Anomaly Replication Lab
  • The zoo
  • Screener
  • Multiple testing
  • Correlations
  • Composite
  • Methodology
  • Guides
  • Resources
Sign in
Anomaly Replication LabSign in
  • The zoo
  • Screener
  • Multiple testing
  • Correlations
  • Composite
  • Methodology
  • Guides
  • Resources

Educational replication, not advice. Long-short returns are decile spreads or published factor series from the Kenneth R. French Data Library and AQR, value-weighted, US equities, and gross of transaction and shorting costs — which for high-turnover signals like short-term reversal is the whole story. Reproducing a premium in-sample is not evidence it will persist. Past performance does not predict future results.

© 2026 Austin Levenberg. All rights reserved. This site’s code, design, written analysis, and computed results are not licensed for reuse or redistribution — terms of use · privacy.

Data: Kenneth R. French Data Library, AQR Capital Management public data sets.

Part of austinlev.dev — four research tools, and a note on where this is headed.

← the zoo
ProfitabilityFaded

Profitability (gross / operating)

More profitable firms earn higher returns — even holding valuation fixed.

Novy-Marx · Journal of Financial Economics · published 2013 · original sample 1963–2010 (reported ≈ +4.3%/yr, t ≈ 3.2)

Our replication
+2.7%
1963–2026, per year
Full-sample t
2.8
Sharpe 0.38
Post-publication
+2.2%
since 2014, t = 1.1
Decay
33%
of the premium is gone

The whole history

Growth of $1 in the long-short strategy, gross of trading and shorting costs. The dashed line marks the year the paper was published — everything to its right is out-of-sample.

$1 in the long-short strategy, gross of costs. Grey = the sample the paper had; blue = everything since.

Before and after publication

The comparison the site is built around.

WindowReturn/yrVolSharpet-statMax DD
Paper's sample (1963–2010)+3.0%7.9%0.422.6-42%
After publication (2014–2026)+1.9%8.5%0.261.1-26%
Full sample (1963–2026)+2.7%7.9%0.382.8-42%

Against the factor models

Is there a risk-adjusted alpha left once you control for the standard factors? Alpha is annualized; t-stats use Newey–West standard errors.

ModelAlpha/yrAlpha tR²Biggest loadings
CAPM (market only)+3.7%3.30.04Mkt-RF -0.10
Fama–French 3-factor+3.7%3.30.13SMB -0.23, HML +0.06, Mkt-RF -0.05
Fama–French 5-factor0.0%0.01.00RMW +1.00, Mkt-RF +0.00, SMB +0.00
FF5 + momentum *0.0%0.01.00RMW +1.00, Mkt-RF +0.00, SMB +0.00
FF5 + mom, own factor removed+3.9%4.10.14tests for anything left beyond the other five

* Profitability (gross / operating) is itself the RMW factor, so its alpha against a model that contains RMW is zero by construction — the informative row is the one with its own factor removed.

Rolling performance

Trailing 3-year Sharpe ratio. Long stretches below zero are common.

By decade

1960s+1.4%/yrSharpe 0.25
1970s-0.6%/yrSharpe -0.11
1980s+4.9%/yrSharpe 0.97
1990s+2.3%/yrSharpe 0.39
2000s+8.3%/yrSharpe 0.62
2010s+1.4%/yrSharpe 0.26
2020s+2.8%/yrSharpe 0.26

The risk explanation

Profitable firms have more of their value in distant, riskier cash flows (long-duration equity), so they carry a higher discount rate.

The behavioral explanation

Investors under-appreciate how persistent high profitability is and how quick the market is to punish unprofitable 'story' stocks.

Why it might have decayed

Young — published 2013 — so the out-of-sample window is short, but it has held up and it is the natural hedge to value (buy cheap AND profitable). Now embedded in the Fama–French 5-factor model.

Long-short = the published Fama–French / Carhart factor return. Value-weighted, US equities, monthly, gross of transaction and shorting costs. The original-paper figures are approximate and annualized for comparison.