• Graduate Programs
  • Research
  • Browse our Courses
  • Events
    • Events Calendar
    • Events Archive
    • Summer School
      • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
      • Deep Learning
      • Development Economics
      • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
      • Economics of Climate Change
      • The Economics of Crime
      • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
      • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
      • Inequalities in Health and Healthcare
      • Marketing Research with Purpose
      • Markets with Frictions
      • Modern Toolbox for Spatial and Functional Data
      • Sustainable Finance
      • Tuition Fees and Payment
      • Business Data Science Summer School Program
    • Tinbergen Institute Lectures
    • 2026 Tinbergen Institute Opening Conference
    • Annual Tinbergen Institute Conference
  • News
  • Summer School
    • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
    • Deep Learning
    • Development Economics
    • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
    • Economics of Climate Change
    • The Economics of Crime
    • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
    • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
    • Inequalities in Health and Healthcare
    • Marketing Research with Purpose
    • Markets with Frictions
    • Modern Toolbox for Spatial and Functional Data
    • Sustainable Finance
    • Tuition Fees and Payment
  • Alumni

Soebhag, A., Van Vliet, B. and Verwijmeren, P. (2024). Non-standard errors in asset pricing: Mind your sorts Journal of Empirical Finance, 78.


  • Journal
    Journal of Empirical Finance

Non-standard errors capture variation due to differences in research design choices. We document large variation in design choices in the context of asset pricing factor models and find that the average ratio of the non-standard error to the standard error across factors exceeds one. Using NAN breakpoints instead of NYSE breakpoints improves the average Sharpe ratios the most, from 0.46 to 0.63. Other important design choices relate to excluding microcaps, industry-adjusting, and the rebalancing frequency, which highlights the need for researchers to clearly describe and motivate these choices.