REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 151 references
Robustness or Crowding: Experimental Design for Trading Strategy Capacity
T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read A within-date experiment comparing parallel sleeves cannot measure aggregate crowding, because an unrestricted calendar effect absorbs it exactly.
desk verdict The core non-identification result is real and clean, but it is a theorem about an additive-exposure model, not about all within-date designs as the abstract implies. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing object is the exposure mapping of Assumption 3.2 combined with the balanced-design assumption 3.4: each sleeve's interference enters through the overlap matrix $\Gamma$, and in the homogeneous case every row of $\Gamma$ equals a common vector $\gamma^\top$ (uniform overlap $\Gamma = N^{-1}\iota\iota^\top$ gives average deployment). This puts the aggregate crowding vector $g_t = c_{\mathrm{agg}}(\gamma^\top W_t)\,\iota$ in $\mathrm{span}(\iota)$, making it observationally equivalent to the unrestricted calendar component $\mu_t$. The argument then runs through contrast weights: $q^\top\iota = 0$ removes $\mu_t$ for arbitrary $\mu_t$, and because $g_t$ is in $\mathrm{span}(\iota)$, the same condition removes aggregate crowding. The within-block trajectory of contrasts, summarised by the accumulation fractions $F_j$, carries the attenuation and deattenuation results, while $\|M_\iota g_t\|$ measures how much crowding information survives when overlap is heterogeneous.
What would settle it
Measure the overlap matrix $\Gamma$ of a real multi-sleeve book from daily executed positions and form a within-date contrast between two sleeves with materially different $\Gamma$ rows while holding own-scale fixed: if the contrast shows a component that moves with measured aggregate deployment across dates, the homogeneous-overlap premise behind the non-identification result fails in the field.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central discovery is a non-identification result for aggregate crowding under homogeneous overlap. When every sleeve's exposure to the strategy's aggregate position enters through the same scalar $\gamma^\top W_t$, the aggregate crowding term $g_t = c_{\mathrm{agg}}(\gamma^\top W_t)\,\iota$ lies in the span of the calendar intercept, and the pair $(\mu_t, c_{\mathrm{agg}})$ is observationally equivalent to $(\mu_t - c_{\mathrm{agg}}(\gamma^\top W_t), 0)$ at every date. Hence no estimator using within-date variation can identify aggregate crowding: the zero-sum contrast that removes arbitrary calendar shocks also removes the crowding term. A same-date design recovers only the controlled direct effect $\mathrm{CDE}(\beta,\beta_0)$ of a sleeve's own scale at a fixed average deployment, scaled by the attenuation factor $R_L(u)$; reaching the strategy-level total effect $TE_{\mathrm{strat}}$ requires either heterogeneous overlap, which moves $g_t$ out of $\mathrm{span}(\iota)$, or cross-date variation that accepts calendar exposure.
Load-bearing premise
The result depends on homogeneous overlap: every sleeve's crowding enters through the same scalar $\gamma^\top W_t$, so the aggregate crowding vector lies in the span of the calendar intercept; if overlap is heterogeneous, within-date contrasts can separate crowding from calendar effects.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- A same-date experiment with homogeneous overlap identifies only the own-sleeve controlled direct effect at the prevailing average deployment, not the effect of scaling the whole strategy.
- Estimating aggregate crowding requires either deliberately heterogeneous overlap across sleeves, which restores information through the component $\|M_\iota g_t\|$, or cross-date variation in average deployment, which costs calendar exposure; the paper's calibration puts that cost at a factor of 23.9 for 100 sleeves under staggered assignment.
- A finite holding period understates the steady-state erosion effect by a factor $G_L$; the terminal contrast is a model-free lower bound, and deattenuation is reliable only when the accumulation kernel is transported rather than estimated from the experiment's own trajectory.
- The sharp identified set for capacity on a finite grid is not a confidence set: a bracket between two estimated arm means covers the true capacity less than half the time, and sequential refinement makes coverage worse, so arm placement and the reporting rule must be fixed separately.
- An impact model fitted to execution records bounds capacity from one side only, overstating capacity by an amount that grows with the share of crowding in total erosion, from 10% to 51% in the paper's calibration.
Reading between the lines
- A practical pre-test follows from the paper's own Remark 3.21: before committing to a within-date design, compute the overlap matrix from historical positions and estimate $\|M_\iota g_t\|$; the size of that component says whether the design could identify aggregate crowding at all.
- The same observational-equivalence failure likely appears beyond trading: any experiment in which a shared accumulated resource—a recommendation model, a matching algorithm, a common supplier—is the treatment of interest and all units receive the same exposure will see the shared effect absorbed by time fixed effects. Testing this in a platform experiment would be a direct transfer of Proposition
- The calibration implies a division of labour in practice: single-strategy shops cannot run the proposed experiment at feasible cost, so the realistic adopters are institutions able to randomise many sleeves simultaneously; for everyone else, the paper's one-sided impact-model bound and the model-free terminal bound are the usable outputs.
- Because a finite hold understates steady-state erosion, the paper's numbers imply that observational capacity estimates built from finite-hold return histories should be read as upper bounds on own-sleeve capacity rather than point estimates, a reinterpretation the authors leave implicit.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper asks what controlled experiment would measure the capital capacity of a trading strategy. It proposes parallel sleeves of one strategy, randomly assigned to deployment scales, held for L periods, and contrasted within the same calendar dates. The main formal results are: (i) under geometric erosion, a finite hold recovers only a fraction F_L or G_L of the steady-state effect, and the choice of block summary is a choice of estimand; (ii) the within-date sleeve contrast identifies only the own-sleeve controlled direct effect at a fixed average deployment; (iii) under homogeneous overlap (Prop 3.18), aggregate crowding is absorbed by an unrestricted date effect and is not identified from within-date variation by any estimator; (iv) heterogeneous overlap or cross-date variation can restore some identification at a cost quantified by the scaling formulas; and (v) a calibration on thirteen long–short strategies prices a realistic study, compares it with impact-model capacity bounds, and is frankly labeled as a scenario rather than an estimate. The paper is unusually explicit about transported bridges, one-sided bounds, and the distinction between identified sets and confidence sets.
Significance. If the central identification theorem is accepted, the paper makes a substantive design contribution: it separates estimands that are often conflated, gives a sharp identified set for capacity, derives explicit minimum-variance recovery weights, quantifies replication saturation, and prices the opportunity cost of arm placement. The proof of Prop 3.18 is clean and does not assume its conclusion, and the constructive reading in Remark 3.21 is valuable. The paper also earns credit for reporting its limitations honestly: the transported persistence and publication bridges are stated as untestable, the scale response is described as a local linearization, and the model-free one-sided bound is presented alongside the model-assisted point estimate. The main caveat is that the headline mutual-exclusion claim is proved only for the additive exposure model, so the scope of the claim needs to be qualified before publication.
major comments (1)
- [Assumption 3.2; Prop 3.18; abstract and §1] The non-identification result and the mutual-exclusion claim are proved under Assumption 3.2, which restricts erosion to the additive pair c_own(W_pt) + c_agg(gamma_p^T W_t). This additive separability is load-bearing and is not flagged as a maintained restriction. If instead the outcome were Y_pt = mu_t - c_own(W_pt) - c_agg(A_t) - lambda W_pt A_t + eps_pt with A_t = gamma^T W_t common to all sleeves, then a within-date contrast between scales beta_1 and beta_0 would have mean -[c_own(beta_1)-c_own(beta_0)] - lambda(beta_1-beta_0)A_t, which varies with A_t. An experiment that randomizes aggregate deployment A_t across blocks while still comparing sleeves within a date would identify lambda with zero exposure to the arbitrary calendar component mu_t. Thus 'robustness and aggregate identification are mutually exclusive' is a theorem about the additive exposure model, not about within-date designs as such. The abstract and introduction state the trade-off unconditionally; Remark 3.8's local-linearization caveat does not address the cross-partial term. Please either extend the model to allow an own-aggregate interaction and characterize when the exclusion survives, or qualify Assumption 3.2, the abstract, and the introductory claims accordingly.
minor comments (6)
- [Throughout] Numbered results are often called 'Theorem' in the text but stated as 'Proposition' (for example, 'Theorem 3.13' for Proposition 3.13, 'Theorem 3.18' for Proposition 3.18, and 'Theorem B.2' for Proposition B.2); the cross-references should be harmonized with the actual labels.
- [Assumption 3.1] The sentence 'By Theorem 3.1 the observed adjusted return is a function of the full deployment vector' refers to a Theorem 3.1 that does not appear in the paper; this appears to be a copy-editing error.
- [Section 5] The first paragraph repeats the sentence 'Three consequences follow for practice.'; one copy should be removed.
- [Prop 3.16 and surrounding text] The notation Delta_infty = -c(beta) is correct only for a zero control arm; for a general arm pair (beta, beta_0) the steady-state contrast is -[c(beta)-c(beta_0)], and this should be stated wherever the attenuation formula is applied to nonzero baseline arms.
- [Remark 3.21] The value ||M_iota g_t|| = 0.27 for six sleeves in two disjoint blocks is stated without derivation; since it is used to quantify the gain from heterogeneous overlap, a short derivation or an explicit reference to Section G would help the reader.
- [Abstract] The sentence 'the comparison that makes the experiment robust is the one that prevents it from measuring the crowding capacity is about' is ungrammatical and should be rewritten.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the core non-identification result is a conditional theorem derived from stated assumptions, the calibrated magnitudes are labeled scenario inputs, and the self-citations are not load-bearing.
full rationale
The paper's central impossibility claim (Proposition 3.18) is a genuine observation-equivalence proof, not a conclusion smuggled into its inputs. It starts from the explicit additive exposure map in Assumption 3.2 and the homogeneous-overlap row condition in Assumption 3.4, then shows that under a common row gamma^T the aggregate crowding vector g_t lies in span(iota), so the pair (mu_t, c_agg) is observationally equivalent to (mu_t - c_agg(gamma^T W_t), 0). This is a derivation from maintained assumptions; it does not presuppose the conclusion. The paper also states the conditional scope of the result: 3.18(ii) and Remark 3.21 show that heterogeneous overlap moves g_t out of span(iota) and recovers information about c_agg, so the impossibility is explicitly not claimed for all within-date designs. The calibrated values (a = 0.9177, c(1) = 0.123, sigma = 3.611, rho = 0.186) are presented in Table 2 as an 'empirically anchored scenario' and are used to price the experiment and to run internal Monte Carlo checks; they are not used to prove the attenuation formulas, the identification bounds, or the one-sided impact-model bound, all of which are algebraic consequences of the stated model. The two transported inputs are explicitly flagged: 'Neither bridge is testable here, and it is worth being concrete about why,' so no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The only self-citations are to Rodriguez Dominguez (2023, 2025) for the driver screen and sensitivity metric; the paper says 'We use the driver screen and the metric; no design result below depends on the causal reading,' so these citations are not load-bearing for any of the paper's theorems. The derivations in Section C are standard algebra and model-based proofs, with no step in which an estimand is defined in terms of the quantity it is said to predict. The paper is self-contained against its own benchmarks and does not exhibit circular reasoning.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (8)
- Persistence a =
0.9177
- Scale response at reference scale c(1) =
0.123
- Curvature zeta of scale response =
0.05 (chosen)
- Withdrawal hurdle tau_out =
0.150 (chosen)
- Uncrowded edge mu =
0.703
- Residual volatility sigma =
3.611
- Cross-sleeve residual correlation rho_bar =
0.186
- Exposure tilt lambda^T phi =
0.0348
assumptions (9)
- domain assumption Erosion enters the conditional mean additively: E[A_{i,t}(w) | F_t] = mu_{i,t} - g_i(w; Z_t).
- domain assumption Exposure consistency: outcome depends on the full assignment vector only through (z_pb, gamma_p^T z_b), with overlap weights gamma_pq >= 0 summing to one; own and aggregate erosion channels are additive.
- domain assumption Homogeneous overlap: Gamma = N^{-1} iota iota^T, or more generally a common row gamma^T, so gamma_p^T W_t is the same for every sleeve.
- domain assumption The calendar component mu_t in Y_pt is unrestricted.
- domain assumption No anticipation and uniform contraction of the erosion recursion under constant policies.
- domain assumption Erosion is scalar, first-order Markov, stable, time-homogeneous, with h_{t+1} = a h_t + (1-a) c(W_t).
- domain assumption Transport bridges: persistence of the strategy's erosion stock equals that of the reconstructed borrow tail, and publication affects adjusted returns only by moving deployment, so c(1) = 0.123 equals total structural erosion at scale 1.
- standard math Standard causal inference tools are valid: g-computation identity, positivity, consistency, and no unmeasured confounding under block randomization.
- domain assumption Price impact is concave in size and decays slowly and only partially, so an accumulating erosion stock is the right aggregate.
invented entities (1)
-
Erosion stock h_t
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Robustness or Crowding: Experimental Design for Trading Strategy Capacity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5NZDDWGO
@misc{pith2026260808405,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Robustness or Crowding: Experimental Design for Trading Strategy Capacity},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5NZDDWGO}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08405}
}
read the original abstract
How much capital a trading strategy can absorb before its edge disappears is a causal question about how much is deployed, but it is answered with observational proxies that rest on incompatible assumptions. We ask what experiment would answer it instead, and show that two features of the problem interact to constrain any answer. Deployed capital erodes the edge gradually, so a trial of fixed length measures less than the eventual effect; and parallel implementations of one strategy trade the same securities, so they are not independent units. Comparing implementations on the same date removes market-wide shocks, which is what makes the comparison credible. But the crowding created by the strategy's own accumulated position is common to those implementations too, and an arbitrary date effect absorbs it exactly: the comparison that makes the experiment robust is the one that prevents it from measuring the crowding capacity is about. A same-date design recovers one implementation's private response at the prevailing level of aggregate positioning, and reaching the aggregate effect requires either implementations with deliberately different exposure to that position or variation in it over time. We characterise what each route identifies and what it costs, establish how far a fixed holding period understates the eventual effect and how to correct for it, and show what a finite set of deployment levels can and cannot reveal. A calibration on a purpose-built panel illustrates the resulting design rules and prices a study that would follow them.
Figures
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
2009 , edition=
Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference , author=. 2009 , edition=
2009
-
[2]
Mathematical Modelling , volume=
A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period , author=. Mathematical Modelling , volume=
-
[3]
2015 , publisher=
Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences , author=. 2015 , publisher=
2015
-
[4]
Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=
Toward causal inference with interference , author=. Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=
-
[5]
Annals of Applied Statistics , volume=
Estimating average causal effects under general interference, with application to a social network experiment , author=. Annals of Applied Statistics , volume=
-
[6]
2015 , publisher=
Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction , author=. 2015 , publisher=
2015
-
[7]
Statistical Science , volume=
Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects , author=. Statistical Science , volume=
-
[8]
Applied Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference from Incomplete-Data Perspectives , pages=
The propensity score with continuous treatments , author=. Applied Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference from Incomplete-Data Perspectives , pages=
Show all 151 references
-
[9]
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B , volume=
Non-parametric methods for doubly robust estimation of continuous treatment effects , author=. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B , volume=
-
[10]
Annals of Statistics , volume=
Gaussian approximation of suprema of empirical processes , author=. Annals of Statistics , volume=
-
[11]
Annals of Statistics , volume=
Time-uniform, nonparametric, nonasymptotic confidence sequences , author=. Annals of Statistics , volume=
-
[12]
Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=
Statistical methods related to the law of the iterated logarithm , author=. Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=
-
[13]
1996 , publisher=
Local Polynomial Modelling and Its Applications , author=. 1996 , publisher=
1996
-
[14]
Econometrica , volume=
Confidence intervals for partially identified parameters , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[15]
Econometrica , volume=
More on confidence intervals for partially identified parameters , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[16]
2002 , edition=
Observational Studies , author=. 2002 , edition=
2002
-
[17]
Econometrica , volume=
Continuous auctions and insider trading , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[18]
Journal of Risk , volume=
Optimal execution of portfolio transactions , author=. Journal of Risk , volume=
-
[19]
2018 , publisher=
Trades, Quotes and Prices: Financial Markets Under the Microscope , author=. 2018 , publisher=
2018
-
[20]
Review of Financial Studies , volume=
A taxonomy of anomalies and their trading costs , author=. Review of Financial Studies , volume=
-
[21]
Journal of Financial Economics , volume=
Scale and skill in active management , author=. Journal of Financial Economics , volume=
-
[22]
Working paper, AQR Capital Management , year=
Trading costs , author=. Working paper, AQR Capital Management , year=
-
[23]
2006 , publisher=
Optimal Design of Experiments , author=. 2006 , publisher=
2006
-
[24]
Biometrika , volume=
Hypothesis testing when a nuisance parameter is present only under the alternative , author=. Biometrika , volume=
-
[25]
Econometrica , volume=
Inference when a nuisance parameter is not identified under the null hypothesis , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[26]
Annals of Applied Statistics , volume=
Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining Freedman's critique , author=. Annals of Applied Statistics , volume=
-
[27]
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A , volume=
The consequences of adjustment for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment , author=. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A , volume=
-
[28]
Journal of Finance , volume=
Is There a Replication Crisis in Finance? , author=. Journal of Finance , volume=
-
[29]
Review of Financial Studies , volume=
Fast and Slow Arbitrage: The Predictive Power of (Persistent) Capital Flows for Factor Returns , author=. Review of Financial Studies , volume=
-
[30]
Review of Financial Studies , volume=
and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns , author=. Review of Financial Studies , volume=
-
[31]
Review of Financial Studies , volume=
Arbitrage Portfolios , author=. Review of Financial Studies , volume=
-
[32]
Physical Review X , volume=
Anomalous price impact and the critical nature of liquidity in financial markets , author=. Physical Review X , volume=
-
[33]
Market Microstructure and Liquidity , volume=
Slow decay of impact in equity markets , author=. Market Microstructure and Liquidity , volume=
-
[34]
Quantitative Finance , volume=
Impact is not just volatility , author=. Quantitative Finance , volume=
-
[35]
Strict universality of the square-root law in price impact across stocks: a complete survey of the Tokyo stock exchange , author=
-
[36]
Journal of Causal Inference , volume=
An approach to nonparametric inference on the causal dose--response function , author=. Journal of Causal Inference , volume=
-
[37]
Doubly robust inference on causal derivative effects for continuous treatments , author=
-
[38]
Statistics in Medicine , volume=
Causal inference for continuous multiple time point interventions , author=. Statistics in Medicine , volume=
-
[39]
Management Science , volume=
Design and Analysis of Switchback Experiments , author=. Management Science , volume=
-
[40]
Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=
Time series experiments and causal estimands: exact randomization tests and trading , author=. Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=
-
[41]
Review of Financial Studies , volume=
The Growth and Limits of Arbitrage: Evidence from Short Interest , author=. Review of Financial Studies , volume=
-
[42]
Elements of Information Theory , author=
-
[43]
Econometrica , volume=
The Distributed Lag between Capital Appropriations and Expenditures , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[44]
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh , volume=
On Least Squares and Linear Combination of Observations , author=. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh , volume=
-
[45]
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B , volume=
Optimum Experimental Designs , author=. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B , volume=
-
[46]
Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=
A Stochastic Approximation Method , author=. Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=
-
[47]
Biometrics , volume=
Continual Reassessment Method: A Practical Design for Phase 1 Clinical Trials in Cancer , author=. Biometrics , volume=
-
[48]
Machine Learning with Applications , volume=
Portfolio Optimization based on Neural Networks Sensitivities from Assets Dynamics respect Common Drivers , author=. Machine Learning with Applications , volume=. 2023 , doi=
2023
-
[49]
2025 , note=
Causal Portfolio Optimization: Principles and Sensitivity-Based Solutions , author=. 2025 , note=
2025
-
[50]
Management Science , volume=
Optimal Experimental Design for Staggered Rollouts , author=. Management Science , volume=
-
[51]
Management Science , volume=
Experimenting in Equilibrium , author=. Management Science , volume=
-
[52]
2025 , note=
Treatment Effects in Market Equilibrium , author=. 2025 , note=
2025
-
[53]
Econometrica , volume=
Monotone Treatment Response , author=. Econometrica , volume=
-
[54]
Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias , volume =
Andrews, Isaiah and Kasy, Maximilian , journal =. Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias , volume =
-
[55]
and Pischke, J
Angrist, Joshua D. and Pischke, J. The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design Is Taking the Con out of Econometrics , volume =. Journal of Economic Perspectives , number =
-
[56]
arXiv , author =:2402.15585 , note =
Inference for Regression with Variables Generated by AI or Machine Learning , year =. arXiv , author =:2402.15585 , note =
-
[57]
Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing , volume =
Benjamini, Yoav and Hochberg, Yosef , journal =. Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing , volume =
-
[58]
and Green, Richard C
Berk, Jonathan B. and Green, Richard C. , journal =. Mutual Fund Flows and Performance in Rational Markets , volume =
-
[59]
Performative Prediction in a Stateful World , volume =
Brown, Gavin and Hod, Shlomi and Kalemaj, Iden , booktitle =. Performative Prediction in a Stateful World , volume =
-
[60]
and Howard, Philip and Lundblad, Christian T
Brown, Gregory W. and Howard, Philip and Lundblad, Christian T. , journal =. Crowded Trades and Tail Risk , volume =
-
[61]
and Pedersen, Lasse Heje , journal =
Brunnermeier, Markus K. and Pedersen, Lasse Heje , journal =. Market Liquidity and Funding Liquidity , volume =
-
[62]
Business News and Business Cycles , volume =
Bybee, Leland and Kelly, Bryan and Manela, Asaf and Xiu, Dacheng , doi =. Business News and Business Cycles , volume =. Journal of Finance , number =
-
[63]
A Spectral Decomposition of the Attractor of Piecewise-Contracting Maps of the Interval , volume =
Calder. A Spectral Decomposition of the Attractor of Piecewise-Contracting Maps of the Interval , volume =. doi:10.1017/etds.2020.29 , journal =
2020 doi
-
[64]
When Anomalies Are Publicized Broadly, Do Institutions Trade Accordingly? , volume =
Calluzzo, Paul and Moneta, Fabio and Topaloglu, Selim , journal =. When Anomalies Are Publicized Broadly, Do Institutions Trade Accordingly? , volume =
-
[65]
Colin and Gelbach, Jonah B
Cameron, A. Colin and Gelbach, Jonah B. and Miller, Douglas L. , journal =. Robust Inference with Multiway Clustering , volume =
-
[66]
and Shaikh, Azeem M
Canay, Ivan A. and Shaikh, Azeem M. , booktitle =. Practical and Theoretical Advances in Inference for Partially Identified Models , volume =
-
[67]
Liquidity Characteristics of Market Anomalies and Institutional Trading , volume =
Cao, Charles and Liang, Bing and Yao, Tong and Zhang, Andrew , doi =. Liquidity Characteristics of Market Anomalies and Institutional Trading , volume =. Journal of Financial Economics , pages =
-
[68]
, journal =
Carhart, Mark M. , journal =. On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance , volume =
-
[69]
and Zimmermann, Tom , doi =
Chen, Andrew Y. and Zimmermann, Tom , doi =. Open Source Cross-Sectional Asset Pricing , volume =. Critical Finance Review , number =
-
[70]
and Zimmermann, Tom , booktitle =
Chen, Andrew Y. and Zimmermann, Tom , booktitle =. Publication Bias in Asset Pricing Research , year =
-
[71]
and Zimmermann, Tom , howpublished =
Chen, Andrew Y. and Zimmermann, Tom , howpublished =. Open Source Asset Pricing Data, October 2025 Release , year =
2025
-
[72]
Deep Learning in Asset Pricing , volume =
Chen, Luyang and Pelger, Markus and Zhu, Jason , doi =. Deep Learning in Asset Pricing , volume =. Management Science , number =
-
[73]
Performative Prediction with Bandit Feedback: Learning through Reparameterization , volume =
Chen, Yatong and Tang, Wei and Ho, Chien-Ju and Liu, Yang , booktitle =. Performative Prediction with Bandit Feedback: Learning through Reparameterization , volume =
-
[74]
Double/Debiased Machine Learning for Treatment and Structural Parameters , volume =
Chernozhukov, Victor and Chetverikov, Denis and Demirer, Mert and Duflo, Esther and Hansen, Christian and Newey, Whitney and Robins, James , journal =. Double/Debiased Machine Learning for Treatment and Structural Parameters , volume =
-
[75]
and Lazo-Paz, Renato and Moneta, Fabio , doi =
Chincarini, Ludwig B. and Lazo-Paz, Renato and Moneta, Fabio , doi =. Crowded Spaces and Anomalies , volume =. Journal of Banking & Finance , pages =
-
[76]
Have Capital Market Anomalies Attenuated in the Recent Era of High Liquidity and Trading Activity? , volume =
Chordia, Tarun and Subrahmanyam, Avanidhar and Tong, Qing , doi =. Have Capital Market Anomalies Attenuated in the Recent Era of High Liquidity and Trading Activity? , volume =. Journal of Accounting and Economics , number =
-
[77]
and McCracken, Michael W
Clark, Todd E. and McCracken, Michael W. , journal =. Tests of Equal Forecast Accuracy and Encompassing for Nested Models , volume =
-
[78]
and Malloy, Christopher J
Cohen, Lauren and Diether, Karl B. and Malloy, Christopher J. , journal =. Supply and Demand Shifts in the Shorting Market , volume =
-
[79]
Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and Optimality , volume =
Cutler, Joshua and D. Stochastic Approximation with Decision-Dependent Distributions: Asymptotic Normality and Optimality , volume =. Journal of Machine Learning Research , number =
-
[80]
Securities Lending, Shorting, and Pricing , volume =
Duffie, Darrell and G. Securities Lending, Shorting, and Pricing , volume =. Journal of Financial Economics , number =
-
[81]
and Ince, Ozgur S
Edelen, Roger M. and Ince, Ozgur S. and Kadlec, Gregory B. , journal =. Institutional Investors and Stock Return Anomalies , volume =
-
[82]
arXiv , author =:2301.10643 , note =
Automatic Locally Robust GMM with Machine-Learning-Generated Regressors , year =. arXiv , author =:2301.10643 , note =
-
[83]
and French, Kenneth R
Fama, Eugene F. and French, Kenneth R. , journal =. Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds , volume =
-
[84]
and French, Kenneth R
Fama, Eugene F. and French, Kenneth R. , journal =. A Five-Factor Asset Pricing Model , volume =
-
[85]
and MacBeth, James D
Fama, Eugene F. and MacBeth, James D. , journal =. Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests , volume =
-
[86]
arXiv , author =:2503.16098 , primaryclass =
Partial Identification in Moment Models with Incomplete Data: A Conditional Optimal Transport Approach , year =. arXiv , author =:2503.16098 , primaryclass =
-
[87]
Taming the Factor Zoo: A Test of New Factors , volume =
Feng, Guanhao and Giglio, Stefano and Xiu, Dacheng , journal =. Taming the Factor Zoo: A Test of New Factors , volume =
-
[88]
Dissecting Characteristics Nonparametrically , volume =
Freyberger, Joachim and Neuhierl, Andreas and Weber, Michael , journal =. Dissecting Characteristics Nonparametrically , volume =
-
[89]
Gabaix, Xavier and Koijen, Ralph S. J. , booktitle =. In Search of the Origins of Financial Fluctuations: The Inelastic Markets Hypothesis , volume =
-
[90]
Multi-dimensional Piecewise Contractions Are Asymptotically Periodic , year =
Gaiv. Multi-dimensional Piecewise Contractions Are Asymptotically Periodic , year =. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , note =
-
[91]
Factor Models, Machine Learning, and Asset Pricing , volume =
Giglio, Stefano and Kelly, Bryan and Xiu, Dacheng , doi =. Factor Models, Machine Learning, and Asset Pricing , volume =. Annual Review of Financial Economics , pages =
-
[92]
Asset Pricing with Omitted Factors , volume =
Giglio, Stefano and Xiu, Dacheng , doi =. Asset Pricing with Omitted Factors , volume =. Journal of Political Economy , number =
-
[93]
Empirical Asset Pricing via Machine Learning , volume =
Gu, Shihao and Kelly, Bryan and Xiu, Dacheng , journal =. Empirical Asset Pricing via Machine Learning , volume =
-
[94]
, journal =
Hansen, Lars Peter and Hodrick, Robert J. , journal =. Forward Exchange Rates as Optimal Predictors of Future Spot Rates: An Econometric Analysis , volume =
-
[95]
arXiv , author =:2310.16608 , primaryclass =
Performative Prediction: Past and Future , year =. arXiv , author =:2310.16608 , primaryclass =
-
[96]
and Liu, Yan and Zhu, Heqing , journal =
Harvey, Campbell R. and Liu, Yan and Zhu, Heqing , journal =. and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns , volume =
-
[97]
Intermediary Asset Pricing: New Evidence from Many Asset Classes , volume =
He, Zhiguo and Kelly, Bryan and Manela, Asaf , journal =. Intermediary Asset Pricing: New Evidence from Many Asset Classes , volume =
-
[98]
, journal =
Hodrick, Robert J. , journal =. Dividend Yields and Expected Stock Returns: Alternative Procedures for Inference and Measurement , volume =
-
[99]
Replicating Anomalies , volume =
Hou, Kewei and Xue, Chen and Zhang, Lu , journal =. Replicating Anomalies , volume =
-
[100]
Piecewise Contractions , volume =
Jain, Sakshi and Liverani, Carlangelo , doi =. Piecewise Contractions , volume =. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , pages =
-
[101]
Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency , volume =
Jegadeesh, Narasimhan and Titman, Sheridan , journal =. Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency , volume =
-
[102]
and Pedersen, Lasse Heje , doi =
Jensen, Theis Ingerslev and Kelly, Bryan T. and Pedersen, Lasse Heje , doi =. Is There a Replication Crisis in Finance? , volume =. Journal of Finance , number =
-
[103]
and Moskowitz, Tobias J
Kaplan, Steven N. and Moskowitz, Tobias J. and Sensoy, Berk A. , journal =. The Effects of Stock Lending on Security Prices: An Experiment , volume =
-
[104]
and Malamud, Semyon and Zhou, Kangying , journal =
Kelly, Bryan T. and Malamud, Semyon and Zhou, Kangying , journal =. The Virtue of Complexity in Return Prediction , volume =
-
[105]
and Pruitt, Seth and Su, Yinan , doi =
Kelly, Bryan T. and Pruitt, Seth and Su, Yinan , doi =. Characteristics Are Covariances: A Unified Model of Risk and Return , volume =. Journal of Financial Economics , number =
-
[106]
and Lo, Andrew W
Khandani, Amir E. and Lo, Andrew W. , journal =. What Happened to the Quants in August 2007? Evidence from Factors and Transactions Data , volume =
2007
-
[107]
Anomaly-Driven Demand , year =
Kj. Anomaly-Driven Demand , year =
-
[108]
Koijen, Ralph S. J. and Yogo, Motohiro , doi =. A Demand System Approach to Asset Pricing , volume =. Journal of Political Economy , number =
-
[109]
Shrinking the Cross-Section , volume =
Kozak, Serhiy and Nagel, Stefan and Santosh, Shrihari , journal =. Shrinking the Cross-Section , volume =
-
[110]
Lahiri, S. N. , publisher =. Resampling Methods for Dependent Data , year =
-
[111]
Lazo-Paz, Renato and Moneta, Fabio and Chincarini, Ludwig B. , doi =. Crowded Spaces and Anomalies , volume =. Journal of Banking & Finance , pages =
-
[112]
Asymptotics in Statistics: Some Basic Concepts , year =
Le Cam, Lucien and Yang, Grace Lo , edition =. Asymptotics in Statistics: Some Basic Concepts , year =
-
[113]
Lee, Charles M. C. and Martin, Ian and Nagel, Stefan , journal =. Machine Learning for Time-Varying Market Betas , year =
-
[114]
and Romano, Joseph P
Lehmann, Erich L. and Romano, Joseph P. , edition =. Testing Statistical Hypotheses , year =
-
[115]
Factors That Fit the Time Series and Cross-Section of Stock Returns , volume =
Lettau, Martin and Pelger, Markus , journal =. Factors That Fit the Time Series and Cross-Section of Stock Returns , volume =
-
[116]
State Dependent Performative Prediction with Stochastic Approximation , volume =
Li, Qiang and Wai, Hoi-To , booktitle =. State Dependent Performative Prediction with Stochastic Approximation , volume =
-
[117]
Which Investors Drive Anomaly Returns and How? , volume =
Li, Yizhang and Sokolinski, Stanislav and Tamoni, Andrea , doi =. Which Investors Drive Anomaly Returns and How? , volume =. Journal of Financial Economics , pages =
-
[118]
and Roberts, Michael R
Linnainmaa, Juhani T. and Roberts, Michael R. , doi =. The History of the Cross-Section of Stock Returns , volume =. Review of Financial Studies , number =
-
[119]
arXiv , author =:2401.13057 , primaryclass =
Inference under Partial Identification with Minimax Test Statistics , year =. arXiv , author =:2401.13057 , primaryclass =
-
[120]
Comomentum: Inferring Arbitrage Activity from Return Correlations , volume =
Lou, Dong and Polk, Christopher , journal =. Comomentum: Inferring Arbitrage Activity from Return Correlations , volume =
-
[121]
, journal =
Lucas, Robert E. , journal =. Econometric Policy Evaluation: A Critique , volume =
-
[122]
An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets , year =
MacKenzie, Donald , publisher =. An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets , year =
-
[123]
Performative Reinforcement Learning , volume =
Mandal, Debmalya and Triantafyllou, Stelios and Radanovic, Goran , booktitle =. Performative Reinforcement Learning , volume =
-
[124]
, publisher =
Manski, Charles F. , publisher =. Partial Identification of Probability Distributions , year =
-
[125]
David and Pontiff, Jeffrey , doi =
McLean, R. David and Pontiff, Jeffrey , doi =. Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability? , volume =. Journal of Finance , number =
-
[126]
Microeconometrics with Partial Identification , volume =
Molinari, Francesca , booktitle =. Microeconometrics with Partial Identification , volume =
-
[127]
and Topel, Robert H
Murphy, Kevin M. and Topel, Robert H. , journal =. Estimation and Inference in Two-Step Econometric Models , volume =
-
[128]
, journal =
Muth, John F. , journal =. Rational Expectations and the Theory of Price Movements , volume =
-
[129]
, journal =
Narang, Adhyyan and Faulkner, Evan and Drusvyatskiy, Dmitriy and Fazel, Maryam and Ratliff, Lillian J. , journal =. Multiplayer Performative Prediction: Learning in Decision-Dependent Games , volume =
-
[130]
and West, Kenneth D
Newey, Whitney K. and West, Kenneth D. , journal =. A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix , volume =
-
[131]
Dynamics of Piecewise Contractions of the Interval , volume =
Nogueira, Arnaldo and Pires, Benito , doi =. Dynamics of Piecewise Contractions of the Interval , volume =. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , number =
-
[132]
, journal =
Nogueira, Arnaldo and Pires, Benito and Rosales, Rafael A. , journal =. Asymptotically Periodic Piecewise Contractions of the Interval , volume =
-
[133]
IvyDB US Borrow Rate Data , year =
OptionMetrics , howpublished =. IvyDB US Borrow Rate Data , year =
-
[134]
Econometric Issues in the Analysis of Regressions with Generated Regressors , volume =
Pagan, Adrian , journal =. Econometric Issues in the Analysis of Regressions with Generated Regressors , volume =
-
[135]
and Zrnic, Tijana and Mendler-D
Perdomo, Juan C. and Zrnic, Tijana and Mendler-D. Performative Prediction , volume =. Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning , pages =
-
[136]
, journal =
Petersen, Mitchell A. , journal =. Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches , volume =
-
[137]
Multi-agent Performative Prediction: From Global Stability and Optimality to Chaos , year =
Piliouras, Georgios and Yu, Fang-Yi , booktitle =. Multi-agent Performative Prediction: From Global Stability and Optimality to Chaos , year =
-
[138]
and Romano, Joseph P
Politis, Dimitris N. and Romano, Joseph P. , journal =. The Stationary Bootstrap , volume =
-
[139]
On the Size of the Active Management Industry , volume =
P. On the Size of the Active Management Industry , volume =. Journal of Political Economy , number =
-
[140]
Performative Reinforcement Learning in Gradually Shifting Environments , volume =
Rank, Ben and Triantafyllou, Stelios and Mandal, Debmalya and Radanovic, Goran , booktitle =. Performative Reinforcement Learning in Gradually Shifting Environments , volume =
-
[141]
and Wolf, Michael , journal =
Romano, Joseph P. and Wolf, Michael , journal =. Stepwise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping , volume =
-
[142]
Saffi, Pedro A. C. and Sigurdsson, Kari , journal =. Price Efficiency and Short Selling , volume =
-
[143]
On the Estimation of Beta-Pricing Models , volume =
Shanken, Jay , journal =. On the Estimation of Beta-Pricing Models , volume =
-
[144]
, journal =
Shleifer, Andrei and Vishny, Robert W. , journal =. The Limits of Arbitrage , volume =
-
[145]
, journal =
Stein, Jeremy C. , journal =. Presidential Address: Sophisticated Investors and Market Efficiency , volume =
-
[146]
Partial Identification in Econometrics , volume =
Tamer, Elie , journal =. Partial Identification in Econometrics , volume =
-
[147]
, publisher =
Tsybakov, Alexandre B. , publisher =. Introduction to Nonparametric Estimation , year =
-
[148]
, publisher =
van der Vaart, Aad W. , publisher =. Asymptotic Statistics , year =
-
[149]
, journal =
West, Kenneth D. , journal =. Asymptotic Inference about Predictive Ability , volume =
-
[150]
A Reality Check for Data Snooping , volume =
White, Halbert , journal =. A Reality Check for Data Snooping , volume =
-
[151]
Asymptotic Theory for Econometricians , year =
White, Halbert , edition =. Asymptotic Theory for Econometricians , year =
Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.