MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1948972648 · doi:10.1177/0312896214565118

Delisted stocks and momentum: Evidence from a new Australian dataset

2015· article· en· W1948972648 on OpenAlexaff
Thanh Huynh, Daniel R. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexMomentum (technical analysis)Market liquiditySample (material)Financial economicsEconomicsBusinessEconometricsMonetary economicsFinancePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore the impact of delisting on the performance of the momentum trading strategy in Australia. We employ a new dataset of hand-collected delisting returns for all Australian stocks and provide the first study outside the U.S. to jointly examine the effects of delisting and missing returns on the magnitude of momentum profits. In the sample of all stocks, we find that the profitability of momentum strategies depends crucially on the returns of delisted stocks, especially on bankrupt firms. In the sample of large stocks, however, the momentum effect remains strong after controlling for the effect of delisted stocks, in contrast to the U.S. evidence in which delisting returns can explain 40% of momentum profits. As these large stocks are less exposed to liquidity risks, the momentum effect in Australia is even more puzzling than in the U.S.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.155
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.127 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ManagementSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207