 5.
Page, Daniel Britten, James and Auret, Christo 2016. Idiosyncratic risk and anomaly persistence on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). Investment Analysts Journal, Vol. 45, Issue. 1, p. 31.
Zaremba, Adam 2016. Investor sentiment, limits on arbitrage, and the performance of cross-country stock market anomalies. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Vol. 9, p. 136.
Andow, James 2015. How Distinctive Is Philosophers’ Intuition Talk?. Metaphilosophy, Vol. 46, Issue. 4-5, p. 515.
Chichernea, Doina C. Ferguson, Michael F. and Kassa, Haimanot 2015. Idiosyncratic Risk, Investor Base, and Returns. Financial Management, Vol. 44, Issue. 2, p. 267.
Jacobs, Heiko 2015. What explains the dynamics of 100 anomalies?. Journal of Banking & Finance, Vol. 57, p. 65.
Lee, Jieun and Ogden, Joseph P. 2015. Did the Profitability of Momentum and Reversal Strategies Decline with Arbitrage Costs After the Turn of the Millennium?. The Journal of Portfolio Management, Vol. 41, Issue. 3, p. 70.
STAMBAUGH, ROBERT F. YU, JIANFENG and YUAN, YU 2015. Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle. The Journal of Finance, Vol. 70, Issue. 5, p. 1903.
C. Galariotis, Emilios 2014. Contrarian and momentum trading: a review of the literature. Review of Behavioural Finance, Vol. 6, Issue. 1, p. 63.
Jones, Steven L. and Yeoman, John C. 2014. Initial uncertainty and the risk of setting a fixed-offer price: Implications for the pricing of bookbuilt and best-efforts IPOs. Journal of Corporate Finance, Vol. 27, p. 194.
Ling, David C. Naranjo, Andy and Scheick, Benjamin 2014. Investor Sentiment, Limits to Arbitrage and Private Market Returns. Real Estate Economics, Vol. 42, Issue. 3, p. 531.
Chichernea, Doina C. and Slezak, Steve L. 2013. IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK PREMIA AND MOMENTUM. Journal of Financial Research, Vol. 36, Issue. 3, p. 389.
Fabozzi, Frank J. Fung, Chun-Yip Lam, Kin and Wong, Wing-Keung 2013. Market overreaction and underreaction: tests of the directional and magnitude effects. Applied Financial Economics, Vol. 23, Issue. 18, p. 1469.
Holderness, Clifford G. and Pontiff, Jeffrey 2012. Hierarchies and the Survival of Prisoners of War During World War II. Management Science, Vol. 58, Issue. 10, p. 1873.
This paper tests whether the persistence of the momentum and reversal effects is the result of idiosyncratic risk limiting arbitrage. Idiosyncratic risk deters arbitrage, regardless of the arbitrageur’s diversification. Reversal is prevalent only in high idiosyncratic risk stocks, suggesting that idiosyncratic risk limits arbitrage in reversal mispricing. This finding is robust to controls for transaction costs, informed trading, and systematic relations between idiosyncratic risk and subsequent returns. Momentum is not related to idiosyncratic risk. Momentum generates a smaller aggregate return than reversal, so the findings along with those in related studies suggest that transaction costs are sufficient to prevent arbitrageurs from eliminating momentum mispricing.
This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 30th March 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.