Neue Studien – September 2022

Hinweis: Ich veröffentliche die Liste interessanter Studien hier mit einer Verzögerung. Die aktuelle Aufstellung erhalten Sie bei Anmeldung für meine monatliche Rundmail (kostenlos und werbefrei).


Why Do Loss Firms Pay Taxes?

On average 68% of firms reporting a current pre-tax loss make positive income tax payments. […] We find that book-tax income reporting differences, firms‘ multinational vs. domestic status, non-operating income, special items, extraordinary items and discontinued operations, firms‘ tax loss carry back potential, and firm size are important determinants of why loss firms are paying taxes and also the magnitude of those taxes.

Fazit: Steuern sind kompliziert – erstaunlich viele Unternehmen, die Verluste erzielen, müssen trotzdem zahlen (aber einige mit Milliardengewinn dagegen kaum).


Indirect Costs of Financial Distress

The indirect costs of financial distress are driven by clients reducing purchases from distressed suppliers, rather than by suppliers cutting back their supply of products and/or services. […] Financial shocks may be amplified by the economic costs of financial distress due to real estate shocks through the balance sheet channel.

Fazit: Ein typischer prozyklischer Effekt, der ohnehin schwache Unternehmen weiter schwächt.


Inflation Hedging: A Dynamic Approach Using Online Prices

We use high-frequency inflation indices derived from millions of product prices scraped from the websites of multi-channel retailers in 21 countries. We show that these series contain forward-looking information with respect to official government inflation releases. […] A dynamic strategy offers investors the potential to capture the price appreciation of nominal bonds when realized inflation is below market expectations and the price appreciation of TIPS when realized inflation is above market expectations.

Fazit: Hochfrequente Preisdaten von Produkten im Internet laufen den Inflationsdaten voraus.


Can Returns Breed Like Rabbits? Econometric Tests for Fibonacci Retracements

The Fibonacci retracement strategy in individual stocks has a positive and significant alpha and possesses beneficial market-timing properties. […] Returns are higher (lower) when the previous day’s closing price is closer to a Fibonacci support (resistance). […] The most informative retracements are 0%, 38.2%, 50%, 61.8%, and 100%.

Fazit: Den Untersuchungen zufolge soll Markttiming mit Fibonacci-Retracements funktionieren.


The Psychological Underpinnings of Why Systematic Trading is Superior to Discretionary Trading

Hayek advocated the use of rules as a means of overcoming our inability to comprehend the full complexity of reality in its entirety. The usefulness of a rules-based approach to trading is illustrated by highlighting the well-documented inability of retail and institutional investors to outperform standard industry indices, which are themselves rule-based systems.

Fazit: Systematische Trader haben die besseren Erfolgsaussichten.


The Impact of Word-of-Mouth Communication on Investors‘ Decisions and Asset Prices

Given the evidence that Word Of Mouth (WOM) is an important source of information for investors that – on balance – does not help them make better decisions, there is reason to believe that WOM can generate mispricing in the stock market.

Fazit: Im Zweifel ist es ein Nachteil für Anleger, auf Mund-zu-Mund-Propaganda zu hören.


The Passive-Ownership Share Is Double What You Think It Is

Previous calculations assume all passive investing is done through index mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which puts the US passive-ownership share at only 15%. […] The reality is that a lot of investors invest passively but do so outside the public universe of index funds and ETFs.

Fazit: Die Autoren schätzen den Anteil passiver Investoren am US-Markt auf mindestens 37,8 Prozent.


Off Target: On the Underperformance of Target-Date Funds

The main strength of the TDF model is that it o ers a convenient and diversified retirement savings strategy in a single fund. […] The main weakness is that investors are captive to the fees charged by the fund and the fund sponsor’s investment choices. […] From 2008 to 2019, investors have incurred $28.2 billion in excess costs.

Fazit: Gute Idee, schlechte Umsetzung (zu teuer).

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert