In today’s fast world, where information flows freely and transactions happen at the speed of light, the significance of cybersecurity cannot be overstated. But it’s no longer just a concern for IT professionals or tech enthusiasts. The specter of well-documented hacks and phishing incidents casts a long shadow over investors, acting as powerful illustrations of how security breaches, vulnerabilities, and cyber threats can reverberate through financial markets. In this blog post, we’ll delve into the intricate relationship between cybersecurity risk and stock performance, uncovering how these digital hazards can influence financial markets.

Social media are often the main and primary choice of information in almost every area of our lives, and they also influence the financial decisions of retail traders and investors. A lot of people give opinions anywhere on the Internet; some are respected, others are disrespected, some are more well-known, and others obscure. But the power of those people, financial influencers, as a group, is substantial as they create the market sentiment. But what’s the real value of their advice? Can we extract useful information from their opinions?

Machine learning models have been successfully employed to cross-sectionally predict stock returns using lagged stock characteristics as inputs. The analyzed paper challenges the conventional wisdom that more training data leads to superior machine learning models for stock return predictions. Instead, the research demonstrates that training market capitalization group-specific machine learning models can yield superior results for stock-level return predictions and long-short portfolios. The paper showcases the impact of model regularization and highlights the importance of careful model design choices.

Traditional asset pricing literature has yielded numerous anomaly variables for predicting stock returns, but real-world outcomes often disappoint. Many of these predictors work best in small-cap stocks, and their profitability tends to decline over time, particularly in the United States. As market efficiency improves, exploiting these anomalies becomes harder. The fusion of machine learning with finance research offers promise. Machine learning can handle extensive data, identify reliable predictors, and model complex relationships. The question is whether these promises can deliver more accurate stock return predictions…

What are our expectations from the ESG theme on the portfolio management level? The question is whether ESG investing also offers some kind of “alternative alpha”, or outperformance against the traditional benchmarks. There are managers and academics who are enthusiastic and hope for the outperformance of the good ESG stocks. However, the academic research community is really split. Some academic papers show positive alpha for “Saints” (good ESG stocks); others show significantly positive alpha for “Sinners” (bad ESG stocks). So, how it’s in reality? Is it “Good to be Bad”? Or the other way around?

In a game of poker, it is usually said that when you do not know who the patsy is, you’re the patsy. The world of finance is not different. It is good to know who your counterparties are and which investors/traders drive the return of anomalies you focus on. We discussed that a few months ago in a short blog article called “Which Investors Drive Factor Returns?“. Different sets of investors and their approaches drive different anomalies, and we have one more paper that helps uncover the motivation of investors and traders for trading and their impact on anomaly returns.