Conditional Skewness in Asset Pricing Tests

If asset returns have systematic skewness, expected returns should include rewards for accepting this risk. We formalize this intuition with an asset pricing model that incorporates conditional skewness. Our results show that conditional skewness helps explain the cross-sectional variation of expected returns across assets and is significant even when factors based on size and book-to-market are included. Systematic skewness is economically important and commands a risk premium, on average, of 3.60 percent per year. Our results suggest that the momentum effect is related to systematic skewness. The low expected return momentum portfolios have higher skewness than high expected return portfolios.     

Corporate sustainability in asset pricing models and mutual funds performance measurement

This study explores whether corporate sustainability is a relevant factor in multifactor asset pricing models. It contributes to the literature on asset pricing, as well as to the literature that examines how sustainability impacts capital markets, by constructing a new factor that captures differences in the returns of sustainable and non-sustainable firms. Specifically, it examines whether an additional sustainability factor has explanatory power in asset pricing models that include size, book-to-market equity, and momentum factors. This research has practical implications for the performance measurement of portfolios and mutual funds that are managed in accordance with sustainability criteria in that it disentangles general stock-picking skills from the differences in returns between sustainable and non-sustainable stocks.     

Constructing and Testing Alternative Versions of the Fama–French and Carhart Models in the UK

This paper constructs and tests alternative versions of the Fama–French and Carhart models for the UK market with the purpose of providing guidance for researchers interested in asset pricing and event studies. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of such models, forming risk factors using approaches advanced in the recent literature including value‐weighted factor components and various decompositions of the risk factors. We also test whether such factor models can at least explain the returns of large firms. We find that versions of the four‐factor model using decomposed and value‐weighted factor components are able to explain the cross‐section of returns in large firms or in portfolios without extreme momentum exposures. However, we do not find that risk factors are consistently and reliably priced.     

New return anomalies and new-Keynesian ICAPM

I propose a new multi-factor asset pricing model with new-Keynesian factors to explain stock return anomalies from 1972Q1 to 2009Q2. This new model explains the average returns across testing portfolios formed on financial distress, momentum, and standardized unexpected earnings with misspecification-robust statistics. Test portfolios formed on net stock issues and total accruals are also partly explained by new-Keynesian factors. Two monetary policy factors play an important role in explaining these new anomalies. The credit aspect of these new anomalies suggests an economic rationale for the model through capital market imperfections and the credit channel of monetary policy mechanism.     

Idiosyncratic momentum and the cross‐section of stock returns: Further evidence

In this article, we evaluate the profitability and economic source of the predictive power of the idiosyncratic momentum effect, by using five popular asset pricing models to construct the idiosyncratic momentum. We show that all five idiosyncratic momentum strategies produce similar return predictability and consistently outperform the conventional momentum strategy in the cross‐sectional pricing of equity portfolios and individual stocks. This positive effect of idiosyncratic momentum on returns is consistent with the investment capital asset pricing model (CAPM). Further analysis reveals that the firm‐level idiosyncratic momentum effect cannot extend to the aggregate stock market.     

The pricing of volatility risk in the US equity market

We analyze whether the pricing of volatility risk depends on the asset pricing framework applied in the tests, the specified volatility proxies, and the portfolio sorts used for spanning the asset universe. For this purpose, we compare the results using a macroeconomic and fundamental based asset pricing model using three proxies of volatility and uncertainty, using size/value sorted and industry sector portfolios. Our results reveal that the marginal pricing effect of the VIX volatility factor is strong and statistically significant throughout the models and specifications, while the effect of an EGARCH-based volatility factor is mixed, mostly smaller but with the correct sign. In most cases, the EGARCH factor does not impair the pricing effect of the VIX. The portfolio sorts have a substantial impact on the volatility premiums in both model frameworks. The size of the volatility risk premium is more uniform across the models if the industry sector portfolio sort is used. Finally, the size/value portfolio sort generates larger volatility risk premiums for both models.     

A Comparison of the Efficacy of Liquidity,Momentum, Size and Book‐to‐Market Value Factors in Equity Pricing on a Heterogeneous Sample: Evidence from Asia

This paper compares the size and book‐to‐market value factors of Fama and French (1993) alongside Momentum of Jagadeesh and Titman ( 1993 ) with two Liu ( 2006 ) liquidity factors formed from 1 year rebalancing and 1 month rebalancing respectively. A heterogeneous and comprehensive sample of the top blue chip stocks of all national Asian equity markets with further differentiation undertaken between sub samples formed for Japan only and Asia excluding Japan for period January 2000 to August 2014. Our empirical results suggest that multifactor time invariant pricing models based on augmented capital asset pricing model (CAPM) framework are ineffective in explaining the cross section of stock returns in the presence of significant inter and intra‐market segmentation. However an alternative model specification based on a time varying parameter specification and using same sets of factors yields significant enhancements in explaining cross section of stock returns across universe. We find that momentum factor largely lacks significance while a time varying two factor model, based on CAPM plus liquidity factor, is optimal. The liquidity factor being that of Liu (2006) and annually rebalanced. Our findings are important for investment managers seeking appropriate factors and modelling techniques to hedge against risks as well as firm's financial managers seeking to reduce costs of equity capital.     

Can stochastic discount factor models explain the cross-section of equity returns?

We propose a multivariate test of the capital asset pricing model (C-CAPM) of the cross-sectional variation in equity returns in which we compare cross-sectional variation in equity returns to the cross-sectional variation in their conditional covariance with stochastic discount factors. We use a multivariate generalized heteroskedasticity in mean model to estimate 25 portfolios that are formed on size and the book-to-market ratio. Each portfolio is allowed to have its own no-arbitrage condition. We find that although the conditional covariances of returns with consumption exhibit negative variation across size, they do not vary across the book-to-market ratio. Thus, C-CAPM can capture the size effect, but not the value effect. The fit is, however, improved by allowing the coefficients on the consumption covariances to be different. The value effect appears to be associated with the book-to-market ratio as well as size. On its own the book-to-market ratio does not generate additional information about average returns to C-CAPM. A possible explanation for these findings is that both small and low book-to-market ratio firms are expected to have higher rates of growth.     

Cash, investments and asset returns

We use an investment-based asset pricing model to examine the effect of firms’ investments relative to cash holdings on stock returns, assuming holding cash lowers transaction costs. We find that mimicking portfolios based on investments relative to non-cash capital and based on investments relative to cash capital are priced for various testing portfolios. On average, momentum stocks and growth stocks are more sensitive to the factor constructed using investment relative to cash.     

Style investing,comovement and return predictability

Barberis and Shleifer (2003) argue that style investing generates momentum and reversals in style and individual asset returns, as well as comovement between individual assets and their styles. Consistent with these predictions, in some specifications, past style returns help explain future stock returns after controlling for size, book-to-market and past stock returns. We also use comovement to identify style investing and assess its impact on momentum. High comovement momentum portfolios have significantly higher future returns than low comovement momentum portfolios. Overall, our results suggest that style investing plays a role in the predictability of asset returns.     

The restrictions on predictability implied by rational asset pricing models

This article shows how rational asset pricing models restrictthe regression-based criteria commonly used to measure returnpredictability. Specifically it invokes no-arbitrage argumentsto show that the intercept, slope coefficients, and R² in predictiveregressions must take specific values. These restrictions providea way to directly assess whether the predictability uncoveredusing regression analysis is consistent with rational pricing.Empirical tests reveal that the returns on the CRSP size decilesare too predictable to be compatible with a number of well-knownpricing models. However, the overall pattern of predictabilityacross these portfolios is reasonably consistent with what wewould expect under circumstances where predictability is rational.     

Systematic Risk and Empirical Research

We show here that risky asset returns generating processes stated in terms of factors which include both accounting and non-accounting based measures of risk (e.g. book to market ratios) imply, under fairly standard regularity conditions, that the Sharpe-Lintner-Black asset pricing model beta is a 'sufficient' statistic in the sense that it captures all important attributes of the returns generating process in a single number. We then derive the parametric relationship between betas based on inefficient index portfolios and betas based on the market or tangency portfolio. We demonstrate that the relationship between risky asset expected returns and betas computed on the basis of inefficient index portfolios is both consistent with the predictions of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and the multi-factor asset pricing models of Fama and French (1992, 1993, 1995 and 1996). The 'trick' is to realise that inefficient index portfolios are composed of the market portfolio and a collection of inefficient but self financing 'kernel' or 'arbitrage' portfolios. It then follows that there is a perfect linear cross sectional relationship between risky asset expected returns, betas based on inefficient index portfolios and the arbitrage portfolios. Hence, if we happen to stumble across variables that span the same subspace as the vectors representing the arbitrage portfolios, it is easy to create the illusion that risky asset expected returns depend on variables other than 'beta'.     

Interaction of size,book‐to‐market and momentum effects in Australia

This study seeks to disentangle the effects of size, book‐to‐market and momentum on returns. Initial results show that each characteristic has a role in explaining returns, but that there is interaction between size and momentum, as well as between size and book‐to‐market. Three key findings emerge. First, the size premium is the strongest, particularly in the loser portfolios. Second, the value premium is generally limited to the smallest portfolios. Third, the momentum premium is evident for the large‐ and middle‐sized portfolios, but loser stocks significantly outperform winner stocks in the smallest size portfolio. When these interactions are controlled with multivariate regression, we find a significant negative average relation between size and returns, a significant positive average relation between book‐to‐market and returns, and a significant positive average relation between momentum and returns.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Campbell-Cochrane Habit Utility Model

Abstract:  This paper tests whether the Campbell and Cochrane (1999) habit utility model generates a valid stochastic discount factor for the 25 Fama-French size/book-to-market and size/momentum sorted portfolios. Campbell and Cochrane (1999) derive a consumption based habit utility asset pricing model and calibrate it to aggregate US stock market data. However, they do not test whether their model is consistent with a larger cross section of asset returns. We test their model using the methodology of Hansen and Jagannathan (1991) and Burnside (1994) . In contrast to previous studies, we find that for reasonable parameter values, the model's stochastic discount factor is inside the Hansen-Jagannathan bounds and therefore satisfies the necessary conditions for a valid stochastic discount factor. We trace the difference between our results and previous studies to the method used to estimate the model's parameters and the parameter values themselves.     

Australian evidence on the implementation of the size and value premia

This study investigates whether passive investment managers can exploit the size and value premia without incurring prohibitive transaction costs or being exposed to substantial tracking error risk. Returns on the value premium are shown to be pervasive across size groups, while the size premium is nonlinear and driven by microcaps. The value premium cannot be explained by the capital asset pricing model; however, returns on value portfolios do covary across monetary regimes. The substantial turnover required to achieve annual rebalancing and the relative illiquidity of Australian small‐cap firms means that investing in a portfolio of large‐cap value firms appears to be the best way for passive fund managers to exploit the Fama and French (1993) premia.     

Firm profitability and expected stock returns: Evidence from Latin America

Despite their higher valuation ratios, larger size, and higher investment needs, profitable firms outperform, in both raw and risk-adjusted returns, unprofitable firms in Latin America. The positive effect of firm profitability on stock returns is pervasive in univariate and bivariate sorts, panel regressions, across sub-regional markets, and among small and large stocks. A five-factor model that includes market, size, distress, profitability, and investment factors prices profitability portfolios better than other popular factor models. Five-factor alphas of profitability portfolios tend to be lower and less statistically significant, both individually and collectively, than alphas from other three widely-used pricing models.     

Data-snooping biases in tests of financial asset pricing models

Tests of financial asset pricing models may yield misleadinginferences when properties of the data are used to constructthe test statistics. In particular, such tests are often basedon returns to portfolios of common stock, where portfolios areconstructed by sorting on some empirically motivated characteristicof the securities such as market value of equity. Analyticalcalculations, Monte Carlo simulations, and two empirical examplesshow that the effects of this type of data snooping can be substantial.     

The interrelatedness of global equity markets, money markets, and foreign exchange markets

This article investigates different aspects of global financial markets, specifically relationships among equity markets, money markets, and foreign exchange markets across countries. To represent the three major financial markets of the world, Japan is the proxy for Asia, Germany is the proxy for Europe, and the United States is the proxy for North America. Strong evidence exists that international money markets and international equity markets are becoming increasingly integrated over time. This article incorporates foreign exchange values as partial determinants of equity returns and money market returns and investigates the interactions among these three asset markets from a global perspective.     

Market proxies as factors in linear asset pricing models: Still living with the roll critique

A new model misspecification measure for linear asset pricing models is proposed for the case where misspecification maps to latency of one of the pricing factors; in this case, the market return. This measure is suited both for testing models that include the market return as a pricing factor in a traditional sense (i.e., whether the chosen model does or does not price a collection of risky assets) and ranking those models (i.e., determining which model performs best). The proposed measure is used in pricing portfolios reflecting the size, value, and momentum premia. The conditional CAPM of Jagannathan and Wang (1996) is found to best the performance of both the simple CAPM and the ICAPM of Petkova (2006). Moreover, it is discovered that winner stocks in a momentum portfolio may have higher market betas than loser stocks.     

Momentum strategies in commodity futures markets

The article tests for the presence of short-term continuation and long-term reversal in commodity futures prices. While contrarian strategies do not work, the article identifies 13 profitable momentum strategies that generate 9.38% average return a year. A closer analysis of the constituents of the long–short portfolios reveals that the momentum strategies buy backwardated contracts and sell contangoed contracts. The correlation between the momentum returns and the returns of traditional asset classes is also found to be low, making the commodity-based relative-strength portfolios excellent candidates for inclusion in well-diversified portfolios.