Indirect Tests of the Haugen-Lakonishok Small-Firm/January Effect Hypotheses: Window Dressing versus Performance Hedging

Cheng Few Lee, David C Porter and Daniel G Weaver

The Financial Review, 1998, vol. 33, issue 2, 177-93

Abstract: Equity mutual fund data from 1976-93 is used to test hypotheses that distinguish window dressing from performance hedging. No significant difference is found pre/post 1983 in the number of funds choosing non-December fiscal year ends or in the percentage of dollars invested when comparing December/non-December fiscal year ends. Significant differences are found in both January returns for mutual funds with December/non-December fiscal year ends and in one month returns for funds with/without a fiscal year end in the previous month. Therefore, if the small-firm/January effect is portfolio manager related, performance hedging, not window dressing, is the more probable source for the "excess" returns. Copyright 1998 by MIT Press.

Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:finrev:v:33:y:1998:i:2:p:177-93

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0732-8516

Access Statistics for this article

The Financial Review is currently edited by Cynthia J. Campbell and Arnold R. Cowan

More articles in The Financial Review from Eastern Finance Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().