Publications Database
Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!
The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:
- Faculty Member’s Name;
- Area of Expertise;
- Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
- Journal Name; and
- Date Range.
At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.
If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Search Results
Mark J. Kamstra and Ruoyao Shi (2024). "Testing and Ranking of Asset Pricing Models Using the GRS Statistic", Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(4), 168.
Abstract
We clear up an ambiguity in the statement of the GRS statistic by providing the correct formula of the GRS statistic and the first proof of its F-distribution in the general multiple-factor case. Casual generalization of the Sharpe-ratio-based interpretation of the single-factor GRS statistic to the multiple-portfolio case makes experts in asset pricing studies susceptible to an incorrect formula. We illustrate the consequences of using the incorrect formulas that the ambiguity in GRS leads to—over-rejecting and misranking asset pricing models. In addition, we suggest a new approach to ranking models using the GRS statistic p-value.Kecskés, A., Michaely, R. and Womack, K. (2017). "Do Earnings Estimates Add Value to Sell-Side Analysts’ Investment Recommendations?", Management Science, 63(6), 1855-1871.
Abstract
Sell-side analysts change their stock recommendations when their valuations differ from the market’s. These valuation differences can arise from either differences in earnings estimates or the nonearnings components of valuation methodologies. We find that recommendation changes motivated by earnings estimate revisions have a greater initial price reaction than the same recommendation changes without earnings estimate revisions: about +1.3% (−2.8%) greater for upgrades (downgrades). Nevertheless, the postrecommendation drift is also greater, suggesting that investors underreact to earnings-based recommendation changes. Implemented as a trading strategy, earnings-based recommendation changes earn risk-adjusted returns of 3% per month, considerably more than non-earnings-based recommendation changes. Evidence from variation in firms’ information environment and analysts’ regulatory environment suggests that recommendation changes with earnings estimate revisions are less affected by analysts’ cognitive and incentive biases.Bae, K. and Zhang, X. (2015). "The Cost of Stock Market Integration in Emerging Markets", Asia-Pacific Journal of Financial Studies, 44(1), 1-23.
Abstract
We find that stock markets more integrated towards global markets experienced larger price drops during the 2008 financial crisis. The negative relation between the crisis period return and the degree of stock market integration is evident only in emerging countries. We show that the withdrawal of foreign equity investments during the crisis period does not contribute to the negative relation between the crisis period stock return and the degree of stock market integration. Instead, the negative relation arises because integrated emerging markets experience increased exposure to the negative global shock during a financial crisis. We obtain similar results when the 1997 Asian financial crisis is used as an experimental setting.Lai, S., Ng, L. and Zhang, B. (2014). "Does PIN Affect Asset Prices Around the World?", Journal of Financial Economics, 114(1), 178-195.
Abstract
This study examines the empirical controversy over the pricing effect of the Easley, Hvidkjaer, and O׳Hara (2002) probability of information-based trading, PIN, on a sample of 30,095 firms from 47 countries worldwide. Contrary to the empirical evidence of Easley, Hvidkjaer, and O׳Hara, but consistent with that of Duarte and Young (2009), we do not find that PIN exhibits a positive effect on a cross section of expected stock returns in international markets. Alternative information-based trading measures also display no effect on expected stock returns, corroborating our finding that information risk proxied by PIN, in general, has no pricing effect in world markets.Ioffe, I. and Prisman, E. (2013). "Arbitrage Violations and Implied Valuations: The Option Market", European Journal of Finance, 19(14), 298-327.