Why the Dogs of the Dow Bark Loudly in China
Carol Wang1, James E. Larsen1, Fall M. Ainina1, Marlena L. Akhbari1 & Nicolas Gressis1 Show affiliations
- Wright State University, United States
American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp. 560–568 · doi.org/10.3844/ajebasp.2011.560.568
Abstract
Problem statement: The Dogs of the Dow (Dow Dogs) strategy, which has gained widespread popularity in the U.S., is found to be considerably successful in China’s stock markets. This trading strategy contradicts the well-established efficient market hypothesis. Approach: This study examines the cross-sectional variations in the magnitude of the predictive power of the Dow Dogs strategy using Chinese stocks for 1994-2009. Results: Our results suggest that (1) Significant Dow Dogs effect apply to Class A shares, but not Class B shares; (2) Stocks priced between $1 and $5 demonstrate the strongest Dogs effect among all stock price ranges; (3) Changes in share price range has the most powerful impact on risk adjusted return, followed by changes in the AB share class, rebalancing frequency and number of Dogs in the portfolio. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the superior predictive power of the Dow Dogs strategy is mainly driven by behavioral factors. Our overall findings support the behavioral hypothesis in which market inefficiency stems from investors irrationality and herding behaviors. This study provides practical implications to both government regulators and finance practitioners. JEL Classification: G14, G15.
Licence and reuse
Free to read. This article carries the publisher’s copyright, as printed on it: © 2011 Science Publications. It is free to read; ask us before reusing it.
How to reuse this articleResponses (0)
About this article
Wang, C., Larsen, J. E., Ainina, F. M., Akhbari, M. L. & Gressis, N. (2011). Why the Dogs of the Dow Bark Loudly in China. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 3(3), 560–568. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajebasp.2011.560.568
- Licence
- © Science Publications
- Issue
- Volume 3, Issue 3
- Policies
- Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
- Version
- Version of record
