Returns to buying upward revision and selling downward revision stocks: evidence from Canada.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of earnings forecast revisions by equity analysts in predicting Canadian stock returns Design/methodology/approach: The sample covers 420 Canadian firms over the period 1998-2009. It analyses investors’ reactions to 27,271 upward revisions and 32,005 downward revisions of analysts’ forecasts for Canadian quoted companies. To test whether analysts’ earnings forecast revisions affect stock return continuation, forecast revision portfolios similar to Jegadeesh and Titman (2001) are constructed. The paper analyses the returns gained from a trading strategy based on buying the strong upward revisions portfolio and short selling the strong downward revisions portfolio. It also separates the sample into upward and downward revisions. Findings: The authors find that new information in the form of analyst forecast revisions is not impounded efficiently into stock prices. Significant returns persist for a trading strategy that buys stocks with recent upward revisions and short sells stocks with recent downward revisions. Good news is impounded into stock prices more slowly than bad news. Post-earnings forecast revisions drift is negatively related to analyst coverage. The effect is strongest for stocks with greatest number of upward revisions. The introduction of the better disclosure standards has made the Canadian stock market more efficient. Originality/value: The paper adds to the limited evidence on the effect of analyst forecast revisions on the returns of Canadian stocks. It sheds light on the importance of analysts’ earnings forecast information and offers support for the investor conservatism and information diffusion hypotheses. It also shows how policy can improve market efficiency

The impacts of stock characteristics and regulatory change on mutual fund herding in Taiwan.

This article analyses the trading activity of Taiwanese open-end equity mutual fund herding behaviour over the period of 1996-2008. We found evidence of both directional and directionless herding. We also found that sell-side fund herding leads to price stabilization, whereas buy-side herding results in prices adjusting slowly. We found that the abolition of qualified foreign institutional investor (QFII) has reduced directionless and sell-side herding but has had no effect on buy-side herding

Pretrained deep models outperform GBDTs in Learning-To-Rank under label scarcity

While deep learning (DL) models are state-of-the-art in text and image domains, they have not yet consistently outperformed Gradient Boosted Decision Trees (GBDTs) on tabular Learning-To-Rank (LTR) problems. Most of the recent performance gains attained by DL models in text and image tasks have used unsupervised pretraining, which exploits orders of magnitude more unlabeled data than labeled data. To the best of our knowledge, unsupervised pretraining has not been applied to the LTR problem, which often produces vast amounts of unlabeled data. In this work, we study whether unsupervised pretraining of deep models can improve LTR performance over GBDTs and other non-pretrained models. By incorporating simple design choices--including SimCLR-Rank, an LTR-specific pretraining loss--we produce pretrained deep learning models that consistently (across datasets) outperform GBDTs (and other non-pretrained rankers) in the case where there is more unlabeled data than labeled data. This performance improvement occurs not only on average but also on outlier queries. We base our empirical conclusions off of experiments on (1) public benchmark tabular LTR datasets, and (2) a large industry-scale proprietary ranking dataset. Code is provided at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ltr-pretrain-0DAD/README.md.Comment: ICML-MFPL 2023 Workshop Ora

Depdc5 deficiency exacerbates alcohol-induced hepatic steatosis via suppression of PPARα pathway

Alcohol-related liver disease (ALD), a condition caused by alcohol overconsumption, occurs in three stages of liver injury including steatosis, hepatitis, and cirrhosis. DEP domain-containing protein 5 (DEPDC5), a component of GAP activities towards Rags 1 (GATOR1) complex, is a repressor of amino acid-sensing branch of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) pathway. In the current study, we found that aberrant activation of mTORC1 was likely attributed to the reduction of DEPDC5 in the livers of ethanol-fed mice or ALD patients. To further define the in vivo role of DEPDC5 in ALD development, we generated Depdc5 hepatocyte-specific knockout mouse model (Depdc5-LKO) in which mTORC1 pathway was constitutively activated through loss of the inhibitory effect of GATOR1. Hepatic Depdc5 ablation leads to mild hepatomegaly and liver injury and protects against diet-induced liver steatosis. In contrast, ethanol-fed Depdc5-LKO mice developed severe hepatic steatosis and inflammation. Pharmacological intervention with Torin 1 suppressed mTORC1 activity and remarkably ameliorated ethanol-induced hepatic steatosis and inflammation in both control and Depdc5-LKO mice. The pathological effect of sustained mTORC1 activity in ALD may be attributed to the suppression of peroxisome proliferator activated receptor α (PPARα), the master regulator of fatty acid oxidation in hepatocytes, because fenofibrate (PPARα agonist) treatment reverses ethanol-induced liver steatosis and inflammation in Depdc5-LKO mice. These findings provide novel insights into the in vivo role of hepatic DEPDC5 in the development of ALD

Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome

The sequence of the human genome encodes the genetic instructions for human physiology, as well as rich information about human evolution. In 2001, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium reported a draft sequence of the euchromatic portion of the human genome. Since then, the international collaboration has worked to convert this draft into a genome sequence with high accuracy and nearly complete coverage. Here, we report the result of this finishing process. The current genome sequence (Build 35) contains 2.85 billion nucleotides interrupted by only 341 gaps. It covers ∼99% of the euchromatic genome and is accurate to an error rate of ∼1 event per 100,000 bases. Many of the remaining euchromatic gaps are associated with segmental duplications and will require focused work with new methods. The near-complete sequence, the first for a vertebrate, greatly improves the precision of biological analyses of the human genome including studies of gene number, birth and death. Notably, the human enome seems to encode only 20,000-25,000 protein-coding genes. The genome sequence reported here should serve as a firm foundation for biomedical research in the decades ahead

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials