This study constructs a new mispricing factor for the Chinese equity market. We propose two-, three-, and four-factor models that incorporate this factor alongside the market, size, and value factors. Our models, especially the two-factor version, consistently outperform the Fama and French models and perform as well as other leading models in explaining Chinese anomalies. This study advances asset pricing literature specific to China and offers a promising new framework for analyzing mispricing in emerging markets.

This paper investigates the sales seasonality premium (Gustavo et al., 2020) in the Chinese stock market. We document a significant sales seasonality premium in the cross section of stocks listed on Chinese market. A long-short strategy of buying low-sales stocks and shorting high-sales season stocks generate a monthly return of 0.84% with a Newey-West t statistic of 2.94. The return spreads between low-sales season stocks and high-sales season stocks are robust to well-known anomalies and are larger in magnitude among large-cap companies. We also find that the return spreads are more pronounced within industries with relatively fixed patterns in product demand. The sales seasonality premium in the Chinese stock market is found to be a combined result of investor rationality and irrationality.

This paper revisits two widely studied predictors of commodity futures returns, basis and basis momentum, whose conventional measures using first-nearby futures as proxies for spot prices may limit their ability to capture fundamental spot-market risks. Motivated by this limitation, we construct two spot-based signals from observed spot and futures prices, which are theoretically shown to contain incremental information beyond conventional measures. Using 41 Chinese commodity futures, we find that these signals robustly predict first-nearby contract returns and remain significantly priced in time-series and cross-sectional tests, even after controlling for their conventional counterparts. We then develop a spot-enhanced three-factor model, including the market factor and the two spot-based factors, which consistently outperforms three widely used benchmark models in pricing competing factors and explaining return anomalies.

We examine the risk-return trade-off in market anomalies within the A-share market, showing that even decaying anomalies may proxy for latent risk factors. To balance forecast bias and variance, we integrate the 1/N and mean-variance frameworks, minimizing out-of-sample forecast error. Treating anomalies as tradable assets, we construct optimized long-short portfolios with strong performance: an average annualized Sharpe ratio of 1.56 and a certainty-equivalent return of 29.4% for a meanvariance investor. These premiums persist post-publication and are largely driven by liquidity risk exposures. Our results remain robust to market frictions, including shortsale constraints and transaction costs. We conclude that even decaying market anomalies may reflect priced risk premia rather than mere mispricing. This research provides practical guidance for academics and investors in return predictability and asset allocation, especially in the unique context of the Chinese A-share market.

We examine the risk-return trade-off in market anomalies within the A-share market, showing that even decaying anomalies may proxy for latent risk factors. To balance forecast bias and variance, we integrate the 1/N and mean-variance frameworks, minimizing out-of-sample forecast error. Treating anomalies as tradable assets, we construct optimized long-short portfolios with strong performance: an average annualized Sharpe ratio of 1.56 and a certainty-equivalent return of 29.4% for a mean-variance investor. These premiums persist post-publication and are largely driven by liquidity risk exposures. Our results remain robust to market frictions, including short-sale constraints and transaction costs. We conclude that even decaying market anomalies may reflect priced risk premia rather than mere mispricing. This research provides practical guidance for academics and investors in return predictability and asset allocation, especially in the unique context of the Chinese A-share market.

We utilize the Bayesian model scan approach to examine the best performing models in a set of 15 factors discovered in the literature, plus principal components (PCs) of anomalies unexplained by the initial factors in the Chinese A-share market. The Bayesian comparison of approximately eight million models shows that HML, MOM, IA, EG, PEAD, SMB, VMG,PMO, plus the four PCs, PC1, PC6, PC7, PC8 are the best supported specification in terms of marginal likelihoods and posterior model probabilities. We also find that the best model outperforms existing factor models in terms of pricing tests and out-of-sample Sharpe ratio.

Using comprehensive account-level data and 192 asset pricing anomaly signals, we investigate whether retail investors and institutions trade on anomalies in China. We find that retail investors tend to trade contrary to anomaly prescriptions, suggesting that they have a strong tendency to buy (sell) overvalued (undervalued) stocks. In contrast, institutions trade consistent with anomalies, indicating that they buy (sell) undervalued (overvalued) stocks. Regarding the information content of anomalies, we find that small retail investors trade contrary to trading-based anomalies, whereas institutions trade consistent with both trading- and accounting-based anomalies. Additionally, lottery stock preference and return extrapolation help explain investors’ trading behavior on anomalies.

Existing research has found cross-sectional seasonality of stock returns—the periodic out- performance of certain stocks during the same calendar months or weekdays. We hypoth- esize that assets’ different sensitivities to investor mood explain these effects and imply other seasonalities. Consistent with our hypotheses, relative performance across individ- ual stocks or portfolios during past high or low mood months and weekdays tends to recur in periods with congruent mood and reverse in periods with noncongruent mood. Furthermore, assets with higher sensitivities to aggregate mood—higher mood betas— subsequently earn higher returns during ascending mood periods and earn lower returns during descending mood periods.

We apply various test portfolios and alternative statistical methodologies to evaluate the performance of eleven prominent asset pricing models. To compile the test portfolios, we construct 105 anomalies in China and apply the 23 significant anomalies as test assets for model comparison. The results indicate that in the time-series test and anomalies explanation, the Hou et al. (2019) five-factor q model exhibits the best overall performance. The pairwise cross-sectional R^2s and the multiple model comparison tests affirm that the Hou et al. (2019) five-factor q model, the Fama and French (2018) six-factor (FF6) model and the Kelly et al. (2019) five-factor Instrumented Principal Component Analysis (IPCA5) model stand out as the top performers. Notably, the performance of the five-factor q model is insensitive to variations in experimental design.

This study investigates the relationship between investors’ prior gains or losses and their adoption of extrapolative beliefs. Our findings indicate that investors facing prior losses tend to rely on optimistic extrapolative beliefs, whereas those experiencing prior gains adopt pessimistic extrapolative beliefs. These results support the theory of motivated beliefs. The interaction between the capital gain overhang and extrapolative beliefs results in noteworthy mispricing, yielding monthly returns of approximately 1%. Motivated extrapolative beliefs comove with investors’ survey expectations and trading behavior, and help explain momentum anomalies. Additionally, households are susceptible to this belief distortion. Institutional investors can avoid overpriced stocks associated with motivated (over-)optimistic extrapolative beliefs.