The MAX effect

An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations

Angel Zhong, Phil Gray

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper studies the role that risk and mispricing play in the negative relation between extreme positive returns and future returns. We document a strong 'MAX effect' in Australian equities over 1991-2013 that is robust to risk adjustment, controlling for other influential stock characteristics and, importantly, manifests in a partition of the 500 largest stocks. While there is no evidence that MAX proxies for sensitivity to risk, the findings are highly consistent with a mispricing explanation. Adapting the recent methodological innovation of Stambaugh et al. (2015) to classify stocks by their degree of mispricing, we show that the MAX effect concentrates amongst the most-overpriced stocks but actually reverses amongst the most-underpriced stocks. Consistent with arbitrage asymmetry, the magnitude of the MAX effect amongst overpriced stocks exceeds that amongst underpriced stocks, leading to the overall negative relation that has been well documented.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)76-90
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Banking and Finance
Volume65
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2016

Keywords

  • Idiosyncratic volatility
  • Lottery
  • MAX
  • Mispricing
  • Risk factor

Cite this

@article{b6cca81069bd40b6afce6bccc070f4fe,
title = "The MAX effect: An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations",
abstract = "This paper studies the role that risk and mispricing play in the negative relation between extreme positive returns and future returns. We document a strong 'MAX effect' in Australian equities over 1991-2013 that is robust to risk adjustment, controlling for other influential stock characteristics and, importantly, manifests in a partition of the 500 largest stocks. While there is no evidence that MAX proxies for sensitivity to risk, the findings are highly consistent with a mispricing explanation. Adapting the recent methodological innovation of Stambaugh et al. (2015) to classify stocks by their degree of mispricing, we show that the MAX effect concentrates amongst the most-overpriced stocks but actually reverses amongst the most-underpriced stocks. Consistent with arbitrage asymmetry, the magnitude of the MAX effect amongst overpriced stocks exceeds that amongst underpriced stocks, leading to the overall negative relation that has been well documented.",
keywords = "Idiosyncratic volatility, Lottery, MAX, Mispricing, Risk factor",
author = "Angel Zhong and Phil Gray",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.01.007",
language = "English",
volume = "65",
pages = "76--90",
journal = "Journal of Banking and Finance",
issn = "0378-4266",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

The MAX effect : An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations. / Zhong, Angel; Gray, Phil.

In: Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 65, 01.04.2016, p. 76-90.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The MAX effect

T2 - An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations

AU - Zhong, Angel

AU - Gray, Phil

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - This paper studies the role that risk and mispricing play in the negative relation between extreme positive returns and future returns. We document a strong 'MAX effect' in Australian equities over 1991-2013 that is robust to risk adjustment, controlling for other influential stock characteristics and, importantly, manifests in a partition of the 500 largest stocks. While there is no evidence that MAX proxies for sensitivity to risk, the findings are highly consistent with a mispricing explanation. Adapting the recent methodological innovation of Stambaugh et al. (2015) to classify stocks by their degree of mispricing, we show that the MAX effect concentrates amongst the most-overpriced stocks but actually reverses amongst the most-underpriced stocks. Consistent with arbitrage asymmetry, the magnitude of the MAX effect amongst overpriced stocks exceeds that amongst underpriced stocks, leading to the overall negative relation that has been well documented.

AB - This paper studies the role that risk and mispricing play in the negative relation between extreme positive returns and future returns. We document a strong 'MAX effect' in Australian equities over 1991-2013 that is robust to risk adjustment, controlling for other influential stock characteristics and, importantly, manifests in a partition of the 500 largest stocks. While there is no evidence that MAX proxies for sensitivity to risk, the findings are highly consistent with a mispricing explanation. Adapting the recent methodological innovation of Stambaugh et al. (2015) to classify stocks by their degree of mispricing, we show that the MAX effect concentrates amongst the most-overpriced stocks but actually reverses amongst the most-underpriced stocks. Consistent with arbitrage asymmetry, the magnitude of the MAX effect amongst overpriced stocks exceeds that amongst underpriced stocks, leading to the overall negative relation that has been well documented.

KW - Idiosyncratic volatility

KW - Lottery

KW - MAX

KW - Mispricing

KW - Risk factor

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957808521&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.01.007

DO - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.01.007

M3 - Article

VL - 65

SP - 76

EP - 90

JO - Journal of Banking and Finance

JF - Journal of Banking and Finance

SN - 0378-4266

ER -