Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 117

Momentum of winning and losing share prices

In the spirit of recognising that there are many different ways to pick stocks, a year ago I wrote an article, Stock market winners versus losers, on using a basic momentum strategy to select stocks. The premise went as follows: academic researchers have found that portfolios of recent outperformers did better than portfolios of recent underperformers. So a long short strategy constructed this way should generate a positive return. We tested this approach in the Australian marketplace and found what appears to be a volatile but high performing strategy. How did this strategy perform in the most recent financial year?

2014-15 financial year performance

A brief refresher on the strategy:

  • At the start of each financial year we hypothetically go long an equally weighted portfolio of the previous financial year’s top 10 performing stocks on the ASX 200
  • We hypothetically also short an equally weighted portfolio of the previous financial year’s worst 10 performing stocks on the ASX 200
  • This portfolio is held untouched for the subsequent financial year (i.e. a 12 month holding period).

The table below lists stocks we would have held, long and short, during the previous financial year (2014 / 2015), based on their performance over the previous 12 months, along with their subsequent performance.

Using the table, if we subtract the short performance (-7%) from the long performance (+10%) we end up with a total performance of 17%. The last financial year has been another solid year of performance for this strategy; a little less than the long term average. The chart below presents the updated track record (now 11 years).

Data: Acadian Asset Management (Australia) Limited

The performance numbers above only focus on the active return piece and leave out cash returns, stock borrowing fees and transaction costs (in theory if you have long and short positions of the same dollar amount then you have 100% of the portfolio earning cash returns).

Digging deeper into the theory

This strategy is a simple one. In fact it catches two known theories in one strategy. First there is the cross-sectional momentum strategy between individual stocks, first identified in 1993 by academics Narasimhan Jegadeesh and Sheridan Titman (their paper was titled “Returns to buying winners and selling losers: implications for stock market efficiency”). However the strategy does not control for sector bets (nor did that of Jegadeesh and Titman) and so we are potentially exposed to a cross-sectional momentum strategy between industries. This has been shown to explain much of the performance of the individual stock effects described above. This was identified by Tobias Moskowitz and Mark Grinblatt in their paper titled “Do Industries Explain Momentum?”.

In practice …

In practice it is unlikely that we would see a strategy like this offered as an investment fund, since:

  • The high volatility of the strategy may make it unpalatable
  • The ability to borrow underperforming stocks may prove difficult and costly.

However in practice we find momentum is a strategy commonly applied by many fund managers, typically those who adopt a quantitative approach. Specifically most fund managers would control the size of the sector bets, hence ruling out the simple strategy presented here. Nonetheless many quant managers use momentum as an indicator of performance for stocks and sectors. It would commonly form part of a suite of signals; indeed I have never seen a fund manager offer a momentum-only stock strategy.

Takeouts

As stated last year: I am not recommending you replicate this ‘strategy’ – I wouldn’t myself. And as per last year I don’t tell you the current positions such a portfolio would be holding – you have to do your own homework! The point of this article is to remind you that there are many different ways to pick stocks. Some are based on company analysis, some are technical, and some are behavioural. You need to pick out an approach that you believe you can execute well, understand  its strengths and weaknesses and the markets in which it will work well and in which it may struggle.

 

David Bell is Chief Investment Officer at Mine Wealth + Wellbeing (formerly Auscoal Super). He is also working towards a PhD at University of NSW. This article is for general education purposes only and does not consider the personal circumstances of any investor.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Does currency hedging provide an edge?

Social media’s impact is changing markets

Why caution is needed in Aussie small companies

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.