Benjamin M. Blau, Todd G. Griffith, Ryan J. Whitby, Darren Woodward
{"title":"锚点回归:52周高点与资产价格的案例","authors":"Benjamin M. Blau, Todd G. Griffith, Ryan J. Whitby, Darren Woodward","doi":"10.1080/15427560.2023.2244103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis study attempts to jointly identify the effects of anchoring and mean reversion on asset prices. In particular, we define “anchor reversion” as the tendency for stock prices to revert back toward an anchor, for example, the 52-week high. Our results show that the further a stock moves away from its 52-week high, the more likely it is to revert back toward that 52-week high in the following month. Conversely, if a stock moves toward its 52-week high in a given month, it is less likely to experience a large movement toward that 52-week high in the following month. Portfolios constructed according to a long-short anchor reversion strategy result in future returns that range from 1.40% to 1.62% per month. These results are robust to controls for various risk factors as well as several cross-sectional stock characteristics, such as the monthly reversal phenomena.Keywords: Anchoringasset pricingbehavioral financemean reversionJEL Codes: G10G19G40G41 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Baker, Pan, and Wurgler (Citation2012) find that prior stock-price peaks act as reference points and affect several aspects of mergers and acquisitions. In particular, the authors find that M&A offer prices are biased toward recent price peaks and that the probability of a targets’ acceptance of an acquirers’ offer is higher if the offer price is above the price peak.2 Much of the volatility forecasting literature is based on the notion of mean reversion (see, e.g., Engle, Citation1982; Bollerslev, Engle, and Wooldridge Citation1988; Bollerslev Citation1990; Bollerslev, Chou, and Kroner Citation1992; Bollerslev and Engle Citation1993; Engle Citation2002b).3 In column [5], without including controls, both the coefficients on Away and Closer are negative and significant. The difference between the two coefficients is 0.0079, but the t statistic, testing the significance of that difference, is only 0.79, suggesting that the two estimates are statistically similar.4 These results are available from the authors upon request.","PeriodicalId":47016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Finance","volume":"154 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anchor Reversion: The Case of the 52-Week High and Asset Prices\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin M. Blau, Todd G. Griffith, Ryan J. Whitby, Darren Woodward\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15427560.2023.2244103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractThis study attempts to jointly identify the effects of anchoring and mean reversion on asset prices. In particular, we define “anchor reversion” as the tendency for stock prices to revert back toward an anchor, for example, the 52-week high. Our results show that the further a stock moves away from its 52-week high, the more likely it is to revert back toward that 52-week high in the following month. Conversely, if a stock moves toward its 52-week high in a given month, it is less likely to experience a large movement toward that 52-week high in the following month. Portfolios constructed according to a long-short anchor reversion strategy result in future returns that range from 1.40% to 1.62% per month. These results are robust to controls for various risk factors as well as several cross-sectional stock characteristics, such as the monthly reversal phenomena.Keywords: Anchoringasset pricingbehavioral financemean reversionJEL Codes: G10G19G40G41 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Baker, Pan, and Wurgler (Citation2012) find that prior stock-price peaks act as reference points and affect several aspects of mergers and acquisitions. In particular, the authors find that M&A offer prices are biased toward recent price peaks and that the probability of a targets’ acceptance of an acquirers’ offer is higher if the offer price is above the price peak.2 Much of the volatility forecasting literature is based on the notion of mean reversion (see, e.g., Engle, Citation1982; Bollerslev, Engle, and Wooldridge Citation1988; Bollerslev Citation1990; Bollerslev, Chou, and Kroner Citation1992; Bollerslev and Engle Citation1993; Engle Citation2002b).3 In column [5], without including controls, both the coefficients on Away and Closer are negative and significant. The difference between the two coefficients is 0.0079, but the t statistic, testing the significance of that difference, is only 0.79, suggesting that the two estimates are statistically similar.4 These results are available from the authors upon request.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Finance\",\"volume\":\"154 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2023.2244103\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2023.2244103","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要本研究试图共同识别锚定和均值回归对资产价格的影响。特别是,我们将“锚点回归”定义为股票价格向锚点(例如,52周高点)回归的趋势。我们的研究结果表明,一只股票离52周高点越远,它在下个月越有可能回到52周高点。相反,如果一只股票在某一个月涨到52周高点,那么它在下一个月大幅涨到52周高点的可能性就较小。根据多空锚回归策略构建的投资组合未来的回报率在每月1.40%至1.62%之间。这些结果对各种风险因素以及几个横截面股票特征(如每月反转现象)的控制是稳健的。关键词:锚定资产定价行为金融平均回归jel代码:G10G19G40G41披露声明作者未报告存在潜在利益冲突。注1 Baker、Pan和Wurgler (Citation2012)发现,先前的股价峰值作为参考点,影响并购的几个方面。特别是,作者发现并购报价偏向于最近的价格峰值,如果报价高于价格峰值,目标公司接受收购方报价的可能性更高许多波动率预测文献是基于均值回归的概念(例如,参见Engle, Citation1982;Bollerslev, Engle, and Wooldridge citation, 1988;Bollerslev Citation1990;Bollerslev, Chou和Kroner Citation1992;Bollerslev and Engle citation; 1993;恩格尔Citation2002b)。3在列[5]中,不包括控件,Away和Closer的系数都是负的且显著的。两个系数之间的差异为0.0079,但检验该差异的显著性的t统计量仅为0.79,这表明两个估计在统计上相似这些结果可向作者索取。
Anchor Reversion: The Case of the 52-Week High and Asset Prices
AbstractThis study attempts to jointly identify the effects of anchoring and mean reversion on asset prices. In particular, we define “anchor reversion” as the tendency for stock prices to revert back toward an anchor, for example, the 52-week high. Our results show that the further a stock moves away from its 52-week high, the more likely it is to revert back toward that 52-week high in the following month. Conversely, if a stock moves toward its 52-week high in a given month, it is less likely to experience a large movement toward that 52-week high in the following month. Portfolios constructed according to a long-short anchor reversion strategy result in future returns that range from 1.40% to 1.62% per month. These results are robust to controls for various risk factors as well as several cross-sectional stock characteristics, such as the monthly reversal phenomena.Keywords: Anchoringasset pricingbehavioral financemean reversionJEL Codes: G10G19G40G41 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Notes1 Baker, Pan, and Wurgler (Citation2012) find that prior stock-price peaks act as reference points and affect several aspects of mergers and acquisitions. In particular, the authors find that M&A offer prices are biased toward recent price peaks and that the probability of a targets’ acceptance of an acquirers’ offer is higher if the offer price is above the price peak.2 Much of the volatility forecasting literature is based on the notion of mean reversion (see, e.g., Engle, Citation1982; Bollerslev, Engle, and Wooldridge Citation1988; Bollerslev Citation1990; Bollerslev, Chou, and Kroner Citation1992; Bollerslev and Engle Citation1993; Engle Citation2002b).3 In column [5], without including controls, both the coefficients on Away and Closer are negative and significant. The difference between the two coefficients is 0.0079, but the t statistic, testing the significance of that difference, is only 0.79, suggesting that the two estimates are statistically similar.4 These results are available from the authors upon request.
期刊介绍:
In Journal of Behavioral Finance , leaders in many fields are brought together to address the implications of current work on individual and group emotion, cognition, and action for the behavior of investment markets. They include specialists in personality, social, and clinical psychology; psychiatry; organizational behavior; accounting; marketing; sociology; anthropology; behavioral economics; finance; and the multidisciplinary study of judgment and decision making. The journal will foster debate among groups who have keen insights into the behavioral patterns of markets but have not historically published in the more traditional financial and economic journals. Further, it will stimulate new interdisciplinary research and theory that will build a body of knowledge about the psychological influences on investment market fluctuations. The most obvious benefit will be a new understanding of investment markets that can greatly improve investment decision making. Another benefit will be the opportunity for behavioral scientists to expand the scope of their studies via the use of the enormous databases that document behavior in investment markets.