scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

A Consumption-Based Model of the Term Structure of Interest Rates

TL;DR: This paper proposed a consumption-based model that can account for many features of the nominal term structure of interest rates, such as a time-varying price of risk generated by external habit.
Abstract: This paper proposes a consumption-based model that can account for many features of the nominal term structure of interest rates. The driving force behind the model is a time-varying price of risk generated by external habit. Nominal bonds depend on past consumption growth through habit and on expected inflation. When calibrated data on consumption, inflation, and the average level of bond yields, the model produces realistic volatility of bond yields and can explain key aspects of the expectations puzzle documented by Campbell and Shiller (1991) and Fama and Bliss (1987). When Actual consumption and inflation data are fed into the model, the model is shown to account for many of the short and long-run fluctuations in the short-term interest rate and the yield spread. At the same time, the model captures the high equity premium and excess stock market volatility.

Summary (4 min read)

Introduction

  • The negative correlation between surplus consumption and the riskfree rate leads to positive risk premia on real bonds, and an upward sloping yield curve.
  • Expected inflation is calibrated purely to match inflation data.
  • Like these models, the model proposed here assumes that the agent evaluates today’s consumption relative to a reference point that increases with past consumption.

1 Model

  • This section describes the model assumed in this paper.
  • Section 1.1 describes the assumptions for preferences, Section 1.2 describes the assumptions on the price level.
  • Section 1.3 describes the solution method, and Section 1.4 discusses consequences for risk premia on real and nominal bonds.

1.1 Preferences

  • The sensitivity function λ(st) will be described below.
  • In the model of Campbell and Cochrane (1999), the mechanism in (10) does not create timevarying risk premia on bonds for the simple reason that bond returns are constant, and equal to the riskfree rate at all maturities.

1.2 Inflation

  • For simplicity, the authors follow Boudoukh (1993) and Cox, Ingersoll, and Ross (1985), and model inflation as an exogenous process.
  • The correlation between inflation, Zt and consumption can be modeled in a parsimonious way by writing the consumption growth shock vt+1 as vt+1 = σc²t+1.
  • This structure allows for an arbitrary number of state variables and cross-correlations.
  • Multiple lags may be accommodated by increasing the dimension of Zt. 5Harvey (1989) provides direct evidence that the the risk-return tradeoff varies counter-cyclically.
  • 6Since an earlier version of this paper circulated, Buraschi and Jiltsov (2003) study a related model that puts the money supply directly in the utility function.

1.3 Model Solution

  • This section calculates the prices of long-term bonds and stocks.
  • To compute prices on nominal bonds, techniques from affine bond pricing7 are combined with numerical methods.
  • Introducing affine bond pricing techniques improves the efficiency of the calculation and provides insight into the workings of the model.

Bond Prices

  • This paper solves for prices of both real bonds (bonds whose payment is fixed in terms of units of the consumption good) and nominal bonds (bonds whose payoff is fixed in terms of units of the price level).
  • This implies the boundary condition: P0,t = 1.
  • For this problem, numerical integration is superior to calculating the expectation by Monte Carlo.
  • Equation (14) indicates that, unlike real bond prices, nominal bond prices are functions of the state variable Zt as well as st.
  • These formulas can also be used to gain insight into the workings of the model, as explained in Section 1.4.

Aggregate Wealth

  • The market portfolio is equivalent to aggregate wealth, and the dividend equals aggregate consumption.
  • The price-consumption ratio and the return on the market can be calculated using methods similar to those above, with a small but important modification.
  • Because these assets pay no coupons, they have the same recursive pricing relation as bonds (16).
  • Of course the prices are different, and this is because there is a different boundary condition: P e0,t = Ct. 1.
  • This formula can be solved recursively using one-dimensional quadrature.

1.4 Implications for bond risk premia

  • Of interest is the risk premium on the nominal riskfree asset.
  • If σπσc < 0, the one-period nominal bond has a positive risk premium relative to the one-period real bond.
  • Intuitively, this is because σπσ ′ c < 0 implies that inflation and consumption growth are negatively correlated.
  • In general, there is no closed form expression for nominal or real bond prices with maturity greater than one period.
  • These can be determined in some special cases, as described below.

Special cases

  • As long as expected inflation varies, the nominal riskfree rate also varies.
  • These risk premia vary with st, and it is again not possible to solve for bond prices in closed form.
  • Then inflation risk is not priced, and the same reasoning as above shows that P $n,t = exp{−nrf} exp{An +BnZt}.
  • Thus risk premia on nominal bonds are zero except for a constant Jensen’s inequality term.

2 Estimation

  • The results of the previous section suggest that the process assumed for expected inflation will be an important determinant of yields and returns on nominal bonds.
  • This is equivalent to assuming that realized inflation follows an ARMA(1,1) process.
  • Equations (26)–(28) imply an exact likelihood function.
  • The left column reports the parameter estimate, the right column reports the standard error.

3 Implications for Asset Returns

  • This section describes the implications of the model for returns on bonds and stocks.
  • Section 3.1 describes the calibration of the parameters, and the data used to calculate moments of nominal bonds for comparison.
  • Section 3.2 characterizes the price-dividend ratio and the yield spread on real and nominal bonds as functions of the underlying state variables st and expected inflation.
  • Section 3.3 evaluates the model by simulating 100,000 quarters of returns on stocks and nominal and real bonds and compares the simulated moments implied by the model to those on stocks and nominal bonds in the data.
  • Lastly, Section 3.4 shows the implications of the model for the time series of the short-term interest rate and the yield spread, and examines the properties of implied bond risk premia using the technique proposed by Dai and Singleton (2002).

3.1 Calibration

  • The processes for consumption and inflation are calibrated using the estimation of Section 2, while the preference parameters are calibrated using bond and stock returns.9.
  • Then σc and σπ can be found by taking the Cholesky decomposition of the right hand side of (29).
  • Boudoukh fits consumption and inflation parameters to consumption and inflation data, and preference parameters to bond returns.
  • This implies that when the nominal riskfree rate in the model is evaluated at s̄, it equals the yield on the three-month bond.
  • The simulation results in Section 3.3 show that the difference is small.

3.2 Characterizing the Solution

  • As shown in Figure 3, the price-dividend ratio increases with surplus consumption St. As the pricedividend ratio is often taken to be a measure of the business cycle (e.g. Lettau and Ludvingson (2001)), this confirms the intuition that St is a procyclical variable.
  • 10A potential concern with this regression is the relatively high degree of persistence in the surplus consumption ratio.
  • 16 Figure 4 plots the yields on nominal and real bonds for maturities of three months and ten years.
  • Both nominal and real yields decrease with St, but the long yields are more sensitive to St than the short yields.
  • Both long and short-term yields are increasing in expected inflation.

3.3 Simulation

  • To evaluate the predictions of the model for asset returns, 100,000 quarters of data are simulated.
  • Prices of the claim on aggregate consumption , of real, and nominal bonds are calculated numerically, using the method described in Section 1.3.

Returns on the Aggregate Market

  • Table 3 shows the implications of this model for equity returns.
  • The implications of the present model for equity returns are nearly identical to those of Campbell and Cochrane (1999).
  • The model fits the mean and standard deviation of equity returns, even though it was calibrated only to match the ratio.
  • The persistence φ is chosen so that the model fits the correlation of the price-dividend ratio by construction.
  • In addition, results available from the author show that price-dividend ratios have the ability to predict excess returns on equities, just as in the data (Campbell and Shiller (1988), Fama and French (1989)), and that declines in the price-dividend ratio predict higher volatility (Black (1976), Schwert (1989), Nelson (1991)).

Bond Returns

  • Table 4 shows the implications of the model for means and standard deviations of real and nominal bond yields.
  • The model produces average nominal yields that are very similar to those in the data for bonds between maturities of 3 months and 5 years.
  • The previous discussion shows that interest rate risk leads both real and nominal bonds to have positive risk premia.
  • This section shows that risk premia are indeed time-varying, and explains why.
  • 17 While the model succeeds in fitting the pattern of the coefficients in the data, the magnitude of the difference between the slope coefficients and one is smaller in the model than in the data.

3.4 Implications for the Time Series

  • The previous section shows the implications of the model for the population values of aggregate market moments, bond yields, and Campbell and Shiller (1991) regression coefficients.
  • Zt, it is possible to calculate the model’s implications for nominal yields.
  • The argument in Section 3.1 shows that this series is equal to Zt. 20For the 3-month nominal yield, (23) is an approximate closed-form expression.
  • 23 the higher frequency movements in the 70s, and overall, the correlation between the yield spread implied by the model and that in the data is .40.
  • 24 Figure 9 plots the coefficients βRn from the regression (36), along with the coefficients βn from (34) found in the data.

4 Conclusion

  • This paper offers a theory of the nominal term structure based on the preferences of a representative agent.
  • Nevertheless, the implied volatility of yields is close to the sample estimates of nominal yield volatility in the data.
  • This suggests that surplus consumption, which, along with expected inflation drives changes in yields in the model, is a determinant of yields in the data.
  • The second test is whether, when the Campbell-Shiller regressions are adjusted by risk premia on bonds implied by the model, the slope coefficients are closer to unity.
  • In summary, the model is able to capture many of the properties of moments of bond returns in the data, and explain much of the time series variation in short and long-term bond yields.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Figures (13)

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

"2-:)67-8=3*)227=0:%2-%"2-:)67-8=3*)227=0:%2-%
',30%60=311327 ',30%60=311327
-2%2')%4)67 #,%6832%'908=)7)%6',

3279148-32%7)(3()03*8,)!)61 869'896)3*28)6)783279148-32%7)(3()03*8,)!)61 869'896)3*28)6)78
%8)7%8)7
)77-'%#%',8)6
"2-:)67-8=3*)227=0:%2-%
3003;8,-7%2(%((-8-32%0;36/7%8,88476)437-836=94)22)(9*2')$4%4)67
%683*8,)-2%2')311327%2(8,)-2%2')%2(-2%2'-%0%2%+)1)28311327
)'311)2()(-8%8-32)'311)2()(-8%8-32
#%',8)63279148-32%7)(3()03*8,)!)61 869'896)3*28)6)78%8)7
3962%03*
-2%2'-%0'3231-'7

,884(<(3-36+..@2)'3
!,-74%4)6-74378)(%8 ',30%60=311327,88476)437-836=94)22)(9*2')$4%4)67
36136)-2*361%8-3240)%7)'328%'86)437-836=43&3<94)22)(9

3279148-32%7)(3()03*8,)!)61 869'896)3*28)6)78%8)73279148-32%7)(3()03*8,)!)61 869'896)3*28)6)78%8)7
&786%'8&786%'8
!,-74%4)6463437)7%'3279148-32&%7)(13()08,%8%''39287*361%2=*)%896)73*8,)231-2%08)61
7869'896)3*-28)6)786%8)7!,)(6-:-2+*36')&),-2(8,)13()0-7%8-1):%6=-2+46-')3*6-7/+)2)6%8)(&=
)<8)62%0,%&-831-2%0&32(7()4)2(324%78'3279148-32+63;8,8,639+,,%&-8%2(32)<4)'8)(
-2A%8-32#,)2'%0-&6%8)(83(%8%32'3279148-32-2A%8-32%2(8,)%++6)+%8)1%6/)88,)13()0
463(9')76)%0-78-'1)%27%2(:30%8-0-8-)73*&32(=-)0(7%2(%''39287*368,))<4)'8%8-32749>>0)!,)
13()0%073'%4896)78,),-+,)59-8=46)1-91%2()<')77783'/1%6/)8:30%8-0-8=
-7'-40-2)7-7'-40-2)7
-2%2')?-2%2')%2(-2%2'-%0%2%+)1)28
!,-7.3962%0%68-'0)-7%:%-0%&0)%8 ',30%60=311327,88476)437-836=94)22)(9*2')$4%4)67

The Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research
A Consumption-Based Model of the
Term Structure of Interest Rates
Jessica A. Wachter
27-04

A Consumption-Based Model of the Term Structure
of Interest Rates
Jessica A. Wachter
University of Pennsylvania and NBER
July 9, 2004
I thank Andrew Ang, Ravi Bansal, Michael Brandt, Geert Bekaert, John Campbell, John Cochrane,
Francisco Gomes, Vassil Konstantinov, Martin Lettau, Anthony Lynch, David Marshall, Lasse Pederson,
Andre Perold, Ken Singleton, Christopher Telmer, Jeremy Stein, Matt Richardson, Stephen Ross, Robert
Whitelaw, Yihong Xia, seminar participants at the 2004 Western Finance Association meeting in Vancouver,
the 2003 Society of Economic Dynamics meeting in Paris, and the 2001 NBER Asset Pricing meeting in
Los Angeles, the the NYU Macro lunch, the New York Federal Reserve, Washington University, and the
Wharton School. I thank Lehman Brothers for financial support.
Address: The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 3620 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104;
Tel: (215) 898-7634; Email: jwachter@wharton.upenn.edu; http://finance.wharton.upenn.edu/˜ jwachter/

A Consumption-Based Model of the Term Structure
of Interest Rates
Abstract
This paper proposes a consumption-based model that can account for many features of the
nominal term structure of interest rates. The driving force behind the model is a time-varying
price of risk generated by external habit. Nominal bonds depend on past consumption growth
through habit and on expected inflation. When calibrated to data on consumption, inflation, and
the average level of bond yields, the model produces realistic volatility of bond yields and can
explain key aspects of the expectations puzzle documented by Campbell and Shiller (1991) and
Fama and Bliss (1987). When actual consumption and inflation data are fed into the model, the
model is shown to account for many of the short and long-run fluctuations in the short-term interest
rate and the yield spread. At the same time, the model captures the high equity premium and
excess stock market volatility.

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors showed that the degree of extrapolative weighting in investors' belief (DOX) proposed by Cassella and Gulen (2018) has strong predictive power for a broad set of overreaction-related anomalies in the stock market.
Abstract: We find that the degree of extrapolative weighting in investors' belief (DOX) proposed by Cassella and Gulen (2018) has strong predictive power for a broad set of overreaction-related anomalies in the stock market. The average return spread of these anomalies is about 0.81% per month following high DOX periods, and -0.22% per month following low DOX periods. In sharp contrast, DOX has opposite, but weaker, predictive power for under-reaction-related anomalies. In addition, the predictive power of DOX is robust after controlling for a broad set of economic forces including investor sentiment and the consumption surplus ratio. Moreover, most of the DOX effect on long-short anomaly returns derives from the short legs of these overreaction-related anomalies, suggesting that time variation in DOX leads to more time variation in overpricing than in under-pricing, probably because of short-sale impediments.

3 citations

DOI
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: Sergeyev et al. as discussed by the authors studied the welfare implications of international financial integration in the presence of bank funding risks and showed that if macroprudential regulation of the banking sector is chosen by each country in an uncoordinated way, the outcome can be Pareto inefficient so that there is a role for global coordination of such policies.
Abstract: Essays on Macroeconomics and International Finance Dmitriy Sergeyev This thesis addresses three topics in Macroeconomics and International Finance. Chapter 1 studies welfare implications of international financial integration in the presence of bank funding risks. Unregulated issuance of safe short-term liabilities by financial intermediaries leads to excessive reliance on this form of financing, which increases losses associated with financial crises. First, I show that integration increases the severity of potential financial crises in the countries that receive capital inflows. As a result, integration may reduce welfare for these countries. Second, I show that if macroprudential regulation of the banking sector is chosen by each country in an uncoordinated way, the outcome can be Pareto inefficient so that there is a role for global coordination of such policies. This effect arises because the macroprudential regulation that limits the overissuance of safe liabilities changes the international interest rate. The regulation may have an additional benefit from manipulating the interest rate. Third, the desire to manipulate the interest rate when regulating the local banking sector creates incentives to use two regulatory tools: macroprudential regulation of the banking sector and capital controls. Chapter 2, written jointly with Emi Nakamura and Jón Steinsson, quantifies the importance of long-run risks—persistent shocks to growth rates and uncertainty—in a panel of long-term aggregate consumption data for developed countries. We identify sizable and highly persistent world growth-rate shocks as well as less persistent country-specific growth rate shocks. The world growth-rate shocks capture the productivity speed-up and slow-down many countries experienced in the second half of the 20th century. We also identify large and persistent world shocks to uncertainty. Our world uncertainty process captures the large but uneven rise and fall of volatility that occurred over the course of the 20th century. We find that negative shocks to growth rates are correlated with shocks that increase uncertainty. Our estimates based on macroeconomic data alone line up well with earlier calibrations of the long-run risks model designed to match asset pricing data. We document how these dynamics, combined with Epstein-Zin-Weil preferences, help explain a number of asset pricing puzzles. Chapter 3, written jointly with Neil R. Mehrotra, investigates the relationship between sector-specific shocks, shifts in the Beveridge curve, and changes in the natural rate of unemployment. We document a significant correlation between shifts in the US Beveridge curve in postwar data and periods of elevated sectoral shocks relying on a factor analysis of sectoral employment to derive our sectoral shock index. We provide conditions under which sectorspecific shocks in a multisector model augmented with labor market search generate outward shifts in the Beveridge curve and raise the natural rate of unemployment. Consistent with empirical evidence, our model also generates cyclical movements in aggregate matching function efficiency and mismatch across sectors. We calibrate a two-sector version of our model and demonstrate that a negative shock to construction employment calibrated to match employment shares can fully account for the outward shift in the Beveridge curve. We augment our standard multisector model with financial frictions to demonstrate that financial shocks or a binding zero lower bound can act like sectoral productivity shocks, generating a shift in the Beveridge curve that may be counteracted by expansionary monetary policy.

3 citations


Cites background from "A Consumption-Based Model of the Te..."

  • ...Davis and von Wachter (2011) show that, in periods of high unemployment, wage loss is up to three years of pre-displacement earnings....

    [...]

Posted Content
01 Jan 2015
TL;DR: In this article, the authors consider a quantitative model of sovereign borrowing with three key ingredients: multiple debt maturities, risk averse lenders and coordination failures, and show that the joint distribution of interest rate spreads and debt duration provides information to distinguish between these two sources of default risk.
Abstract: How important was non-fundamental risk in driving interest rate spreads during the euro-area sovereign debt crisis? To answer this question, we consider a quantitative model of sovereign borrowing with three key ingredients: multiple debt maturities, risk averse lenders and coordination failures a la Cole and Kehoe (2000). In this environment, lenders' expectations of a default can be self-fulfilling, and market sentiments contribute to variation in interest rate spreads along with economic fundamentals. We show that the joint distribution of interest rate spreads and debt duration provides information to distinguish between these two sources of default risk. We make use of this result by calibrating the model to match the empirical distribution of Italian sovereign spreads and debt duration. The process for the lenders' stochastic discount factor, a key input in our analysis, is disciplined using moments from the yield curve on safe assets and the euro-area stock price-consumption ratio. Our preliminary results indicate that the rise in Italian interest rate spreads over the 2011-2012 period was mostly the result of bad economic fundamentals and high risk premia, with a limited role played by non-fundamental uncertainty. We show how this information can be used to understand the implications of the OMT program announced by the ECB.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article showed that inflation is negatively correlated with long-run income growth but positively correlated with cyclical income, thus enabling the model to replicate positive and sizable term premiums, along with the Phillips curve over business cycles.
Abstract: Upward sloping yield curves are hard to reconcile with the positive association between income and inflation (the Phillips curve) in consumption-based asset pricing models. Using US and UK data, this paper shows inflation is negatively correlated with long-run income growth but positively correlated with cyclical income, thus enabling the model to replicate positive and sizable term premiums, along with the Phillips curve over business cycles. Quantitative analyses also emphasize the importance of monetary policy, predicting that a permanently low growth and low inflation environment would precipitate flatter yield curves due to constraints to monetary policy around the zero lower bound.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare consumption-based asset pricing models based on the forecasting performance of investors who use economic constraints derived from the models to predict the equity premium, and propose a simple Bayesian framework through which the investors impose the economic constraints as model-based priors on the parameters of their predictive regressions.
Abstract: This paper compares consumption-based asset pricing models based on the forecasting performance of investors who use economic constraints derived from the models to predict the equity premium. Three prominent asset pricing models are considered: Habit Formation, Long Run Risk, and Prospect Theory. I propose a simple Bayesian framework through which the investors impose the economic constraints as model-based priors on the parameters of their predictive regressions. An investor whose prior beliefs are rooted in the Long Run Risk model achieves more accurate forecasts overall. The greatest difference in performance occurs during the bull market of the late 1990s. During this period, the weak predictability of the equity premium implied by the Long Run Risk model helps the investor to not prematurely anticipate falling stock prices.

3 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, an exponential ARCH model is proposed to study volatility changes and the risk premium on the CRSP Value-Weighted Market Index from 1962 to 1987, which is an improvement over the widely-used GARCH model.
Abstract: This paper introduces an ARCH model (exponential ARCH) that (1) allows correlation between returns and volatility innovations (an important feature of stock market volatility changes), (2) eliminates the need for inequality constraints on parameters, and (3) allows for a straightforward interpretation of the "persistence" of shocks to volatility. In the above respects, it is an improvement over the widely-used GARCH model. The model is applied to study volatility changes and the risk premium on the CRSP Value-Weighted Market Index from 1962 to 1987. Copyright 1991 by The Econometric Society.

10,019 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...In addition, results available from the author show that price–dividend ratios have the ability to predict excess returns on equities, just as in the data (Campbell and Shiller, 1988; Fama and French, 1989), and that declines in the price–dividend ratio predict higher volatility (Black, 1976; Schwert, 1989; Nelson, 1991)....

    [...]

  • ...…from the author show that price–dividend ratios have the ability to predict excess returns on equities, just as in the data (Campbell and Shiller, 1988; Fama and French, 1989), and that declines in the price–dividend ratio predict higher volatility (Black, 1976; Schwert, 1989; Nelson, 1991)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors use an intertemporal general equilibrium asset pricing model to study the term structure of interest rates and find that anticipations, risk aversion, investment alternatives, and preferences about the timing of consumption all play a role in determining bond prices.
Abstract: This paper uses an intertemporal general equilibrium asset pricing model to study the term structure of interest rates. In this model, anticipations, risk aversion, investment alternatives, and preferences about the timing of consumption all play a role in determining bond prices. Many of the factors traditionally mentioned as influencing the term structure are thus included in a way which is fully consistent with maximizing behavior and rational expectations. The model leads to specific formulas for bond prices which are well suited for empirical testing. 1. INTRODUCTION THE TERM STRUCTURE of interest rates measures the relationship among the yields on default-free securities that differ only in their term to maturity. The determinants of this relationship have long been a topic of concern for economists. By offering a complete schedule of interest rates across time, the term structure embodies the market's anticipations of future events. An explanation of the term structure gives us a way to extract this information and to predict how changes in the underlying variables will affect the yield curve. In a world of certainty, equilibrium forward rates must coincide with future spot rates, but when uncertainty about future rates is introduced the analysis becomes much more complex. By and large, previous theories of the term structure have taken the certainty model as their starting point and have proceeded by examining stochastic generalizations of the certainty equilibrium relationships. The literature in the area is voluminous, and a comprehensive survey would warrant a paper in itself. It is common, however, to identify much of the previous work in the area as belonging to one of four strands of thought. First, there are various versions of the expectations hypothesis. These place predominant emphasis on the expected values of future spot rates or holdingperiod returns. In its simplest form, the expectations hypothesis postulates that bonds are priced so that the implied forward rates are equal to the expected spot rates. Generally, this approach is characterized by the following propositions: (a) the return on holding a long-term bond to maturity is equal to the expected return on repeated investment in a series of the short-term bonds, or (b) the expected rate of return over the next holding period is the same for bonds of all maturities. The liquidity preference hypothesis, advanced by Hicks [16], concurs with the importance of expected future spot rates, but places more weight on the effects of the risk preferences of market participants. It asserts that risk aversion will cause forward rates to be systematically greater than expected spot rates, usually

7,014 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper showed that an equilibrium model which is not an Arrow-Debreu economy will be the one that simultaneously rationalizes both historically observed large average equity return and the small average risk-free return.

6,141 citations


"A Consumption-Based Model of the Te..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...Thus, the model can fit the equity premium puzzle of Mehra and Prescott (1985)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, this paper found that expected returns on common stocks and long-term bonds contain a term or maturity premium that has a clear business-cycle pattern (low near peaks, high near troughs).

4,110 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...In addition, results available from the author show that price–dividend ratios have the ability to predict excess returns on equities, just as in the data (Campbell and Shiller, 1988; Fama and French, 1989), and that declines in the price–dividend ratio predict higher volatility (Black, 1976; Schwert, 1989; Nelson, 1991)....

    [...]

  • ...…from the author show that price–dividend ratios have the ability to predict excess returns on equities, just as in the data (Campbell and Shiller, 1988; Fama and French, 1989), and that declines in the price–dividend ratio predict higher volatility (Black, 1976; Schwert, 1989; Nelson, 1991)....

    [...]

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, a consumption-based model is proposed to explain a wide variety of dynamic asset pricing phenomena, including the procyclical variation of stock prices, the long-term horizon predictability of excess stock returns, and the countercyclical variations of stock market volatility.
Abstract: We present a consumption†based model that explains a wide variety of dynamic asset pricing phenomena, including the procyclical variation of stock prices, the long†horizon predictability of excess stock returns, and the countercyclical variation of stock market volatility. The model captures much of the history of stock prices from consumption data. It explains the short†and long†run equity premium puzzles despite a low and constant risk†free rate. The results are essentially the same whether we model stocks as a claim to the consumption stream or as a claim to volatile dividends poorly corelated with consumption. The model is driven by an independently and identically distributed consumption growth process and adds a slow †moving external habit to the standard power utility function. These features generate slow countercyclical variation in risk premia. The model posits a fundamentally novel description of risk premia. Investors fear stocks primarily because they do poorly in recessions unrelated to the risks of long†run average consumption growth.

3,886 citations

Frequently Asked Questions (1)
Q1. What are the contributions in "A consumption-based model of the term structure of interest rates" ?

This paper proposes a consumption-based model that can account for many features of the nominal term structure of interest rates.