When Anomalies Are Publicized Broadly, Do Institutions Trade Accordingly?

Paul Calluzzo (), Fabio Moneta () and Selim Topaloglu ()
Additional contact information
Paul Calluzzo: Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
Fabio Moneta: Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
Selim Topaloglu: Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada

Management Science, 2019, vol. 65, issue 10, 4555-4574

Abstract: This paper studies whether institutional investors trade on 14 well documented stock market anomalies. We show that there is an increase in anomaly-based trading when information about the anomalies is readily available through academic publications and the release of necessary accounting data. This finding is more pronounced among hedge funds and institutions with high turnover, that is, the subset of investors who likely have the abilities and incentives to act on the anomalies. We directly relate the increase in trading to the observed decay in post-publication anomaly returns. Our results support the role of institutional investors in the arbitrage process and in improving market efficiency.

Keywords: anomalies; publication impact; arbitrage; institutions; hedge funds (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (24)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3066 (application/pdf)

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:inm:ormnsc:v:65:y:2019:i:10:p:4555-4574

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Management Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().