Conditional interest rate risk and the cross‐section of excess stock returns

Differences in excess stock returns can be rationalized by their sensitivities to conditional interest rate risk. Value stocks are particularly sensitive to upside movements in interest rate growth, while growth stocks react strongly to downside movements in interest rate growth. Consistent with the basic asset pricing theory, the upside interest rate risk commands a negative premium which is higher than the premium associated with the downside interest rate risk. Upside beta pertains its explanatory power after controlling for exposure to regular unconditional interest rate and various sources of financial and conditional macroeconomic risk.     

Is U.S. economic policy uncertainty priced in China's A-shares market? Evidence from market,industry, and individual stocks

This paper is motivated by Bali, Brown, and Tang (2017) who find U.S. economic policy uncertainty (EPU) is priced in the cross-section of U.S. stock returns, and uses weekly data from March 2006 to April 2016 to study whether shocks in U.S. EPU also influence prices of China's A-shares from a market, industry, and individual stock perspective. Our methodology relies on an ARMA (1,1) model to extract shocks in the U.S. EPU series and a GARCH (1,1) model to examine how returns of China's A-shares respond to these shocks after controlling for business conditions proxied by term and credit spread in China. Generally, we find that shocks in U.S. EPU significantly and negatively explain returns of Chinese A-shares with a lag of one week. In addition, the market index containing small and growth stocks is more sensitive to shocks in U.S. EPU than the index containing big and value stocks. Furthermore, we find that firms in manufacturing, information technology, and media industries in China are more sensitive to shocks in U.S. EPU, while firms in agriculture and real estate industries respond less to shocks in U.S. EPU. Finally, China's A-shares which decline more in response to shocks in U.S. EPU have higher returns, smaller market capitalization, weaker operating profitability, higher asset growth, and better past year's cumulative returns. Overall, our findings show that investors in the Chinese A-shares market require a premium to hold stocks that are sensitive to shocks in U.S. economic policy uncertainty.     

Downside beta and the cross section of equity returns: A decade later

This study reexamines the relation between downside beta and equity returns in the United States. First, we replicate the 2006 work of Ang, Chen, and Xing who find a positive relation between downside beta and future equity returns for equal‐weighted portfolios of NYSE stocks. We show that this relation doesn't hold after using value‐weighted returns or controlling for various return determinants. We also extend the original sample, add AMEX/NASDAQ stocks or utilize alternative downside beta measures and still find no downside risk premium. We focus on factor analysis results, persistence of downside beta, and various subsamples to understand the economic reasons behind the findings.     

Extreme downside risk and expected stock returns

We propose a measure for extreme downside risk (EDR) to investigate whether bearing such a risk is rewarded by higher expected stock returns. By constructing an EDR proxy with the left tail index in the classical generalized extreme value distribution, we document a significantly positive EDR premium in cross-section of stock returns even after controlling for market, size, value, momentum, and liquidity effects. The EDR premium is more prominent among glamor stocks and when high market returns are expected. High-EDR stocks are generally characterized by high idiosyncratic risk, large downside beta, lower coskewness and cokurtosis, and high bankruptcy risk. The EDR premium persists after these characteristics are controlled for. Although Value at Risk (VaR) plays a significant role in explaining the EDR premium, it cannot completely subsume the EDR effect.     

Asymmetric risk premium in value and growth stocks

There are two competing explanations for the existence of a value premium, a rational market risk explanation, whereby value stocks are inherently more risky than growth stocks, and a market over-reaction hypothesis, where agents overstate future returns on growth stock. Using asymmetric GARCH-M models this paper tests the predictions of the two hypotheses. Specifically, examining whether returns exhibit a positive (negative) risk premium resulting from a negative (positive) shock and the relative size of any premium. The results of the paper suggest that following a shock, volatility and expected future volatility are heightened, leading to a rise in required rates of return which depresses current prices. Further, these effects are heightened for value stock over growth stock and for negative shocks over positive shocks. Thus, in support of the rational risk interpretation, with a volatility feedback explanation for predictive volatility asymmetry.     

Downside Risk

Economists have long recognized that investors care differentlyabout downside losses versus upside gains. Agents who placegreater weight on downside risk demand additional compensationfor holding stocks with high sensitivities to downside marketmovements. We show that the cross section of stock returns reflectsa downside risk premium of approximately 6% per annum. Stocksthat covary strongly with the market during market declineshave high average returns. The reward for beasring downsiderisk is not simply compensation for regular market beta, noris it explained by coskewness or liquidity risk, or by size,value, and momentum characteristics. (JEL C12, C15, C32, G12)     

Valuation of firms that disclose related party transactions

We examine the stock market’s valuation of firms that disclose related party (RP) transactions compared to those that do not. We examine market values just prior to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) ban on RP loans to evaluate the market’s perception of firms with RP transactions prior to regulatory intervention. We also evaluate subsequent returns to assess the RP firms’ overall risk return profile. We use the 2001 S&P 1500 to provide a large yet manageable hand-collected sample that predates SOX. Our market analysis suggests that RP firms have significantly lower valuations and marginally lower subsequent returns than non-RP firms. Market perceptions differ based on partitioning firms by RP transaction type and parties. The results are consistent with the market discounting firms that engage in simple RP transactions.     

Downside Risk in Emerging Markets

This paper investigates the relation between downside risk and expected returns on the aggregate stock market in an international context. Nonparametric and parametric value at risk are used as measures of downside risk to determine the existence of a risk-return trade-off. For emerging markets, fixed effects panel data regressions provide evidence for a significantly positive relationship between monthly expected market returns and downside risk. This result is robust after controlling for aggregate dividend yield and price-to-fundamental ratios. The relationship between expected returns and downside risk is weaker for developed markets and vanishes when control variables are included in the specification.     

Habit formation,the cross section of stock returns and the cash-flow risk puzzle

Non-linear external habit persistence models, which feature prominently in the recent “equity premium” asset pricing and macroeconomics literature, generate counterfactual predictions in the cross-section of stock returns. In particular, we show that in the absence of cross-sectional heterogeneity in firms’ cash-flow risk, these models produce a “growth premium,” that is, stocks with high price-to-fundamental ratios command a higher premium than stocks with low price-to-fundamental ratios. This implication is at odds with the well-established empirical observation of a “value premium” in the cross-section of stock returns. Substantial heterogeneity in firms’ cash-flow risk yields both a value premium as well as most of the stylized facts about the cross-section of stock returns, but it generates a “cash-flow risk puzzle”: Quantitatively, value stocks have to have “too much” cash-flow risk compared to the data to generate empirically plausible value premiums.     

Value versus Growth: The International Evidence

Value stocks have higher returns than growth stocks in markets around the world. For the period 1975 through 1995, the difference between the average returns on global portfolios of high and low book-to-market stocks is 7.68 percent per year, and value stocks outperform growth stocks in twelve of thirteen major markets. An international capital asset pricing model cannot explain the value premium, but a two-factor model that includes a risk factor for relative distress captures the value premium in international returns.     

Returns and option activity over the option-expiration week for S&P 100 stocks

For S&P 100 stocks, we find that the weekly returns over option-expiration (OE) weeks (a month’s third-Friday week) tend to be high, relative to: (1) the third-Friday weekly returns of other stocks with less option activity, (2) the own stock’s other weekly returns, (3) the risk, based on asset-pricing alphas. For these same stocks, a month’s fourth-Friday weekly returns underperform modestly. We suggest the following two avenues are likely partial contributors towards understanding these return patterns: (1) delta-hedge rebalancing by option market makers, with a reduction in short-stock hedge positions over the OE week, and (2) declining risk perceptions over the OE week, as measured by option-derived implied volatilities. Our findings suggest option activity can induce reliable patterns in the weekly returns of option-active large-cap stocks.     

The term structures of equity and interest rates

This paper proposes a dynamic risk-based model capable of jointly explaining the term structure of interest rates, returns on the aggregate market, and the risk and return characteristics of value and growth stocks. Both the term structure of interest rates and returns on value and growth stocks convey information about how the representative investor values cash flows of different maturities. We model how the representative investor perceives risks of these cash flows by specifying a parsimonious stochastic discount factor for the economy. Shocks to dividend growth, the real interest rate, and expected inflation are priced, but shocks to the price of risk are not. Given reasonable assumptions for dividends and inflation, we show that the model can simultaneously account for the behavior of aggregate stock returns, an upward-sloping yield curve, the failure of the expectations hypothesis, and the poor performance of the capital asset pricing model.     

Liquidity risk and stock performance during the financial crisis

We investigate whether and how ex-ante liquidity risk affects realized stock returns during the global financial crisis of 2008–2009 in international equity markets. We find that stocks with higher pre-crisis return exposure to global market liquidity shocks experience larger price reductions during the crisis period. Our findings provide further insight into the comprehensive picture of the effect of liquidity risk on asset prices, especially in an international context and under different market conditions.     

The relationship between asset growth and the cross-section of stock returns

There is a large body of literature examining the association between stock characteristics and the cross-section of stock returns in international markets. Recently, Cooper et al. (2008) reported a strong association between total asset growth and stock returns in the US. In this paper, we show that an asset-growth effect also exists in the Australian equity market. Of particular interest, it is present amongst the largest Australian stocks. Over the 1983-2007 period, an equally-weighted portfolio of low-growth Big stocks outperforms a portfolio of high-growth Big stocks by an average 1% per month, equating to nearly 13% per annum. At an individual stock level of analysis, the asset-growth effect remains even after controlling for other variables whose association with the cross-section of returns is well known. Finally, we explicitly test whether asset growth is a priced risk factor using the common two-stage cross-sectional regression methodology. We find no evidence to support a risk-based explanation, thereby lending credence to Cooper et al.’s (2008) suggestion that the asset-growth effect is attributable to mispricing.     

Incentives and risk taking in hedge funds

We study how incentive fees and manager’s own investment in the fund affect the investment strategy of hedge fund managers. We find that loss averse managers increase the risk of the fund’s investment strategy with higher incentive fees. However, risk taking is greatly reduced if a substantial amount of the manager’s own money (at least 30%) is in the fund. Using the Zurich hedge fund universe, we test the relation between risk taking and incentive fees empirically. Hedge funds with incentive fees have significantly lower mean returns (net of fees), while downside risk is positively related to the incentive fee level. Fund of funds charging large incentive fees achieve relatively high mean returns, but with significantly higher risk as well.     

Extreme downside risk spillover from the United States and Japan to Asia-Pacific stock markets

This paper proposes a binary response model approach to measure and forecast extreme downside risks in Asia-Pacific markets given information on extreme downside risks in the U.S. and Japanese markets. The extreme downside risk of a market is measured as the occurrence of extreme downside movement—market returns falling below left-tail Value at Risk in a Markov switching framework. The empirical findings are consistent with the following notions. First, extreme downside movements of the S&P 500 and Nikkei 225 are significantly predictive for the likelihood of extreme downside movements in all the investigated Asia-Pacific markets. Second, the majority of Asia-Pacific markets become more sensitive to Japan's extreme downside risk when the Japanese market switches into high volatility periods, whereas the U.S. spillover effect is intensified only on Taiwan during high volatility periods in the U.S. Third, mainland China is the least sensitive to extreme downside risk in the U.S. and Japan, Australia is the most sensitive to the U.S., and Singapore is the most sensitive to Japan.     

Nonlinearity and Flight‐to‐Safety in the Risk‐Return Trade‐Off for Stocks and Bonds

We document a highly significant, strongly nonlinear dependence of stock and bond returns on past equity market volatility as measured by the VIX. We propose a new estimator for the shape of the nonlinear forecasting relationship that exploits variation in the cross‐section of returns. The nonlinearities are mirror images for stocks and bonds, revealing flight‐to‐safety: expected returns increase for stocks when volatility increases from moderate to high levels while they decline for Treasuries. These findings provide support for dynamic asset pricing theories in which the price of risk is a nonlinear function of market volatility.     

Does Risk Seeking Drive Stock Prices? A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Aggregate Investor Preferences and Beliefs

We use various stochastic dominance criteria that account for(local) risk seeking to analyze market portfolio efficiencyrelative to benchmark portfolios formed on market capitalization,book-to-market equity ratio and price momentum. Our resultssuggest that reverse S-shaped utility functions with risk aversionfor losses and risk seeking for gains can explain stock returns.The results are also consistent with a reverse S-shaped patternof subjective probability transformation. The low average yieldon big caps, growth stocks, and past losers may reflect investors’twin desire for downside protection in bear markets and upsidepotential in bull markets.     

Liquidity Dynamics Around Jumps: The Evidence from the Warsaw Stock Exchange

The aim of our study is to examine the dynamics of trading volume and the number of trades around jumps detected in intraday stock returns. We detect jumps in equally spaced 10-minute returns for most liquid stocks quoted on the Warsaw Stock Exchange within one-year sample period. We match jumps with macroeconomic and firm specific news. We find that only the minority of jumps is associated with public information releases, whereas the majority of them is motivated by liquidity shocks observed in the spreads, volume, and the number of trades. Our findings show that jumps are related to the inability of the market to absorb new and big orders. Liquidity shocks in volatility, volume, and quoted spread are the key drivers accompanying the occurrence of the jumps. Finally, the introduction of a faster and more efficient trading system improves the liquidity by increasing the depth of the market.     

Growth Opportunities,Technology Shocks,and Asset Prices

We explore the impact of investment‐specific technology (IST) shocks on the cross section of stock returns. Using a structural model, we show that IST shocks have a differential effect on the value of assets in place and the value of growth opportunities. This differential sensitivity to IST shocks has two main implications. First, firm risk premia depend on the contribution of growth opportunities to firm value. Second, firms with similar levels of growth opportunities comove with each other, giving rise to the value factor in stock returns and the failure of the conditional CAPM. Our empirical tests confirm the model's predictions.