ata. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omissioAccording to Finance professors Dave Yermack of NYU and Crocker Liu of Arizona State, there is a strong inverse correlation between the size of a CEO's home and the share price performance of their company. By big, the authors were referring to homes over 10,000 square feet or on at least 10 acres. While quoting some anecdotes like the poor performance of Rich-Man complexes owned by the CEOs of Home Depot and Hilton Hotels, the broader data set showed that large home owners lagged the S&P by 25% for the 3 years following their purchase compared to 22% returns for those owning more measly homes under 10,000 square feet.

This is certainly an interesting finding and it's backed up by relevant statiscally sound data. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omission

ormance of their company. By big, the authors were referring to homes over 10,000 square feet or on at least 10 acres. While quoting some anecdotes like the poor performance of Rich-Man complexes owned by the CEOs of Home Depot and Hilton Hotels, the broader data set showed that large home owners lagged the S&P by 25% for the 3 years following their purchase compared to 22% returns for those owning more measly homes under 10,000 square feet.

This is certainly an interesting finding and it's backed up by relevant statiscally sound data. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omissio

-Man complexes owned by the CEOs of Home Depot and Hilton Hotels, the broader data set showed that large home owners lagged the S&P by 25% for the 3 years following their purchase compared to 22% returns for those owning more measly homes under 10,000 square feet.

This is certainly an interesting finding and it's backed up by relevant statiscally sound data. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omissio

ompared to 22% returns for those owning more measly homes under 10,000 square feet.

This is certainly an interesting finding and it's backed up by relevant statiscally sound data. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omissio

ata. Although I'm sure it's not inclusive of all homes of all S&P CEOs, any variability within one population would be expected to exist for the other population wrt sample omission, sample size, error in appraisal value/square footage reporting, etc. Based on the quirky findings from this study, there obviously isn't an ETF or mutual fund out there to capitalize on this phenomena, but can serve as a red flag for investors moving forward.

What to do with this information? Presumably, purchases of this size say something about the fiscal responsibility, prudence, or or leadership style of these CEOs (think Enron, Tyco, Comcast). Next time you see your favorite company's CEO on the news for the $12million dollar mansion in the hills, consider whether this is the type of leader you want to invest your money with.