{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01932367149758454, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.475, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Momentum is Not an Anomaly

In this paper, we develop a new approach to test whether momentum is indeed an anomaly in that it reflects delayed reactions, or continued overreactions, to firm specific news. Our methodology does not depend on a specific model of expected returns and, more importantly, does not require a decomposition of momentum profits. Yet we provide distinct testable predictions that can discriminate between the two diametrically opposed causes for the profitability of momentum strategies: time-series continuation in the firm-specific component of returns, and cross-sectional differences in expected returns and systematic risks of individual securities. Our results show that, contrary to the common belief in the profession, momentum is not an anomaly; we find no evidence of continuation in the idiosyncratic component of individual-security returns. The evidence is instead consistent with momentum being driven entirely by cross-sectional differences in expected returns and risks of individual securities.