Skip Navigation



RFS Advance Access published online on October 25, 2006
Review of Financial Studies, doi:10.1093/rfs/hhl042
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Accepted Manuscript)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/4/1577    most recent
hhl042v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boudoukh, J.
Right arrow Articles by Whitelaw, R. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies.

Article

The Myth of Long-Horizon Predictability

Jacob Boudoukh 1, Matthew Richardson 2, and Robert F. Whitelaw 2
1 The Caesarea Center, IDC, 3 Kanfei Nesharim, Herzlia 46150, Israel and NBER
2 New York University, Stern School of Business, 44 W. 4th St., New York, NY 10012 and NBER


  Abstract
The prevailing view in finance is that the evidence for long-horizon stock return predictability is significantly stronger than that for short horizons. We show that for persistent regressors, a characteristic of most of the predictive variables used in the literature, the estimators are almost perfectly correlated across horizons under the null hypothesis of no predictability. For the persistence levels of dividend yields, the analytical correlation is 99% between the 1- and 2-year horizon estimators and 94% between the 1- and 5-year horizons. Common sampling error across equations leads to ordinary least squares coefficient estimates and R2s that are roughly proportional to the horizon under the null hypothesis. This is the precise pattern found in the data. We perform joint tests across horizons for a variety of explanatory variables and provide an alternative view of the existing evidence.

We would like to thank an anonymous referee, Matthew Spiegel, Jeff Wurgler, the paper's discussants John Cochrane, Motohiro Yogo and Shmuel Kandel, and seminar participants at Yale University, New York University, University of Maryland, Stanford University, U.C. Berkeley, the 5-Star Conference at the Salomon Center, the NBER Asset Pricing Program, and the Finance and Accounting Conference at Tel Aviv University for helpful comments.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 REV FINANC STUDHome page
T. Bollerslev, G. Tauchen, and H. Zhou
Expected Stock Returns and Variance Risk Premia
Rev. Financ. Stud., November 1, 2009; 22(11): 4463 - 4492.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 REV FINANC STUDHome page
D. E. Rapach, J. K. Strauss, and G. Zhou
Out-of-Sample Equity Premium Prediction: Combination Forecasts and Links to the Real Economy
Rev. Financ. Stud., August 11, 2009; (2009) hhp063v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.