摘要
In this study, we use Chinese A-share stock market data from 1995 to 2005 to test the persistence of the size and valueeffect and the robustness of the Fama-French three-factor model in explaining the variation in stock returns.Wefind that the three-factor model can explain the common variation in stock returns well.However, it is mis-specifiedfor the Chinese stock market.We demonstrate that the size effect and the book-to-market effect are significant andpersistent over our sample period.Interestingly, the book-to-market effect for China is much stronger than the averageones in mature markets and other emerging markets documented by Fama and French (1998).Moreover, we find noevidence to support the argument that seasonal effects can explain the results of the multifactor model.Last, our mixedobservations on firm-specific fundamentals suggest that the risk-based explanation proposed by Fama and French(1995) cannot shed light on the size and BM effect for China.In view of the features of the Chinese stock market, weinstead argue that China’s size and book-to-market effect may be attributed to syndicate speculators’ manipulation andmispricing caused by irrational investor behavior.
In this study, we use Chinese A-share stock market data from 1995 to 2005 to test the persistence of the size and valueeffect and the robustness of the Fama-French three-factor model in explaining the variation in stock returns.Wefind that the three-factor model can explain the common variation in stock returns well.However, it is mis-specifiedfor the Chinese stock market.We demonstrate that the size effect and the book-to-market effect are significant andpersistent over our sample period.Interestingly, the book-to-market effect for China is much stronger than the averageones in mature markets and other emerging markets documented by Fama and French (1998).Moreover, we find noevidence to support the argument that seasonal effects can explain the results of the multifactor model.Last, our mixedobservations on firm-specific fundamentals suggest that the risk-based explanation proposed by Fama and French(1995) cannot shed light on the size and BM effect for China.In view of the features of the Chinese stock market, weinstead argue that China’s size and book-to-market effect may be attributed to syndicate speculators’ manipulation andmispricing caused by irrational investor behavior.
