A Consumption-Based Explanation of Expected Stock Returns

When utility is nonseparable in nondurable and durable consumption and the elasticity of substitution between the two consumption goods is sufficiently high, marginal utility rises when durable consumption falls. The model explains both the cross‐sectional variation in expected stock returns and the time variation in the equity premium. Small stocks and value stocks deliver relatively low returns during recessions, when durable consumption falls, which explains their high average returns relative to big stocks and growth stocks. Stock returns are unexpectedly low at business cycle troughs, when durable consumption falls sharply, which explains the countercyclical variation in the equity premium.     

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.     

The relation between stock returns and short-term interest rates

This study examines the relation between the expected returns on common stocks and short-term interest rates. Using a two-factor model of stock returns, we show that the expected returns on common stocks are systematically related to the market risk and the interest-rate risk, which are estimated as the sensitivity of common-stock excess returns to the excess return on the equally weighted market index and to the federal fund premium, respectively. We find that the interest-rate risk for small firms is a significant source of investors' portfolio risk, but is not properly reflected in the single-factor market risk. We also find that the interest-rate risk for large firms is “negative” in the sense that the market risk estimated from the single-factor model overstates the true risk of large firms. An application of the Fama-MacBeth methodology indicates that the interest-rate risk premium as well as the market's risk premium are significant, implying that both the market risk and the interest-rate risk are priced. We show that the interest-rate risk premium explains a significant portion of the difference in expected returns between the top quintile and the bottom quintile of the NYSE and AMEX firms. We also show that the turn-of-the-year seasonal is observed for the interest-rate risk premium; however, the risk premium for the rest of the year is still significant, although small in mangitude.     

A New Measure of Equity and Cash Flow Duration: The Duration‐Based Explanation of the Value Premium Revisited

This article reexamines the duration‐based explanation of the value premium using novel estimates of the firms' equity and cash flow durations based on analyst forecasts. We show that the value premium can be explained by cross‐sectional differences in the shares' equity durations, but not by their cash flow durations. Different from the duration‐based explanation of the value premium that explains the value premium with cross‐sectional differences in the firm's cash flow timing, we find that short‐horizon stocks have lower (expected) returns than long‐horizon stocks. This result is consistent with an upward‐sloping equity yield curve.     

New Paradigms in Stock Market Indexing

Considerable recent interest has been shown in a new set of stock‐market indices that are weighted by fundamental factors such as sales, earnings, dividends or book values, rather than by capitalization. In this paper, we analyze the performance of Fundamental Indexing? (“FI”). First, we show that the source of FI's recent excellent performance is not from its ability to systematically arbitrage mispricing in a noisy market but from increasing the portfolio's exposure to stocks with low price‐to‐book values and with small capitalizations. We find that FI does not produce a positive alpha when its excess returns are explained by the Fama‐French three‐factor model of CAPM beta, the value premium and the size premium. Second, we show that it is possible to construct a portfolio of exchange‐traded funds with similar factor loadings that can replicate, and sometimes, even outperform FI. However, we caution investors not to expect consistent outperformance from portfolios tilted towards value and small‐cap stocks. Historical data shows evidence of mean reversion in the performance of such strategies.     

An Analysis of Contrarian Investment Strategies in the UK

The performance of contrarian, or value strategies – those that invest in stocks that have low market value relative to a measure of their fundamentals – continues to attract attention from researchers and practitioners alike. While there is much extant evidence on the profitability of value strategies, however, most of this evidence pertains to the US. In this paper, we provide a detailed characterisation of value strategies using data on UK stocks for the period 1975 to 1998. We first undertake simple one-way and two-way classifications of stocks in which value is defined using both past performance and expected future performance. Using sales growth as a proxy for past performance and book-to-market, earnings yield and cash flow yield as measures of expected future performance, we find that that stocks that have both poor past performance and low expected future performance have significantly higher returns than those that have either good past performance or good expected future performance. Allowing for size effects in returns reduces the value premium but it nevertheless remains significant. We go on to explore whether the profitability of value strategies in the UK can be explained using the three factor model of Fama and French (1996). Broadly consistent with the results for the US, we find that using the one-way classification the excess returns to almost all value strategies can be explained by their loading on the market, book-to-market and size factors. However, in contrast with the US, using the two-way classification there are excess returns to value strategies based on book-to-market and sales growth, even after controlling for their loading on the market, book-to-market and size factors.     

The Piotroski F‐score: evidence from Australia

A market‐neutral strategy that is long [short] stocks with a high [low] Piotroski F‐score generates an index‐weighted 0.8 percent pm on S&P/ASX 200 stocks and 1.4 percent pm on smaller stocks. Equal‐weighted returns are higher and in all cases returns are statistically significant. However, the Carhart model alphas are not statistically significant except in the case of equal‐weighted small cap portfolios. For such portfolios, however, most of the alpha comes from the short side and most institutional investors would find them uninvestable due to capacity constraints. A range of tests indicate that analyst neglect does not explain the F‐score premium.     

Time-varying expected momentum profits

This paper examines the time variations of expected momentum profits using a two-state Markov switching model with time-varying transition probabilities to evaluate the empirical relevance of recent rational theories of momentum profits. We find that in the expansion state the expected returns of winner stocks are more affected by aggregate economic conditions than those of loser stocks, while in the recession state the expected returns of loser stocks are more affected than those of winner stocks. Consequently, expected momentum profits display strong procyclical variations. We argue that the observed momentum profits are the realization of such expected returns and can be interpreted as the procyclicality premium. We provide a plausible explanation for time-varying momentum profits through the differential effect of leverage and growth options across business cycles.     

Predicting the equity market with option-implied variables

We comprehensively analyze the predictive power of several option-implied variables for monthly S&P 500 excess returns and realized variance. The correlation risk premium (CRP) and the variance risk premium (VRP) emerge as strong predictors of both excess returns and realized variance. This is true both in- and out-of-sample. Our results also reveal that statistical evidence of predictability does not necessarily lead to economic gains. However, a timing strategy based on the CRP leads to utility gains of more than 5.03% per annum. Forecast combinations provide stable forecasts for both excess returns and realized variance, and add economic value.     

Idiosyncratic Volatility Covariance and Expected Stock Returns

Given that the idiosyncratic volatility (IDVOL) of individual stocks co‐varies, we develop a model to determine how aggregate idiosyncratic volatility (AIV) may affect the volatility of a portfolio with a finite number of stocks. In portfolio and cross‐sectional tests, we find that stocks whose returns are more correlated with AIV innovations have lower returns than those that are less correlated with AIV innovations. These results are robust to controlling for the stock's own IDVOL and market volatility. We conclude that risk‐averse investors pay a premium for stocks that pay well when AIV is high, consistent with our model.     

Can Time‐Varying Risk of Rare Disasters Explain Aggregate Stock Market Volatility?

Why is the equity premium so high, and why are stocks so volatile? Why are stock returns in excess of government bill rates predictable? This paper proposes an answer to these questions based on a time‐varying probability of a consumption disaster. In the model, aggregate consumption follows a normal distribution with low volatility most of the time, but with some probability of a consumption realization far out in the left tail. The possibility of this poor outcome substantially increases the equity premium, while time‐variation in the probability of this outcome drives high stock market volatility and excess return predictability.     

Expected returns on value,growth, and HML

In this paper, I analyze the predictability of returns on value and growth portfolios and examine time variation of the expected value premium. As a primary tool, I use the filtering technique, which accounts for time variation in expected cash flows and explicitly exploits the constraints imposed by the present value relation. I demonstrate that returns on value and growth portfolios are predictable, and the predictability is stronger for growth stocks. Applying the filtering technique to the HML portfolio, I build a novel powerful forecaster for the value premium. The new forecaster appears to be only weakly related to business cycle variables.     

Fear and the Fama‐French Factors

Investors’ expectations of market volatility, captured by the VIX (the Chicago Board Options Exchange's volatility index, also known as the “investor fear gauge”), affects the expected returns of US equities. Changes in the VIX drive variations in the expected returns of the factors included in the Fama and French three‐factor model augmented with a momentum factor. The market risk premium (R_m– R_f) and the value premium (HML) are especially sensitive to changes in the VIX. An increase in expected volatility is associated with flights to quality and increases in estimated required returns.     

Do Invesrtors Capture the Value Premium?

Do investors realize higher returns by investing in value stocks instead of gorwth stocks? Examination of a sample of equity indexes, mutual funds, and large‐cap stocks reveals no evidence that value firms have earned higher returns than growth firms. The value premium reported in the literarture is historically strongest for small‐capitalization firms, yea average annual rerturns for small‐cap equity funds are 14.10% for value funds compared to 14.52% for growth funds. Despite dramatic increases in mutual fund expense ratios from 1965 to 2001, fee differences across style funds cannot explain the absence of a value premium.     

Cross-sectional dispersion and expected returns

This study investigates whether the cross-sectional dispersion of stock returns, which reflects the aggregate level of idiosyncratic risk in the market, represents a priced state variable. We find that stocks with high sensitivities to dispersion offer low expected returns. Furthermore, a zero-cost spread portfolio that is long (short) in stocks with low (high) dispersion betas produces a statistically and economically significant return. Dispersion is associated with a significantly negative risk premium in the cross section (–1.32% per annum) which is distinct from premia commanded by alternative systematic factors. These results are robust to stock characteristics and market conditions.     

On the Stability of the Cross‐Section of Expected Stock Returns in the Cross‐Section: Understanding the Curious Role of Share Turnover

In this paper, we shed further light on cross‐sectional predictors of stock return performance. Specifically, we explore whether the cross‐section of expected stock returns is robust within stock groups sorted by past monthly return. We find that the book/market and momentum effects are remarkably robust to sorting on past returns. However, share turnover is negatively related to future returns for stocks with abnormally low stock price performance in the recent past, but postively related to returns for well‐performing stocks. This casts doubt on the use of turnover as a liquidity proxy, but is consistent with turnover being a proxy for momentum trading which pushes prices in the direction of past price movements. Our results are robust to both NYSE/AMEX and Nasdaq stocks, and also robust to stratifying the sample by time period.     

Which institutional investor types are the most informed?

We examine the informativeness of quarterly disclosed portfolio holdings across four institutional investor types: hedge funds, mutual funds, pension funds and private banking firms. Overweight positions outperform underweight positions only for hedge funds. By decomposing holdings and stock returns, we find that hedge funds are superior to other institutional investors both at picking industries and stocks and that they are better at forecasting long‐term as well as short‐term returns. Furthermore, our results show that hedge funds, mutual funds and pension funds are able to successfully time the market. The outperformance of hedge funds is not explained by a liquidity premium.     

Pricing assets with stochastic cash-flow growth

We model the time series behavior of dividend growth rates, as well as the profitability rate, with a variety of autoregressive moving-average processes, and use the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) to derive the appropriate discount rate. One of the most important implications of this research is that the rate of return beta changes with the time to maturity of the expected cash flow, and the degree of mean reversion displayed by the growth rate. We explore the consequences of this observation for three different strands of the literature. The first is for the value premium anomaly, the second for stock valuation and learning about long-run profitability, and the third is for the St. Petersburg paradox. One of the most surprising results is that the CAPM implies a higher rate of return beta for value stocks than growth stocks. Therefore, value stocks must have higher expected returns, and this is what is required theoretically in order to explain the well-known value premium anomaly.     

Sentiment-scaled CAPM and market mispricing

This study explores the conditional version of the capital asset pricing model on sentiment to provide a behavioural intuition behind the value premium and market mispricing. We find betas (β) and the market risk premium to vary over time across different sentiment indices and portfolios. More importantly, the state β derived from this sentiment-scaled model provides a behavioural explanation of the value premium and a set of anomalies driven by mispricing. Different from the static β–return relation that gives a flat security market line, we document upward security market lines when plotting portfolio returns against their state βs and portfolios with higher state βs earn higher returns.     

Accrual quality,skill, and the cross-section of mutual fund returns

We use returns of actively managed mutual funds to document the link between accrual quality (AQ) and systematic (priced) risk. Despite compelling theoretical arguments, prior research finds no evidence that poor AQ commands a risk premium in the cross-section of realized stock returns. We argue that the previously obtained premium estimates are biased downward because, for a large portion of poor AQ stocks, higher expected returns are offset by the news of deteriorating fundamentals. We suggest that skilled mutual fund managers should be able to either avoid investing in stocks with deteriorating fundamentals or assign them lower portfolio weights. As a consequence, returns on their portfolios should better reflect the expected AQ risk premium. Our empirical evidence is consistent with these predictions.