Random Walk Hypothesis

Topics: Variance, Statistical hypothesis testing, Normal distribution Pages: 30 (9644 words) Published: September 24, 2012
Stock Market Prices Do Not Follow Random Walks: Evidence from a Simple Specification Test Andrew W. Lo A. Craig MacKinlay University of Pennsylvania In this article we test the random walk hypothesis for weekly stock market returns by comparing variance estimators derived from data sampled at different frequencies. The random walk model is strongly rejected for the entire sample period (19621985) and for all subperiod for a variety of aggregate returns indexes and size-sorted portofolios. Although the rejections are due largely to the behavior of small stocks, they cannot be attributed completely to the effects of infrequent trading or timevarying volatilities. Moreover, the rejection of the random walk for weekly returns does not support a mean-reverting model of asset prices. Since Keynes’s (1936) now famous pronouncement that most investors’ decisions “can only be taken as a result of animal spirits-of a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction, and not as the outcome of a weighted average of benefits multiplied by quantitative probabilities,” a great deal of research has been devoted to examining the efficiency of stock market price formation. In Fama’s (1970) survey, the vast majority of those studies were unable to reject the ‘“efficient markets” This paper has benefited considerably from the suggestions of the editor Michael Gibbons and the referee. We thank Cliff Ball, Don Keim, Whitney K. Newey, Peter Phillips, Jim Poterba, Krishna Ramaswamy. Bill Schwert, and seminar participants at MIT, the NBER-FMME Program Meeting (November 1986). Northwestern University, Ohio State University, Princeton University, Stanford University, UCLA, University of Chicago, University of Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, University of Western Ontario, and Yale University for helpful comments. We are grateful to Stephanie Hogue, Elizabeth Schmidt, and Madhavi Vinjamuri for preparing the manuscript. Research support from the Geewax-Terker Research Program in Investments, the National Science Foundation (Grant No. SES-8520054), and the University of Pennsylvania Research Fund is gratefully acknowledged. Any errors are of course our own. Address reprint requests to Andrew Lo, Department of Finance, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. The Review of Financial Studies 1988, Volume 1, number 1, pp. 41-66. © 1988 The Review of Financial Studies 0021-9398/88/5904-013 $1.50


hypothesis for common stocks. Although several seemingly anomalous departures from market efficiency have been well documented,1 many financia1 economists would agree with Jensen’s (1978a) belief that “there is no other proposition in economics which has more solid empirical evidence supporting it than the Efficient Markets Hypothesis.” Although a precise formulation of an empirically refutable efficient markets hypothesis must obviously be model-specific, historically the majority of such tests have focused on the forecastability of common stock returns. Within this paradigm, which has been broadly categorized as the “random walk” theory of stock prices, few studies have been able to reject the random walk model statistically. However, several recent papers have uncovered empirical evidence which suggests that stock returns contain predictable components. For example, Keim and Stambaugh (1986) find statistically significant predictability in stock prices by using forecasts based on certain predetermined variables. In addition, Fama and French (1987) show that long holding-period returns are significantly negatively serially correlated, implying that 25 to 40 percent of the variation of longer-horizon returns is predictable from past returns. In this article we provide further evidence that stock prices do not follow random walks by using a simple specification test based on variance estimators. Our empirical results indicate that the random walk model is generally not consistent with the stochastic behavior of weekly...

References: Campbell, J., and G. Mankiw, 1987, “Are Output Fluctuations Transitory?” Quarterly JournaI of Economics, 102,857-880. Cochrane. J., 1987a, “How Big Is the Random Walk In GNP?” working paper, University of Chicago. Cochrane. J., 1987b, “Spectral Density Estimates of Unit Roots,” working paper, University of Chicago. Cohen, K., et al., 1983, “Friction in the Trading Process and the Estimation of Systematic Risk,” Journal of Financial Economics, 12.263-278. Dufour. J. M., 1981, “Rank Tests for Serial Dependence,” Journal of Time Analysis 2.117-128. Dufour, J. M., and R. Roy, 1985, “Some Robust Exact Results on Sample Autocorrelations and Tests of Randomness,” JournaI of Econometrics 29,257-273. Engle, R., 1982, “Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation.” Econometrica, 50,987-1007. Fama, E., 1965, “The Behavior of Stock Market Prices,” Journal of Business, 38,34-105. Fama, E., 1970, “Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work,” Journal of Finance, 25,383-417. Fama, E., and K. French, 1987, “Permanent and Temporary Components of Stock Prices,” Working Paper 178, Center for Research on Security Prices, University of Chicago; forthcoming in Journal of Political Economy. French, K., and R. Roll, 1986, “Stock Return Variances: The Arrival of Information and the Reaction of Traders,” Journal of Financial Econometrics, 17.5-26. French, K., G. W. Schwert, and R. F. Stambaugh, 1987, “Expected Stock Returns and Volatility,” Journal of Financial Economics 19,340. Fuller, W., 1976, Introduction to Statistical Time Series, Wiley, New York. Hausman, J., 1978, "Specification Tests in Econometrics,” Econometrica, 46,1251-1272.
Hulzinga, J., 1987, “An Empirical Investigation of the Long-Run Behavior of Real Exchange Rates,” Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 27. Jensen, M., 1978a, “Some Anomalous Evidence Regarding Market Efficiency,” Journal of Financial Eco. nomics, 6,95-102. Jensen, M. (ed.), 1978b. Symposium on Some Anomalous Evidence Regarding Market Efficiency (issue title), Journal of Financial Economics 6. Kcim, D., and R. Stambaugh, 1986, “Predicting Returns in Stock and Bond Markets,” Journal of Financial Economics, 17,357-390. Keynes, J. M., 1936, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, Harcourt, Brace, New York, chap. 12. Leroy, S. F., 1973. “Risk Aversion and the Martingale Property of Stock Returns,” International Economic Review, 14,436-446. Lo, A. W.. and A. C. MacKinlay, 1987a, “Stock Market Prices Do Not Follow Random Walks: Evidence from a Simple Specification Test,” Working Paper 5-87, Rodney L. White Center, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. Lo, A. W., and A. C. MacKinlay, 1987b, “The Size and Power of the Variance Ratio Test in Finite Samples: A Monte Carlo Investigation,” Working Paper 28-87, Rodney L. White Center, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; forthcoming in Journal of Econometrics. Lucas, R. E., 1978, ‘Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy,” Econometrica, 46,1429-1446. Mandelbrot, B., 1963, “The Variation of Certain Speculative Prices,” Journal of Business, 36,394-419. Merton. R. C., 1980, “On Estimating the Expected Return on the Market: An Exploratory Investigation,” Journal of Financial Economics, 8.323361. Newey, W., and K. West, 1987, “A Simple Positive Definite, Heteroscedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix,” Econometrica, 55.703-708. Poterba. J., and L Summers, 1986. “The Persistence of Volatility and Stock Market Fluctuations,” American Economic Review. 76, 1142-1151. Poterba, J., and L Summers. 1987, “Mean Reversion in Stock Returns: Evidence and Implications,” forthcoming in Journal of Financial Economics Priestley, M., 1981. Spectral Analysis and Time Series, Academic Press, London. Roll, R., 1984. “A Simple Implicit Measure of the Effective Bid-Ask Spread in an Efficient Market,” Journal of Finance, 39, 1127-l 140. Scholes, M., and J. Williams, 1977, “Estimating Betas from Nonsynchronous Data,” Journal of Financial Economics, 5,309-328. Shillcr, R. J., and P. Perron, 1985, “Testing the Random Walk Hypothesis: Power Versus Frequency of Observation,” Economics Letters. 18,381-386. Summers, L. H., 1986, “Does the Stock Market Rationally Reflect Fundamental Values?” Journal of Finance, 41,591-600. Taylor, S., 1984, “Estimating the Variances of Autocorrelations Calculated from Financial Time Series,” Applied Statistics, 33,300-308. White, H., 1980, “A Heterascedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroscedasticity,” Econometrica, 48,817-838. White, H., 1984, Asymptotic Theory for Econometricians, Academic Press, New York. White, H., and I. Domowitz. 1984, “Nonlinear Regression with Dependent Observations,” Econometrica, 52, 143-162.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • The Contrasting Evidence of the Validity of Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • Empirical Challenges of the Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • “Stock Market Prices Follow the Random Walks” Essay
  • The Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay
  • Technical Analysis & Efficient Market Hypothesis Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free