Systematic Mispricing of Speculative Stocks and the Cross-Sectional Risk-Return Trade-off

We examine the cross-section of returns from the perspective of a benchmark model that only includes systematic mispricing factors. In contrast to conclusions from standard benchmark models, we recover robust positive risk-return relations for many cross-sectional risk, distress, and friction proxies. Our findings are consistent with systematic mispricing that primarily affects speculative stocks and predominantly results in overpricing, predicting lower returns. Hence, failing to control for exposure to systematic mispricing can bias tests of risk-return trade-offs for anomalies with one speculative leg (e.g., risky, distressed, or high-friction stocks) and one nonspeculative leg. Overall, our study offers novel economic insight for this subset of anomalies, indicating that a positive risk-return trade-off can be resurrected after purging out the systematic mispricing component. The evidence suggests that a small shift in perspective generates a substantially different interpretation of the same data. This paper was accepted by Lukas Schmid, finance. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.08815 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management Science
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.08815
Primary Topic
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systematic Mispricing of Speculative Stocks and the Cross-Sectional Risk-Return Trade-off

Hannes Mohrschladt, Justin Birru, Trevor Young
Management Science
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
article

Systematic Mispricing of Speculative Stocks and the Cross-Sectional Risk-Return Trade-off

Hannes Mohrschladt, Justin Birru, Trevor Young
article en

Abstract

We examine the cross-section of returns from the perspective of a benchmark model that only includes systematic mispricing factors. In contrast to conclusions from standard benchmark models, we recover robust positive risk-return relations for many cross-sectional risk, distress, and friction proxies. Our findings are consistent with systematic mispricing that primarily affects speculative stocks and predominantly results in overpricing, predicting lower returns. Hence, failing to control for exposure to systematic mispricing can bias tests of risk-return trade-offs for anomalies with one speculative leg (e.g., risky, distressed, or high-friction stocks) and one nonspeculative leg. Overall, our study offers novel economic insight for this subset of anomalies, indicating that a positive risk-return trade-off can be resurrected after purging out the systematic mispricing component. The evidence suggests that a small shift in perspective generates a substantially different interpretation of the same data. This paper was accepted by Lukas Schmid, finance. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.08815 .

Management Science
Tulane University (US), University of Münster (DE), Fisher College (US), The Ohio State University (US), FH Münster University of Applied Sciences (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.