Factor Investing: A Decomposition of Returns into Risk and Mispricing

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, University of Isfahan, Iran

2 University of Isfahan

Abstract

Objective:

This study examines the role of the underlying nature of factor returns in the context of factor-based investing. Higher returns from investment factors or financial anomalies may arise either from exposure to greater risk or from mispricing that stem from market inefficiencies, behavioral biases, and cognitive mistakes made by investors. A review of the literature reveals that, for many investment factors, there is no definitive answer as to whether their returns are driven by risk or by mispricing—leaving the question open to further investigation. Meanwhile, most factor investing strategies have been developed within a risk-based interpretative framework. This research addresses whether differentiating and accounting for the nature of factor returns can influence the performance of factor investing strategies. More specifically, the goal is to evaluate the dual interpretations—risk-based and mispricing-based—for several widely used investment factors, and to determine whether incorporating mispricing-based interpretations alongside risk-based ones can enhance factor return predictability and ultimately improve investment performance.



Method:

The study introduces a novel perspective in which factor returns are allowed to simultaneously reflect both risk and mispricing components—unlike traditional views that attribute returns solely to one or the other. Given the lack of developed behavioral multi-factor models in Iran’s capital market, the study utilizes U.S. market data and focuses on well-established investment factors in that context. First, a common mispricing factor is constructed using behavioral components drawn from existing behavioral asset pricing models. Next, the risk and mispricing characteristics of each investment factor are quantified monthly using the beta from the CAPM (to reflect risk exposure) and the beta relative to the mispricing factor (to capture mispricing). These characteristics are then assigned to each factor on a monthly basis. In the final stage, the parametric optimization model of Brandt et al. (2009) is employed to assess whether using both risk and mispricing characteristics—alongside predictors of market risk conditions and behavioral sentiment—can enhance the performance of factor investing strategies. Performance outcomes from different optimization scenarios are compared with those of a standard equal-weight strategy.



Findings:

In the section analyzing mispricing characteristics of different investment factors, the results indicate that the short legs of the value and momentum factors are more exposed to mispricing than their long legs. Conversely, in the size factor, the long side shows greater mispricing exposure. The findings for value and size align with expectations: the short leg of the value factor typically includes growth stocks, which are more speculative and therefore more prone to mispricing. Similarly, the size factor's long leg includes small-cap stocks, whose smaller size makes them more susceptible to speculative behavior, explaining their higher mispricing risk.

However, when risk and mispricing characteristics are used alone in optimization strategies, they do not lead to performance improvement and underperform even relative to equal-weight strategies. In contrast, when these characteristics are combined with predictors of market-wide risk and behavioral sentiment, the performance of factor investing improves significantly—both in terms of mean return and Sharpe ratio—surpassing the results of single-factor models and equal-weighted approaches.



Conclusion:

The results demonstrate that decomposing factor returns into risk and mispricing components provides a more nuanced understanding of factor behavior over time. Incorporating both characteristics, along with market-level predictive variables for risk and sentiment, can enhance the effectiveness of factor-based investment strategies. Overall, the findings suggest that moving beyond a purely risk-based interpretation of factor returns and embracing a dual-component view can contribute meaningfully to the development of the factor investing literature.

Keywords


  1. Alquist, R., Israel, R., & Moskowitz, T. (2018). Fact, fiction, and the size effect. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 45(1), 34-61.
  2. Ang, A., Goetzmann, W. N., & Schaefer, S. (2009). Evaluation of active management of the Norwegian government pension fund–global. report to the Norwegian Ministry of Finance.
  3. Arnott, R. D., Harvey, C. R., Kalesnik, V., & Linnainmaa, J. T. (2021). Reports of value’s death may be greatly exaggerated. Financial Analysts Journal, 77(1), 44-67.
  4. Asness, C. S., Frazzini, A., Israel, R., & Moskowitz, T. J. (2015). Fact, fiction, and value investing. Published in Journal of Portfolio Management42(1).
  5. Asness, C. S. (2016). The siren song of factor timing aka “smart beta timing” aka “style timing”. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 42(5), 1-6.
  6. Asness, C., Frazzini, A., Israel, R., Moskowitz, T. J., & Pedersen, L. H. (2018). Size matters, if you control your junk. Journal of Financial Economics129(3), 479-509.
  7. Asness, C. S., Frazzini, A., & Pedersen, L. H. (2019). Quality minus junk. Review of Accounting Studies, 24(1), 34-112.
  8. Bajalan, S., & AliAkbari Bidokhti, A. (2022). Performance evaluation of factor investing (smart beta) in Tehran stock exchange. Financial Research Journal, 24(3), 353- 374. (In Persian)
  9. Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2006). Investor sentiment and the cross‐section of stock returns. The journal of Finance, 61(4), 1645-1680.
  10. Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2007). Investor sentiment in the stock market. Journal of economic perspectives, 21(2), 129-151.
  11. Baker, M., Wurgler, J., & Yuan, Y. (2012). Global, local, and contagious investor sentiment. Journal of financial economics, 104(2), 272-287.
  12. Banz, R. W. (1981). The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of financial economics, 9(1), 3-18.
  13. Basu, S. (1977). Investment performance of common stocks in relation to their price‐earnings ratios: A test of the efficient market hypothesis. The journal of Finance, 32(3), 663-682.
  14. Birru, J., Mohrschladt, H., & Young, T. (2022). Disentangling anomalies: Risk versus mispricing. Fisher College of Business Working Paper, (2020-03), 029.
  15. Blin, O., Ielpo, F., Lee, J., & Teiletche, J. (2020). Alternative risk premia timing: A point-in-time macro, sentiment, valuation analysis. Forthcoming in Journal of Systematic Investing.
  16. Brandt, M. W., Santa-Clara, P., & Valkanov, R. (2009). Parametric portfolio policies: Exploiting characteristics in the cross-section of equity returns. The Review of Financial Studies22 (9), 3411-3447.
  17. Cazalet, Z., & Roncalli, T. (2014). Facts and fantasies about factor investing. Available at SSRN 2524547.
  18. Daniel, K., & Titman, S. (1997). Evidence on the characteristics of cross sectional variation in stock returns. the Journal of Finance52(1), 1-33.
  19. Daniel, K., & Titman, S. (2006). Market reactions to tangible and intangible information. The Journal of Finance, 61(4), 1605-1643.
  20. Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D., & Sun, L. (2020). Short-and long-horizon behavioral factors. The review of financial studies, 33(4), 1673-1736.
  21. De Bondt, W. F., & Thaler, R. (1985). Does the stock market overreact?. The Journal of finance40(3), 793-805.
  22. De Long, J. B., Shleifer, A., Summers, L. H., & Waldmann, R. J. (1990). Noise trader risk in financial markets. Journal of political Economy, 98(4), 703-738.
  23. DeMiguel, V., Garlappi, L., & Uppal, R. (2009). Optimal versus naive diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy?. The review of Financial studies, 22(5), 1915-1953.
  24. Engelberg, J., McLean, R. D., & Pontiff, J. (2018). Anomalies and news. The Journal of Finance, 73(5), 1971-2001.
  1. Eyvazloo, R., Ghahramani, A. & Ajam, A. (2017). Analyzing the Performance of Fama and French Five-factor Model Using GRS Test. Financial Research Journal, 18(4), 691-714. (In Persian)
  2. Fadaenezhad, M., & Eyvazloo, R. (2006). The Value Premium in Capital Asset Pricing; the Case of Tehran Stock Exchange. Financial Research Journal, 8(22). (In Persian)
  1. Fama, E. F., & French, K. (1992). The cross-section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance47(2), 427-465.
  2. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1989). Business conditions and expected returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of financial economics25(1), 23-49.
  3. Fama, E., & French, K. (1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of financial economics33(1), 3-56.
  4. Gilchrist, S., & Zakrajšek, E. (2012). Credit spreads and business cycle fluctuations. American economic review102(4), 1692-1720.Graham, B., and Dodd, D. (1934). Security Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  5. Hirshleifer, D., Hou, K., & Teoh, S. H. (2011). The accrual anomaly: Risk or mispricing? forthcoming. Management Science.
  6. Huang, D., Jiang, F., Tu, J., & Zhou, G. (2015). Investor sentiment aligned: A powerful predictor of stock returns. The Review of Financial Studies, 28(3), 791-837.
  7. Ilmanen, A., Israel, R., Moskowitz, T. J., Thapar, A. K., & Lee, R. (2021). How do factor premia vary over time? A century of evidence. A Century of Evidence (February 18, 2021).
  8. Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications for stock market efficiency. The Journal of finance, 48(1), 65-91.
  9. Kagkadis, A., Nolte, I., Nolte, S., & Vasilas, N. (2024). Factor timing with portfolio characteristics. The Review of Asset Pricing Studies14(1), 84-118.
  10. Kozak, S., Nagel, S., & Santosh, S. (2018). Interpreting factor models. The Journal of Finance, 73(3), 1183-1223.
  11. Kyosev, G. (2019). Essays on Factor Investing 
  12. Lakonishok, J., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1994). Contrarian investment, extrapolation, and risk. The journal of finance49(5), 1541-1578.
  13. Leung, W. S., Evans, K. P., & Mazouz, K. (2020). The R&D anomaly: Risk or mispricing?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 115, 105815.
  14. Maloney, T., & Moskowitz, T. J. (2021). Value and Interest Rates: Are Rates to Blame for Value’s Torments?. The Journal of Portfolio Management.
  1. Mirzaie, M. , Khani, A. & Botshekan, M. (2020). Developing Multifactor Asset Pricing Models Using Firm's Life Cycle. Financial Research Journal, 21(4), 545-569. (In Persian).
  2. Novy-Marx, R. (2014). Predicting anomaly performance with politics, the weather, global warming, sunspots, and the stars. Journal of Financial Economics, 112(2), 137-146.
  3. Penman, S., & Reggiani, F. (2013). Returns to buying earnings and book value: Accounting for growth and risk. Review of Accounting Studies, 18, 1021-1049.
  1. Khajavi, Shokrollah., Pourgoudarzi, (2020). Investigating the effect of default risk on explanatory power of Fama-French five factor model (Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange). Financial Knowledge of Securities Analysis,97-109. (In Persian).
  2. Stagnol, L., Lopez, C., Roncalli, T., & Taillardat, B. (2021). Understanding the Performance of the Equity Value Factor. Available at SSRN 3813572.
  3. Stagnol, L., Lopez, C., Roncalli, T., & Taillardat, B. (2021). Understanding the Performance of the Equity Value Factor. Available at SSRN 3813572.
  4. Stambaugh, R. F., & Yuan, Y. (2017). Mispricing factors. The review of financial studies, 30(4), 1270-1315.
  5. Stambaugh, R. F., Yu, J., & Yuan, Y. (2012). The short of it: Investor sentiment and anomalies. Journal of financial economics, 104(2), 288-302.
  6. Welch, I., & Goyal, A. (2008). A comprehensive look at the empirical performance of equity premium prediction. The Review of Financial Studies, 21(4), 1455-1508.
  7. Wiest, T. (2023). Momentum: what do we know 30 years after Jegadeesh and Titman’s seminal paper?. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 37(1), 95-114.