Future Realized Return,Firm‐specific Risk and the Implied Expected Return

In this paper, I propose a novel approach to derive a firm‐specific measure of expected return. It builds on recent accounting‐based valuation models developed by Clubb (2013) and Ashton and Wang (2013). The measure is intrinsically linked to commonly used financial ratios, including book‐to‐market, (forward) earnings yield, and dividend‐to‐price, as well as growth and past returns. The empirical evidence shows that it is significantly positively associated with future realized stock returns and also significantly correlated with commonly used risk characteristics in a theoretically predictable manner. The results are likely to be of interest to practitioners and managers in making capital allocation decisions and to academics in need of proxies for firms’ discount rates and expected returns.     

A theoretical analysis connecting conservative accounting to the cost of capital

We connect conservative accounting to the cost of capital by developing an accounting model within an asset pricing framework. The model has three distinctive features: (1) transaction-cycle-conformity, where the book value equals the value of cash at the beginning and the end of a cash-to-cash transaction cycle; (2) a revenue recognition principle, where uncertainty affects the amount of revenues recognized; (3) a matching principle, where expenses are matched with revenue with a conservative bias due to uncertainty. We demonstrate how the growth rate of expected earnings, the accruals-to-cash ratio, and the expected earnings yield relate to the expected stock return.     

The cross section of cashflow volatility and expected stock returns

I show that historical cashflow volatility is negatively related to future returns cross-sectionally. The negative association is large; economically meaningful; long-lasting up to five years; robust to known return-informative effects of size, value, price and earnings momentums and illiquidity; and extends to both systematic and idiosyncratic cashflow volatilities. Using the standard deviations of cashflow to sales and of cashflow to book equity as proxies for cashflow volatility, the least volatile decile portfolio outperforms the most volatile decile portfolio by 13% a year relative to the Fama–French four factors. The cashflow volatility effect is closely related to the idiosyncratic return volatility effect documented in Ang et al. [Ang, A., Hodrick, R.J., Xing, Y. and Zhang, X. “The cross-section of volatility and expected returns.” Journal of Finance, 51 (2006), 259–299.]. However, in portfolios simultaneously sorted on both cashflow and return volatilities, and in cross sectional regressions of returns at the firm level, these two effects neither drive out nor dominate each other. While the pricing of idiosyncratic cashflow volatility represents an anomaly against the traditional asset pricing theories, the pricing of historical cashflow uncertainty sheds light on potential fundamental risks embodied in the Fama–French HML and SMB factors.     

Market Reactions to Tangible and Intangible Information

The book‐to‐market effect is often interpreted as evidence of high expected returns on stocks of “distressed” firms with poor past performance. We dispute this interpretation. We find that while a stock's future return is unrelated to the firm's past accounting‐based performance, it is strongly negatively related to the “intangible” return, the component of its past return that is orthogonal to the firm's past performance. Indeed, the book‐to‐market ratio forecasts returns because it is a good proxy for the intangible return. Also, a composite equity issuance measure, which is related to intangible returns, independently forecasts returns.     

“好”的不确定性、“坏”的不确定性与股票市场定价——基于中国股市高频数据分析

不确定性并不是都是“坏”的,“好”的不确定性也同样存在。本文采用Barndorff-Nielsen et al.(2010)提出的已实现半方差作为股票市场“好”的不确定性和“坏”的不确定性的代理指标,并在此基础上构建了相对符号变差(RSV),分析RSV对中国股市定价的影响。基于2007-2017年中国A股5分钟高频数据的实证研究发现:(1)与理论解释相一致,RSV与股票收益之间呈现负相关关系。无论是基于单变量分组、双变量分组还是公司层面的截面回归,这种影响在经济上和统计上都显著。(2)RSV是独立于已实现偏度的一个重要定价因子,且RSV对股票的定价能力强于已实现偏度的定价能力。(3)RSV对中国股市的影响是状态依存的,相对于经济景气程度高的状态,在经济景气程度低的状态下RSV定价影响更大。(4)基于RSV构建的投资组合的表现明显优于市场超额收益率组合、SMB组合和HML组合的表现。     

Investment Dynamics and Earnings‐Return Properties: A Structural Approach

We propose the standard neoclassical model of investment under uncertainty with short‐run adjustment frictions as a benchmark for earnings‐return patterns absent accounting influences. We show that our proposed benchmark generates a wide range of earnings‐return patterns documented in accounting research. Notably, our model generates a concave earnings‐return relation, similar to that of Basu [1997], and predicts that the earnings‐return concavity increases with the volatility of firms’ underlying shock processes and decreases with the level of firms’ investments. We find strong empirical support for these predictions. Overall, our evidence suggests that our proposed benchmark is useful for understanding the joint dynamics of variables of interest to accounting research (e.g., earnings, returns, investment, market‐to‐book) absent accounting influences, a necessary precondition for inferring the effects of accounting from these dynamics.     

Risk,Mispricing, and Value Investing

We evaluate the stock return performance of a modified version of the book-to-market strategy and its implications for market efficiency. If the previously documented superior stock return of the book-to-market strategy represents mispricing, its performance should be improved by excluding fairly valued firms with extreme book-to-market ratios. To attain this, we classify stocks as value or glamour on book-to-market ratios and accounting accruals jointly. This joint classification is likely to exclude stocks with extreme book-to-market ratios due to mismeasured accounting book values reflecting limitations underlying the accounting system. Using both 12-month buy-and-hold returns and earnings announcement returns, our results show that this joint classification generates substantially higher portfolio returns in the post-portfolio-formation year than the book-to-market classification alone with no evidence of increased risk. In addition, this superior stock return performance is more pronounced among firms held primarily by small (unsophisticated) investors and followed less closely by market participants (stock price <$10). Finally, and most importantly, financial analysts are overly optimistic (pessimistic) about earnings of glamour (value) stock, and for a subset of firms identified as overvalued by our strategy, the earnings announcement raw return, as well as abnormal return, is negative. These last results are particularly important because it is hard to envision a model consistent with rational investors holding risky stocks with predictable negative raw returns for a long period of time rather than holding fT-bills and with financial analysts systematically overestimating the earnings of these stocks while underestimating earnings of stocks that outperform the stock market.     

Accounting information,disclosure, and expected utility: Do investors really abhor uncertainty?

Investors are said to “abhor uncertainty,” but if there were no uncertainty they could earn only the risk‐free rate. A fundamental result in the analytical accounting literature shows that investors buying into a CARA‐normal CAPM market pay lower asset prices, gain higher ex‐ante expected returns, and obtain higher expected utility, when the market payoff has higher variance. New investors obtain similar “welfare” gains from risk under a log/power utility CAPM. These results do not imply that investors “abhor information.” To realize investors' ex‐ante expectations, the subjective probability distributions representing market expectations must be accurate. Greater payoff risk can add to investors' expected utility, but higher ex‐post(realized) utility comes from better information and more accurate ex‐ante expectations. An important implication for accounting is that greater disclosure can have the simultaneous effects of (i) exposing more fully or perceptibly firms' payoff uncertainty, thereby increasing new investors' expected utility, and (ii) improving market estimates of firms' payoff parameters (means, variances, covariances), thereby giving investors a better chance of realizing their expectations. Paradoxically, better information can be valuable to new investors by exposing more fully and more accurately the risk in firms' business operations and results–new investors maximizing expected utility want both more risk and better information.     

Beyond accounting and back: An empirical examination of the relative relevance of earnings and “other” information

Ohlson (1995) models firm value as a function of book value, earnings, and analysts' earnings forecasts which capture “other” information not yet reflected in the financial statements. Within this framework, stock returns reflect information from earnings and forecasts, each of which is different in terms of reliability and timeliness. For the period 1984–2012, this paper examines time trends and the influence of aggregate market conditions on the relative relevance of earnings and forecasts. In this context, relative relevance is defined as the incremental explanatory power of earnings or forecasts, relative to their combined explanatory power with respect to the cross-section of stock returns. This inquiry is motivated by anecdotal evidence and recent research, which suggests that aggregate market conditions influence the usefulness of accounting information for investors. The findings show that while the relative relevance of earnings has remained stable, the relative relevance of forecasts has increased over time. I also find that the relative relevance of earnings is higher in bad years, i.e. years with low market returns or elevated market uncertainty. Overall, the results reported in this study suggest that despite the increase in the relevance of timely “other” information, investors tend to rely more on reliable accounting information during bad years.     

The Book-to-Price Effect in Stock Returns: Accounting for Leverage

This paper lays out a decomposition of book‐to‐price (B/P) that derives from the accounting for book value and that articulates precisely how B/P “absorbs” leverage. The B/P ratio can be decomposed into an enterprise book‐to‐price (that pertains to operations and potentially reflects operating risk) and a leverage component (that reflects financing risk). The empirical analysis shows that the enterprise book‐to‐price ratio is positively related to subsequent stock returns but, conditional upon the enterprise book‐to‐price, the leverage component of B/P is negatively associated with future stock returns. Further, both enterprise book‐to‐price and leverage explain returns over those associated with Fama and French nominated factors—including the book‐to‐price factor—albeit negatively so for leverage. The seemingly perverse finding with respect to the leverage component of B/P survives under controls for size, estimated beta, return volatility, momentum, and default risk.     

The Extreme Future Stock Returns Following I/B/E/S Earnings Surprises

We investigate the stock returns subsequent to quarterly earnings surprises, where the benchmark for an earnings surprise is the consensus analyst forecast. By defining the surprise relative to an analyst forecast rather than a time‐series model of expected earnings, we document returns subsequent to earnings announcements that are much larger, persist for much longer, and are more heavily concentrated in the long portion of the hedge portfolio than shown in previous studies. We show that our results hold after controlling for risk and previously documented anomalies, and are positive for every quarter between 1988 and 2000. Finally, we explore the financial results and information environment of firms with extreme earnings surprises and find that they tend to be “neglected” stocks with relatively high book‐to‐market ratios, low analyst coverage, and high analyst forecast dispersion. In the three subsequent years, firms with extreme positive earnings surprises tend to have persistent earnings surprises in the same direction, strong growth in cash flows and earnings, and large increases in analyst coverage, relative to firms with extreme negative earnings surprises. We also show that the returns to the earnings surprise strategy are highest in the quartile of firms where transaction costs are highest and institutional investor interest is lowest, consistent with the idea that market inefficiencies are more prevalent when frictions make it difficult for large, sophisticated investors to exploit the inefficiencies.     

Time Variation in the Covariance between Stock Returns and Consumption Growth

The conditional covariance between aggregate stock returns and aggregate consumption growth varies substantially over time. When stock market wealth is high relative to consumption, both the conditional covariance and correlation are high. This pattern is consistent with the “composition effect,” where agents' consumption growth is more closely tied to stock returns when stock wealth is a larger share of total wealth. This variation can be used to test asset‐pricing models in which the price of consumption risk varies. After accounting for variations in this price, the relation between expected excess stock returns and the conditional covariance is negative.     

Explaining the accrual anomaly by market expectations of future returns and earnings

This study examines the accrual anomaly under the framework of the Campbell [Campbell, J.Y. (1991). A variance decomposition for stock returns. Economic Journal 101 (405), 157-179.] model. The Campbell (1991) model shows that realized asset returns are a joint function of 1) expected returns, 2) revisions in market expected future returns (i.e., return news), and 3) revisions in market expected future cash flows (i.e., cash flow news). The current study adopts the Easton [Easton, P. (2004). PE ratios, PEG ratios, and estimating the implied expected rate of return on equity capital. The Accounting Review 79 (1), 73-96.] model to estimate proxies for expected returns, return news, and cash flow news. The results show that firms with low accruals have lower expected returns than firms with high accruals, which is contradictory to prior research that argues that firms with low accruals are more risky. However, investors underestimate (overestimate) future earnings growth, a proxy for cash flow growth, for low (high) accrual firms. Further analysis demonstrates that earnings news (proxy for cash flow news) plays a major role in explaining abnormal returns associated with the accrual anomaly.     

Predicting firm level stock returns: Implications for asset pricing and economic links

We examine the predictive ability of stock price ratios, stock return dispersion and distribution measures for firm level returns. Analysis typically focusses on market level returns, however, for the underlying asset pricing model to hold, firm-level predictability should be present. Additionally, we examine the economic content of predictability by considering whether the predictive coefficient has the theoretically correct sign and whether it is related to future output growth. While stock returns reflect investor expectations regarding future economic conditions, they are often too noisy to act as predictor. We use the time-varying predictive coefficient as it reflects investor confidence in the predictive relation. Results suggest that a subset of stock price ratios have predictive power for individual firm stock returns, exhibit the correct coefficient sign and has predictive power for output growth. Each of these ratios has a measure of fundamentals divided by the stock price and has a positive relation with stock returns and output growth. This implies that as investors expect future economic conditions to improve and earnings and dividends to rise, so expected stock returns will increase. This supports the cash flow channel as the avenue through which stock return predictability arises.     

Evidence on the Trade-Off between Risk and Return for IPO and SEO Firms

Do the low long‐run average returns of equity issuers reflect underperformance due to mispricing or the risk characteristics of the issuing firms? We shed new light on this question by examining how institutional lenders price loans of equity issuing firms. Accounting for standard risk factors, we find that equity issuing firms' expected debt return is equivalent to the expected debt return of nonissuing firms, implying that institutional lenders perceive equity issuers to be as risky as similar nonissuing firms. In general, institutional lenders perceive small and high book‐to‐market borrowers as systematically riskier than larger borrowers with low book‐to‐market ratios, consistent with the asset pricing approach in Fama and French (1993) . Finally, we find that firms' expected debt returns decline after equity offerings, consistent with recent theoretical arguments suggesting that firm risk should decline following an equity offering. Overall, our analysis provides novel evidence consistent with risk‐based explanations for the observed equity returns following IPOs and SEOs.     

Accounting Ratios and the Cross‐section of Expected Stock Returns

Under clean‐surplus accounting, the log return on a stock can be decomposed into a linear function of the contemporaneous log return on equity, the contemporaneous log dividend–price ratio (if the stock pays a dividend), and both the contemporaneous and lagged values of the log book‐to‐market equity ratio. This paper studies the implications of this decomposition for the cross‐section of conditional expected stock returns. The empirical analysis reveals that the log accounting ratios capture cross‐sectional variation in both the conditional mean and conditional variance of log stock returns, which is consistent with the decomposition. It also brings fresh insights to the relation between firm size (market equity) and conditional expected stock returns. The evidence indicates that the conditional median return increases with firm size, while the conditional return skewness decreases with firm size. Empirically, the skewness effect outweighs the median effect, leading to the well‐documented inverse relation between size and average returns. The results of out‐of‐sample tests suggest that investors could use the information provided by the observed values of the log accounting ratios to formulate more effective portfolio strategies.     

Accounting-based downside risk and expected stock returns: Evidence from China

We document that earnings downside risk contains information on firms' future operating performance and is positively associated with expected stock returns in Chinese stock markets, and the return predictability of earning downside risk mainly comes from its accrual downside risk component. The pricing of earnings downside risk is especially evident among firms with more transparent information environment and stronger governance efficacy, such as large firms, non-high-tech firms, old firms, and firms with high analyst coverage. Lastly, we show that aggregated earnings downside risk and its components at the market level are all significantly and positively associated with subsequent stock market returns, which is consistent with the notion that the accounting-based downside risk measures contain information about future macroeconomic conditions.     

When is a MAX not the MAX? How news resolves information uncertainty

A well-known asset pricing anomaly, the “MAX” effect, measured by the maximum daily return in the past month, depicts stocks’ lottery-like features and investor gambling behaviour. Using the comprehensive stock-level Dow Jones (DJNS) news database between 1979 and 2016, we consider in a empirical setting how the presence of news reports affects these lottery-type stocks. We find an augmented negative relationship between MAX stocks without news and expected returns, whereby MAX with news coverage generates return momentum. The differing future return relationships between MAX stocks with and without news appears to be best explained by information uncertainty mitigation upon news arrival. Overall, our findings suggest that news plays a role in resolving information uncertainty in the stock market.     

Multifactor Explanations of Asset Pricing Anomalies

Previous work shows that average returns on common stocks are related to firm characteristics like size, earnings/price, cash flow/price, book-to-market equity, past sales growth, long-term past return, and short-term past return. Because these patterns in average returns apparently are not explained by the CAPM, they are called anomalies. We find that, except for the continuation of short-term returns, the anomalies largely disappear in a three-factor model. Our results are consistent with rational ICAPM or APT asset pricing, but we also consider irrational pricing and data problems as possible explanations.     

Lessons from the Financial Crisis on Risk and Capital Management: The Case of Insurance Companies

This article proposes that risk management be viewed as an integral part of the corporate value‐creation process— one in which the concept of economic capital can provide companies with the financial cushion and confidence to carry out their strategic plans. Using the case of insurance and reinsurance companies, the authors discuss three main ways that the integration of risk and capital management creates value:

• 1 strengthening solvency (by limiting the probability of financial distress);
• 2 increasing prospects for profitable growth (by preserving access to capital during post‐loss periods); and
• 3 improving transparency (by increasing the “information content” or “signaling power” of reported earnings).

Insurers can manage solvency risk by using Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) models to limit the probability of financial distress to levels consistent with the firm's specified risk tolerance. While ERM models are effective in managing “known” risks, we discuss three practices widely used in the insurance industry to manage “unknown” and “unknowable” risks using the logic of real options—slack, mutualization, and incomplete contracts. Second, risk management can create value by securing sources of capital that, like contingent capital, can be used to fund profitable growth opportunities that tend to arise in periods following large losses. Finally, the authors argue that risk management can raise the confidence of investors in their estimates of future growth by removing the “noise” in earnings that comes from bearing non‐core risks, thereby making current earnings a more reliable guide to future earnings. In support of this possibility, the authors provide evidence showing that, for a given level of reported return on equity (ROE), (re)insurers with more stable ROEs have higher price‐to‐book ratios, suggesting investors' willingness to pay a premium for the stability provided by risk management.