Showing 1 - 10 of 27 results

Sort By
  • Relevance
  • Newest
  • Oldest

Data Set

The Devil in HML's Details: Factors, Daily

We have updated and extended our data set for “The Devil in HML’s Details” (Asness and Frazzini, 2013). We include long/short HML Devil returns for the U.S. and 23 international equity markets updated monthly.

Data Set

The Devil in HML's Details: Factors, Monthly

We have updated and extended our data set for “The Devil in HML’s Details” (Asness and Frazzini, 2013). We include long/short HML Devil returns for the U.S. and 23 international equity markets updated monthly.

Data Set

Value and Momentum Everywhere: Portfolios, Monthly

We have updated our data set for our paper “Value and Momentum Everywhere,” in which we find consistent value and momentum return premia across eight diverse markets and asset classes, and a common factor structure among their returns.

Data Set

Value and Momentum Everywhere: Factors, Monthly

We have updated and extended the data set for the paper, “Value and Momentum Everywhere.” Our research shows consistent value and momentum return premia in eight diverse markets and asset classes, and a common factor structure among their returns.

Data Set

How Do Factor Premia Vary Over Time? A Century of Evidence, Factor Data Monthly

This is the updated data set related to the paper “How Do Factor Premia Vary Over Time? A Century of Evidence,” in which we examine four prominent factor premia – value, momentum, carry, and defensive – over a century from six asset classes.

Perspective

The Long Run Is Lying to You

Everyone knows the value strategy has been a grave disappointment out-of-sample since, say, 1990, based on realized returns. However, odd as it might sound, the realized average return on a strategy is not necessarily the best estimate of its true long-term expected return. In fact, the right estimate of the true long-term expected return of the value strategy is considerably higher than many might think if they were to just look at simple past returns – especially right now. Why? I explain it in this note (spoiler: it has to do with changes in valuation).

Perspective

A Gut Punch

Sure, the last nearly three years have hurt, but at least the explanation was straightforward. A core part of our process, value, suffered. So when value rebounds, we will too, right? Well, not necessarily. To be clear, if value makes a prolonged major recovery, we certainly believe we will as well, but over short periods that doesn’t have to happen. Unfortunately, this is what we have experienced since the end of October. Regardless, it does not change my view one drop that going forward multi-factor investing is a darn good bet in a world that needs some darn good bets.

Perspective

Is (Systematic) Value Investing Dead?

When value has underperformed for so long, it’s natural and proper that people wonder if it’s ever going to work again. To test the popular explanations for why value investing is “broken,” Cliff tweaks the value factor’s construction to remove the stocks that best fit these stories. He finds no “this time is different” explanation holds water, affirming our belief that the medium-term odds are rather dramatically on value’s side.

Journal Article

Is (Systematic) Value Investing Dead?

Undoubtedly, many systematic approaches to value investing have suffered recently. However, we find the popular suggestion that value investing is dead to be premature. We find expectations of fundamental information have been and continue to be an important driver of security returns.

Perspective

The Valuesburg Address

One score and eight years ago Fama and French brought forth on this world, a new factor, conceived in either risk or behavioral effects, and dedicated to the proposition that all portfolios are not created equal. Now we are engaged in a great drawdown, testing whether investors in that factor, or any factor so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure…