You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The Contrarian Investment Strategy does not Work in Canadian Markets
Lawrence Kryzanowski and Hao Zhang
The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis
Vol. 27, No. 3 (Sep., 1992), pp. 383-395
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the University of Washington School of Business Administration
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2331326
Page Count: 13
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Statistical significance, Financial portfolios, Stock markets, Databases, Statistical estimation, Certificates of deposit, Systematic risk, Finance, Quantitative analysis, Performance metrics
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
This paper tests the overreaction hypothesis using monthly data for stocks listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange over the 1950-1988 period. Unlike De Bondt and Thaler (1985), (1987), it finds statistically significant continuation behavior for the next one (and two) year(s) for winners and losers, and insignificant reversal behavior for winners and losers over longer formation/test periods of up to ten years. While the systematic risks of the winners decrease significantly over all test periods, the systematic risks of the losers increase significantly for only the 12-month formation/test periods (unlike Chan (1988)). The only significant change in variance from the formation to test periods occurs for the losers for the 12-month formation/test periods. The findings are robust for January versus non-January and size-based portfolios (unlike Zarowin (1989), (1990)). The findings are robust for various performance measures (specifically, market-adjusted CAR, and the Jensen (1968) and Sharpe (1966) portfolio performance measures).
The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis © 1992 University of Washington School of Business Administration