Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T12:44:32.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abnormal Returns from the Common Stock Investments of the U.S. Senate

Part of:JFQA William F. Sharpe Best Paper Award Winner

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Alan J. Ziobrowski,
Ping Cheng,
James W. Boyd and
Brigitte J. Ziobrowski
Alan J. Ziobrowski
Affiliation:
aziobrowski@gsu.edu, Georgia State University, Department of Real Estate, J. Mack Robinson College of Business, P.O. Box 4020, 33 Gilmer Street SE, Atlanta, GA 30302
Ping Cheng
Affiliation:
pcheng@fau.edu, Florida Atlantic University, Department of Industry Study, College of Business, 777 Glades Road, Boca Raton, FL 33431
James W. Boyd
Affiliation:
jboyd@bsa3.kent.edu, Kent State University, Department of Finance, College of Business Administration, Kent, OH 44242
Brigitte J. Ziobrowski
Affiliation:
bziobrow@aug.edu, Augusta State University, School of Business Administration, Augusta, GA 30904
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

The actions of the federal government can have a profound impact on financial markets. As prominent participants in the government decision making process, U.S. Senators are likely to have knowledge of forthcoming government actions before the information becomes public. This could provide them with an informational advantage over other investors. We test for abnormal returns from the common stock investments of members of the U.S. Senate during the period 1993–1998. We document that a portfolio that mimics the purchases of U.S. Senators beats the market by 85 basis points per month, while a portfolio that mimics the sales of Senators lags the market by 12 basis points per month. The large difference in the returns of stocks bought and sold (nearly one percentage point per month) is economically large and reliably positive.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 2004, pp. 661 - 676
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 2004

References

Barber, B. M., and Odean, T.. “Trading is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors.” Journal of Finance, 55 (2000), 773–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boller, G. “Taking Stock in Congress,” by Joy Ward, Mother Jones (09./10. 1995).Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. M., and Tollison, R.. Theory of Public Choice II, Univ. of Michigan Press (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dallek, R.Lone Star Rising. New York, NY: Oxford Univ. Press (1991).Google Scholar
Fama, E. F. “Market Efficiency, Long-Term Returns and Behavioral Finance.” Journal of Financial Economics, 49 (1998), 283–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, E. F., and French, K. R.. “Common Risk Factors in Returns on Stocks and Bonds.” Journal of Financial Economics, 33 (1993), 3–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaffe, J. F. “Special Information and Insider Trading.” Journal of Business, 47 (1974), 410–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeng, L. A.; Metrick, A.; and Zeckhauser, R.. “Estimating Returns to Insider Trading: A Performance Perspective.” Working Paper, Boston Univ. (2001).Google Scholar
Loughran, T., and Ritter, J. R.. “The New Issues Puzzle.” Journal of Finance, 50 (1995), 23–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandelker, G. “Risk and Return: The Case of Merging Firms.” Journal of Financial Economics, 1 (1974), 303–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, M. L., and Stafford, E.. “Managerial Decisions and Long-Term Stock Price Performance.” Journal of Business, 73 (2000), 287–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Senate Ethics Manual, http://http://ethics.senate.gov/downloads/pdffiles/manual.pdf (2003).Google Scholar