Real Anomalies

We examine the importance of cross‐sectional asset pricing anomalies (alphas) for the real economy. To this end, we develop a novel quantitative model of the cross‐section of firms that features lumpy investment and informational inefficiencies, while yielding distributions in closed form. Our findings indicate that anomalies can cause material real inefficiencies, which raises the possibility that agents who help eliminate them add significant value to the economy. The model shows that the magnitude of alphas alone is a poor indicator of real outcomes, and highlights the importance of the alpha persistence, the amount of mispriced capital, and the Tobin's q of firms affected.     

Dissecting Anomalies

The anomalous returns associated with net stock issues, accruals, and momentum are pervasive; they show up in all size groups (micro, small, and big) in cross-section regressions, and they are also strong in sorts, at least in the extremes. The asset growth and profitability anomalies are less robust. There is an asset growth anomaly in average returns on microcaps and small stocks, but it is absent for big stocks. Among profitable firms, higher profitability tends to be associated with abnormally high returns, but there is little evidence that unprofitable firms have unusually low returns.     

市场均衡就业区间与劳动市场的“连续非出清”特性

市场经济条件下厂商将其供给量调整到合理水平所需的费用可称为微观调节成本。由于存在微观调节成本，传统分析中宏观层面上的就业均衡中心心两侧便分别存在着“低位临界点”与“高位临界点”，这两点界定一个“市场均衡就业区间”，社会就业一旦进入该区间，市场机制便不可能再对其作出调节。“市场均衡就业区间”的存在，使现代市场经济条件下的劳动市场成为一种特殊的“连续非出清市场”，其直观表现即经济运行中经常性地存在两个层面的就业失衡；根源于有效需求不足的 “需求短缺型失业”，与存在于市场均衡就业区间内部的“区间内就业失衡”。前者可通过实行各种扩张性经济政策予以消除，后者则一般需采取多种特殊政策措施方可有效应对，其中，积极扶持和促进个体经济发展对有效化解“区间内就业不足”，从而减轻就业压力具有独特作用，因而尤应引起高度重视。     

评西方对人民币均衡汇率的评估

宏观经济平衡方法和扩展的购买力平价方法是西方常用的衡量人民币均衡汇率的方法。宏观经济平衡方法主要用来测算为达到对外收支均衡,实际汇率需要作出的变动,但该方法计算基本经常账户时需要作出取舍,且难以预期经济结构变化对一国对外收支状况的影响,具有扩大实际汇率的低估或高估等弊端。扩展的购买力平价方法直接通过单一等式测算均衡实际汇率,但应用该方法会夸大人民币汇率低估的程度。由于这些方法存在弊端,人民币均衡汇率难以确定,因此,西方指责人民币汇率严重低估,从而构成对中国出口产品的补贴或倾销的论调难以成立。     

Anomalies and financial distress

This paper explores commonalities across asset pricing anomalies. In particular, we assess implications of financial distress for the profitability of anomaly-based trading strategies. Strategies based on price momentum, earnings momentum, credit risk, dispersion, idiosyncratic volatility, and capital investments derive their profitability from taking short positions in high credit risk firms that experience deteriorating credit conditions. In contrast, the value-based strategy derives most of its profitability from taking long positions in high credit risk firms that survive financial distress and subsequently realize high returns. The accruals anomaly is an exception. It is robust among high and low credit risk firms in all credit conditions.     

Competing Theories of Financial Anomalies

We compare two competing theories of financial anomalies: "behavioral"theories built on investor irrationality, and "rational structuraluncertainty" theories built on incomplete information aboutthe structure of the economic environment. We find that althoughthe theories relax opposite assumptions of the rational expectationsideal, their mathematical and predictive similarities make themdifficult to distinguish. Even if irrationality generates financialanomalies, their disappearance still may hinge on rational learning—thatis, on the ability of rational arbitrageurs and their investorsto reject competing rational explanations for observed pricepatterns.     

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.     

Equilibrium Subprime Lending

This paper develops an equilibrium model of a subprime mortgage market. Our goal is to offer a benchmark with which the recent subprime boom and bust can be compared. The model is tractable and delivers plausible orders of magnitude for borrowing capacities, as well as default and trading intensities. We offer simple explanations for several phenomena in the subprime market, such as the prevalence of teaser rates and the clustering of defaults. In our model, both nondiversifiable and diversifiable income risks reduce debt capacities. Thus, debt capacities need not be higher when a larger fraction of income risk is diversifiable.     

Anomalies and stock returns: Australian evidence

Prior research has identified the existence of several cross‐sectional patterns in equity returns, commonly referred to as effects. This paper tests for the existence of a number of well‐known effects using data from the Australian equities market. Specifically, we investigate the size effect, book‐to‐market effect, earnings‐to‐price effect, cashflow‐to‐price effect, leverage effect and the liquidity effect. An additional aim of this paper is to investigate the capability of the Fama–French model in explaining any observed effects. We document a size, book‐to‐market, earnings‐to‐price and cashflow‐to‐price effect but fail to find evidence of a leverage or liquidity effect. Although our findings indicate that the Fama–French model can partially explain some of the observed effects, we conclude that its performance is less than satisfactory in Australia.     

Anomalies in the Oversight of Australian Auditors

This commentary identifies and comments on anomalies in the oversight of Australian auditors and audit firms. Regulatory and professional oversight and inspection of Australian auditors and audit firms arise from a number of sources, highlighting its multi‐faceted nature. This makes it impossible to identify a single body with ultimate responsibility for auditor oversight. Three recent Australian reviews commissioned by the Financial Reporting Council, together with an evaluation of the roles of the various regulatory and professional bodies, are used in this commentary as a platform from which to identify a number of significant anomalies in oversight processes. Major anomalies highlighted arise from the overlapping nature of the duties and functions of the various bodies and the variation in oversight across different categories of audit service providers. Policymakers should closely examine the issues raised in the paper if auditor oversight is to be undertaken in an effective and efficient manner.     

Anomalies: Is it the Economy?

There is still no consensus on whether small firm or value stock anomalies exist. We examine the last half of the 20th century and apply a six‐factor macroeconomic model to test for the presence of these abnormal returns. Using four proxies for value, we find that detecting this anomaly is sensitive to choice of proxy, the magnitude of the abnormal returns varies over time, and the anomaly does not persist through time. Additional tests provide evidence that abnormal returns for small, value‐oriented, and growth‐oriented firms differ significantly under restrictive versus expansive monetary policy regimes.     

Asset Pricing Models and Financial Market Anomalies

This article develops a framework that applies to single securitiesto test whether asset pricing models can explain the size, value,and momentum anomalies. Stock level beta is allowed to varywith firm-level size and book-to-market as well as with macroeconomicvariables. With constant beta, none of the models examined captureany of the market anomalies. When beta is allowed to vary, thesize and value effects are often explained, but the explanatorypower of past return remains robust. The past return effectis captured by model mispricing that varies with macroeconomicvariables.     

Size and Value Anomalies under Regime Shifts

This paper finds strong evidence of time-variations in the jointdistribution of returns on a stock market portfolio and portfoliostracking size- and value effects. Mean returns, volatilitiesand correlations between these equity portfolios are found tobe driven by underlying regimes that introduce short-run markettiming opportunities for investors. The magnitude of the premiaon the size and value portfolios and their hedging propertiesare found to vary across regimes. Regimes are shown to havea large impact both on the optimal asset allocation—especiallyunder rebalancing—and on investors' utility. Regimes alsohave a considerable impact on hedging demands, which are positivewhen the investor starts from more favorable regimes and negativewhen starting from bad states. Recursive out-of-sample forecastingexperiments show that portfolio strategies based on models thataccount for regimes dominate single-state benchmarks.     

Equilibrium Exchange Rate Hedging

We assume a world like the one that gives the capital asset pricing model, but with many goods and many countries. We assume that investors in a given country have homothetic utility functions with the same weights, and a currency that has a sure end-of-period value using a price index with those weights. Siegel's paradox (derived from Jensen's inequality) makes investors want a positive amount of exchange risk. When average risk tolerance is the same across countries, every investor will hold the same mix of market risk (through the world market portfolio of all assets) and exchange risk (in a diversified basket of foreign currencies). In fact, the ratio of exchange risk to market risk is equal to the average investor's risk tolerance. We can write the ratio of exchange risk to market risk (and the fraction of the market's exchange risk that investors hedge) as depending on an average of world market risk premia, an average of world market volatilities, and an average of exchange rate volatilities. The weights in these averages are the same as the weights of the different countries in the currency basket. Given these averages, the ratio (and the fraction hedged) will not depend directly on exchange rate means or covariances. In equilibrium, we can use the ratio of exchange risk to market risk to measure average risk tolerance: in this model, risk tolerance is observable.     

Equilibrium in risk-sharing games

The large majority of risk-sharing transactions involve few agents, each of whom can heavily influence the structure and the prices of securities. In this paper, we propose a game where agents’ strategic sets consist of all possible sharing securities and pricing kernels that are consistent with Arrow–Debreu sharing rules. First, it is shown that agents’ best response problems have unique solutions. The risk-sharing Nash equilibrium admits a finite-dimensional characterisation, and it is proved to exist for an arbitrary number of agents and to be unique in the two-agent game. In equilibrium, agents declare beliefs on future random outcomes different from their actual probability assessments, and the risk-sharing securities are endogenously bounded, implying (among other things) loss of efficiency. In addition, an analysis regarding extremely risk-tolerant agents indicates that they profit more from the Nash risk-sharing equilibrium than compared to the Arrow–Debreu one.     

Equilibrium matching and termination

In an equilibrium model of the labor market with moral hazard, jobs are dynamic contracts, job separations are terminations of optimal dynamic contracts. Transitions from unemployment to new jobs are modeled as a process of random matching and Nash bargaining. Non-employed workers make consumption and saving decisions as in a standard growth model, as well as whether or not to participate in the labor market. The stationary equilibrium is characterized. The model is then calibrated to the U.S. labor market to study quantitatively the worker flows and distributions, the compensation dynamics, and the effects of UI system.     

From T-Bills to Stocks: Seasonal Anomalies Revisited

This paper employed eleven data series which consist of stocks, bonds, bills, equity premiums, term premiums, and various default premiums to investigate whether January seasonality reported in existing literature is robust across different states of the economy as this has important trading implications. For the periods 1926–1990, small stocks, small stock premiums, low grade bonds, and default premiums (spread between high grade, low grade and government bonds) reveal January seasonality and that the seasonality is robust across different states of the economy except for low grade bond returns and default premiums. January seasonality for low grade bond returns and low grade bond default premiums are primarily driven by results found during periods of economic expansion. Overall, January seasonality is more evident during the economic expansion periods although the magnitude of default premiums is larger during periods of economic contraction. Furthermore, prior findings of strong summer equity returns are primarily driven by the results found during the periods of economic contraction. It is also found that equity returns are generally higher during periods of economic expansion.     

An Analysis of Covariance Risk and Pricing Anomalies

This article examines the link between several well-known assetpricing "anomalies" and the covariance structure of returns.I find size, book-to-market, and momentum strategies exhibita strong, weak, and negligible relation to covariance risk,respectively. A size factor helps predict future volatilityand covariation, improving the efficiency of investment strategies.Moreover, its premium rises following increases in both itsvolatility and covariation with other assets. These effectsare amplified in recessions. No such relations exist for book-to-marketor momentum. These findings may shed light on explanations forthese premia and present a challenging set of facts for futuretheory.     

The Impact of Bid-Ask Prices on Market Anomalies

A substantial body of literature on security market anomalies has evolved since the articulation of the efficient markets hypothesis. These anomalies include the size, January, and weekend effects. The evidence of such anomalies has been based upon returns computed from closing prices. Although readily available, analysis of closing prices may not reflect returns obtainable by public traders utilizing market orders to execute trades. We have demonstrated elsewhere that returns computed from closing prices are biased upward compared with returns that would have resulted from using market orders. This study reexamines the evidence on two market anomalies using returns generated in a manner more consistent with the actual returns available to actual market participants.     

An Empirical Portfolio Perspective on Option Pricing Anomalies

We empirically study the economic benefits of giving investorsaccess to index options in the standard portfolio problem, analyzingboth expected-utility and nonexpected-utility investors in orderto understand who optimally buys and sells options. Using dataon S&P 500 index options, CRRA investors find it alwaysoptimal to short out-of-the-money puts and at-the-money straddles.The option positions are economically and statistically significantand robust to corrections for transaction costs, margin requirements,and Peso problems. Loss-averse and disappointment-averse investorsalso optimally hold short option positions. Only with highlydistorted probability assessments can we obtain positive portfolioweights for puts (cumulative prospect theory and anticipatedutility) and straddles (anticipated utility).