R&D-Intensity Value
In plain terms
Standard value factors mistake R&D-heavy tech firms as 'growth' because R&D is expensed not capitalized. Adding R&D back uncovers hidden value.
How it works
Standard book-to-market misclassifies R&D-heavy firms as growth because GAAP expenses R&D instead of capitalizing it. Peters-Taylor 2017 capitalize R&D (plus part of SG&A) via the perpetual-inventory method and add the stock to book equity; Eisfeldt-Kim-Papanikolaou show that sorting on this intangible-adjusted book-to-market restores the value premium for tech/biotech. Our implementation is an intentional, documented proxy of that construct, not the paper's cross-sectional sort: it trades a per-ticker 12Q rolling z-score of R&D/total_assets combined with a price-below-200d-MA drawdown trigger (long cheap R&D-intensive firms). Direction and long-only mode match the paper.
Live results
0 times picked on its own · 7 times inside a blend (7 beat the stock) · updated 2026-07-06Data dependencies
- Daily prices
Adjusted-close OHLCV for every US-listed ticker; primary price feed.
- Fundamentals
Quarterly fundamentals (income, balance, cash-flow) from FMP + SEC.
Expected edge
- Tested over
- US Compustat, 1975 onward (post-SFAS No. 2 R&D disclosure; intangible-adjusted HML per EKP)
See the source research for the original effect size; a modern replication on new data may be weaker.
Explore R&D-Intensity Value on alphactor.ai
See which tickers this family is currently firing on, with live signals and rankings.