Historic Changes in the High Yield Bond Market

In a history that now stretches about four decades, the high yield (HY) market has experienced growth in issuance and out‐standings that is remarkable both for its level (about 13% per annum, with HY bonds now accounting for about 25% of the total corporate bond market) and its cyclicality and sensitivity to the broad economy. The HY market has also experienced a notable shift away from B‐rated bonds and toward both lower‐risk Ba‐rated bonds and, to a lesser extent, more risky Caa‐rated bonds. Consistent with this development, studies of the performance of HY bonds show Ba‐rated bonds experiencing not only lower risk, but also higher returns than Caa‐rated bonds, which have produced surprisingly low average returns along with exceptionally high volatility. At the same time, studies of the correlation of HY bond returns with returns on other major asset classes report that all classes of HY bonds (but particularly the riskier B‐ and Caa‐rated bonds) have consistently stronger relationships with common stocks (especially small‐cap stocks) than with Treasuries and investment‐grade bonds. Analysis of the volatility of HY bond returns over time shows that during periods of stability in the economy and financial markets, the volatility of HY bond returns has been very similar to that of investment‐grade bonds. But during periods of political or economic uncertainty, the volatility of HY bonds has become two or three times that of investment‐grade bonds, approaching the volatility of common stocks. The main driver of the significant increase in the risk of the aggregate HY bond market during periods of uncertainty has been Caa‐rated bonds, whose risk pattern has been remarkably similar to that of small‐cap common stocks. Analysis of the credit risk spread (or CRS) series for both the composite HY bond market and each of its rating categories shows markedly non‐normal distributions with significant positive “skewness”—that is, periods of exceptionally high spreads (that are not counterbalanced by periods of exceptionally low spreads). The authors also report a consistently strong relationship of the CRS series with default rates and the general state of the economy, with major peaks occurring during or shortly after economic recessions. Near the end of 2008, however, there was a clear break in this relationship when the CRS reached an historic peak of 2,000 basis points, or more than five standard deviations above its long‐term mean, while the default rate (at 4%) was below its long‐term average. The authors offer two explanations for this break in CRS‐default rate relationship: the jump in the CRS caused by the extreme flight to quality and drop in liquidity for all risky securities during the second half of 2008; and the use of covenant‐lite securities and other sources of financial flexibility that appear to have enabled many HY issuers to defer defaults (if not avoid them entirely).     

On the suboptimality of single-factor exercise strategies for Bermudan swaptions

This paper examines the interaction between momentum in the returns of equities and corporate bonds. We find that investment grade corporate bonds do not exhibit momentum at the three- to 12-month horizons. Instead, the evidence suggests that they exhibit reversals. However, significant evidence exists of a momentum spillover from equities to investment grade corporate bonds of the same firm. Firms earning high (low) equity returns over the previous year earn high (low) bond returns the following year. The spillover results are stronger among firms with lower-grade debt and higher equity trading volume, seem robust to various risk and liquidity controls, and hold even after controlling for past earnings surprises. In examining the source of the spillover, we find that the bond ratings of firms with positive (negative) equity momentum continue to improve (deteriorate) in the future, suggesting underreaction to the information in past equity prices about changing default risk is a likely source of the spillover effect. Overall, our results suggest that both equity and debt underreact to firm fundamentals, but past equity returns is a better proxy of firm fundamentals than past bond returns.     

Liquidity risk of corporate bond returns: conditional approach

We study the exposure of the US corporate bond returns to liquidity shocks of stocks and Treasury bonds over the period 1973–2007 in a regime-switching model. In one regime, liquidity shocks have mostly insignificant effects on bond prices, whereas in another regime, a rise in illiquidity produces significant but conflicting effects: Prices of investment-grade bonds rise while prices of speculative-grade (junk) bonds fall substantially (relative to the market). Relating the probability of these regimes to macroeconomic conditions we find that the second regime can be predicted by economic conditions that are characterized as “stress.” These effects, which are robust to controlling for other systematic risks (term and default), suggest the existence of time-varying liquidity risk of corporate bond returns conditional on episodes of flight to liquidity. Our model can predict the out-of-sample bond returns for the stress years 2008–2009. We find a similar pattern for stocks classified by high or low book-to-market ratio, where again, liquidity shocks play a special role in periods characterized by adverse economic conditions.     

Credit default swaps and the UK 2008–09 short sales ban

Most studies of the short sales ban of UK financial stocks from September 2008 to January 2009 fail to control for the UK’s worst ever banking crisis and the underlying increase in risk. This paper studies the ban’s impact on the 13 large financials with credit default swaps (CDS) and 20 smaller stocks without CDS. The results reveal that returns of banned stocks Granger cause CDS returns in the pre- and post-ban periods, but causality runs from CDS to stock returns during the ban period. Underlying risk proxied by the CDS probability of default increased during the ban and the immediate pre- and post-ban periods which highlights an endogeneity problem ignored in some studies. This increased risk provides a plausible rationale for why CDS and related equity bid-ask spreads - which increased during the ban period – failed to fall significantly in the post-ban period. Panel regression results indicate that probability of default was an important economic determinant of stock bid-ask spreads during the ban period. Finally, our results suggest that the ban offered direct price support for the smaller non-CDS stocks during the ban period and indirect support for CDS stocks from their pre-ban to their post-ban levels.     

A Market-based Risk Classification of Financial Institutions

In this article we derive, estimate, and analyze a multifactor model of the monthly holding period returns on the stocks of exchange-traded financial institutions. In addition to bond and equity returns, the factors include default, liquidity, and term structure risk premiums plus variables that measure changes in deposit demand. To ensure that our sample has a large number of firms, we use data from January 1981 through December 1988. The equity return explains a large share of time-series variation in financial institutions' returns. The additional factors implied by theory have little incremental explanatory power. The two-factor model regression coefficients have considerable cross-sectional variation. This permits us to group intermediaries into portfolios with similar risk exposures. These portfolios bear no relation to the SIC codes that group intermediaries by their charters and lines of business.     

The Variation of Economic Risk Premiums in Real Estate Returns

We examine the predictable components of returns on stocks, bonds, and real estate investment trusts (REITs). We employ a multiple-beta asset pricing model and find that there are varying degrees of predictability among stocks, bonds, and REITs. Furthermore, we find that most of the predictability of returns is associated with the economic variables employed in the asset pricing model. The stock market risk premium is highly important in capturing the predictable variation in stock portfolios, and the bond market risk premiums (term and risk structure of interest rates) are important in capturing the predictable variation in bond portfolios. For REITs, however, both the stock and bond market risk premiums capture the predictable variation in returns. REITs have comparable return predictability to stock portfolios. We conclude that there is an important economic risk premium for REITs that are not captured by traditional multiple-beta asset pricing models.     

The predictability of returns on equity REITs and their co-movement with other assets

Recent evidence suggests that the variation in the expected excess returns is predictable and arises from changes in business conditions. Using a multifactor latent variable model with time-varying risk premiums, we decompose excess returns into expected and unexpected excess returns to examine what determines movements in expected excess returns for equity REITs are more predictable than all other assets examined, due in part to cap rates which contain useful information about the general risk condition in the economy. We also find that the conditional risk premiums (expected excess returns) on EREITs move very closely with those of small cap stocks and much less with those of bonds.     

Do hedge funds' exposures to risk factors predict their future returns?

This paper investigates hedge funds' exposures to various financial and macroeconomic risk factors through alternative measures of factor betas and examines their performance in predicting the cross-sectional variation in hedge fund returns. Both parametric and non-parametric tests indicate a significantly positive (negative) link between default premium beta (inflation beta) and future hedge fund returns. The results are robust across different subsample periods and states of the economy, and after controlling for market, size, book-to-market, and momentum factors as well as the trend-following factors in stocks, short-term interest rates, currencies, bonds, and commodities. The paper also provides macro-level and micro-level explanations of our findings.     

THE SEASONALITY IN CONVERTIBLE BOND MARKETS: A STOCK EFFECT OR BOND EFFECT?

There is a strong January effect in convertible bond returns that has been partially attributed to seasonality in the underlying stock. January returns for convertible bonds are positively influenced by the degree to which the bond reflects the underlying equity, which suggests that the anomaly in one asset market may carry over to its derivative asset market. Significant evidence presented here indicates that the January effect also is attributable to unique tax-loss selling in the convertible bond market. A peripheral contribution of this study is that, similar to findings in the stock market, the risk-return trade-off appears to hold only in January for convertible bonds.     

January Seasonality in Preferred Stocks

This study documents the existence of January season-ality in preferred stocks. January seasonality is found in all grades of preferred stock while stronger summer returns are also observed in low-grade preferred, which resembles findings reported in common equity. Although January seasonality is also found in high-grade preferred stocks, a size effect-which is used to explain the January seasonality in low-grade bonds-may not be able to account for the same seasonality observed in high-grade preferred.     

Liquidity risk and expected corporate bond returns

This paper studies the pricing of liquidity risk in the cross section of corporate bonds for the period from January 1994 to March 2009. The average return on bonds with high sensitivities to aggregate liquidity exceeds that for bonds with low sensitivities by about 4% annually. The positive relation between expected corporate bond returns and liquidity beta is robust to the effects of default and term betas, liquidity level, and other bond characteristics, as well as to different model specifications, test methodologies, and a variety of liquidity measures. The results suggest that liquidity risk is an important determinant of expected corporate bond returns.     

Asset market linkages: Evidence from financial, commodity and real estate assets

We use a general Markov switching model to examine the relationships between returns over three different asset classes: financial assets (US stocks and Treasury bonds), commodities (oil and gold) and real estate assets (US Case-Shiller index). We confirm the existence of two distinct regimes: a “tranquil” regime with periods of economic expansion and a “crisis” regime with periods of economic decline. The tranquil regime is characterized by lower volatility and significantly positive stock returns. During these periods, there is also evidence of a flight from quality - from gold to stocks. By contrast, the crisis regime is characterized by higher volatility and sharply negative stock returns, along with evidence of contagion between stocks, oil and real estate. Furthermore, during these periods, there is strong evidence of a flight to quality - from stocks to Treasury bonds.     

What determines the stock market's reaction to monetary policy statements?

We find that information communicated through monetary policy statements has important business cycle dependent implications for stock prices. For example, during periods of economic expansion, stocks tend to respond negatively to announcements of higher rates ahead. In recessions, however, we find a strong positive reaction of stocks to seemingly similar signals of future monetary tightening. We provide evidence that the state dependence in the stock market's response is explained by information about the expected equity premium and future corporate cash flows contained in monetary policy statements. We also show state dependence in the average stock returns on days of scheduled FOMC meetings and in the impact of monetary policy statements on stock and bond return volatility.     

Returns and Volatility of Low-Grade Bonds 1977–1989

This paper examines the risks and returns of long-term low-grade bonds for the period 1977–1989. We find: (1) low-grade bonds realized higher returns than higher-grade bonds and lower returns than common stocks, and low-grade bonds exhibited less volatility than higher-grade bonds due to their call features and high coupons; (2) there is no relation between the age of low-grade bonds and their realized returns; cyclical factors explain much of the observed relation between default rates and bond age; and (3) low-grade bonds behave like both bonds and stocks. Despite this complexity there is no evidence that low-grade bonds are systematically over- or under-priced.     

Original-Issue Systematic and Default Risk Pricing Efficiency of Speculative-Grade Bonds

We investigate whether primary market, original‐issue risk premiums on speculative‐grade debt are justified solely by expected defaults or whether these risk premiums also include other orthogonal risk components. Studies of secondary‐market holding period risk and return have hypothesized that risk premiums on speculative‐grade debt may be explained by bond‐ and equity‐related systematic risk and possibly other types of risk. Using an actuarial approach that considers contemporaneous correlation between default frequency and severity and first‐order serial correlation, we cannot reject the hypothesis that the entire original‐issue risk premium can be explained by expected default losses. This suggests that speculative‐grade bond primary markets efficiently price default risk and that other types of risk are priced as coincident as opposed to orthogonal risks.     

The Effect of Junk Bond Defaults on Common Stock Returns

This paper examines the effect of junk bond defaults on common stock returns. The evidence indicates that stockholders uncover the signs of financial distress long before the default date. Stock prices fall sharply at the time of the default announcement. Although stocks of fallen angel sample recover slowly and steadily after the default announcement, stocks of the original-issue junk bond sample continue to decline. On average, bankrupt firms suffer larger negative stock returns than defaulted firms not only at the time of announcement, but also in both pre- and post-event periods.     

The lead-lag relation between the stock and the bond markets

I examine the relative informational efficiency of bonds and the underlying stocks through the lead-lag relation between their daily returns. I find that stock returns lead the returns of high yield bonds but not those of investment grade bonds, which indicates that the stock market is relatively more informational efficient than the bond market. The findings imply trading opportunities for the bonds that are highly sensitive to the release of new information. I also find that stocks detect impending defaults earlier than bonds, which implies that bond holders may have enough time to protect their capital.     

Is There a January Effect in Corporate Bond and Paper Returns?

This paper examines the question of seasonality in corporate bond and commercial paper returns by testing specifically for a January effect. Complete data covering a 131-year period for both series, as well as term premiums, are analyzed using a procedure that provides consistent estimates of the variance-covariance matrix. The results suggest that a January effect does exist for both assets for the entire period; however, closer examination reveals a strong January effect for the pre-1915 period but a dampening thereafter. We conclude that precise results depend primarily upon the time period chosen and the debt instrument examined. Tests involving the inflation rate strengthen the case for a January seasonal.     

Is there Value-Added Information in Liquidity and Risk Premiums?

Size has become a significant factor in explaining returns. According to the size effect, smaller capitalization stocks on average outperform larger capitalization stocks over long periods of time. This paper first documents the traditional size effect on the French market for the 1986–1998 period. It introduces a new proxy for size, free float, which is argued to be the appropriate measure of size and liquidity for most non‐US markets. Evidence is presented of a negative link between historical returns and free float. The link is significant even outside of the month of January, a notable divergence from results obtained on the NYSE. The rest of the paper is an attempt to take advantage of this 'ex‐post' phenomenon on an 'ex‐ante' basis, with an empirical study of the link between expected return, risk, and liquidity in a sample consisting of the main 150 stocks quoted on the Paris Bourse between January 1986 and January 1998. Liquidity premiums are estimated for portfolios from both a univariate and a multivariate perspective. The paper shows how risk and liquidity premiums can be used separately or in tandem for market timing and asset allocation. In all cases, the use of both premiums together leads to superior performance. Results confirm our measurements of liquidity and liquidity premiums and supply evidence that liquidity premiums together with risk premiums are useful in active asset management.     

A Conditional Assessment of the Relationships between the Major World Bond Markets

This paper uses a bivariate GARCH framework to examine the lead‐lag relations and the conditional correlations between 10‐year US government bond returns and their counterparts from the UK, Germany, and Japan. We find that while mean and volatility spillovers exist between the major international bond markets, they are much weaker than those between equity markets. The results also indicate that the correlations between the US and other major bond market returns are time varying and are driven by changing macroeconomic and market conditions. However, in contrast to the finding that the benefits of international diversification in equity markets evaporate during high‐stress periods, we find that the benefits of diversification across major government bond markets do not decrease during periods of extremely high bond market volatility or following extremely negative US and foreign bond returns.