Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T08:43:10.428Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Alternative Industry Performance and Risk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Frank K. Reilly  and
Eugene F. Drzycimski
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Industry analysis has long been a cornerstone in both the academic and professional segments of the investment community. Concepts such as “an industry providing downside protection” or “another is certain to outperform the market” have been prevalent throughout the profession. The importance of industry analysis in terms of stock price changes has been suggested by King, while the influence of the industry factor on corporate earnings changes has been documented by Brown and Ball. These studies and others have indicated that industry analysis has been an important part of security valuation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , June 1974 , pp. 423 - 446
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 King, Benjamin F., “Market and Industry Factors in Stock Price Behavior,” Journal of Business, vol. 39, No. 1, Part 2 (January 1966), pp. 139–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Brown, Philip and Ball, Ray, “Some Preliminary Findings on the Association between the Earnings of a Firm; Its Industry, and the Economy,” Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 5 Supplement (1967), pp. 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 For a further discussion of this point of view and a summary of the King results and the Brown and Ball study, see Reilly, Frank K., “The Misdirected Emphasis in Security Valuation,” Financial Analysts Journal, vol. 29, No. 1 (January–February 1973), pp. 54–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The King study is also summarized in Brealey, Richard A., An Introduction to Risk and Return from Common Stocks (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1969), pp. 55–65.Google Scholar

4 Lataneé, Henry A. and Tuttle, Donald L., “Framework for Forming Probability Beliefs,” Financial Analysts Journal, vol. 24, No. 4 (July–August 1968), pp. 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Cheney, Harlan L., “The Value of Industry Forecasting As an Aid to Portfolio Management,” Appalachian Financial Review, vol. 1, No. 5 (Spring 1970), pp. 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Brigham, Eugene F. and Pappas, James L., “Rates of Return on Common Stock,” Journal of Business, vol. 42, No. 3 (July 1969), pp. 302–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Tysseland, Milford S., “Further Tests of the Validity of the Industry Approach to Investment Analysis,” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, vol. 6, No. 2 (March 1971), pp. 835–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Gaumnitz, Jack E., “The Influence of Industry Factors in Stock Price Movements.”Paper presented at Southern Finance Association Meeting,October 1970. Subsequently released as University of Kansas, School of Business, Working Paper No. 42 (June 1971).Google Scholar

9 An outstanding example showing the importance of employing unique market adjustment is, Fama, E. F., Fisher, L., Jensen, M., and Roll, R., “The Adjustment of Stock Prices to New Information,” International Economic Review, vol. 10, No. 1 (February 1969), pp. 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 King, “Market and Industry Factors,” p. 154.

11 Dietz, P., “Further Tests of the Validity of the Industry Approach to Investment Analysis: Discussion,” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, vol. 6, No. 2 (March 1971), pp. 849–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Reilly, Frank K. and Sherr, Lawrence A., “The Shift Method – A Technique for Measuring the Differential Performance of Stocks,” Mississippi Valley Journal of Business and Economics, vol. 9, no. 1 (Fall 1973), pp. 28–40.Google Scholar

13 Sharpe, William F., “Capital Asset Prices: Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk,” Journal of Unance, vol. 19, No. 3 (September 1964), pp. 425–442.Google Scholar

14 Ibid.

15 Blume, Marshall E., “On the Assessment of Risk,” Journal of finance, vol. 26, No. 1, (March 1971), pp. 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Ibid., p. 7.

17 The expectations of industries with beta values less than one are rather small based upon the findings of Blume, Ibid., p. 6, in which only seven out of 4,357 betas were negative (0.16 percent).

18 Farrell, Maurice L., ed., The Dow-Jones Investor's Handbook, 1973 Edition (Princeton, N.J.: Dow-Jones Books), pp. 54–56.Google Scholar

19 The market average originally selected was the New York Stock Exchange Composite Index. The prices available on the NYSE Composite Index were weekly closing prices as compared with Thursday closing prices used for the computation of the thirty Barron's Industry Averages. Preliminary results indicated that the one-day difference in closing prices between two indexes caused a substantial change in the relationship between the two. Therefore, the Standard & Poor's 500 was adopted because of the availability of Thursday closing prices for this series.

20 Standard S Poor's Trade and Securities Statistics Security Price Index Record. (Orange, Conn.: Standard & Poor's Corporation, Publishers, 1970 edition)Google Scholar. Standard & Poor's four main group indexes are computed at five-minute intervals. S & P does not publish these frequent readings, but does maintain a record of them. Indexes based on hourly readings are published in the Daily News Section of S & P's Corporation Records. Daily high, low, and closing indexes are published in their weekly “Outlook” and their monthly “Current Statistics.”

21 ” Reilly and Sherr, “The Shift Method.” The subperiods were selected on the basis of when a major change appeared in direction of the DJIA. Given the change in direction, the daily figures surrounding the time of change were examined to discover the day when the closing average was at its peak or trough. These peaks and troughs generally conform to those specified in Bellemore, Douglas H. and Ritchie, John C., Investment Principles, Practice and Analysis (South-Western Publishing Co., 1969), pp. 96–97Google Scholar. They are also quite similar to the periods in Van Horne, James C., “New Listings and Their Price Behavior,” Journal of Finance, vol. 25, No. 4 (September 1970), p. 792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 For a discussion of growth stocks see, Reilly, Frank K., “Differentiation between Types of Companies and Types of Stocks,” ississippi Valley Journal of Business and Economics, vol. 7, No. 1, (Fall 1972), pp. 35–43.Google Scholar

23 See Cohen, Jerome B. and Zinbarg, Edward D., Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management (Homewood, Ill;: Richard D. Irwin, 1967), pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

24 For a discussion of tests of significance see, Chou, Ya-lun, Statistical Analysis (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969), pp. 644–647.Google Scholar

25 Blume, “On Assessment of Risk,” pp. 6–7; Levy, Robert A., “On the ShortTerm Stationarity of Beta Coefficients,” Financial Analysts Journal, vol. 27, No. 6 (November–December 1971), pp. 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 Latané” and Tuttle, “Framework for Forming,” Brown, Philip and Ball, Ray, “An Empirical Evaluation of Accounting Income Numbers,” Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 6 (Autumn 1968), pp. 159–178.Google Scholar