Maxing out: Stocks as lotteries and the cross-section of expected returns

Motivated by existing evidence of a preference among investors for assets with lottery-like payoffs and that many investors are poorly diversified, we investigate the significance of extreme positive returns in the cross-sectional pricing of stocks. Portfolio-level analyses and firm-level cross-sectional regressions indicate a negative and significant relation between the maximum daily return over the past one month (MAX) and expected stock returns. Average raw and risk-adjusted return differences between stocks in the lowest and highest MAX deciles exceed 1% per month. These results are robust to controls for size, book-to-market, momentum, short-term reversals, liquidity, and skewness. Of particular interest, including MAX reverses the puzzling negative relation between returns and idiosyncratic volatility recently shown in 2 and 3.     

The return impact of realized and expected idiosyncratic volatility

We show that the negative relation between realized idiosyncratic volatility, measured over the prior month, and returns is robust in non-January months. Controlling for realized idiosyncratic volatility, we show that the relation between returns and expected idiosyncratic volatility is positive and robust. Realized and expected idiosyncratic volatility are separate and important effects describing the cross-section of returns. We find the negative return on a zero-investment portfolio that is long high realized idiosyncratic volatility stocks and short low realized idiosyncratic volatility stocks is dependent on aggregate investor sentiment. In cross-sectional tests, we find the negative relation is weaker for stocks with a large analyst following and stronger for stocks with high dispersion of analyst forecasts. The positive relation between expected idiosyncratic volatility and returns is not due to mispricing.     

Idiosyncratic Cash Flows and Systematic Risk

We show that unpriced cash flow shocks contain information about future priced risk. A positive idiosyncratic shock decreases the sensitivity of firm value to priced risk factors and simultaneously increases firm size and idiosyncratic risk. A simple model can therefore explain book‐to‐market and size anomalies, as well as the negative relation between idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns. Empirically, we find that anomalies are more pronounced for firms with high idiosyncratic cash flow volatility. More generally, our results imply that any economic variable correlated with the history of idiosyncratic shocks can help to explain expected stock returns.     

Cross section of option returns and idiosyncratic stock volatility

This paper presents a robust new finding that delta-hedged equity option return decreases monotonically with an increase in the idiosyncratic volatility of the underlying stock. This result cannot be explained by standard risk factors. It is distinct from existing anomalies in the stock market or volatility-related option mispricing. It is consistent with market imperfections and constrained financial intermediaries. Dealers charge a higher premium for options on high idiosyncratic volatility stocks due to their higher arbitrage costs. Controlling for limits to arbitrage proxies reduces the strength of the negative relation between delta-hedged option return and idiosyncratic volatility by about 40%.     

Trend in aggregate idiosyncratic volatility

We suggest that price interaction among stocks is an important determinant of idiosyncratic volatility. We demonstrate that as more (less) stocks are listed in the markets, price interaction among stocks increases (decreases), and hence stocks, on average, become more (less) volatile. Our results show that price interaction has a significant positive effect of idiosyncratic volatility. The results of various robustness checks indicate that the effect of price interaction is still significant to the presence of liquidity, newly listed firms, cash flow variables, business cycle variables, and market volatility. Once the price interaction effect is taken into account, no trend remains in idiosyncratic volatility. We conclude that there is no trend, but a reflection of the positive effect of price interaction on idiosyncratic volatility.     

Earnings volatility,ambiguity, and crisis-period stock returns

Financial crises are marked by substantial increases in ambiguity where prices appear to decouple from fundamentals. Consistent with ambiguity-based asset pricing theories, we find that ambiguity concerns are more severe for firms with higher earnings volatility, causing investors to demand a higher ambiguity premium for such firms. While there is no relation between earnings volatility and stock returns under normal conditions, there is a significant negative relation between crisis-period stock returns and prior earnings volatility. The effect is stronger in firms with low institutional ownership and low analyst following, consistent with ambiguity concerns being greatest amongst firms with unsophisticated investors.     

Corporate Bond Returns and Volatility

Recent literature emphasizes the relation of stock volatility to corporate bond yields. We demonstrate that during 1996–2005 corporate bond excess return volatility is directly related to contemporaneous corporate bond excess returns. In fact, the decompositions of aggregate bond volatility have a higher contemporaneous correlation with bond yields in comparison to idiosyncratic stock risk. Additionally, bond volatility and idiosyncratic risk are significant predictors of corporate three‐month and six‐month ahead bond excess returns. We also find that corporate bond volatility contains both slow moving and time‐varying components.     

Idiosyncratic volatility and cross‐sectional stock returns in Southeast Asian stock markets

We examine the role of idiosyncratic risk in five ASEAN markets of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Our research was motivated by the findings of Ang et al. (2006, 2009) of a ‘puzzling’ negative relation between idiosyncratic volatility and 1‐month ahead stock returns in developed markets and the suggestion of the ubiquity of these results in other markets. In contrast, we find no evidence of an idiosyncratic volatility puzzle in these Asian stock markets; instead, we document a positive relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and returns in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia and no relationship in the Philippines. The idiosyncratic volatility trading strategy could result in significant trading profits in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and to some extent in Indonesia. Our study underscores the fact that generalizing empirical results obtained in developed stock markets to new and emerging markets could potentially be misleading.     

Idiosyncratic Risk in Emerging Markets

In this study, I examine the properties and portfolio management implications of value‐weighted idiosyncratic volatility in 24 emerging markets. This paper provides evidence against the view that the rise of idiosyncratic risk is a global phenomenon. Furthermore, specific and market risks jointly predict market returns as there is a negative (positive) relation between idiosyncratic (market) risk and subsequent stock returns. Idiosyncratic volatility is the most important component of tracking error volatility, and it does not exhibit either an upward or a downward trend. Thus, investors do not have to increase, on average, the number of stocks they hold to keep the active risk constant.     

Determinants of idiosyncratic volatility: Evidence from the Indian stock market

This paper investigates whether firm-specific characteristics explain idiosyncratic volatility in the stocks of non-financial firms traded in the Indian stock market. It employs the linear time series five-factor model, augmented with a liquidity factor and the conditional EGARCH model, to extract yearly idiosyncratic volatility. We estimate a panel data regression to quantify the relationship between firm-specific characteristics and the volatility of individual securities. The results show that idiosyncratic volatility is significant in emerging markets such as India, and that cross-sectional return variations of firms are associated with firm-specific characteristics such as firm size, book-to-market ratio, momentum, liquidity, cash flow-to-price ratio, and returns on assets. We find that the idiosyncratic risk documented in this study is associated with smaller size of company, higher liquidity, low momentum, high book-to-market ratio, and low cash flow-to-price ratio. The findings suggest need to develop alternative tools to make investment decisions in emerging markets.     

Is idiosyncratic volatility priced in cryptocurrency markets?

This paper investigates how idiosyncratic volatility is priced in the cross-section of cryptocurrency returns. By conducting both portfolio-level analysis and Fama-MacBeth regression analysis, we demonstrate that idiosyncratic volatility is positively related to the expected returns of cryptocurrencies. This finding is not subsumed by effects of size, momentum, liquidity, volume, and price and is robust to different weighting schemes, holding periods, and sample sizes. Besides, we find no evidence of temporal relation between idiosyncratic volatility and returns in cryptocurrency markets.     

Effects of Passive Intensity on Aggregate Price Dynamics

We find that passive intensity (PI), measured by the passive‐linked share of total stock market trading volume, is strongly related to the overall pattern of stock price movements. A one‐standard‐deviation increase in PI is associated with an 8% higher price synchronicity. We further investigate the channels through which this relation is established by separately analyzing its impact on aggregate systematic and idiosyncratic volatility of stock returns. PI has a positive effect on systematic volatility and a negative impact on firm‐specific volatility. Consistent with the effect of passive trading on price dynamics, we find evidence that PI is negatively associated with mutual funds alpha dissimilarity. After controlling for market and idiosyncratic volatility, a one‐standard‐deviation increase in PI corresponds to a 0.20% decrease in fund dissimilarity. Our findings are robust after controlling for various macro and corporate factors known to affect systematic or firm‐specific volatility.     

Terrorism,country attributes,and the volatility of stock returns

This study investigates the interplay between terrorism and finance, focusing on the stock return volatility of American firms targeted by terrorist attacks. We find terrorism risk is an important factor in explaining the volatility of stock returns, which should be taken into account when modelling volatility. Using a volatility event-study approach and a new bootstrapping technique, we find volatility increases on the day of the attack and remain significant for at least fifteen days following the day of the attack. Cross-sectional analysis of the abnormal volatility indicates that the impact of terrorist attacks differs according to the country characteristics in which the incident occurred. We find that firms operating in wealthier, or more democratic countries, face greater volatility in stock returns relative to firms operating in developing countries. Firm exposure varies with the nature of country location, with country wealth and level of democracy playing an important role in explaining the likelihood of a terrorist attack. Our results show that despite significant terrorist events this past decade, stock markets in developed countries have not taken terrorist risk into sufficient consideration.     

Idiosyncratic risk and debt maturity dispersion

We investigate the relation between idiosyncratic asset risk and debt maturity dispersion. Idiosyncratic asset volatility represents significant risk, which can impede the ability to obtain or maintain external debt financing necessary for business operations, and is difficult to control given its unpredictable nature. We find that this risk is managed through the maturity structure of debt: firms with higher idiosyncratic asset volatility also have more dispersed maturity structures. Consistent with active management of rollover risk, this relation is weaker for younger firms and stronger for firms without significant credit lines.     

Do extreme returns matter in emerging markets? Evidence from the Chinese stock market

Recent evidence in the U.S. and Europe indicates that stocks with high maximum daily returns in the previous month, perform poorly in the current month. We investigate the presence of a similar effect in the emerging Chinese stock markets with portfolio-level analysis and firm-level Fama–MacBeth cross-sectional regressions. We find evidence of a MAX effect similar to the U.S. and European markets. However, contrary to U.S. and European evidence, the MAX effect in China does not weaken much less reverse the anomalous idiosyncratic volatility (IV) effect. Both the MAX and IV effects appear to independently coexist in the Chinese stock markets. Interpreted together with the strong evidence of risk-seeking behaviour among Chinese investors, our results partially support the suggestion that the negative MAX effect is driven by investor preference for stocks with lottery-like features.     

Price Momentum and Idiosyncratic Volatility

We find that returns to momentum investing are higher among high idiosyncratic volatility ( IVol) stocks, especially high IVol losers. Higher IVol stocks also experience quicker and larger reversals. The findings are consistent with momentum profits being attributable to underreaction to firm‐specific information and with IVol limiting arbitrage of the momentum effect. We also find a positive time‐series relation between momentum returns and aggregate IVol. Given the long‐term rise in IVol, this result helps explain the persistence of momentum profits since Jegadeesh and Titman's (1993) study.     

Cross-country differences in the effect of political connections on stock price informativeness

Using an international sample of firms from 28 countries, we document that there exists a negative relationship between political connections and the informativeness of stock price, as measured by idiosyncratic volatility (IV). This finding is robust to alternative regression specifications, sub-samples analyses, and concerns related to endogeneity. A more detailed analysis shows that out of the different types of possible connections, the connectedness of the owners is the primary driver of this result. Further, the negative association is only significant for firms in countries characterized by low institutional quality (corrupted countries, countries with low access to external equity markets, and countries with low media penetration). There is no evidence of any relation between political connections and stock price informativeness for firms in countries characterized by high institutional quality. Overall, our results show that although political connections exacerbate rent-seeking that weaken the firms’ information environment on average, the negative information consequences are compensated by the countries’ institutional quality.     

Idiosyncratic Volatility and Firm‐Specific News: Beyond Limited Arbitrage

We examine the relation between idiosyncratic volatility and returns around news announcements. Mispricing is most likely to occur during news announcements. If idiosyncratic volatility generates a limit to arbitrage, then the negative relation between returns and news volatility should be stronger than the relation to nonnews volatility. Instead, we find nonnews volatility has a robust negative relation to returns and lacks key features expected if volatility were a reflection of limits to arbitrage. Pricing of nonnews volatility is related to lottery‐like features of a stock's return. Our results suggest that volatility has a price effect beyond a limit to arbitrage.     

Does more information in stock price lead to greater or smaller idiosyncratic return volatility?

We investigate the relation between price informativeness and idiosyncratic return volatility in a multi-asset, multi-period noisy rational expectations equilibrium. We show that the relation between price informativeness and idiosyncratic return volatility is either U-shaped or negative. Using several price informativeness measures, we empirically document a U-shaped relation between price informativeness and idiosyncratic return volatility. Our study therefore reconciles the opposing views in the following two strands of literature: (1) the growing body of research showing that firms with more informative stock prices have greater idiosyncratic return volatility, and (2) the studies arguing that more information in price reduces idiosyncratic return volatility.