262,204 research outputs found

    Chasing the ESG factor

    No full text
    We analytically compare two dominant methodologies for the construction of an ESG factor: the time-series (ratings used to sort stocks) and cross-sectional (ratings used to weight stocks) approaches. Differences in ESG rating and exposure to other firm characteristics imply an ex ante expected return spread between the two factors. We construct a cross-sectional factor (i) featuring a targeted rating, thus allowing comparability with other factors, (ii) neutralizing exposure to other firm characteristics, and (iii) not harming diversification through stock screening. Using ratings from several data vendors, we document strong variations of the factor alpha in the time series and across vendors. The conditional alpha is negatively related to the level of media attention for ESG and positively related to variations in media attention

    Macroeconomic environment, money demand and portfolio choice

    No full text
    We solve the portfolio choice problem of a long-term investor holding real balances, a stock index, multiple bonds and a remunerated money market account. We relate the factors driving the term structure and the equity premium to macroeconomic variables. When expected inflation decreases, the investor allocates more to the stock market, long-term bonds and unrewarded real balances, reducing short-maturity deposits. The optimal money demand: i) entails time variations in risk aversion; ii) reduces bond market positions when the importance of money in preferences increases, with little impact on the stock market participation; and iii) has quantitative implications in terms of horizon effects

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    No full text
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore