Difference of opinion and the cross-section of equity returns: Australian evidence

View/ Open
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Gharghori, Philip
See, Quin
Veeraraghavan, Madhu
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2011
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
This paper examines the relationship between difference of opinion among investors and the return on Australian equities. The paper is the first to employ dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts, abnormal turnover and idiosyncratic volatility as proxies for difference of opinion. We document a negative relationship between difference of opinion and stock returns when dispersion in analysts' forecasts and idiosyncratic volatility are employed as proxies. This result provides support for Miller's (1977) model and is consistent with the findings of Diether et al. (2002). In contrast, we find mixed results when using abnormal ...
View more >This paper examines the relationship between difference of opinion among investors and the return on Australian equities. The paper is the first to employ dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts, abnormal turnover and idiosyncratic volatility as proxies for difference of opinion. We document a negative relationship between difference of opinion and stock returns when dispersion in analysts' forecasts and idiosyncratic volatility are employed as proxies. This result provides support for Miller's (1977) model and is consistent with the findings of Diether et al. (2002). In contrast, we find mixed results when using abnormal turnover to proxy difference of opinion.
View less >
View more >This paper examines the relationship between difference of opinion among investors and the return on Australian equities. The paper is the first to employ dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts, abnormal turnover and idiosyncratic volatility as proxies for difference of opinion. We document a negative relationship between difference of opinion and stock returns when dispersion in analysts' forecasts and idiosyncratic volatility are employed as proxies. This result provides support for Miller's (1977) model and is consistent with the findings of Diether et al. (2002). In contrast, we find mixed results when using abnormal turnover to proxy difference of opinion.
View less >
Journal Title
Pacific Basin Finance Journal
Volume
19
Issue
4
Copyright Statement
© 2011 Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited.
Subject
Banking, Finance and Investment not elsewhere classified
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability
Banking, Finance and Investment