Stock Options as Lotteries

We investigate the relationship between ex ante total skewness and holding returns on individual equity options. Recent theoretical developments predict a negative relationship between total skewness and average returns, in contrast to the traditional view that only coskewness is priced. We find, consistent with recent theory, that total skewness exhibits a strong negative relationship with average option returns. Differences in average returns for option portfolios sorted on ex ante skewness range from 10% to 50% per week, even after controlling for risk. Our findings suggest that these large premiums compensate intermediaries for bearing unhedgeable risk when accommodating investor demand for lottery‐like options.     

Can habit formation under complete market integration explain the cross-section of international equity risk premia?

In this article, we analyse whether the prominent habit formation model of Campbell and Cochrane (1999) can explain the cross-section of the G7 equity risk premia when formulated under the assumption of complete capital market integration. We test the conditional covariance representation of the model using a combined GARCH and GMM approach in the spirit of Bali (2008) and find that in comparison to the CAPM and the standard power utility CCAPM the habit model has superior explanatory power. It explains more than 90% of the cross-sectional variation in risk premia. Overall, our findings suggest that global consumption-based recession indicators and not returns of reference portfolios are key risk factors driving equity risk premia.     

Effects of the Boxing Day tsunami on the world capital markets

The effects of the Boxing Day tsunami on the world equity markets are investigated in this paper. In particular, this paper examines how the risks and returns of industry and market portfolios are altered as a result of the tsunami. The analysis includes countries that were directly or indirectly exposed to this catastrophe. Both parametric and non-parametric tests are employed to explore the relationship between equity stock returns and the tsunami, and the CAPM is utilised to assess the variation in systematic risks. Given that the literature in this area is at its earliest stage, we draw on economic theories of flooding. In this way, our results are consistent with that of the flooding literature, which would predict that the Boxing Day tsunami would have minimal effects on the risks and returns of equity markets. This paper documents that the tsunami was associated with few abnormal return changes and a general increase in the long-term systematic risk of the equity portfolios in the study.     

Default Risk and Equity Returns: Evidence from the Taiwan Equities Market

Studies of risk and return characteristics of different portfolios have recently gained enormous attention. Differing from past studies, this paper uses a compound option model to build the proxy of default risk and evaluate the relationship between default risk effect and equity returns. The primary goal of this paper is to evaluate the relationship among default risk, size, book-to-market, and equity returns, using data drawn from the Taiwan equities market, and to also examine whether size and book-to-market are proxies for default risk. The results show that the effects of size and book-to-market exist in different default portfolios when default risks are controlled. If size or book-to-market is controlled, there are no default effects. In the regression analysis, when default risk is included in Fama and French’s Three Factor Model, it shows that size, book-to-market and default risk have significant influence on equity returns and default risk is a systematic risk. Default risk is also more powerful in explaining returns when the compound option model is adopted for estimating default risks.     

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.     

Pairs trading in the UK equity market: risk and return

In this paper, we provide the first comprehensive UK evidence on the profitability of the pairs trading strategy. Evidence suggests that the strategy performs well in crisis periods, so we control for both risk and liquidity to assess performance. To evaluate the effect of market frictions on the strategy, we use several estimates of transaction costs. We also present evidence on the performance of the strategy in different economic and market states. Our results show that pairs trading portfolios typically have little exposure to known equity risk factors such as market, size, value, momentum and reversal. However, a model controlling for risk and liquidity explains a far larger proportion of returns. Incorporating different assumptions about bid-ask spreads leads to reductions in performance estimates. When we allow for time-varying risk exposures, conditioned on the contemporaneous equity market return, risk-adjusted returns are generally not significantly different from zero.     

Home bias in equity portfolios, inflation hedging, and international capital market equilibrium

We test whether the home bias in equity portfolios is causedby investors trying to hedge inflation risk. The empirical evidenceis consistent with this motive only if investors have very highlevels of risk tolerance and equity returns are negatively correlatedwith domestic inflation. We then develop a model of internationalportfolio choice and equity market equilibrium that integratesinflation risk and deadweight costs. Using this model we estimatethe levels of costs required to generate the observed home biasin portfolios consistent with different levels of risk aversion.For a level of risk aversion consistent with standard estimatesof the domestic equity market risk premium these costs are abouta few percent per annum greater than observable costs such aswithholding taxes. Thus, the home bias cannot be explained byeither inflation hedging or direct observable costs of internationalinvestment unless investors have very low levels of risk aversion.     

International portfolio diversification: Currency,industry and country effects revisited

We examine the relative importance of country, industry, world market and currency risk factors for international stock returns. Our approach focuses on testing the mean-variance efficiency of the various factor portfolios. An unconditional analysis does not show significant differences between country, industry and world portfolios, nor any role for currency risk factors. However, when we allow expected returns, volatilities and correlations to vary over time, we find that equity returns are mainly driven by global industry and currency risk factors. We propose a novel test to evaluate the relative benefits of alternative investment strategies and find that including currencies is critical to take full advantage of the diversification benefits afforded by international markets.     

The Variation of Economic Risk Premiums in Real Estate Returns

We examine the predictable components of returns on stocks, bonds, and real estate investment trusts (REITs). We employ a multiple-beta asset pricing model and find that there are varying degrees of predictability among stocks, bonds, and REITs. Furthermore, we find that most of the predictability of returns is associated with the economic variables employed in the asset pricing model. The stock market risk premium is highly important in capturing the predictable variation in stock portfolios, and the bond market risk premiums (term and risk structure of interest rates) are important in capturing the predictable variation in bond portfolios. For REITs, however, both the stock and bond market risk premiums capture the predictable variation in returns. REITs have comparable return predictability to stock portfolios. We conclude that there is an important economic risk premium for REITs that are not captured by traditional multiple-beta asset pricing models.     

Small caps in international equity portfolios: the effects of variance risk

We show that predictable covariances between means and variances of stock returns may have a first order effect on portfolio composition. In an international asset menu that includes both European and North American small capitalization equity indices, we find that a three-state, heteroskedastic regime switching VAR model is required to provide a good fit to weekly return data and to accurately predict the dynamics in the joint density of returns. As a result of the non-linear dynamic features revealed by the data, small cap portfolios become riskier in bear markets, i.e., display negative co-skewness with other stock indices. Because of this property, a power utility investor ought to hold a well-diversified portfolio, despite the high risk premium and Sharpe ratios offered by small capitalization stocks. On the contrary, small caps command large optimal weights when the investor ignores variance risk, by incorrectly assuming joint normality of returns.      

Normative portfolio theory

In this paper, we correct the adverse impact of estimation risk on both portfolio weights and performance with two new equity allocation methods we implement with estimation-free and estimated ex-ante returns. Portfolios with estimation-free ex-ante returns and systematic-to-unsystematic risk weights have statistically higher Sharpe ratios than both similar portfolios with estimated ex-ante returns and 1/N′th portfolios. Optimal portfolio methods with well-behaved weights guide investors in a way not hitherto possible (normative portfolio theory).     

Is there a real estate factor premium?

In this paper, we study the variation of expected returns on five different asset portfolios in a multi-factor model. We found the presence of a real estate factor, in addition to both a stock factor and a bond factor in asset pricing. This suggests that mutual fund managers should seriously consider including real estate assets in their portfolios, since one cannot capture the real estate factor premium without having some kind of real estate exposure. Another result is that the market segmentation found in previous studies disappears in a more general model of asset pricing in which we allow for multi-factors other than the market factor to affect asset returns. This implies that real estate assets can be treated just like other assets as far as mean-variance efficient asset allocations are concerned. We also have some preliminary evidence that equity REITs and the Russell-NCREIF index are driven by the same underlying real estate factor.     

Do liquidity and idiosyncratic risk matter? Evidence from the European mutual fund market

This paper examines the interaction of idiosyncratic risk, liquidity and return across time in determining fund performance, as well as across investment style portfolios of European mutual funds. This study utilizes a unique data set including returns for equity mutual funds registered in six European countries. Overall, using monthly data, we find that both liquidity and idiosyncratic risk are relevant in determining mutual fund returns. Our results are robust across different model specifications. We show that model specifications up to six factors are useful as these risk factors capture different aspects in the cross-section of mutual funds returns. The evidence regarding mutual funds subgroups is strongly in favor of the significance of liquidity, and idiosyncratic risk to a lesser extent, as risk factors. Even if liquidity and idiosyncratic risk are considered at the same time, one factor is not significantly decreasing the importance of the other factor.     

Positive return premia in Japan

This paper examines Jensen's [J. Finance, 1968, 23, 389–416] alphas and the time-varying return premia unexplained by standard risk factors in Japan and presents several new findings. First, in contrast to the US experience, positive alphas remain after Fama and French's three factors are applied to excess stock returns in Japan. Second, positive alphas remain in Japan, even if the Fama–French three factors combined with momentum and reversal factors are applied to excess stock returns. Third, the positive return premia unexplained by these five factors bear little relation to the dynamics of the Japanese macroeconomy. Fourth, the time series evolution of the positive return premia indicates autonomous dynamics with at least three regimes. Fifth, we can predict or time the acquisition of the positive return premia for small-size portfolios in Japan by observing the direction and effect of the return premia of large-size portfolios and high-book equity to market equity (BE/ME) portfolios. Finally, application of the self-exciting threshold autoregressive (SETAR) model shows that the size effects are stronger than the BE/ME effects in Japan, given that the return premia from small-size portfolios in the SETAR model are bounded by positive thresholds, while the return premia from high-BE/ME portfolios are bounded by negative thresholds.     

Estimation and Evaluation of Conditional Asset Pricing Models

We find that several recently proposed consumption‐based models of stock returns, when evaluated using an optimal set of managed portfolios and the associated model‐implied conditional moment restrictions, fail to capture key features of risk premiums in equity markets. To arrive at these conclusions, we construct an optimal Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimator for models in which the stochastic discount factor (SDF) is a conditionally affine function of a set of priced risk factors, and we show that there is an optimal choice of managed portfolios to use in testing a null model against a proposed alternative generalized SDF.     

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.     

Consumption risk and the cross-section of government bond returns

In this paper we provide a consumption-based explanation of risk in nominal US Treasury bond portfolios. We use a consumption-CAPM with Epstein–Zin–Weil recursive preferences. Our model introduces two sources of risk: uncertainty about current consumption (reflected in contemporaneous consumption growth) and uncertainty about prospects of consumption in a long run (reflected in innovations to expectations about future consumption growth). We use a novel approach to estimate pricing factors in our model: we employ a factor-augmented VAR model with common factors, extracted from a large panel of macroeconomic and financial data, as state variables. We find that the important source of risk in US bonds is related to uncertainty in prospects in future consumption and it induces a positive and significant risk premium. We find as well that covariance risk related to innovations in expectations about future consumption growth is greater for long term bond portfolios than for short term bond portfolios, which is consistent with a duration measure of risk and justifies why long term bonds require greater premium than short term bonds. Our model explains well the cross-sectional variation in average excess returns of bonds with different maturities over the period 1975–2011 and compares favorably with competing models.     

Monetary Policy and the Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns

Ample evidence shows that size and book-to-market equity explain significant cross-sectional variation in stock returns, whereas beta explains little or none of the variation. Recent studies also demonstrate that proxies for monetary stringency increase the explained variation in stock returns. We reexamine a three-factor model that includes beta, size, and book-to-market equity, while allowing monetary conditions to influence the relations between these risk factors and average stock returns. We find that ex-ante proxies for monetary stringency significantly influence the relations between stock returns and all three risk factors. Additionally, all three variables are found to contribute significantly to explaining cross-sectional returns in a three-factor model that includes the monetary sector.     

Implied volatility and future portfolio returns

Prior studies find that the CBOE volatility index (VIX) predicts returns on stock market indices, suggesting implied volatilities measured by VIX are a risk factor affecting security returns or an indicator of market inefficiency. We extend prior work in three important ways. First, we investigate the relationship between future returns and current implied volatility levels and innovations. Second, we examine portfolios sorted on book-to-market equity, size, and beta. Third, we control for the four Fama and French [Fama, E., French, K., 1993. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33, 3–56.] and Carhart [Carhart, M., 1997. On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance, 52, 57–82.] factors. We find that VIX-related variables have strong predictive ability.     

Volatility‐Managed Portfolios

Managed portfolios that take less risk when volatility is high produce large alphas, increase Sharpe ratios, and produce large utility gains for mean‐variance investors. We document this for the market, value, momentum, profitability, return on equity, investment, and betting‐against‐beta factors, as well as the currency carry trade. Volatility timing increases Sharpe ratios because changes in volatility are not offset by proportional changes in expected returns. Our strategy is contrary to conventional wisdom because it takes relatively less risk in recessions. This rules out typical risk‐based explanations and is a challenge to structural models of time‐varying expected returns.