arbiter
JournalsAccount

So What Do We Learn from Li and Wang (2025)?

Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber

Critical Finance Review2025https://doi.org/10.1561/104.00000153article
AJG 1ABDC A*
Weight
0.50

Abstract

We criticize ad-hoc tests of return predictability, like those presented by Li and Wang (2025), which are purely motivated by statistical associations. Without ex-ante hypotheses grounded in theory or evidence on portfolio choice, it is difficult to say what we learn from such correlation exercises. We then discuss how convincing progress can be made in uncovering the foundations of portfolio choice and asset pricing, drawing on our own experimental research for illustration.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1561/104.00000153

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{michael2025,
  title        = {{So What Do We Learn from Li and Wang (2025)?}},
  author       = {Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber},
  journal      = {Critical Finance Review},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1561/104.00000153},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

So What Do We Learn from Li and Wang (2025)?

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.