We examine the hypothesis originally advanced by Roll  that observed anomalies in excess returns can be explained by misspecification of the market model used to estimate systematic risk. We find substantial misspecifications in the model systematically related to size and period of listing of the securities in question. There is some evidence that these misspecifications are associated with systemic biases in measured betas used to construct excess returns.
If you can't find a tool you're looking for, please click the link at the top of the page to "Go to old article view". Alternatively, view our Knowledge Base articles for additional help. Your feedback is important to us, so please let us know if you have comments or ideas for improvement.