Posted Content•
The Cross-Section of Volatility and Expected Returns
TL;DR: This paper examined the pricing of aggregate volatility risk in the cross-section of stock returns and found that stocks with high sensitivities to innovations in aggregate volatility have low average returns, and that stock with high idiosyncratic volatility relative to the Fama and French (1993) model have abysmally low return.
Abstract: We examine the pricing of aggregate volatility risk in the cross-section of stock returns Consistent with theory, we find that stocks with high sensitivities to innovations in aggregate volatility have low average returns In addition, we find that stocks with high idiosyncratic volatility relative to the Fama and French (1993) model have abysmally low average returns This phenomenon cannot be explained by exposure to aggregate volatility risk Size, book-to-market, momentum, and liquidity effects cannot account for either the low average returns earned by stocks with high exposure to systematic volatility risk or for the low average returns of stocks with high idiosyncratic volatility
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose that high return dispersion (RD) is associated with economic conditions characterized by high discount rates, which are not conducive to growth and investment and propose that RD risk can explain the accrual and investment anomalies.
Abstract: Recent research shows that high return dispersion (RD) is associated with economic conditions characterized by high discount rates, which are not conducive to growth and investment. We propose that RD risk can explain the accrual and investment anomalies. We conduct asset-pricing tests that include RD as a potential risk factor and show that low-accrual and low-investment firms have significantly higher exposure to the risk captured by RD. RD significantly explains future returns and the excess returns to accrual and investment hedge portfolios shrink in magnitude and become insignificant during periods of low RD. We conclude that risk explains the accrual and investment anomalies.
40 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the relation between divergence of opinion about the value of the acquiring firm in the pre-acquisition announcement period and postacquisition stock returns and find that acquirers subject to high opinion dispersion earn lower future returns than acquirers that are subject to low dispersion.
Abstract: We examine the relation between divergence of opinion about the value of the acquiring firm in the pre-acquisition announcement period and post-acquisition stock returns. We find that acquirers subject to high opinion dispersion earn lower future returns than acquirers subject to low dispersion. It appears that, on average, only acquirers in the high divergence of opinion subset experience significant negative post-event abnormal returns. In the spirit of Miller (1977), such evidence implies that high pre-event investor disagreement leads to systematic overpricing of acquirers that manifests itself through long-run underperformance of their stock. The documented misvaluation persists irrespective of the opinion divergence proxy and performance evaluation method used and after controlling for several common deal and acquirer characteristics.
39 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors used option prices to infer the level of uncertainty about future asset prices and found that implied volatility shows that uncertainty about short-term interest rates has been falling for almost 20 years, as the levels of interest rates and inflation have fallen.
Abstract: Option prices can be used to infer the level of uncertainty about future asset prices. The first two parts of this article explain such measures (implied volatility) and how they can differ from the market’s true expectation of uncertainty. The third then estimates the implied volatility of threemonth eurodollar interest rates from 1985 to 2001 and evaluates its ability to predict realized volatility. Implied volatility shows that uncertainty about short-term interest rates has been falling for almost 20 years, as the levels of interest rates and inflation have fallen. And changes in implied volatility are usually coincident with major news about the stock market, the real economy, and monetary policy.
39 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the cross-sectional properties of return forecasts derived from Fama-MacBeth regressions were studied, and the expected return estimates were found to have strong predictive power for actual returns.
Abstract: This paper studies the cross-sectional properties of return forecasts derived from Fama-MacBeth regressions. These forecasts mimic how an investor could, in real time, combine many firm characteristics to obtain a composite estimate of a stock’s expected return. Empirically, the forecasts vary substantially across stocks and have strong predictive power for actual returns. For example, using ten-year rolling estimates of Fama-MacBeth slopes and a cross-sectional model with 15 firm characteristics (all based on low-frequency data), the expected-return estimates have a cross-sectional standard deviation of 0.87% monthly and a predictive slope for future monthly returns of 0.74, with a standard error of 0.07.
38 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify "best idea" trades of fund managers and identify such trades using an ex ante proxy that does not rely on any performance-related variables and is instead based on common trades of managers with similar information sets.
Abstract: In this paper, I identify "best idea" trades of fund managers. These trades account for about 30% of fund volume and outperform benchmarks and other fund trades by as much as 47 basis points per month. I identify such trades using an ex ante proxy that does not rely on any performance-related variables and is instead based on common trades of managers with similar information sets. The performance of best ideas is not explained by herding, short-term liquidity pressures, changes in the index composition, or funds' reaction to analyst revisions, and does not revert in the long term. The remaining fund trades (not best ideas) fail to beat passive benchmarks even before expenses, e.g., their average characteristic-adjusted return is statistically insignificant 0.03% per month. Finally, best ideas also improve funds' after-fee returns: Funds which participate in best idea trades beat other funds by up to 0.3% per quarter.
36 citations
References
More filters
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present some additional tests of the mean-variance formulation of the asset pricing model, which avoid some of the problems of earlier studies and provide additional insights into the nature of the structure of security returns.
Abstract: Considerable attention has recently been given to general equilibrium models of the pricing of capital assets Of these, perhaps the best known is the mean-variance formulation originally developed by Sharpe (1964) and Treynor (1961), and extended and clarified by Lintner (1965a; 1965b), Mossin (1966), Fama (1968a; 1968b), and Long (1972) In addition Treynor (1965), Sharpe (1966), and Jensen (1968; 1969) have developed portfolio evaluation models which are either based on this asset pricing model or bear a close relation to it In the development of the asset pricing model it is assumed that (1) all investors are single period risk-averse utility of terminal wealth maximizers and can choose among portfolios solely on the basis of mean and variance, (2) there are no taxes or transactions costs, (3) all investors have homogeneous views regarding the parameters of the joint probability distribution of all security returns, and (4) all investors can borrow and lend at a given riskless rate of interest The main result of the model is a statement of the relation between the expected risk premiums on individual assets and their "systematic risk" Our main purpose is to present some additional tests of this asset pricing model which avoid some of the problems of earlier studies and which, we believe, provide additional insights into the nature of the structure of security returns The evidence presented in Section II indicates the expected excess return on an asset is not strictly proportional to its B, and we believe that this evidence, coupled with that given in Section IV, is sufficiently strong to warrant rejection of the traditional form of the model given by (1) We then show in Section III how the cross-sectional tests are subject to measurement error bias, provide a solution to this problem through grouping procedures, and show how cross-sectional methods are relevant to testing the expanded two-factor form of the model We show in Section IV that the mean of the beta factor has had a positive trend over the period 1931-65 and was on the order of 10 to 13% per month in the two sample intervals we examined in the period 1948-65 This seems to have been significantly different from the average risk-free rate and indeed is roughly the same size as the average market return of 13 and 12% per month over the two sample intervals in this period This evidence seems to be sufficiently strong enough to warrant rejection of the traditional form of the model given by (1) In addition, the standard deviation of the beta factor over these two sample intervals was 20 and 22% per month, as compared with the standard deviation of the market factor of 36 and 38% per month Thus the beta factor seems to be an important determinant of security returns
2,899 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic (GARCH) model of returns is modified to allow for volatility feedback effect, which amplifies large negative stock returns and dampens large positive returns, making stock returns negatively skewed and increasing the potential for large crashes.
Abstract: It is sometimes argued that an increase in stock market volatility raises required stock returns, and thus lowers stock prices. This paper modifies the generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic (GARCH) model of returns to allow for this volatility feedback effect. The resulting model is asymmetric, because volatility feedback amplifies large negative stock returns and dampens large positive returns, making stock returns negatively skewed and increasing the potential for large crashes. The model also implies that volatility feedback is more important when volatility is high. In U.S. monthly and daily data in the period 1926-88, the asymmetric model fits the data better than the standard GARCH model, accounting for almost half the skewness and excess kurtosis of standard monthly GARCH residuals. Estimated volatility discounts on the stock market range from 1% in normal times to 13% after the stock market crash of October 1987 and 25% in the early 1930's. However volatility feedback has little effect on the unconditional variance of stock returns.
1,793 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined a class of continuous-time models that incorporate jumps in returns and volatility, in addition to diffusive stochastic volatility, and developed a likelihood-based estimation strategy and provided estimates of model parameters, spot volatility, jump times and jump sizes using both S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 index returns.
Abstract: This paper examines a class of continuous-time models that incorporate jumps in returns and volatility, in addition to diffusive stochastic volatility. We develop a likelihood-based estimation strategy and provide estimates of model parameters, spot volatility, jump times and jump sizes using both S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 index returns. Estimates of jumps times, jump sizes and volatility are particularly useful for disentangling the dynamic effects of these factors during periods of market stress, such as those in 1987, 1997 and 1998. Using both formal and informal diagnostics, we find strong evidence for jumps in volatility, even after accounting for jumps in returns. We use implied volatility curves computed from option prices to judge the economic differences between the models. Finally, we evaluate the impact of estimation risk on option prices and find that the uncertainty in estimating the parameters and the spot volatility has important, though very different, effects on option prices.
1,040 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, a new way to generalize the insights of static asset pricing theory to a multi-period setting is proposed, which uses a loglinear approximation to the budget constraint to substitute out consumption from a standard intertemporal asset pricing model.
Abstract: This paper proposes a new way to generalize the insights of static asset pricing theory to a multi-period setting. The paper uses a loglinear approximation to the budget constraint to substitute out consumption from a standard intertemporal asset pricing model. In a homoskedastic lognormal selling, the consumption-wealth ratio is shown to depend on the elasticity of intertemporal substitution in consumption, while asset risk premia are determined by the coefficient of relative risk aversion. Risk premia are related to the covariances of asset returns with the market return and with news about the discounted value of all future market returns.
805 citations
TL;DR: This article investigated whether market-wide liquidity is a state variable important for asset pricing and found that expected stock returns are related cross-sectionally to the sensitivities of returns to fluctuations in aggregate liquidity.
Abstract: This study investigates whether market-wide liquidity is a state variable important for asset pricing. We find that expected stock returns are related cross-sectionally to the sensitivities of returns to fluctuations in aggregate liquidity. Our monthly liquidity measure, an average of individual-stock measures estimated with daily data, relies on the principle that order flow induces greater return reversals when liquidity is lower. Over a 34-year period, the average return on stocks with high sensitivities to liquidity exceeds that for stocks with low sensitivities by 7.5% annually, adjusted for exposures to the market return as well as size, value, and momentum factors.
789 citations