What does “Neighbouring Assets” teach us? – 01

Now, the question here is: “which characteristics” derive this performance? But wait! Here is exactly the main point of my paper: characteristics jointly derive this performance.

So, asking the question of “which characteristics” is not really that accurate. For instance, if I consider size in isolation, there’s literally no profitability in this strategy. But if I add size to a set of other characteristics, the spread between portfolios starts to appear.

In one table, I show that if we add more characteristics, the performance starts increasing. Does the performance increase because of the new characteristics? Not necessarily. But it increases because of the interactions between new characteristics and the previous ones.

How the interaction between characteristics should enter the model? For instance, should we consider size×bm, or size2×bm or size2×bm2 or size2×bm2×momentum …? We don’t really know the answer. And we are subject to the curse of dimensionality. Simple interactions might have been working decades ago but probably investors learned the mispricing and traded against them, which makes the relationship between characteristics and expected returns more complicated.

Here is the beauty of “Neighbouring Assets” that we let data speak. The neighbouring assets will tell you about this relationship without providing a closed-form solution.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: