MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301366084 · doi:10.18374/jife-22-3.4

FLYING HIGH – INVESTING IN THE CANNABIS INDUSTRY

2022· article· en· W4301366084 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert N. Killins, Daniel P. Liston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Finance and Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisBusinessPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the performance of publicly-traded cannabis equities. Particularly, the goal of this research is to provide academics and practitioners with empirical evidence on how the traditional Fama-French factors, calendar effects, and social media interest explain the equity returns of the relatively new cannabis industry. Design/methodology/approach – This study uses a sample of cannabis related firms that trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange along with two indices that capture the overall cannabis industry in Canada and the U.S. Using daily data, that spans from January 2014 to April 2019, we apply both OLS and GARCH methodologies to multiple asset pricing models of equity returns. In addition to the Fama-French factors, this research also tests for calendar anomalies such as the day-of-the-week and January effect and a factor related to Twitter interest of cannabis stocks (#potstocks). Findings – First, our results show that cannabis related investments tend to have low market betas. Second, the three-, four-, and five-factor asset pricing models suggest that the size, profitability, and investment factors tend to have negative and statistically significant coefficients. Third, the coefficient on #potstocks also tends to be positive and significant, suggesting that investors can monitor investor interest via social media platforms and exploit this information to capture excess returns in the cannabis sector. Finally, the day-of-the-week effect suggests that Mondays tend to have statistically significant higher returns, while there is little evidence of the January effect. Research limitations/implications – This paper serves as a starting point for future research on cannabis investing. As the cannabis market continues to grow and evolve, within Canada and internationally, more financial capital will be required. Thus, both retail and institutional investors around the globe will need to understand the returns and risks associated with this relatively new investment opportunity. As the data sets capturing cannabis-related firms become more robust, further research surrounding the financial activities of cannabis-related firms will be required (e.g., risk management, corporate finance, financing decisions). Moreover, further research in other geographic regions will be required as regulations and legalization of cannabis continue to evolve. Finally, future studies can explore how COVID 19 lockdowns potentially impacted cannabis stock returns. Keywords Cannabis stocks, alternative investments, sin stocks, CAPM

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Finance and EconomicsSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207