 Thin‐Trading Effects in Beta: Bias v. Estimation ErrorPiet Sercu, Martina Vandebroek and Tom Vinaimont Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 2008, vol. 35, issue 9‐10, 1196-1219 Abstract: Abstract: Two regression coefficients often used in Finance, the Scholes‐Williams (1977) quasi‐multiperiod ‘thin‐trading’ beta and the Hansen‐Hodrick (1980) overlapping‐periods regression coefficient, can both be written as instrumental‐variables estimators. Competitors are Dimson's beta and the Hansen‐Hodrick original OLS beta. We check the performance of all these estimators and the validity of the t‐tests in small and medium samples, in and outside their stated assumptions, and we report their performances in a hedge‐fund style portfolio‐management application. In all experiments as well as in the real‐data estimates, less bias comes at the cost of a higher standard error. Our hedge‐portfolio experiment shows that the safest procedure even is to simply match by size and industry; any estimation just adds noise. There is a clear relation between portfolio variance and the variance of the beta estimator used in market‐neutralizing the portfolio, dwarfing the beneficial effect of bias. Date: 2008 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jbfnac:v:35:y:2008:i:9-10:p:1196-1219 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Journal of Business Finance & Accounting is currently edited by P. F. Pope, A. W. Stark and M. Walker More articles in Journal of Business Finance & Accounting from Wiley Blackwell |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.