Uncertainty,Time‐Varying Fear,and Asset Prices

I construct an equilibrium model that captures salient properties of index option prices, equity returns, variance, and the risk‐free rate. A representative investor makes consumption and portfolio choice decisions that are robust to his uncertainty about the true economic model. He pays a large premium for index options because they hedge important model misspecification concerns, particularly concerning jump shocks to cash flow growth and volatility. A calibration shows that empirically consistent fundamentals and reasonable model uncertainty explain option prices and the variance premium. Time variation in uncertainty generates variance premium fluctuations, helping explain their power to predict stock returns.     

Nominal rigidities,asset returns,and monetary policy

Asset-return implications of nominal price and wage rigidities are analyzed in general equilibrium. Nominal rigidities, combined with permanent productivity shocks, increase expected excess returns on production claims. This is mainly explained by consumption dynamics driven by rigidity-induced changes in employment and markups. An interest-rate monetary policy rule affects asset returns. Stronger (weaker) rule responses to inflation (output) increase expected excess returns. Policy shocks substantially increase asset-return volatility. Price rigidity heterogeneity produces cross-sectoral differences in expected returns. The model matches important macroeconomic moments and the Sharpe ratio of stock returns, but only captures a small fraction of the observed equity premium.     

Risks for the Long Run: A Potential Resolution of Asset Pricing Puzzles

We model consumption and dividend growth rates as containing (1) a small long‐run predictable component, and (2) fluctuating economic uncertainty (consumption volatility). These dynamics, for which we provide empirical support, in conjunction with Epstein and Zin's (1989) preferences, can explain key asset markets phenomena. In our economy, financial markets dislike economic uncertainty and better long‐run growth prospects raise equity prices. The model can justify the equity premium, the risk‐free rate, and the volatility of the market return, risk‐free rate, and the price–dividend ratio. As in the data, dividend yields predict returns and the volatility of returns is time‐varying.     

Currency Returns, Intrinsic Value, and Institutional-Investor Flows

We decompose currency returns into (permanent) intrinsic‐value shocks and (transitory) expected‐return shocks. We explore interactions between these shocks, currency returns, and institutional‐investor currency flows. Intrinsic‐value shocks are: dwarfed by expected‐return shocks (yet currency returns overreact to them); unrelated to flows (although expected‐return shocks correlate with flows); and related positively to forecasted cumulated‐interest differentials. These results suggest flows are related to short‐term currency returns, while fundamentals better explain long‐term returns and values. They also rationalize the long‐observed poor performance of exchange‐rate models: by ignoring the distinction between permanent and transitory exchange‐rate changes, prior tests obscure the connection between currencies and fundamentals.     

Cash Flow News and Stock Price Dynamics

We develop a new approach to modeling dynamics in cash flows extracted from daily firm-level dividend announcements. We decompose daily cash flow news into a persistent component, jumps, and temporary shocks. Empirically, we find that the persistent cash flow component is a highly significant predictor of future growth in dividends and consumption. Using a log-linearized present value model, we show that news about the persistent dividend growth component predicts stock returns consistent with asset pricing constraints implied by this model. News about the daily dividend growth process also helps explain concurrent return volatility and the probability of jumps in stock returns.     

Indeterminacy, aggregate demand, and the real business cycle

We show that under indeterminacy aggregate demand shocks are able to explain not only aspects of actual fluctuations that standard RBC models predict fairly well, but also aspects of actual fluctuations that standard RBC models cannot explain, such as the hump-shaped, trend reverting impulse responses to transitory shocks found in US output (Cogley and Nason, Am. Econom. Rev. 85 (1995) 492); the large forecastable movements and comovements of output, consumption and hours (Rotemberg and Woodford, Am. Econom. Rev. 86 (1996) 71); and the fact that consumption appears to lead output and investment over the business cycle. Indeterminacy arises in our model due to capacity utilization and mild increasing returns to scale.     

TRANSITORY MARKET STATES AND THE JOINT OCCURRENCE OF MOMENTUM AND MEAN REVERSION

In this article we derive and investigate the implications of the Fama–French and Poterba–Summers model—in which the market price of equity contains permanent and temporary components—to explain cross‐sectional differences in equity risk premia and returns. Shocks to the transitory component are regarded a Merton risk factor. We obtain estimates from a simple Kalman decomposition of the market price. The transitory component estimate is used in a conditional capital asset pricing model to test implications of the model related to predictability, cross‐sectional performance, and the existence of momentum and mean reversion.     

Regime switching in the relationship between equity returns and short-term interest rates in the UK

This paper examines the relationship between UK equity returns and short-term interest rates using a two regime Markov-Switching EGARCH model. The results suggest one high-return, low variance regime within which the conditional variance of equity returns responds persistently but symmetrically to equity return innovations. In the other, low-mean, high variance, regime equity volatility responds asymmetrically and without persistence to shocks to equity returns. There is evidence of a regime dependent relationship between shorter maturity interest rate differentials and equity return volatility. Furthermore, there is evidence that events in the money markets influence the probability of transition across regimes.     

Stock markets fragmentation,volatility and final investors

The 2000s in equity markets are marked by two major regulatory shocks: RegNMS in the United States, and MiFID in the European Union. Simultaneously, there is a massive increase in the proportion of high-frequency trading, and market orders volume. However, trading volumes do not significantly increase. We propose a theoretical model describing the effects of stock markets fragmentation on two types of investors optimization problems: “intermediary” high-frequency and “final” investors. Volatility has a permanent and a transitory component, whose weights depend on market fragmentation via the share of non-marketable orders of intermediary investors. The trading volume of final investors depends on market fragmentation both directly via transaction costs, and indirectly via total volatility. Finally a shock in fragmentation may lead to a decrease in trading volume, enhanced in the case of an equity markets crisis by a rise in the components of volatility.     

The volatility linkage between energy and agricultural futures markets with external shocks

This paper investigates the volatility linkage between energy and agricultural futures returns and how this linkage responds to external macroeconomic shocks. A framework combining the VARMA-BEKK-GARCH model and the Permanent-Transitory decomposition technology is employed to detect the volatility transmission, to decompose the volatility linkage into permanent and transitory components, and to examine the underlying determinants of the transitory volatility linkage. We have the following findings. A bidirectional volatility linkage between energy and agricultural futures returns exists and becomes more pronounced in recent years. The bidirectional linkage results from the co-movement effect induced by external shocks rather than from the substitution effect induced by the biofuel industry, and is not weakened by the shale gas revolution. Serving as proxies for external shocks from the world economy, trade, and financial markets, the CRB, BDI, and USDX indices provide strong explanatory power for the transitory volatility linkage, and the futures of these indices can be used to effectively and inexpensively hedge against the risks of the portfolios involving energy and agricultural futures.     

Asymmetry in return and volatility spillover between equity and bond markets in Australia

We document asymmetry in return and volatility spillover between equity and bond markets in Australia for daily returns during the period 1992–2006 using a bivariate GARCH modelling approach. Negative bond market returns spillover into lower stock market returns whereas good news originating in the equity market leads to lower bond returns. Bond market volatility spills over into the equity market but the reverse is not true. Transmission of bond volatility into equity volatility depends in a complex way upon the respective signs of the return shocks in each market.     

Are equities good inflation hedges? A frequency domain perspective

By using industry level data, we examine the relation between equity returns and inflation in a frequency dependent framework. Our analysis shows that a positive relation in fact exists between equity returns and high frequency inflation shocks for commodity and technology related industries. Since higher frequency shocks are independent from trend and are transitory in nature, our findings imply a positive relation between stock returns and the unexpected component of inflation. Furthermore, we show that the results are robust to firm-level data by using a sample from the oil industry. Hence, our study provides a new look at the impact of inflation on equities by showing the sensitivity of conclusions in prior work to frequency dependence in data.     

Consumption,asset wealth,equity premium,term spread,and flight to quality

We link transitory deviations of consumption from its equilibrium relationship with aggregate wealth and labor income to equity returns on the one hand, and to two characteristics of bond investors—the premium demanded to hold long‐term assets, and “flight to quality” behavior—on the other hand. Using a panel of 10 euro area countries over the period 1984Q1–2017Q4, we show that a rise in the consumption–wealth ratio predicts both higher equity returns and the future term spread, while a fall in the consumption–wealth ratio explains a large fraction of the rise in the spread between the “risky” and the “safe‐haven” bond.     

Can Time‐Varying Risk of Rare Disasters Explain Aggregate Stock Market Volatility?

Why is the equity premium so high, and why are stocks so volatile? Why are stock returns in excess of government bill rates predictable? This paper proposes an answer to these questions based on a time‐varying probability of a consumption disaster. In the model, aggregate consumption follows a normal distribution with low volatility most of the time, but with some probability of a consumption realization far out in the left tail. The possibility of this poor outcome substantially increases the equity premium, while time‐variation in the probability of this outcome drives high stock market volatility and excess return predictability.     

General equilibrium pricing of options with habit formation and event risks

This paper proposes a general equilibrium model that explains the pricing of the S&P 500 index options. The central ingredients are a peso component in the consumption growth rate and the time-varying risk aversion induced by habit formation which amplifies consumption shocks. The amplifying effect generates the excess volatility and a large jump-risk premium which combine to produce a pronounced volatility smirk for index options. The time-varying volatility and jump-risk premiums explain the observed state-dependent smirk patterns. Besides volatility smirks, the model has a variety of other implications which are broadly consistent with the aggregate stock and option market data.     

Growth uncertainty,generalized disappointment aversion and production-based asset pricing

We study a production economy with regime switching in the conditional mean and volatility of productivity growth. The representative agent has generalized disappointment aversion (GDA) preferences. We show that volatility risk in productivity growth carries a positive and sizable risk premium in levered equity. Our model can endogenously generate long-run risks in the volatility of consumption growth observed in the data. We show that introducing leverage with a procyclical dividend process consistent with the data is critical for the GDA preferences to have a large impact on equity returns.     

Habit-based asset pricing with limited participation consumption

We calibrate and estimate a consumption-based asset pricing model with habit formation using limited participation consumption data. Based on survey data of a representative sample of American households, we distinguish between assetholder and non-assetholder consumption, as well as the standard aggregate consumption series commonly used in the CCAPM literature. We show that assetholder consumption outperforms non-assetholder and aggregate consumption data in explaining bond returns, bond yields, and the volatility of bond yields. We further show that the high volatility of assetholder consumption enables the model to explain the equity premium puzzle and the risk-free rate puzzle simultaneously for a reasonable value of relative risk aversion.     

Volatility,the Macroeconomy,and Asset Prices

How important are volatility fluctuations for asset prices and the macroeconomy? We find that an increase in macroeconomic volatility is associated with an increase in discount rates and a decline in consumption. We develop a framework in which cash flow, discount rate, and volatility risks determine risk premia and show that volatility plays a significant role in explaining the joint dynamics of returns to human capital and equity. Volatility risk carries a sizable positive risk premium and helps account for the cross section of expected returns. Our evidence demonstrates that volatility is important for understanding expected returns and macroeconomic fluctuations.     

Monetary policy and the cyclicality of risk

A dynamic general equilibrium model to study the relationship between monetary policy and movements in risk is developed. Variation in risk arises because households face fixed costs of transferring cash across financial accounts, implying that some households rebalance their portfolios infrequently. Accordingly, prices for risky assets respond sharply to aggregate shocks because only a relatively small subset of consumers are available to absorb these shocks. The model can account for both the mean and the volatility of returns on equity and the risk-free rate and generates a decline in the equity premium following an unanticipated easing of monetary policy.     

Idiosyncratic Cash Flows and Systematic Risk

We show that unpriced cash flow shocks contain information about future priced risk. A positive idiosyncratic shock decreases the sensitivity of firm value to priced risk factors and simultaneously increases firm size and idiosyncratic risk. A simple model can therefore explain book‐to‐market and size anomalies, as well as the negative relation between idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns. Empirically, we find that anomalies are more pronounced for firms with high idiosyncratic cash flow volatility. More generally, our results imply that any economic variable correlated with the history of idiosyncratic shocks can help to explain expected stock returns.