Risk‐return associations: Paradox or artifact? An empirically tested explanation

Robert M. Wiseman and Philip Bromiley

Strategic Management Journal, 1991, vol. 12, issue 3, 231-241

Abstract: This study tests Fiegenbaum and Thomas's suggestion that Bowman's risk‐return paradox may be due to measuring risk by variance in data that have trends. Results indicate that trends in ROA and ROE cannot explain the pattern of risk‐return associations found in previous research.

Date: 1991
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120306

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:stratm:v:12:y:1991:i:3:p:231-241

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0143-2095

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Strategic Management Journal from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().