The Risk‐Return Relation in International Stock Markets

We investigate the risk‐return relation in international stock markets using realized variance constructed from MSCI (Morgan Stanley Capital International) daily stock price indices. In contrast with the capital asset pricing model, realized variance by itself provides negligible information about future excess stock market returns; however, we uncover a positive and significant risk‐return tradeoff in many countries after controlling for the (U.S.) consumption‐wealth ratio. U.S. realized variance is also significantly related to future international stock market returns; more importantly, it always subsumes the information content of its local counterparts. Our results indicate that stock market variance is an important determinant of the equity premium.     

Shiller's CAPE: Market Efficiency and Risk

Robert Shiller shows that Cyclically Adjusted Price to Earnings Ratio (CAPE) is strongly associated with future long‐term stock returns. This is often interpreted as evidence of market inefficiency. We present two findings contrary to such an interpretation. First, if markets are efficient, stock returns should be higher than the risk‐free rate. We find that even when CAPE is in its ninth decile, future 10‐year stock returns, on average, are higher than future returns on 10‐year U.S. Treasurys. Thus, the results are largely consistent with market efficiency. Second, consistent with a risk–return tradeoff, we find that CAPE is negatively associated with future stock market volatility.     

The risk return tradeoff in the long run: 1836–2003

Previous studies typically find a statistically insignificant relation between the market risk premium and its expected volatility. Further, several of these studies estimate a negative risk return tradeoff, contrary to the predictions of mainstream theory. Using simulations, I demonstrate that even 100 years of data constitute a small sample that may easily lead to this finding even though the true risk return tradeoff is positive. Small-sample inference is plagued by the fact that conditional volatility has almost no explanatory power for realized returns. Using the nearly two century history of U.S. equity market returns from Schwert [1990. Indexes of United States stock prices from 1802 to 1987. Journal of Business 63, 399–426], I estimate a positive and statistically significant risk return tradeoff. Finally, exploratory analysis suggests a role for a time-varying relation linked to the changing nature of the U.S. economy.     

SYMMETRIC VERSUS ASYMMETRIC CONDITIONAL COVARIANCE FORECASTS: DOES IT PAY TO SWITCH?

Volatilities and correlations for equity markets rise more after negative returns shocks than after positive shocks. Allowing for these asymmetries in covariance forecasts decreases mean‐variance portfolio risk and improves investor welfare. We compute optimal weights for international equity portfolios using predictions from asymmetric covariance forecasting models and a spectrum of expected returns. Investors who are moderately risk averse, have longer rebalancing horizons, and hold U.S. equities benefit most and may be willing to pay around 100 basis points annually to switch from symmetric to asymmetric forecasts. Accounting for asymmetry in both variances and correlations significantly lowers realized portfolio risk.     

Determinants of Investor Demand for Cross‐Listed Firms

By focusing on the decisions of investors to invest in cross‐listed stocks, this paper presents new evidence on why we observe striking differences in the percentage of trade in foreign markets for cross‐listed stocks. With a large sample of Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) stocks cross‐listed in the U.S. and Canada, we document the effect of investor recognition and risk characteristics on the distribution of trading volume. Firms that are more visible to American investors are traded more heavily in the U.S. At the same time, firms that offer diverse risk characteristics are attractive to Americans. While investors understand the benefits of international diversification, as they are attracted to stocks that are different (e.g., the stock of small firms with few assets in the U.S.), they also seek stocks that provide them with high returns.     

Emerging Market Bond Funds: A Comprehensive Analysis

We analyze U.S.‐based emerging market bond funds over a ten‐year (1996–2005) complete cycle of ups and downs in the dominant emerging bond markets. Emerging market bond funds outperform comparable domestic and global bond funds. The results are robust across both conditional and unconditional models. The funds also provide international diversification benefits to U.S. and international bond and equity portfolios. The funds exhibit persistence in performance and seasonality. Active funds, large funds and funds with high minimum purchases perform better on a total return basis but not on a risk‐adjusted basis.     

The Announcement Effects of U.S. versus non‐U.S. Bank Mergers: Do They Differ?

Non‐U.S. bank mergers are becoming an increasingly important part of the worldwide economic landscape. Are the market reactions to non‐U.S. bank mergers similar to the reaction in the United States? I address this question by examining abnormal returns of publicly traded partners on the announcement of forty‐one non‐U.S. bank mergers and comparing the returns with a U.S. control group. I find acquirers in non‐U.S. domestic bank mergers earn more and non‐U.S. targets earn less than their U.S. counterparts. However, for the subset of mergers in countries with relatively well‐developed stock markets, I find that partners earn similar returns.     

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.     

THE USE OF ACQUISITIONS AND JOINT VENTURES BY U.S. BANKS EXPANDING ABROAD

We examine international bank expansions, which are classified as banking (scale related) or nonbanking (complementary) moves into developed or developing markets. The market responds favorably to expansions through joint ventures by U.S. banks, and insignificantly to expansions through acquisitions. Accounting and operating performances (for joint venture banks) and long‐period holding returns (for acquisitions) show improvement in the two years following the announcement. Systematic risk declines for the sample overall, for acquisitions, and for expansions into developing countries. In general, scale or developing expansions are better pursued through acquisitions, whereas complementary or developed expansions are best pursued through joint ventures.     

International Cross‐Listings and Subsequent Security‐Market Choices: Evidence from ADRs

We study the link between the attributes of American depositary receipt (ADR)‐listed firms and their post‐listing security‐market choices. We find that developed market firms are more likely to issue equity and debt than their emerging market counterparts. Furthermore, we find that large firms are more likely to issue debt and less likely to issue equity. When we examine locations where ADR firms raise their capital, we find that firms originating from countries where the protection of minority shareholders is weak are more likely to issue debt on their home markets and less likely to issue debt on international markets (excluding U.S. markets). Furthermore, ADR firms originating from developed (emerging market) countries are more (less) likely to issue their equity on their domestic markets and less (more) likely to issue equity on international markets (excluding U.S. markets).     

U.S. investors and global equity markets

This study examines international equity flows of U.S. residents to emerging markets in Latin America and Asia and to developed markets in Europe, Canada, and Japan. The major issues addressed are (1) appropriate means of measuring relationships between returns and flows, (2) role of volatility in these relationships, and (3) effects of the Asian crisis. Basic findings include: (1) the information contribution argument is stronger than the feedback trading argument (flows affect returns more than past returns affect flows), (2) volatility of flows and of returns are not of major importance, (3) the Asian crisis effects are important and strongest for Asia followed by developed markets and by Latin America, and (4) regional measures and U.S. returns play significant roles in international equity flows to many countries.     

MARKET TIMING OF INTERNATIONAL STOCK MARKETS USING THE YIELD SPREAD

We use probit modeling to forecast bear stock markets in the United States and in eight major foreign stock markets. In general, we find that the U.S. yield spread contains more important market‐timing information than does the home‐country yield spread for profitable market timing. At a 35% probability screen, our simulations show that the U.S. dollar (representative local currency) investor could earn a median compound annual return across eight foreign (non‐U.S.) stock markets of 15.75% (17.67%) by following a market‐timing strategy versus a median buy‐and‐hold return of 13.56% (16.55%).     

Financial crises and the asymmetric relation between returns on banks,risk factors,and other industry portfolio returns

We show that the relations between the returns on the banking industry, risk factors, and other industries often are asymmetric. Lagged banking industry returns seem to improve predictability but the positive impact of a 1‐month lag of the return on the banking portfolio is much higher in the lower part of the return distribution. However, after the Dodd‐Frank Act in 2010, the cross‐autocorrelation with banks is changed and becomes negative in the upper part of the distribution. Returns on banks also seem to lead returns on five risk factors. This relation, however, is not robust across the distribution.     

A behavioural explanation to the asymmetric volatility phenomenon: Evidence from market volatility index

This study examines how the behavioural explanations, in particular loss aversion, can be used to explain the asymmetric volatility phenomenon by investigating the relationship between stock market returns and changes in investor perceptions of risk measured by the volatility index. We study the behaviour of India volatility index vis‐à‐vis Hong Kong, Australia and UK volatility index, and provide a comprehensive comparative analysis. Using Bai‐Perron test, we identify structural breaks and volatility regimes in the time series of volatility index, and investigate the volatility index‐return relation during high, medium and low volatility periods. Regardless of volatility regimes, we find that volatility index moves in opposite direction in response to stock index returns, and contemporaneous return is the most dominating across the four markets. The negative relation is strongest for UK followed by Australia, Hong Kong and India. Second, volatility index reacts significantly different to positive and negative returns; negative return has higher impact on changes in volatility index than positive return across the markets over full‐sample and sub‐sample periods. The asymmetric effect is stronger in low volatility regime than in high and medium volatility periods for all the markets except UK. The strength of asymmetric effect is strongest for Hong Kong and weakest for India. Finally, negative returns have exponentially increasing effect and positive returns have exponentially decreasing effect on the changes in volatility index.     

The Determinants of Conditional Autocorrelation in Stock Returns

We investigate whether return volatility, trading volume, return asymmetry, business cycles, and day‐of‐the‐week are potential determinants of conditional autocorrelation in stock returns. Our primary focus is on the role of feedback trading and the interplay of return volatility. We present empirical evidence using conditional autocorrelation estimates generated from multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (M‐GARCH) models for individual U.S. stock and index data. In addition to return volatility, we find that trading volume and market returns are important in explaining the time‐varying patterns of return autocorrelation.     

Countercyclical currency risk premia

We describe a novel currency investment strategy, the ‘dollar carry trade,’ which delivers large excess returns, uncorrelated with the returns on well-known carry trade strategies. Using a no-arbitrage model of exchange rates we show that these excess returns compensate U.S. investors for taking on aggregate risk by shorting the dollar in bad times, when the U.S. price of risk is high. The countercyclical variation in risk premia leads to strong return predictability: the average forward discount and U.S. industrial production growth rates forecast up to 25% of the dollar return variation at the one-year horizon. The estimated model implies that the variation in the exposure of U.S. investors to worldwide risk is the key driver of predictability.     

Correlation and return dispersion dynamics in Chinese markets

This paper studies the relation between firm-level return dispersions and correlations among Chinese stocks during periods of unusually large upward and downward swings. We analyze individual stock returns across 18 sectors and test if return dispersions and stock correlations show asymmetric patterns for extreme up and down markets. Evidence from studies on U.S. stocks suggests that equity return correlations tend to be much greater on the downside than on the upside and that the degree of comovement gets even stronger during extreme market states. However, in the case of Chinese stock market, we find that higher downside correlations apply to only stocks within the Financial sector. With the exception of Financial stocks, we find that stock correlations are significantly higher during up markets, rather than down markets. Regarding firm-level return dispersions, our findings are consistent with rational asset pricing model predictions. We find that equity return dispersions are significantly higher during periods of large price changes.     

Is Gold a Hedge or a Safe Haven? An Analysis of Stocks,Bonds and Gold

Is gold a hedge, defined as a security that is uncorrelated with stocks or bonds on average, or is it a safe haven, defined as a security that is uncorrelated with stocks and bonds in a market crash? We study constant and time‐varying relations between U.S., U.K. and German stock and bond returns and gold returns to investigate gold as a hedge and a safe haven. We find that gold is a hedge against stocks on average and a safe haven in extreme stock market conditions. A portfolio analysis further shows that the safe haven property is short‐lived.     

Trend‐Following Trading Strategies in U.S. Stocks: A Revisit

We show that previous findings regarding the profitability of trend‐following trading rules over intermediate horizons in futures markets also extend to individual U.S. stocks. Portfolios formed using technical indicators such as moving average or channel ratios, without employing cross‐sectional rankings of any kind, tend to perform about as well as the more commonly examined momentum strategies. The profitability of these strategies appears significant, both statistically and economically, through 2007, but evidence of profitability vanishes after 2007. Market‐state dependence, while clearly present, does not explain the post‐2007 reduction in returns to these strategies.     

A Conditional Assessment of the Relationships between the Major World Bond Markets

This paper uses a bivariate GARCH framework to examine the lead‐lag relations and the conditional correlations between 10‐year US government bond returns and their counterparts from the UK, Germany, and Japan. We find that while mean and volatility spillovers exist between the major international bond markets, they are much weaker than those between equity markets. The results also indicate that the correlations between the US and other major bond market returns are time varying and are driven by changing macroeconomic and market conditions. However, in contrast to the finding that the benefits of international diversification in equity markets evaporate during high‐stress periods, we find that the benefits of diversification across major government bond markets do not decrease during periods of extremely high bond market volatility or following extremely negative US and foreign bond returns.