Global liquidity risk in the foreign exchange market

Using a broad data set of 20 US dollar exchange rates and order flow of institutional investors over 14 years, we construct a measure of global liquidity risk in the foreign exchange (FX) market. Our FX liquidity measure may be seen as the analog of the well-known Pastor–Stambaugh liquidity measure for the US stock market. We show that this measure has reasonable properties, and that there is a strong common component in liquidity across currencies. Finally, we provide evidence that liquidity risk is priced in the cross-section of currency returns, and estimate the liquidity risk premium in the FX market around 4.7 percent per annum.     

THE CHOICE OF TRADING VENUE AND RELATIVE PRICE IMPACT OF INSTITUTIONAL TRADING: ADRs VERSUS THE UNDERLYING SECURITIES IN THEIR LOCAL MARKETS

We address two important themes associated with institutions’ trading in foreign markets: (1) the choice of trading venues (between a company's listing in its home market and that in the United States as an American Depositary Receipt [ADR]) and (2) the comparison of trading costs across the two venues. We identify institutional trading in both venues using proprietary institutional trading data. Overall, our research underscores the intuition that the choice of institutional trading in a stock's local market or as an ADR is a complex process that embodies variables that measure the relative adverse selection and liquidity at order, stock, and country levels. Institutions route a higher percentage of trades to more liquid markets, and these trades are associated with higher cumulative abnormal returns. We also find that institutional trading costs are generally lower for trading cross‐listed stocks on home exchanges even after controlling for selection bias.     

A liquidity-augmented capital asset pricing model

Using a new measure of liquidity, this paper documents a significant liquidity premium robust to the CAPM and the Fama–French three-factor model and shows that liquidity is an important source of priced risk. A two-factor (market and liquidity) model well explains the cross-section of stock returns, describing the liquidity premium, subsuming documented anomalies associated with size, long-term contrarian investment, and fundamental (cashflow, earnings, and dividend) to price ratios. In particular, the two-factor model accounts for the book-to-market effect, which the Fama–French three-factor model fails to explain.     

Cross-listing and liquidity in emerging market stocks

In this study, we analyze liquidity costs for stocks and ADRs from the four main Latin American markets. The results indicate that international investors are exposed to different trading costs in Latin America, with market location and firm size as important determinants. In the local market, stocks that cross-list internationally do not always present a liquidity cost advantage relative to non-cross-listed stocks. When the ADR and the local stock markets are compared, large firms present lower trading costs in the home market. The opposite occurs for small firms.     

Time-varying risk aversion and asset prices

This paper uses a variant of the consumption-based representative agent model in Campbell and Cochrane [Campbell, J.Y., Cochrane, J.H., 1999. By force of habit: Consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. Journal of Political Economy 107, 205–251] to study how investors’ time-varying risk aversion affects asset prices. First, we show that a countercyclical variation of risk aversion drives a procyclical conditional risk premium. Second, we show that with a small value for the volatility of the log surplus consumption ratio, a large value of risk aversion may not determine whether the equity premium and the risk-free rate puzzles can be resolved or not. Third, we show that countercyclical risk aversion may not help explain the predictability of long-horizon stock returns, the univariate mean-reversion of stock prices and the “leverage effect” in return volatility.     

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.     

Institutional ownership,analyst following,and share prices

We study the mutual relationships between institutional ownership, analyst following and share prices. We show that the pressure on firms to set lower share prices to attract analysts is attenuated by institutional monitoring. Our theory refutes the assumed causal relation between share price and institutional ownership, attributed to the share price–liquidity relation, and we show empirically that share prices and institutional ownership are positively related after controlling for liquidity. Our study provides a rationale for why better firms generally maintain higher share price levels, and offers new insights into the puzzling empirical linkages observed between nominal share price levels and firm fundamentals.     

Share restrictions and asset pricing: Evidence from the hedge fund industry

This paper presents evidence on the relation between hedge fund returns and restrictions imposed by funds that limit the liquidity of fund investors. The excess returns of funds with lockup restrictions are approximately 4–7% per year higher than those of nonlockup funds. The average alpha of all funds is negative or insignificant after controlling for lockups and other share restrictions. Also, a negative relation is found between share restrictions and the liquidity of the fund's portfolio. This suggests that share restrictions allow funds to efficiently manage illiquid assets, and these benefits are captured by investors as a share illiquidity premium.     

Hedge fund liquidity and performance: Evidence from the financial crisis

We investigate how share restrictions affect hedge fund performance in crisis and non-crisis periods. Consistent with prior research, we find that in the pre-crisis period more illiquid funds generate a share illiquidity premium compensating investors for limited liquidity. In the crisis period, this share illiquidity premium turns into an illiquidity discount. Hedge funds with more stringent share restrictions invest more heavily in illiquid assets. While share restrictions enable funds to manage illiquid assets effectively in the pre-crisis period, they seem insufficient to ensure effective management of illiquid portfolios in the crisis. In a crisis period, funds holding illiquid portfolios experience lower returns and alphas, also when share restrictions are controlled for. Funds with an asset–liability mismatch perform particularly poorly and experience the strongest outflows. Share restrictions are also a proxy for incentives as investors cannot immediately withdraw their money after poor performance. We show that higher incentive fees can offset the share illiquidity discount in the crisis period.     

LIQUIDITY AND ASSET PRICING UNDER THE THREE‐MOMENT CAPM PARADIGM

We examine whether the use of the three‐moment capital asset pricing model can account for liquidity risk. We also make a comparative analysis of a four‐factor model based on Fama–French and Pástor–Stambaugh factors versus a model based solely on stock characteristics. Our findings suggest that neither of the models captures the liquidity premium nor do stock characteristics serve as proxies for liquidity. We also find that sensitivities of stock return to fluctuations in market liquidity do not subsume the effect of characteristic liquidity. Furthermore, our empirical findings are robust to differences in market microstructure or trading protocols between NYSE/AMEX and NASDAQ.     

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.     

Trading activity and bid–ask spreads of individual equity options

We empirically examine the impact of trading activities on the liquidity of individual equity options measured by the proportional bid–ask spread. There are three main findings. First, the option return volatility, defined as the option price elasticity times the stock return volatility, has a much higher power in explaining the spread variations than the commonly considered liquidity determinants such as the stock return volatility and option trading volume. Second, after controlling for all the liquidity determinants, we find a maturity-substitution effect due to expiration cycles. When medium-term options (60–90 days maturity) are not available, traders use short-term options as substitutes whose higher volume leads to a smaller bid–ask spread or better liquidity. Third, we also find a moneyness-substitution effect induced by the stock return volatility. When the stock return volatility goes up, trading shifts from in-the-money options to out-of-the-money options, causing the latter’s spread to narrow.     

Stock repurchases and treasury share sales: Do they stabilize price and enhance liquidity?

Can companies reduce the volatility and increase the liquidity of their stocks by trading them? In the context of the Italian stock market, where companies have far more leeway to sell as well as buy their own stocks than in the U.S., the answer is yes. We examine the effects of trading (open-market share repurchases and treasury shares sales) on liquidity (bid-ask spread) and volatility (return variance). Further, we examine the impact of shareholder approvals of repurchase programs on liquidity and volatility. We find clear evidence that trading increases liquidity and reduces volatility. These results are consistent with our analysis of the motives Italian companies give for making share repurchases.     

Who moves first? An intensity-based measure for information flows across stock exchanges

In this paper we propose an innovative measure for information flows between stock exchanges. We develop an intensity-based information share using Russell’s (1999) autoregressive conditional intensity model. Thereby we maintain the irregular nature of financial high frequency data and use durations and timing of price changes to determine the informationally dominant market. From our empirical application to US-listed Canadian stocks we conclude that the home market mostly reflects information first. On the basis of a cross-sectional analysis we find a positive correlation between the intensity-based information share and liquidity.     

Convertible bond arbitrage,liquidity externalities,and stock prices

In the context of convertible bond issuance, we examine the impact of arbitrage activity on underlying equity markets. In particular, we use changes in equity short interest following convertible bond issuance to identify convertible bond arbitrage activity and analyze its impact on stock market liquidity and prices for the period 1993 to 2006. There is considerable evidence of arbitrage-induced short selling resulting from issuance. Moreover, we find strong evidence that this activity is systematically related to liquidity improvements in the stock. These results are robust to controlling for the potential endogeneity of arbitrage activity.     

The empirical risk–return relation: A factor analysis approach

Existing empirical literature on the risk–return relation uses relatively small amount of conditioning information to model the conditional mean and conditional volatility of excess stock market returns. We use dynamic factor analysis for large data sets, to summarize a large amount of economic information by few estimated factors, and find that three new factors—termed “volatility,” “risk premium,” and “real” factors—contain important information about one-quarter-ahead excess returns and volatility not contained in commonly used predictor variables. Our specifications predict 16–20% of the one-quarter-ahead variation in excess stock market returns, and exhibit stable and statistically significant out-of-sample forecasting power. We also find a positive conditional risk–return correlation.     

Commonality in liquidity and multilateral trading facilities

We use the introduction of two multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) to examine the impact of market fragmentation on commonality in liquidity. We find that the introduction of MTFs following the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive increases the comovement of stocks’ liquidity with MTF liquidity, while the comovement with the home market liquidity generally decreases. We also find that the higher the MTF trading volume or the number of MTFs trading a stock, the stronger the effect. Further, we find that the commonality in liquidity remains unchanged for a matched control sample of stocks that do not trade on MTFs.     

Lost in translation: Delayed ex-dividend price adjustments of Hong Kong ADRs

Previous research documents that Hong Kong stocks have a full ex-dividend price adjustment consistent with dividends and capital gains being tax free. We examine ex-dividend price behavior of Hong Kong ADRs to assess the impact of differing tax environments in US and Hong Kong. These ADRs typically go ex-dividend before their underlying stock. They experience significant abnormal returns of 1.16% on their ex-day; the average ex-day price drop is only 30% of the dividend. However, ADR prices drop when the underlying stock goes ex-dividend subsequently. The cumulative ADR price drop is equal to the dividend. Thus, the ADR ex-dividend adjustment resembles that of the underlying stock, consistent with home country tax laws governing ADR price behavior. Neither liquidity nor transaction costs can explain the anomalous delayed ex-dividend adjustment of ADRs.     

Actual share repurchases,timing and liquidity

Research on the impact of open market share repurchases has been hindered by the lack of data available on actual share repurchases in many countries, including the US. Using a previously unused database containing detailed information on 36,848 repurchases made by 352 French firms, we show that corporate share repurchases have a significant adverse effect on liquidity as measured by bid–ask spread or depth. Our results also indicate that share repurchases largely reflect contrarian trading rather than managerial timing ability.     

Disagreement and asset prices

How do differences of opinion affect asset prices? Do investors earn a risk premium when disagreement arises in the market? Despite their fundamental importance, these questions are among the most controversial issues in finance. In this paper, we use a novel data set that allows us to directly measure the level of disagreement among Wall Street mortgage dealers about prepayment speeds. We examine how disagreement evolves over time and study its effects on expected returns, return volatility, and trading volume in the mortgage-backed security market. We find that increased disagreement is associated with higher expected returns, higher return volatility, and larger trading volume. These results imply that there is a positive risk premium for disagreement in asset prices. We also show that volatility in and of itself does not lead to higher trading volume. Instead, only when disagreement arises in the market is higher uncertainty associated with more trading. Finally, we are able to distinguish empirically between two competing hypotheses regarding how information in markets gets incorporated into asset prices. We find that sophisticated investors appear to update their beliefs through a rational expectations mechanism when disagreement arises.