Model Comparison with Transaction Costs

Andrew Detzel, Robert Novy‐marx and Mihail Velikov

Journal of Finance, 2023, vol. 78, issue 3, 1743-1775

Abstract: Failing to account for transaction costs materially impacts inferences drawn when evaluating asset pricing models, biasing tests in favor of those employing high‐cost factors. Ignoring transaction costs, Hou, Xue, and Zhang (2015, Review of Financial Studies, 28, 650–705) q‐factor model and Barillas and Shanken (2018, The Journal of Finance, 73, 715–754) six‐factor models have high maximum squared Sharpe ratios and small alphas across 205 anomalies. They do not, however, come close to spanning the achievable mean‐variance efficient frontier. Accounting for transaction costs, the Fama and French (2015, Journal of Financial Economics, 116, 1–22; 2018, Journal of Financial Economics, 128, 234–252) five‐factor model has a significantly higher squared Sharpe ratio than either of these alternative models, while variations employing cash profitability perform better still.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13225

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:jfinan:v:78:y:2023:i:3:p:1743-1775

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.afajof.org/membership/join.asp

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Finance from American Finance Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().