Stock return volatility,operating performance and stock returns: International evidence on drivers of the ‘low volatility’ anomaly

This study highlights the link between stock return volatility, operating performance, and stock returns. Prior studies suggest that there is a ‘low volatility’ anomaly, where firms with a low stock return volatility out-perform firms with a high stock return volatility. This paper confirms that low volatility stocks earn higher returns than high volatility stocks in emerging markets and developed markets outside of North America. We also show that low volatility stocks have higher operating returns and this might explain why low volatility stocks earn higher stock returns. These results provide a partial explanation for the ‘low volatility effect’ that is independent from the existence of market anomalies or per se inefficiencies that might otherwise drive a low volatility effect. We emphasize the importance of controlling for stock return volatility when analyzing operating performance and stock performance.     

Volatility risk and the value premium: Evidence from the French stock market

This paper documents that systematic volatility risk is an important factor that drives the value premium observed in the French stock market. Using returns on at-the-money straddles written on the CAC 40 index as a proxy for systematic volatility risk, I document significant differences between volatility factor loadings of value and growth stocks. Furthermore, when markets are classified into expected booms and recessions, volatility factor loadings are also time-varying. When expected market risk premium is above its average, i.e. during expected recessions, value stocks are seen riskier than their growth counterparts. This implies in bad times, investors shift their preferences away from value firms. Instead they use growth stocks as hedges against deteriorations in their wealth during those times. The findings are in line with the predictions of rational asset pricing theory and support a “flight-to-quality” explanation.     

A Tale of Two Anomalies: Higher Returns of Low‐Risk Stocks and Return Seasonality

Prior studies have shown that low beta and low volatility stocks earn higher average returns than high beta and high volatility stocks, contradicting the prediction of the capital asset pricing model and the fundamental relationship between risk and return. In this paper, we demonstrate that this phenomenon is driven by the seasonality of stock returns. We show that the risk‐return tradeoff does hold in the nonsummer months, and that switching to a portfolio of low‐risk stocks in summer outperforms—both in terms of absolute and in risk‐adjusted returns—buy and hold strategies as well as the Sell in May strategy of switching to treasury bills in summer.     

Investor attention,information acquisition,and value premium: A mispricing perspective

This paper investigates the impact of investor attention on the dynamics of the value premium. We find superior return differences to value-growth strategy conditioned as low degree of investor attention. In contrast, return differences to the value-growth strategy conditioned as high investor attention are indifferent from zero. We show that return differences to low degree of investor attention across value and growth firms are attributed to mispricing explanation using common risk factors, mispricing factors, sentiment analysis, multivariate analysis, and market expectation errors approach. The findings suggest that investor attention contributes to generating superior return differences to standard value-growth strategy. Our finding concludes that long-short investment strategy in value stocks and growth stocks conditioned as low investor attention generate superior value premium.     

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.     

Cross-section of option returns and volatility

We study the cross-section of stock option returns by sorting stocks on the difference between historical realized volatility and at-the-money implied volatility. We find that a zero-cost trading strategy that is long (short) in the portfolio with a large positive (negative) difference between these two volatility measures produces an economically and statistically significant average monthly return. The results are robust to different market conditions, to stock risks-characteristics, to various industry groupings, to option liquidity characteristics, and are not explained by usual risk factor models.     

The impact of naked short selling on the securities lending and equity market

This paper examines the impact of naked short selling on equity markets where it is restricted to securities on an approved list. Consistent with Miller's (1977) intuition, stocks with the highest dispersion of opinions and short sale constraints are the only stocks to exhibit significant and negative abnormal returns in the post-event period. We also find slightly higher stock return volatility and a small reduction in liquidity when naked short sales are allowed. Overall, it impairs market quality (liquidity and volatility), although there appears to be some improvement in price efficiency in stocks with high short sale constraints.     

Unique Symptoms of Japanese Stagnation: An Equity Market Perspective

This paper documents several unique financial symptoms of Japanese economic stagnation in the 1990s. We find a surprising fall in firm-level volatility and turnover in Japanese stocks after the market crash in 1990. These results stand in sharp contrast to the U.S. case, where firm-level volatility generally increases after a market crash. Further analysis reveals a parallel sharp reduction in earnings heterogeneity among Japanese firms. Preliminary evidence suggests that the reduction in firm-level volatility may be related to Japanese business group protection. The large decrease in firm-level volatility may impede the equity market's information role, as it has made it more difficult over the past decade for both investors and managers to distinguish high quality from low-quality firms.     

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.     

Asset pricing and foreign exchange risk

According to the International Capital Asset Pricing Model (ICAPM), the covariance of assets with foreign exchange currency returns should be a risk factor that must be priced when the purchasing power parity is violated. The goal of this study is to re-examine the relationship between stock returns and foreign exchange risk. The novelties of this work are: (a) a data set that makes use of daily observations for the measurement of the foreign exchange exposure and volatility of the sample firms and (b) data from a Eurozone country.The methodology we make use in reference to the estimation of the sensitivity of each stock to exchange rate movements is that it allows regressing stock returns against factors controlling for market risk, size, value, momentum, foreign exchange exposure and foreign exchange volatility. Stocks are then classified according to their foreign exchange sensitivity portfolios and the return of a hedge (zero-investment) portfolio is calculated. Next, the abnormal returns of the hedge portfolio are regressed against the return of the factors. Finally, we construct a foreign exchange risk factor in such manner as to obtain a monotonic relation between foreign exchange risk and expected returns.The empirical findings show that the foreign exchange risk is priced in the cross section of the German stock returns over the period 2000-2008. Furthermore, they show that the relationship between returns and foreign exchange sensitivity is nonlinear, but it takes an inverse U-shape and that foreign exchange sensitivity is larger for small size firms and value stocks.     

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.     

Asymmetric risk premium in value and growth stocks

There are two competing explanations for the existence of a value premium, a rational market risk explanation, whereby value stocks are inherently more risky than growth stocks, and a market over-reaction hypothesis, where agents overstate future returns on growth stock. Using asymmetric GARCH-M models this paper tests the predictions of the two hypotheses. Specifically, examining whether returns exhibit a positive (negative) risk premium resulting from a negative (positive) shock and the relative size of any premium. The results of the paper suggest that following a shock, volatility and expected future volatility are heightened, leading to a rise in required rates of return which depresses current prices. Further, these effects are heightened for value stock over growth stock and for negative shocks over positive shocks. Thus, in support of the rational risk interpretation, with a volatility feedback explanation for predictive volatility asymmetry.     

Have European Stocks become More Volatile? An Empirical Investigation of Idiosyncratic and Market Risk in the Euro Area

We examine the dynamics of idiosyncratic risk, market risk and return correlations in European equity markets using weekly observations from 3515 stocks listed in the 12 euro area stock markets over the period 1974–2004. Similarly to Campbell et al. (2001) , we find a rise in idiosyncratic volatility, implying that it now takes more stocks to diversify away idiosyncratic risk. Contrary to the US, however, market risk is trended upwards in Europe and correlations are not trended downwards. Both the volatility and correlation measures are pro‐cyclical, and they rise during times of low market returns. Market and average idiosyncratic volatility jointly predict market wide returns, and the latter impact upon both market and idiosyncratic volatility. This has asset pricing and risk management implications.     

Extreme volumes and expected stock returns: Evidence from China's stock market

We examine the relation between extreme trading volumes and expected returns for individual stocks traded on the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange over the July 1994–December 2000 interval. Contrasted with the evidence obtained from the US data [J. Finance 56 (2001) 877], our results show that stocks experiencing extremely high (low) volumes are associated with low (high) subsequent returns. Moreover, this extreme volume–return relation significantly co-varies with security characteristics like past stock performance, firm size, and book-to-market values. In particular, stocks with extreme volumes are related to poorer performance if they are past winners, large firms, and glamour stocks than if they are past losers, small firms, and value stocks, respectively. These results are robust to both daily and weekly samples as well as stock exchange sub-samples. Although the liquidity premium hypothesis of Amihud and Mendelson [J. Financ. Econ. 17 (1986) 223] provides a partial explanation for the extreme volume–return relation, our results fit better the behavioral hypothesis of Baker and Stein [J. Financ. Mark. 7 (2004) 271].     

THE ECONOMIC GAINS OF TRADING STOCKS AROUND HOLIDAYS

I assess the economic gains of strategies that account for the effect of holiday calendar effects on the daily returns and volatility of the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average index. The dynamic strategies use forecasts from stochastic volatility models that distinguish between regular trading days and different types of holidays. More important, I assess the economic value of conditioning on holiday effects and find that a risk-averse investor will pay a high performance fee to switch from a dynamic portfolio strategy that does not account for the effect of holidays on daily conditional expected returns and volatility to a strategy that does. This result is robust to reasonable transaction costs.     

Firm level return-volatility analysis using dynamic panels

This paper examines “leverage” and volatility feedback effects at the firm level by considering both market and firm level effects, using 242 individual firm stock data in the US market. We adopt a panel vector autoregressive framework which allows us to control simultaneously for common business cycle effects, unobserved cross correlation effects in return and volatility via industry effects, and heterogeneity across firms. Our results suggest that volatility feedback effects at the firm level are present due to both market and firm effects, though the market volatility feedback effect is stronger than the corresponding firm level effect. We also find that the leverage effect at the firm level is persistent, significant and negative, while the effect of market return on firm volatility is persistent, significant and positive. The presence of these effects is further explored through the responses of the model's variables to market-wide return and volatility shocks.     

Death and jackpot: Why do individual investors hold overpriced stocks?

Campbell, Hilscher, and Szilagyi (2008) show that firms with a high probability of default have abnormally low average future returns. We show that firms with a high potential for default (death) also tend to have a relatively high probability of extremely large (jackpot) payoffs. Consistent with an investor preference for skewed, lottery-like payoffs, stocks with high predicted probabilities for jackpot returns earn abnormally low average returns. Stocks with high death or jackpot probabilities have relatively low institutional ownership and the jackpot effect we find is much stronger in stocks with high limits to arbitrage.     

New ESG rating drivers in the cross-section of European stock returns

We assess the performance of two quantitative signals based on ESG scores across a large, multi-national cross-section of European stock returns. We test whether the cost of equity capital is more influenced by the upward momentum (measured over time) of the ESG scores of the firms issuing stocks or by their stability (identified as the volatility of the scores over time), measured around a changing mean level. We find that short-term ESG momentum over 1 month has a significant impact on the cross-section of stock returns, lowering the anticipated cost of capital and leading to positive average abnormal returns. This suggests that short-term ESG momentum may represent a novel, priced systematic risk factor. Furthermore, we find strong evidence that an ESG volatility spread strategy which buys low ESG score volatility stocks and sells high volatility ones, generates a substantial alpha and affects the ex-ante cost of capital. Both quantitative ESG signals result in portfolio sorting and long-short strategies that enhance the overall sustainability profile of the issuing firms without compromising the raw average of their ESG scores.     

Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile?

U.S. stocks are more volatile than stocks of similar foreign firms. A firm's stock return volatility can be higher for reasons that contribute positively (good volatility) or negatively (bad volatility) to shareholder wealth and economic growth. We find that the volatility of U.S. firms is higher mostly because of good volatility. Specifically, stock volatility is higher in the United States because it increases with investor protection, stock market development, new patents, and firm‐level investment in R&D. Each of these factors is related to better growth opportunities for firms and better ability to take advantage of these opportunities.     

Can tail risk explain size,book‐to‐market,momentum, and idiosyncratic volatility anomalies?

We examine the impact of tail risk on the return dynamics of size, book‐to‐market ratio, momentum and idiosyncratic volatility sorted portfolios. Our time‐series analyses document significant portfolio return exposures to aggregate tail risk. In particular, portfolios that contain small, value, high idiosyncratic volatility and low momentum stocks exhibit negative and statistically significant tail risk betas. Our cross‐sectional analyses at the individual stock level suggest that tail risk helps in explaining the four pricing anomalies, particularly size and idiosyncratic volatility anomalies.