Evidence · factor attribution

Is it selection, or factor exposure?

Two different questions: which market and style exposures contributed to the return, and whether the remaining alpha is distinguishable from zero after fees. FlightDeck publishes both, followed below by the separate comparison with factor funds.

Academic window starts
27 Jun 2025
Academic window ends
31 Aug 2026
Trading days
296
Academic basis
SPY (cap-weight)

Academic factor attribution

What remains after the market and style factors?

FlightDeck separates the cumulative return into market, size, value, momentum and a selection residual using the Fama–French / Carhart factors. These contributions describe the record; the regression below asks whether alpha is statistically distinguishable from zero.

Published comparison window: 27 Jun 2025 to 31 Aug 2026 · 296 trading days · basis: SPY (cap-weight). This window lags the live record because academic factor data arrive later.

Academic cumulative return contributions, gross
ComponentContribution, gross95% bootstrap interval
Market+22.2 ppt15.86 to 28.23 ppt
Size−0.3 ppt−1.49 to 0.42 ppt
Value+8.1 ppt4.40 to 11.98 ppt
Momentum0.0 ppt−1.34 to 0.54 ppt
Selection residual+26.4 ppt20.46 to 32.88 ppt

Contributions are percentage points of cumulative return, not annual alpha. The residual includes unexplained effects; its bootstrap interval measures estimation precision, not the conventional alpha significance test.

Conventional alpha test, gross

Annual regression alpha and Newey-West HAC tests
ModelAlpha a year, grosst, grossp, grosstwo-sidedGross at 95%two-sided
CAPM+23.95%2.340.0193Significant
FF3+18.53%1.970.0485Significant
Carhart-4+18.05%1.920.0551Not significant
FF5+18.38%2.090.0370Significant
FF5 + Mom+18.71%2.100.0354Significant

Daily excess-return regressions use Newey-West HAC standard errors; p-values here are two-sided as FlightDeck publishes them. The five models are related diagnostics of one record, not independent trials, and supplementary to the primary test on the Statistical Validation page. All model results are shown, including those that do not meet the 95% threshold. A short sample cannot establish a durable edge. Computed on gross returns; does not reflect the deduction of all fees and expenses. Net total returns for the same period are shown on the Evidence page. Source and methodology on FlightDeck.

The same test, five factor funds

Alpha Convergence against funds that own the factors

Each row is the average daily alpha on Alpha Opportunity days, with its t-statistic and p-value. A factor fund that showed the same alpha would suggest the excess is factor exposure rather than selection.

Observed · as of 20 Oct 2026
Alpha on Alpha Opportunity days: Alpha Convergence and five factor funds
PortfolioAlpha on AO dayst-statisticp-valueAt 95%
Alpha Convergence274 AO days, live8.1 bp/day2.190.028Significant
DFUSXDimensional US large company4.0 bp/day1.370.170Not significant
MTUMMomentum−0.6 bp/day−0.090.925Not significant
QUALQuality−1.7 bp/day−1.060.291Not significant
VTVValue0.8 bp/day0.280.783Not significant
VIGDividend growth−2.3 bp/day−1.070.284Not significant

From FlightDeck’s AC Market Monitor feed (factor validation), never recomputed here. DFUSX is Dimensional’s US large company fund; MTUM, QUAL, VTV and VIG are momentum, quality, value and dividend-growth funds. A result that is not significant does not prove a factor played no part; it means the factor funds did not show a reliable edge on the same days.

After beta

Jensen alpha: the excess left after the market’s share is taken out

A simple excess return assumes a beta of one. Alpha Convergence runs at lower beta than the market by design, so the regression version, with standard errors robust to serial correlation, asks what remains once the actual beta is accounted for.

Backstage tour

See it running live

A live screen-share of FlightDeck with Mark Tennenbaum, CIO: the command center driven in real time, how today’s market is classified and what the book does about it, and the record with the tests behind it.