… and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns
National Bureau of Economic Research · Texas A&M University · +2 more institutions
Indexed incrossref
Abstract
Hundreds of papers and factors attempt to explain the cross-section of expected returns. Given this extensive data mining, it does not make sense to use the usual criteria for establishing significance. Which hurdle should be used for current research? Our paper introduces a new multiple testing framework and provides historical cutoffs from the first empirical tests in 1967 to today. A new factor needs to clear a much higher hurdle, with a t-statistic greater than 3.0. We argue that most claimed research findings in financial economics are likely false. (JEL C12, C52, G12)
Citation impact
2,027
total citations
- FWCI
- 200.03
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 421
Citations per year
Authors
3Topics & keywords
Topics
Keywords
- Section (typography)
- Cross section (physics)
- Economics
- Physics
- Business
No related works found for this paper.