The Dog and the Straw Man: Response to “Dividend Growth Does Not Help Predict Returns Compared to Likelihood-Based Tests: An Anatomy of the Dogâ€

John H. Cochrane

Critical Finance Review, 2021, vol. 10, issue 3, 465-470

Abstract: I respond to Hjalmarsson and Kiss (2021). Cochrane (2008) does not advocate a “data-dependent null,†a testing methodology in which one always uses a sample value as null hypothesis for a test statistic. In fact, I calculate sampling distributions for a wide variety of fixed null values of the parameters. How best to impose prior information that the dividend yield is stationary remains an important question highlighted by both papers.

Keywords: Predictive regressions; Present-value relationship; Stock-return predictability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C22 G1 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/104.00000106 (application/xml)

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:now:jnlcfr:104.00000106

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Critical Finance Review from now publishers
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Lucy Wiseman ().