MARKET VOLATILITY AND PERVERSE TIMING PERFORMANCE OF MUTUAL FUND MANAGERS

Prompted by the recent volatility in equity markets, I investigate performance evaluation methods and the mutual fund managers' ability to select undervalued investments and time major market movements during the high-market-volatility period of the 1980s. Specifically, I examine mutual fund managers' stock-selection and market-timing abilities by employing a five-factor risk-adjusted model based on Carhart's four-factor loading model and Bhattacharya and Pfleiderer's quadratic timing model adjusted for perverse timing behavior. Individually, some managers persistently affect fund performance through the selection of undervalued investments, however, at the expense of timing performance. In addition, funds that demonstrate an ability to time major market movements showed persistence in timing performance before and after the October market crash of 1987.     

TAXES AND THE REFUNDING OF DISCOUNT BONDS

This paper examines the effect of the Bankruptcy Tax Act of 1980 on the decision to refund corporate bonds selling at a discount. Historically, the refunding of discount debt has appeared to be profitable on a discounted cash flow basis. This study demonstrates, however, that the tax effects of the Bankruptcy Tax Act of 1980 have eliminated effectively any potential gains from refunding discounted debt.     

TAX-TIMING OPTIONS AND THE PRICING OF GOVERNMENT BONDS

Internal Revenue Code provisions affect trading strategies for long-term, fixed-payment securities when investment income is subject to taxation and can create tax-timing options of varying nontrivial values for specific bonds at specific times. In this paper, an estimate of the tax bracket of the marginal investor is used to measure the relative impact of changing tax-timing option values on government bond prices. Results support the argument that tax-timing options help to explain an apparent discrepancy between theoretical arguments regarding the tax bracket of the marginal investor and observed market relationships.     

THE CHOICE BETWEEN CALLABLE AND NONCALLABLE BONDS

We examine the choice and the offer spreads between callable and noncallable bonds. We find significant differences by industry sector and therefore segment our results by financial and nonfinancial industries. For the financial sector, the popularity of callable and noncallable bonds is significantly related to the economic environment. Financial and high‐grade nonfinancial callable bonds are also more likely to be issued via a shelf prospectus. Although firms that issue callable bonds do not consistently display the characteristics associated with severe agency problems, the issue choice for below‐investment‐grade nonfinancial and lower rated financial bonds, where we can expect agency problems to be more severe, is more consistent with agency theory than is the issue choice for higher rated bonds.     

DETERMINANTS OF THE RATINGS AND YIELDS ON CORPORATE BONDS: TESTS OF THE CONTINGENT CLAIMS MODEL

A contingent claims model for corporate bonds is tested on newly issued bonds of firms with very simple capital structures. Two default risk measures derived from the model — firm return standard deviation (σ) and leverage (D/V) — explain approximately 78 percent of the variation in the agency ratings on the bonds, based on a probit analysis. Model yield premiums explain almost 60 percent of the variation in market yield premiums. In both analyses, however, firm size is a significant additional variable, suggesting that the contingent claims model is not robust to changes in scale. The assumption of nonstochastic interest rates also appears to be an important misspecification. Institutional restrictions on investments in speculative grade bonds, however, do not affect market yield premiums on such bonds, and thus do not appear to represent a serious misspecification.     

AN ANALYTICAL MODEL OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MATURITY AND BONDS RISK DIFFERENTIALS

This paper extends previous analyses of bond risk differentials by relaxing the key assumption of a constant probability of firm survival. Under the less restrictive assumption that firm income is stationary and independent over time, it is shown that risk differential clearly varies with maturity even with a flat term structure. Because the payoff possibilities of multi-period bonds are interdependent even though income in each period is independent, risk differentials must depend on maturity, even if term structure is flat. This conclusion is more compatible with empirical findings than were conclusions of previous analyses.