Growth or Glamour? Fundamentals and Systematic Risk in Stock Returns

The cash flows of growth stocks are particularly sensitive to temporary movements in aggregate stock prices (driven by movements in the equity risk premium), while the cash flows of value stocks are particularly sensitive to permanent movements in aggregate stock prices (driven by market-wide shocks to cash flows. ) Thus the high betas of growth stocks with the market's discount-rate shocks, and of value stocks with the market's cash-flow shocks, are determined by the cash-flow fundamentals of growth and value companies. Growth stocks are not merely "glamour stocks" whose systematic risks are purely driven by investor sentiment. More generally, accounting measures of firm-level risk have predictive power for firms' betas with market-wide cash flows, and this predictive power arises from the behavior of firms' cash flows. The systematic risks of stocks with similar accounting characteristics are primarily driven by the systematic risks of their fundamentals.

Growth or Glamour? Fundamentals and Systematic Risk in Stock Returns

The cash flows of growth stocks are particularly sensitive to temporary movements in aggregate stock prices (driven by movements in the equity risk premium), while the cash flows of value stocks are particularly sensitive to permanent movements in aggregate stock prices (driven by market-wide shocks to cash flows.) Thus the high betas of growth stocks with the market's discount-rate shocks, and of value stocks with the market's cash-flow shocks, are determined by the cash-flow fundamentals of growth and value companies. Growth stocks are not merely "glamour stocks" whose systematic risks are purely driven by investor sentiment. More generally, accounting measures of firm-level risk have predictive power for firms' betas with market-wide cash flows, and this predictive power arises from the behavior of firms' cash flows. The systematic risks of stocks with similar accounting characteristics are primarily driven by the systematic risks of their fundamentals.

Chiasma

Newspaper reporting on events at the Boston University School of Medicine in the 1960s

Comparing Neanderthal and Modern Human Long Bone Loading History from Cross-Sectional Geometry

We evaluate here efforts to compare archaic and modern human limb loading from long bone cross sectional. Recent studies find that cross sectional properties (I, J, Z) calculated from second moments of area (SMA) are similar in Neanderthals and early modern humans when adjusted for body mass and limb length, but differ in cross-sectional shape (e.g., Ix/Iy). These results suggest the two taxa had similar magnitudes but different patterns of locomotor loading. Such interpretations, however, assume that long bones are deformed like long, straight beams in pure bening, with neutral axes (NA) that run through the cross-sectional area centroids. We test this assumption experimentally using exercised sheep with rosette strain gauges mounted at three locations around the midshaft of the tibia and metatarsal. Calculation of normal strain distributions at the midshaft indicate that the NA does not run through the area centroid, largely because of the combined effects of bending and compression. In addition, orientation of the centroidal axes around which maximum SMAs (Imax) are calculated are unrelated to the planes in which the bines bend. Because SMAs are fourth-power functions, cross-sectional properties that assume the NA runs through the area centroid yield substantial errors in magnitude (up to 100%) compared to cross-sectional properties calculated around experimentally-determined NAs. The polar moment of area, J, is least subject to error. Applying these analyses to the hominoid fossil record indicates that SMAs neither support nor refute the hypothesis that Neanderthals and early modern humans had different magnitudes or patterns of loading.AnthropologyHuman Evolutionary Biolog

Is Palpation Sufficient for Estimation of IOP Immediately Following Cataract Surgery?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of standard palpation techniques and Barraquer tonometry relative to Tono-Pen for measurement of postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) immediately following routine micro-incision cataract surgery (MICS). We conducted a prospective comparative analysis of postoperative IOP immediately after MICS in a single academic outpatient surgery center. A random block of 166 eyes that underwent MICS at our institution included in our study. Exclusion criteria consisted of any complications including posterior capsule rupture. IOP was measured immediately postoperatively, first with palpation or a Barraquer tonometer, then with a Tono-Pen handheld applanation tonometer. Measurements obtained by each method were compared. The mean difference between IOP measurements obtained by palpation and Tono-Pen was 10 mmHg, 95% confidence interval (CI; 8, 12); whereas the mean difference between IOP measurements obtained by Barraquer tonometer and Tono-Pen was 2 mmHg, 95% CI (1, 3). IOP measurements acquired via palpation differed from their corresponding Tono-Pen measurements by > 5 mmHg in 48.0% of cases compared to only 5.9% of measurements acquired using a Barraquer tonometer. Spearman correlation coefficient for measurements obtained by standard palpation and Tono-Pen was r = 0.397 (p < 0.01) compared to r = 0.774 (p < 0.01) for those obtained by Barraquer tonometer and Tono-Pen. In conclusion, palpation is not an accurate method for estimating IOP immediately after cataract surgery compared to Tono-Pen. Appropriate measurement and adjustment of IOP after the operation may decrease complications such as cystoid macular edema. In settings where a Tono-Pen is not readily available, Barraquer tonometry may serve as a reasonable and cost-effective alternative

The policy analysis market: an electronic commerce application of a combinatorial information market

[no abstract

The Development of an Instrument to Determine the Study Skill of College Freshmen

The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument to determine the study skills of college freshmen