A reduced form model of default spreads with Markov-switching macroeconomic factors

We examine the ability of observed macroeconomic factors and the possibility of changes in regime to explain the proportion of yield spreads caused by the risk of default in the context of a reduced form model. For this purpose, we extend the Markov-switching risk-free term structure model of Bansal and Zhou (2002) to the corporate bond setting and develop recursive formulas for default probabilities, risk-free and risky zero-coupon bond yields as well as credit default swap premia. The model is calibrated with consumption, inflation, risk-free yields and default data for Aa, A and Baa bonds from the 1987 to 2008 period. We find that our macroeconomic factors are linked with two out of three sharp increases in the spreads during this sample period, indicating that the spread variations can be related to macroeconomic undiversifiable risk.     

Unbiased estimation of expected return using CAPM

Estimation of expected return is required for many financial decisions. For example, an estimate for cost of capital is required for capital budgeting and cost of equity estimates are needed for performance evaluation based on measures such as EVA. Estimates for expected return are often based on the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), which states that expected excess return (expected return minus the risk-free rate) is equal to the asset's sensitivity to the world market portfolio (β) times the risk premium on the “world market portfolio” (the market risk premium). Since the world market portfolio, by definition, contains all assets in the world, it is not observable. As a result, an estimate for expected return is commonly obtained by taking an estimate for β based on some index (as a proxy for the world market portfolio) and an estimate for the market risk premium based on a potentially different index and multiplying them together. In this paper, it is shown that this results in a biased estimate for expected return. This is undesirable since biased estimates lead to misallocation of funds and biased performance measures. It is also shown in this paper that the straightforward procedure suggested by Fama and MacBeth [J. Financ. Econ. 1 (1974) 43] results in an unbiased estimate for expected return. Further from the analysis done, it follows that, for an unbiased estimate, it does not matter what proxy is used, as long as it is used correctly an unbiased estimate for expected return results.     

On the test of the correction mechanism for mis-pricing between assets using a statistical yield spread model

This paper investigates the existence of a correction mechanism for mis-pricing between Japanese stock and bond. By this correction mechanism we mean that when deviations occur from the equilibrium levels of the expected return differentials between stock and bond — the risk premium differentials, the market will tend to correct the mis-pricing and bring the expected return differentials back to the equilibrium levels. We assume that the yield spread between the predicted earnings price ratio of stock and the yield to maturity of bond reflects the risk premium between stock and bond, and estimate the equilibrium risk premium differentials and mis-prices between stock and bond by modelling their behaviors with a statistical yield spread model (SYS). Empirical results strongly indicate the existence of the mis-pricing correction mechanism, suggesting the inefficiency of securities markets.     

Robust Portfolio Rules and Asset Pricing

I present a new approach to the dynamic portfolio and consumptionproblem of an investor who worries about model uncertainty (inaddition to market risk) and seeks robust decisions along thelines of Anderson, Hansen, and Sargent (2002). In accordancewith max-min expected utility, a robust investor insures againstsome endogenous worst case. I first show that robustness dramaticallydecreases the demand for equities and is observationally equivalentto recursive preferences when removing wealth effects. Unlikestandard recursive preferences, however, robustness leads toenvironment-specific "effective" risk aversion. As an extension,I present a closed-form solution for the portfolio problem ofa robust Duffie-Epstein-Zin investor. Finally, robustness increasesthe equilibrium equity premium and lowers the risk-free rate.Reasonable parameters generate a 4% to 6% equity premium.     

GLOBAL EVIDENCE ON THE EQUITY RISK PREMIUM

The size of the equity risk premium—the incremental return that shareholders require to hold risky equities rather than risk-free securities—is a key issue in corporate finance. Financial economists generally measure the equity premium over long periods of time in order to obtain reliable estimates. These estimates are widely used by investors, finance professionals, corporate executives, regulators, lawyers, and consultants. But because the 20th century proved to be a period of such remarkable growth in the U.S. economy, estimates of the risk premium that rely on past market performance may be too high to serve as a reliable guide to the future.
The authors analyze a 103-year history of risk premiums in 16 countries and conclude that the U.S. risk premium relative to Treasury bills was 5.3% for that period—lower than previous studies suggest—as compared to 4.2% for the U.K. and 4.5% for a world index. But the article goes on to observe that the historical record may still overstate expectations of the future risk premium, partly because market volatility in the future may be lower than in the past, and partly because of a general decline in risk resulting from new technological advances and increased diversification opportunities for investors. After adjusting for the expected impact of these factors, the authors calculate forward-looking equity risk premiums of 4.3% for the U.S., 3.9% for the U.K., and 3.5% for the world index. At the same time, however, they caution that the risk premium can fluctuate over time and that managers should make appropriate adjustments when there are compelling economic reasons to think that expected premiums are unusually high or low.     

Super-Exponential RE bubble model with efficient crashes

We propose a dynamic Rational Expectations (RE) bubble model of prices, combining a geometric random walk with separate crash (and rally) discrete jump distributions associated with positive (and negative) bubbles. Crashes tend to efficiently bring back excess bubble prices close to a “normal” process. Then, the RE condition implies that the excess risk premium of the risky asset exposed to crashes is an increasing function of the amplitude of the expected crash, which itself grows with the bubble mispricing: hence, the larger the bubble price, the larger its subsequent growth rate. This positive feedback of price on return is the archetype of super-exponential price dynamics. We use the RE condition to estimate the real-time crash probability dynamically through an accelerating probability function depending on the increasing expected return. After showing how to estimate the model parameters, we obtain a closed-form approximation for the optimal investment that maximizes the expected log of wealth (Kelly criterion) for the risky bubbly asset and a risk-free asset. We demonstrate, on seven historical crashes, the promising outperformance of the method compared to a 60/40 portfolio, the classic Kelly allocation, and the risky asset, and how it mitigates jumps, both positive and negative.     

Risky asset pricing based on safety first fund management

We study a portfolio selection model based on Kataoka's safety-first criterion (KSF model in short). We assume that the market is complete but without risk-free asset, and that the returns are jointly elliptically distributed. With these assumptions, we provide an explicit analytical optimal solution for the KSF model and obtain some geometrical properties of the efficient frontier in the plane of probability risk degree z _α and target return r _α. We further prove a two-fund separation and tangency portfolio theorem in the spirit of the traditional mean-variance analysis. We also establish a risky asset pricing model based on risky funds that is similar to Black's zero-beta capital asset pricing model (CAPM, for short). Moreover, we simplify our risky asset pricing model using a derivative risky fund as a reference for market evaluation.     

CORPORATE CAPITAL COSTS: A PRACTITIONER'S GUIDE

Central to modern finance theory is an understanding of the cost of capital—the minimum required rate of return that is used by companies and investors for both valuation and ongoing performance measurement. This paper provides new insights into the market risk premium for U.S. equities, as well as better methods for measuring and quantifying a company's systematic risk. In so doing, it furnishes evidence that stock market investors now expect a 5% return premium over 30-year government bonds—a decline from the 6–8% premiums suggested by the Ibbotson-Sinquefeld data that extends from 1926 to the present. The author argues that, because of structural changes in the global economy and capital markets, only the most recent 40 or 50 years of data are relevant for estimating current risk premiums. Like the article that precedes it, this article also notes that the 30-year Treasury bond has an increasing component of systematic risk, and the author provides a method of applying the CAPM that removes that risk component from the "risk-free" rate and shifts it to the market risk premium.     

Liquidity,default, taxes,and yields on municipal bonds

We examine the effects of liquidity, default and personal taxes on the relative yields of Treasuries and municipals using a generalized model with liquidity risk. The municipal yield model includes liquidity as a state factor. Using a unique transaction dataset, we estimate the liquidity risk of municipals and its effect on bond yields. Empirical evidence shows that municipal bond yields are strongly affected by all three factors. The effects of default and liquidity risk on municipal yields increase with maturity and credit risk. Liquidity premium accounts for about 9–13% of municipal yields for AAA bonds, 9–15% for AA/A bonds and 8–19% for BBB bonds. A substantial portion of the maturity spread between long- and short-maturity municipal bonds is attributed to the liquidity premium. Ignoring the liquidity risk effect thus results in a severe underestimation of municipal bond yields. Conditional on the effects of default and liquidity risk, we obtain implicit tax rates very close to the statutory tax rates of high-income individuals and institutional investors. Furthermore, these implicit income tax rates are quite stable across bonds of different maturities. Results show that including liquidity risk in the municipal bond pricing model helps explain the muni puzzle.     

Flight-to-safety and retail investor behavior

Flight-to-safety (FTS) episodes are associated with substantial yet short-lived changes in expected returns on equities and bonds. These price changes are typically surrounded by active trading and/or risk transfer between different investors. Using aggregate net exchanges, flows from bond to equity mutual funds, in the US for a period 1984 until 2015, I empirically investigate retail investor behavior around FTS episodes. Overall, I find a reversal statistical relation between net exchanges and market excess returns. A one-standard-deviation shock to net exchanges leads to an increase of market excess return of 1.75%, of which 72% is reversed within 5 months. In particular, FTS episodes are preceded by periods where more risk averse investors, e.g. retail investors, rebalance their portfolios towards risky assets. A trading strategy that is based on signals from past net exchanges outperforms the market portfolio, significantly during FTS periods by 1.4% monthly. However, I find that the observed reversal relationship is not necessarily due to price ‘noise’ induced by uninformed trading. It is more reasonable that the sudden increase in market stress and selling of risky assets is caused by other demand/supply shocks driven by increased economic uncertainty.     

MACROECONOMIC VARIABLES AND SEASONAL MEAN REVERSION IN STOCK RETURNS

In this paper I investigate whether seasonal mean reversion in stock portfolio returns is related to common macroeconomic risk factors. I decompose excess returns into explained and unexplained returns using a multifactor pricing model. The explained excess returns exhibit January mean reversion; the unexplained excess returns do not. The mean reversion can be attributed to the components of return related to unexpected inflation, bond default premium, and market risk. The results do not depend on the time-series properties of the portfolio betas. Bond default premia and excess market returns are mean reverting in January.     

ESTIMATING THE EQUITY RISK PREMIUM AND EQUITY COSTS: NEW WAYS OF LOOKING AT OLD DATA

This article examines three alternative ways of estimating the expected return on the equity market in using the CAPM or some other risk premium model. The three techniques are (1) direct estimation of the average nominal equity return for use as a forecast nominal equity return; (2) estimation of the average real equity return, which can then be added to a forecast inflation rate; and (3) estimation of an average equity risk premium, which is then added to a current risk-free rate. Ibbotson and Sinquefeld's data on annual holding period returns are used to test the validity of their assumption that the equity risk premium follows a random walk and that the third of these approaches is thus the best method.
The paper reaches three major conclusions. First, each of these three techniques involves a "bias" of some kind. The use of average equity returns as a forecast is subject to "risk-free rate" and "inflation rate" biases, while the use of an average equity risk premium is subject to a "term premium" bias. As a result, only the data can tell us which approach is best. Second, from analyzing equity and bond return data and the trend in interest rates, the author concludes that the term premium bias when using average historic equity risk premium is by far the largest of the three sources of bias. Indeed, the popular practice of adding an historic average equity risk premium to the 30-year Treasury bond rate significantly overstates equity costs. Third, after examining equity rates of return back to 1871, the author concludes that the real equity return seems to follow a process that is close to a random walk and is thus the "best" of the three techniques to use as a "naive" forecast.     

中债估值识别了债券信用风险吗？——基于跳跃视角的实证分析

本文以2011—2018年中国A股上市公司发行的一般公司债为样本,探究了中债估值跳跃对债券信用利差的影响及作用机制,以此说明中债估值对债券信用风险的识别作用。研究发现:中债估值跳跃能够显著提高债券信用利差,其中,中债估值上跳降低了信用利差,下跳提高了信用利差,且相对于上跳,下跳对信用利差的作用更大。异质性分析发现:中债估值跳跃对信用利差的作用在机构投资者中较大,同时在信息不对称性较严重、流动性较差及违约风险较高的债券中也较大。进一步研究发现:中债估值跳跃不仅包含了公共信息,还含有私有信息,并能改善股票分析师预测表现。本研究说明中债估值能够识别债券信用风险,具有信息含量,对于债券市场信息环境建设和系统性金融风险防范具有重要意义。     

Disappointment aversion and the equity premium puzzle: new international evidence

Drawing upon the seminal study of Ang, Bekaert, and Liu [2005. “Why Stock May Disappoint?” Journal of Financial Economics 76 (3): 471–508], we incorporate disappointment aversion (DA, that is, aversion to outcomes that are worse than prior expectations) within a simple theoretical portfolio-choice model. Based on the results of this model, we then empirically address the portfolio allocation problem of an investor who chooses between a risky and a risk-free asset using international data from 19 countries. Our findings strongly support the view that DA leads investors to reduce their exposure to the stock market (i.e. DA significantly depresses the portfolio weights on equities in all cases considered). Overall, our study shows that in addition to risk aversion, DA plays an important role in explaining the equity premium puzzle around the world.     

Trading and liquidity in the catastrophe bond market

We provide first insights into secondary market trading, liquidity determinants, and the liquidity premium of catastrophe bonds. Based on transaction data from TRACE (Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine), we find that cat bonds are traded less frequently during the hurricane season and more often close to maturity. Trading activity indicates that the market is dominated by brokers without a proprietary inventory. Liquidity is high in periods of high trading activity in the overall market and for bonds with low default risk or close to maturity, which results from lower order processing costs. Finally, using realized bid–ask spreads as a liquidity measure, we find that on average, 21% of the observable yield spread on the cat bond market is attributable to the liquidity premium, with a magnitude of up to 141 bps for high-risk bonds.     

Hard markets,hard times: On the inefficiency of the CAT bond market

This study explores the existence of inefficiencies in catastrophe (CAT) bond secondary markets by investigating the impact of sponsor characteristics on the CAT bond premium. We show that the CAT bond market does not satisfy the demand for catastrophe risk transfer efficiently by revealing a significant effect of sponsor-related factors on the CAT bond premium. This inefficiency is particularly surprising given that a CAT bond isolates the insured risk from other sponsor-related risks through a special purpose vehicle. Remarkably, this inefficiency is even present among non-indemnity CAT bonds, which determine the payout through a mechanism that is exogenous to the sponsor. Our findings also reveal that sponsor-related pricing inefficiencies vary over time and are more relevant during hard and neutral phases compared to soft market phases. Among the sponsor-related determinants of the CAT bond premium are the sponsor's tenure, market coverage, rating, credit default swap spread, and his ability to issue innovative “on the run” CAT bonds.     

Estimating Portfolio and Consumption Choice: A Conditional Euler Equations Approach

This paper develops a nonparametric approach to examine how portfolio and consumption choice depends on variables that forecast time-varying investment opportunities. I estimate single-period and multiperiod portfolio and consumption rules of an investor with constant relative risk aversion and a one-month to 20-year horizon. The investor allocates wealth to the NYSE index and a 30-day Treasury bill. I find that the portfolio choice varies significantly with the dividend yield, default premium, term premium, and lagged excess return. Furthermore, the optimal decisions depend on the investor's horizon and rebalancing frequency.     

The risk premium and long-run global imbalances

This study proposes that heterogeneous household portfolio choices within a country and across countries offer an explanation for global imbalances. We construct a stochastic growth multi-country model in which heterogeneous agents face the following restrictions on asset trade. First, the degree of US equity market participation is higher than that of the rest of the world. Second, a fraction of households in each country maintains a fixed share of equity in its portfolios. In our calibrated model, which matches the US net foreign asset position and the equity premium, the average US household loads up more aggregate risk than the average foreign household by investing in risky assets abroad and issuing risk-free assets. As a result, the US is compensated by a high risk premium and runs trade deficits even as a debtor country. The long-run average trade deficit in our model accounts for 50% of the observed US trade deficit.     

Optimal mean-reversion strategy in the presence of bid-ask spread and delays in capital allocations

A portfolio optimization problem for an investor who trades T-bills and a mean-reverting stock in the presence of proportional and convex transaction costs is considered. The proportional transaction cost represents a bid-ask spread, while the convex transaction cost is used to model delays in capital allocations. I utilize the historical bid-ask spread in US stock market and assume that the stock reverts on yearly basis, while an investor follows monthly changes in the stock price. It is found that proportional transaction cost has a relatively weak effect on the expected return and the Sharpe ratio of the investor's portfolio. Meantime, the presence of delays in capital allocations has a dramatic impact on the expected return and the Sharpe ratio of the investor's portfolio. I also find the robust optimal strategy in the presence of model uncertainty and show that the latter increases the effective risk aversion of the investor and makes her view the stock as more risky.     

Estimating the Equity Risk Premium and Expected Equity Rates of Return: The Case of Canada

It is common to use the average excess return of equities over bonds estimated over long time periods as an expected equity risk premium on the grounds that going back far enough covers most possible economic scenarios. But although this data is useful in guiding the exercise of judgment, it cannot substitute for judgment. Adding more years of data to the near century of Canadian stock and bond returns that inform today's estimate of the equity risk premium will not produce a “random walk” for a simple reason: the historic bond series is the result of a specific historic monetary policy. This is particularly true of and important for the case of Canada, where today's very low current bond yields reflect the emergence of the Canadian dollar as a reserve currency as well as the impact of unconventional monetary policy elsewhere. After analyzing the historic record of the Canadian equity risk premium and noting the need for adjustments when this premium is applied to the current anomalously low Canadian long‐term bond yields, the author reaches the following conclusions:

• The historic Canadian equity risk premium is approximately 5.0% (based on arithmetic returns), which is slightly lower than the roughly 6.0% value for the U.S.
• The historic equity risk premium has not been constant because of obvious changes in the Canadian bond market. To some extent, the huge cycle in which bond yields began their increase from the 4.0% level starting in 1957, when markets were liberalized, and then fell back to the 4.0% level in 2007‐2008 completed an adjustment to changes in fiscal versus monetary policy. However, in 2016, average long Canada bond yields dropped to an anomalously low 1.8%, which is below the long‐term inflation target of the Bank of Canada, and have barely recovered since. It is difficult to view this as an equilibrium rate determined by private investors.
• Of the drop in bond yields, about 0.50% is unique to Government of Canada bonds as they became attractive to sovereign investors as a rare AAA‐rated issuer.
• Using an indicator variable for the post‐2010 years, a simple regression analysis indicates that current long Canada bond yields should be about 2.75% higher but for the recent changes. And for 2018, this means that the 2.35% average long Canada bond yield should have been about 5.0%. Apart from the impact of higher government deficits, this is consistent with average yields before the 2008 financial crisis.
• Adding an adjusted 5.0% long Canada bond yield to the historic equity risk premium in Canada of 4.50% gives 9.50% for the cost of the overall equity market or, given the Bank of Canada's target inflation rate of 2.0%, a real equity return of 7.5%, both slightly higher than the long‐run averages.

In sum, the conventional practice of adding a historic market risk premium to the current low Canada long bond yields would impart a sharp downward bias to current equity cost estimates; use of this method would not be appropriate until long Canada bond yields increase to at least the 4.0% level.