Stock Market Prices Do Not Follow Random Walks: Evidence From a Simple Specification Test

Andrew Lo () and A. Craig MacKinlay

No 2168, NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc

Abstract: In this paper, we test the random walk hypothesis for weekly stock market returns by comparing variance estimators derived from data sampled at different frequencies. The random walk model is strongly rejected for the entire sample period (1962-1985) and for all sub-periods for a variety of aggregate returns indexes and size-sorted portfolios. Although the rejections are largely due to the behavior of small stocks, they cannot be ascribed to either the effects of infrequent trading or time-varying volatilities. Moreover, the rejection of the random walk cannot be interpreted as supporting a mean-reverting stationary model of asset prices, but is more consistent with a specific nonstationary alternative hypothesis.

Date: 1987-02
Note: ME
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (12)

Published as The Review of Financial Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 41-66, (1988).

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.nber.org/papers/w2168.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Stock Market Prices do not Follow Random Walks: Evidence from a Simple Specification Test (1988)
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:nbr:nberwo:2168

Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from
http://www.nber.org/papers/w2168

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().