THE FALACY OF PARADOX: AN ANALYSIS OF BINOMIAL RISK-RETURN IN THE BRAZILIAN CAPITAL MARKET
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14392/asaa.2021140205Keywords:
Seleção de Carteiras, Binômio Risco-Retorno, Paradoxo de BowmanAbstract
Purpose:Theaimofthisstudywastoanalyzethe existence of Bowman’sParadox(PB)intheBraziliancompanieslistedinBrazil,Bolsa,Balcão(B3).
Method:Thedescriptivestudy,usingarchivaldata and withquantitativeapproach,analyzedquarterlydatafrom the period2008-2018of292companieslistedinB3andatotalof9,387firmobservations/year.
Results: Ours evidence reinforced the hypothesis of positive association between risk and return, both for market proxies and for accounting data. However, it was found that economic and/or normative uncertainties can impair the predictability of returns, resulting in a negative spurious relationship between risk and return. Implications/Contributions: The results reinforce the assumptions of modern finance theory, especially the idea of positive association between risk and return. Contribute to the debate in the management of the investment portfolio in the Brazilian context, including accounting data. The evidence has implications for investors, especially non-institutional and other economic agents who seek to understand the relevant variables in risk investment decision-making.
Downloads
References
Abad, P., & Robles, M. D. (2015). The Risk-Return Binomial After Rating Changes: The Risk-Return Binomial. Economic Notes, 44(2), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecno.12033
Amit, R., & Livnat, J. (1988). Research Notes. Diversification and the Risk-Return Trade-off. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 154–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/256502
Artuso, A. R., & Neto, A. C. (2014). Análise Discriminante e Regressão Logística—Reconhecimeto de Padrões para a Seleção de Portfólios no Mercado Acionário Brasileiro. Revista de Estatística UFOP, III, 23.
Ball, R., & Brown, P. (1969). Portfolio Theory and Accounting. Journal of Accounting Research, 7(2), 300. https://doi.org/10.2307/2489972
Baucus, D. A., Golec, J. H., & Cooper, J. R. (1993). Estimating risk‐return relationships: An analysis of measures. Strategic Management Journal, 14(5), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140506
Beaver, W. H. (2010). Financial Statement Analysis and the Prediction of Financial Distress. Foundations and Trends in Accounting, 5(2), 99–173. https://doi.org/10.1561/1400000018
Beaver, W., Kettler, P., & Scholes, M. (1970). The Association between Market Determined and Accounting Determined Risk Measures. The Accounting Review, 45(4), 654–682.
Bettis, R. A., & Mahajan, V. (1985). Risk/Return Performance of Diversified Firms. Management Science, 31(7), 785–799. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.31.7.785
Bowman, E. H. (1980). A risk/return paradox for strategic management. 46.
Brockett, P. L., Cooper, W. W., Kwon, K. H., & Ruefli, T. W. (2003). Commentary on “a review of research on the negative accounting relationship between risk and return: Bowman’s paradox by M.N. Nickel and M.C. Rodriguez”. Omega, 31(5), 409–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(03)00056-2
Chang, Y., & Thomas, H. (1989). The Impact of Diversification Strategy on Risk-Return Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 10(3), 271–284.
Chou, P.-H., Chou, R. K., & Ko, K.-C. (2009). Prospect theory and the risk-return paradox: Some recent evidence. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 33(3), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-009-0109-z
Cool, K., Dierickx, I., & Jemison, D. (1989). Business strategy, market structure and risk-return relationships: A structural approach. Strategic Management Journal, 10(6), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100602
Dickinson, V. (2011). Cash Flow Patterns as a Proxy for Firm Life Cycle. The Accounting Review, 86(6), 1969–1994. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-10130
Dionne, G. (2013). Risk Management: History, Definition, and Critique: Risk Management. Risk Management and Insurance Review, 16(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/rmir.12016
Elton, E. J., & Gruber, M. J. (1997). Modern portfolio theory, 1950 to date. Journal of Banking & Finance, 21(11–12), 1743–1759. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(97)00048-4
Fabozzi, F. J., Huang, D., & Zhou, G. (2010). Robust portfolios: Contributions from operations research and finance. Annals of Operations Research, 176(1), 191–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-009-0515-6
Fama, E. F. (1968). Risk, Return and Equilibrium: Some Clarifying Comments. The Journal of Finance, 23(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb02996.x
Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2325486
Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1992). The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns. The Journal of Finance, 47(2), 427–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1992.tb04398.x
Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 607–636. https://doi.org/10.1086/260061
Fávero, L., P., Belfiore, P., Silva, F. L., & Chan, B. (2009). Análise de Dados: Modelagem multivariada para de decisões. Elsevier.
Fiegenbaum, A. (1990). Prospect theory and the risk-return association. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 14(2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(90)90074-N
Fiegenbaum, A., & Thomas, H. (1988). Attitudes Toward Risk and The Risk–Return Paradox: Prospect Theory Explanations. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.5465/256499
Freitas, M., H. B., Freitas, M. A. L., Anjos, L. C. M., & Tavares, M. F. N. (2017). Estudo sobre a utilização de análise fundamentalista na seleção de ações vencedoras e perdedoras da BOVESPA pós-implantação e transição do IFRS (2014-2016). Revista de Estudos Contábeis, 8(15), 23–44.
Gooding, R. Z., Goel, S., & Wiseman, R. M. (1996). Fixed versus variable reference points in the risk-return relationship. Journal of Economic
Behavior & Organization, 29(2), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(95)00067-4
Gujarati, D. (2019). Econometria: Princípios, Teoria e Aplicações Práticas. Saraiva.
Henkel, J. (2009). The risk-return paradox for strategic management: Disentangling true and spurious effects. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.734
Hou, K., van Dijk, M. A., & Zhang, Y. (2012). The implied cost of capital: A new approach. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 53(3), 504–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2011.12.001
Huang, D., Zhu, S., Fabozzi, F. J., & Fukushima, M. (2010). Portfolio selection under distributional uncertainty: A relative robust CVaR approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 203(1), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.07.010
Iquiapaza, R. A., Amaral, H. F., & Bressan, A. A. (2009). Evolução da pesquisa em finanças: Epistemologia, paradigma e críticas. Organizações & Sociedade, 16(49), 351–370. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-92302009000200008
Jegers, M. (1991). Prospect Theory and The Risk-Return Relation: Some Belgian Evidence. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.5465/256309
Kim, W. C., Hwang, P., & Burgers, W. P. (1993). Multinationals’ diversification and the risk-return trade-off. Strategic Management Journal, 14(4), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250140404
Malta, T. L., & de Camargos, M. A. (2016). Variáveis da análise fundamentalista e dinâmica e o retorno acionário de empresas brasileiras entre 2007 e 2014. REGE - Revista de Gestão, 23(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rege.2015.09.001
Markowitz, H. (1952). PORTFOLIO SELECTION*. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1952.tb01525.x
McShane, M. K., Nair, A., & Rustambekov, E. (2011). Does Enterprise Risk Management Increase Firm Value? Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 26(4), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X11409160
Miller, K. D., & Bromiley, P. (1990). Strategic Risk and Corporate Performance: An analysis of Alternative Risk Measures. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 756–779. https://doi.org/10.2307/256289
Morettin, P. A., & Toloi, C. M. C. (2006). Análise de Séries Temporais (2a ed. revista e ampliada). Edigard Blucher.
Mota, R. H. G., & Tavares, A. de L. (2015). Classificação entre empresas vencedoras a perdedoras após a adoção das IFRS: Um estudo em empresas não financeiras do setor regulado brasileiro com ações listadas na BM&FBovespa. Enfoque: Reflexão Contábil, 34(2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.4025/enfoque.v34i2.24628
Nickel, M. N., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of research on the negative accounting relationship between risk and return: Bowman’s paradox. Omega, 30(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(01)00055-X
Nissim, D., & Penman, S. H. (2001). Ratio Analysis and Equity Valuation: From Research to Practice. Review of Accounting Studies, 6(1), 109–154. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011338221623
Oviatt, B. M., & Bauerschmidt, A. D. (1991). Business Risk and Return: A Test of Simultaneous Relationships. Management Science, 37(11), 1405–1423. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.37.11.1405
Rodrı́guez, M. C., & Nickel, M. N. (2003). Author’s reply. Omega, 31(5), 413–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(03)00057-4
Rosa, M. R., & Bered, R. (2018). A Importância da Análise Fundamentalista para Avaliar o Preço das Ações de Companhias Listadas na Bolsa de Valores (B3). Revista Eletrônica de Ciências Contábeis, 7(2), 124–150.
Rotela Junior, P., Pamplona, E. D. O., & Salomon, F. L. R. (2014). Otimização de Portfólios: Análise de eficiência. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 54(4), 405–413. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020140406
Rubinstein, M. (2002). Markowitz’s “Portfolio Selection”: A Fifty-Year Retrospective. The Journal of Finance, 57(3), 1041–1045. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00453
Ruefli, T. W. (1990). Mean-Variance Approaches to Risk-Return Relationships in Strategy: Paradox Lost. Management Science, 36(3), 368–380. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.368
Sampaio, F., Lopes, I., & Gomes, L. (2018). Risco, Retorno e Equlíbrio na Bolsa de Valores Portuguesa. Portuguese Journal of Finance, Management and Accounting, 4(8), 69–100.
Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk. The Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/2977928
Silveira, J. A. G. (1990). Risco versus retorno a partir de dados contábeis de empresas brasileiras: Uma contribuição empírica. (Tese de Doutorado) FGV EAESP - Escola de Administração de Empresas de São Paulo. http://hdl.handle.net/10438/4495
Sinha, T. (1994). Prospect theory and the risk return association: Another look. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 24(2), 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(94)90029-9
Souza, L. C., Massardi, W. de O., Pires, V. A. V., & Ciribeli, J. P. (2017). Otimização da Carteira de Investimentos: Uma estudo com ativos do IBOVESPA. Revista de Gestão, Finanças e Contabilidade, 7(3), 13.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 297–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574
Vancin, D. F., & Procianoy, J. L. (2016). Os Fatores Determinantes do Pagamento de Dividendos: O Efeito do Obrigatório Mínimo Legal e Contratual nas Empresas Brasileiras. 1, 35.
Vieira, M. V. (2012). A relação risco-retorno e o paradoxo de Bowman: Uma investigação em empresas brasileiras. (Tese de Doutorado) CEPEAD - Centro de Pós-graduação e Pesquisa em Administração da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUOS-98MH5H
Wiseman, R. M., & Bromiley, P. (1991). Risk-return associations: Paradox or artifact? An empirically tested explanation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(3), 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120306
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright for articles published in the ASAA Journal is held by the author, with first publication rights to the journal. By virtue of appearing in this publicly accessible journal, the articles are free to use, with their own attributions, in educational and non-commercial applications. The ASAA Journal will allow the use of published works for non-commercial purposes, including the right to submit the work to publicly accessible databases. Published articles are the authors' full and exclusive responsibility. There are no submission/publishing charges or fees for processing articles (APC).
