Abstract
The anomalies literature suggests that pricing is biased systematically for securities grouped by certain characteristics. If these characteristics are related to selection in an event study sample, imprecise predictions of an event study method may produce erroneous results. This paper performs simulations to compare a battery of short-run event study prediction and testing methods where samples are grouped by market equity, prior returns, book-to-market, and earnings-to-price ratios. Significant statistical errors are reported for both standard and newer methods, including three- and four-factor models. A characteristic-based benchmark model produces the least biased returns with the least rejection errors in all samples.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
