At the moment, there is a lot of attention surrounding overnight anomalies in various types of financial markets. While such effects have been well documented in research, especially in US equities and derivatives, there are other asset classes that are not as well addressed. A recent (2022) paper from Jiang, Luo, and Ye contributed appealing evidence in favor of validating these phenomena in the Chinese market. We highlight the finding that the market MKT factor beta premium is earned exclusively overnight and tend to reverse intraday (and in smaller potency also value HML and profitability RMW), which is the same finding as for the US equities. In contrast, the size SMB factor exhibit significantly opposite pattern: positive intraday premium and negative overnight premium (and the same for investment CMA factor).

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.

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.

Every year, Quantpedia’s team investigates thousands of academic research papers to bring you the most promising ideas from the academic world. We read papers, identify ideas and backtest them to build our unique database. As a result, we have already identified hundreds of factors and built tools to help you orient better in the broad universe of trading strategies and systematic investment factors.

And now, we are opening the possibility to all external researchers, quants, and portfolio managers to contribute to Quantpedia.