Finding high-quality data with a long history can be challenging. We have already examined How To Extend Historical Daily Bond Data To 100 years, How To Extend Daily Commodities Data To 100 years, and How To Build a Multi-Asset Trend-Following Strategy With a 100-year Daily History. Following the theme of our previous articles, we decided to extend historical data of a new factor, the Dollar Factor. This article explains how to combine multiple data sources to create a 100-year daily data history for the Dollar Factor (the value of the United States Dollar relative to its most important trading partners’ currencies), introduces data sources, and explains the methodology.

Hello all,

What have we accomplished in the last month?

– A new ETF Replication report
– 9 new Quantpedia Premium strategies have been added to our database
– 10 new related research papers have been included in existing Premium strategies during the last month
– Additionally, we have produced 10 new backtests written in QuantConnect code
– And finally, 1+3 new blog posts that you may find interesting have been published on our Quantpedia blog in the previous month

Despite Warren Buffett’s claim that the MVE/GDP ratio is “probably the best single measure of where valuations stand at any given moment,” its predictive ability has been the subject of relatively little academic scrutiny. A novel paper by Swinkels and Umlauft (2022) fills this gap and examines whether the MVE/GDP ratio can forecast international equity returns, which complements the existing research limited to the United States. A simple trading strategy that invests in countries with the highest model-predicted returns yields statistically significant and economically meaningful alpha over a corresponding buy-and-hold benchmark while experiencing lower volatility and maximum drawdown.

Choosing the correct portfolio-construction techniques is very important. The new paper that is written by Amar Soebhag, Bart van Vliet, and Patrick Verwijmeren explores the various ways in which different design choices in portfolio construction can, either intentionally or unintentionally, influence and distort the statistical results of a market factor’s research. Their takeaway is that seemingly small differences in design can significantly impact the resultant portfolio’s performance.

The size effect assumes a negative relationship between average stock returns and firm size. In other words, it states that low capitalization stocks outperform stocks with large capitalization. Although generally accepted, the size effect keeps being challenged. Researchers have been asking how important the firm size characteristic actually is, and whether it is possible to replace the traditional size factor of Fama and French asset pricing model (1993) with more accurate factor. Recently, one potential challenger has emerged – so-called takeover factor, employed by Easterwood et al. (2022). In their study, they work on the assumption that small firms are often targets of takeovers, which gives us a different perspective on merger and acquisition news in regards to size effect. Their results show that M&A component of average returns explains the size premium entirely.