Conditional coskewness and asset pricing

We explore the empirical usefulness of conditional coskewness to explain the cross-section of equity returns. We find that coskewness is an important determinant of the returns to equity, and that the pricing relationship varies through time. In particular we find that when the conditional market skewness is positive investors are willing to sacrifice 7.87% annually per unit of gamma (a standardized measure of coskewness risk) while they only demand a premium of 1.80% when the market is negatively skewed. A similar picture emerges from the coskewness factor of Harvey and Siddique (Harvey, C., Siddique, A., 2000a. Conditional skewness in asset pricing models tests. Journal of Finance 65, 1263–1295.) (a portfolio that is long stocks with small coskewness with the market and short high coskewness stocks) which earns 5.00% annually when the market is positively skewed but only 2.81% when the market is negatively skewed. The conditional two-moment CAPM and a conditional Fama and French (Fama, E., French, K., 1992. The cross-section of expected returns. Journal of Finance 47,427465.) three-factor model are rejected, but a model which includes coskewness is not rejected by the data. The model also passes a structural break test which many existing asset pricing models fail.     

Asset pricing models with errors-in-variables

This paper revisits Fama and French [Fama, Eugene F., French, Kenneth R., (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stock and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33 (1), 3–56] and Carhart [Carhart, Mark M., 1997. On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance 52 (1), 57–82] multifactor model taking into account the possibility of errors-in-variables. In their well known paper, Fama and French [Fama, Eugene F., French, Kenneth R., 1997. Industry costs of equity. Journal of Financial Economic 43 (2), 153–193] concluded that estimates of the cost of equity for the three-factor model of FF (1993) were imprecise. We argue that this imprecision is even more severe because of the pervasive effects of measurement errors. We propose Dagenais and Dagenais [Dagenais, Marcel G., Dagenais, Denyse L., 1997. Higher moment estimators for linear regression models with errors in the variables. Journal of Econometrics 76 (1–2), 193–221] higher moments estimator as a solution. Our results show that estimates of the cost of equity obtained with Dagenais and Dagenais estimator differ sharply from popular OLS estimates and shed a new light on performance attribution and abnormal performance (α). Adapting the Generalized Treynor Ratio, recently developed by Hübner [Hübner, Georges, 2005. The generalized treynor ratio. Review of Finance 9 (3), 415–435], we show that the performance of managed portfolios with multi-index models should be revisited in presence of errors-in-variables.     

Implied volatility and future portfolio returns

Prior studies find that the CBOE volatility index (VIX) predicts returns on stock market indices, suggesting implied volatilities measured by VIX are a risk factor affecting security returns or an indicator of market inefficiency. We extend prior work in three important ways. First, we investigate the relationship between future returns and current implied volatility levels and innovations. Second, we examine portfolios sorted on book-to-market equity, size, and beta. Third, we control for the four Fama and French [Fama, E., French, K., 1993. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33, 3–56.] and Carhart [Carhart, M., 1997. On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance, 52, 57–82.] factors. We find that VIX-related variables have strong predictive ability.     

The cross section of cashflow volatility and expected stock returns

I show that historical cashflow volatility is negatively related to future returns cross-sectionally. The negative association is large; economically meaningful; long-lasting up to five years; robust to known return-informative effects of size, value, price and earnings momentums and illiquidity; and extends to both systematic and idiosyncratic cashflow volatilities. Using the standard deviations of cashflow to sales and of cashflow to book equity as proxies for cashflow volatility, the least volatile decile portfolio outperforms the most volatile decile portfolio by 13% a year relative to the Fama–French four factors. The cashflow volatility effect is closely related to the idiosyncratic return volatility effect documented in Ang et al. [Ang, A., Hodrick, R.J., Xing, Y. and Zhang, X. “The cross-section of volatility and expected returns.” Journal of Finance, 51 (2006), 259–299.]. However, in portfolios simultaneously sorted on both cashflow and return volatilities, and in cross sectional regressions of returns at the firm level, these two effects neither drive out nor dominate each other. While the pricing of idiosyncratic cashflow volatility represents an anomaly against the traditional asset pricing theories, the pricing of historical cashflow uncertainty sheds light on potential fundamental risks embodied in the Fama–French HML and SMB factors.     

Common risk factors in bank stocks

This paper provides evidence on the risk factors that are priced in bank equities. Alternative empirical models with precedent in the nonfinancial asset pricing literature are tested, including the single-factor CAPM, three-factor Fama–French model, and ICAPM. Our empirical results indicate that an unconditional two-factor ICAPM model that includes the stock market excess return and shocks to the slope of the yield curve is useful in explaining the cross-section of bank stock returns. However, we find no evidence that firm specific factors such as size and book-to-market ratios are priced in bank stock returns. These results have a number of important implications for the estimation of the banks’ cost of capital as well as regulatory initiatives to utilize market discipline to evaluate bank risk under Basel II.     

Evaluation of linear asset pricing models by implied portfolio performance

We present a theoretical perspective that motivates the use of the Generalized Least Squares R-Square, prominently advocated by Lewellen et al. [Lewellen, J., Nagel, S., Shanken, J., forthcoming. A skeptical appraisal of asset-pricing tests. Journal of Financial Economics], as an evaluation measure for multivariate linear asset pricing models. Adapting results from Shanken [Shanken, J., 1985. Multivariate tests of the zero-beta CAPM. Journal of Financial Economics 14, 327–348] and Kandel and Stambaugh [Kandel, S., Stambaugh, R.F., 1995. Portfolio inefficiency and the cross-section of expected returns. Journal of Finance 50, 157–184], we provide various interpretations and a graphical account in mean-variance space of this measure, facilitating a better understanding of its properties. We furthermore relate it to another leading evaluation metric, the HJ-distance of Hansen and Jagannathan [Hansen, L.P., Jagannathan, R., 1997. Assessing specification errors in stochastic discount factor models. Journal of Finance 52, 557–590]. Additionally, we present a comparison between these evaluation measures using mean-variance mathematics in risk-return space, and we provide a simple formula for calculating both model evaluation measures that involves only the parameters of the mean-variance asset and factor frontiers.     

Beta,size, book-to-market equity and returns: A study based on UK data

This paper examines the role of beta, size and book-to-market equity as competing risk measurements in explaining the cross-sectional returns of UK securities for the period July 1980 through June 2000. The methodology of [Fama, E., French, K., 1992. The cross-section of expected stock returns. Journal of Finance 47, 427–467] and [Pettengill, G., Sundaram, S., Mathur, I., 1995. The conditional relation between beta and returns. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 30, 101–116] is adopted. Results show that, when adopting the methodology of [Pettengill, G., Sundaram, S., Mathur, I., 1995. The conditional relation between beta and returns. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 30, 101–116], where data is segmented between up and down markets, a significant relationship is found between beta and returns even in the presence of size and book-to-market equity. Size is not found to be a significant risk variable, whereas book-to-market equity is found to be priced by the market and is thus a significant determinant of security returns. This is the case irrespective of the methodology adopted.     

Information asymmetry and the value of cash

This study investigates the market value of corporate cash holdings in connection with firm-specific and time-varying information asymmetry. Analyzing a large international sample, we test two opposing hypotheses. According to the pecking order theory, adverse selection problems make external financing costly and imply a higher market value of a marginal dollar of cash in states with higher information asymmetry. In contrast, the free cash flow theory predicts that excessive cash holdings bundled with higher information asymmetry generate moral hazard problems and lead to a lower market value of a marginal dollar of cash. We use the dispersion of analysts’ earnings per share forecasts as our main measure of firm-specific and time-varying information asymmetry. Extending the valuation regressions of Fama and French [Fama, E.F., French, K.R., 1998. Taxes, financing decisions, and firm value. Journal of Finance 53, 819–843], our results support the free cash flow theory and indicate that the value of corporate cash holdings is lower in states with a higher degree of information asymmetry.     

Information-based trade in the Shanghai stock market

We show that the probability of information-based trade (PIN) played a significant role in explaining monthly returns on Shanghai A shares over the period 2001 to 2006. In particular, PIN, as approximated by order imbalance as a proportion of total transactions, appears to explain returns even after controlling for risk in the much-cited Fama and French [Fama, E. F. & French, K. R. (1992). The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns. Journal of Finance, XLVII, 427–465.] three-factor model. However, we also find that some of the PIN effect appears to be indistinguishable from a turnover effect.     

Do zero-cost portfolios have the ability to predict economic growth? Evidence from Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan

In this paper we investigate the relationship between growth in future Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Industrial Production (IDP) and the performance of SMB (small stocks minus big stocks) and HML (High book-to-market stocks minus low book-to-market stocks) portfolios for equities listed in Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan.We find evidence to suggest that: (a) the excess market return is positively related to future GDP or IDP growth in South Korea and Taiwan; (b) contrary to most European markets, Australia, Japan and the US, future economic growth is in general significantly negatively related to SMB in Hong Kong and South Korea; and, (c) a negative relationship between future economic growth and HML for Hong Kong. Our results cast doubt if SMB and HML portfolios are positive risk factors in the Fama and French (Fama, E. F., and French, K. R. (1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33, 3-56) three-factor asset pricing model for Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan.     

Do relative leverage and relative distress really explain size and book-to-market anomalies?

In a capital asset pricing model (CAPM) framework, Ferguson and Shockley [2003. Equilibrium “anomalies”. Journal of Finance 58, 2549–2580] propose two factors constructed on relative leverage and relative distress, and show that the two factors subsume Fama and French's [1993. Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics 33, 3–56] factors constructed on size and book-to-market (BM) in explaining the cross-sectional average returns of the 25 size-BM portfolios. Based on tests on individual securities, we find that all factors fail to fully explain the common asset-pricing anomalies. In the spirit of Merton's [1973. An intertemporal capital asset pricing model. Econometrica 41, 867–887] intertemporal CAPM, we propose an augmented five-factor model, which incorporates Ferguson and Shockley's [2003. Equilibrium “anomalies”. Journal of Finance 58, 2549–2580] factors into the Fama–French three-factor model. The empirical results show that a simple conditional version of the augmented model is able to explain most well-known asset-pricing anomalies.     

TRANSITORY MARKET STATES AND THE JOINT OCCURRENCE OF MOMENTUM AND MEAN REVERSION

In this article we derive and investigate the implications of the Fama–French and Poterba–Summers model—in which the market price of equity contains permanent and temporary components—to explain cross‐sectional differences in equity risk premia and returns. Shocks to the transitory component are regarded a Merton risk factor. We obtain estimates from a simple Kalman decomposition of the market price. The transitory component estimate is used in a conditional capital asset pricing model to test implications of the model related to predictability, cross‐sectional performance, and the existence of momentum and mean reversion.     

The expected value premium

Fama and French [2002. The equity premium. Journal of Finance 57, 637–659] estimate the equity premium using dividend growth rates to measure expected rates of capital gain. We apply their method to study the value premium. From 1945 to 2005, the expected value premium is on average 6.1% per annum, consisting of an expected dividend growth component of 4.4% and an expected dividend price ratio component of 1.7%. Unlike the equity premium, the value premium has been largely stable over the last half century.     

Improvement in finite sample properties of the Hansen–Jagannathan distance test

Jagannathan and Wang [Jagannthan, R., and Wang, Z., “The conditional CAPM and the cross-section of expected returns.” Journal of Finance, 51 (1996), 3–53] derive the asymptotic distribution of the Hansen–Jagannathan distance (HJ-distance) proposed by Hansen and Jagannathan [Hansen, L.P., and Jagannathan, R., Assessing specific errors in stochastic discount factor models." Journal of Finance, 52 (1997), 557–590], and develop a specification test of asset pricing models based on the HJ-distance. While the HJ-distance has several desirable properties, Ahn and Gadarowski [Ahn, S.C., and Gadarowski, C., “Small sample properties of the GMM specification test based on the Hansen–Jagannathan distance.” Journal of Empirical Finance, 11 (2004), 109–132] find that the specification test based on the HJ-distance overrejects correct models too severely in commonly used sample size to provide a valid test. This paper proposes to improve the finite sample properties of the HJ-distance test by applying the shrinkage method [Ledoit, O., and Wolf, M., “Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection.” Journal of Empirical Finance, 10 (2003), 603–621] to compute its weighting matrix. The proposed method improves the finite sample performance of the HJ-distance test significantly.     

Do the Fama–French Factors Proxy for Innovations in Predictive Variables?

The Fama–French factors HML and SMB are correlated with innovations in variables that describe investment opportunities. A model that includes shocks to the aggregate dividend yield and term spread, default spread, and one‐month Treasury‐bill yield explains the cross section of average returns better than the Fama–French model. When loadings on the innovations in the predictive variables are present in the model, loadings on HML and SMB lose their explanatory power for the cross section of returns. The results are consistent with an ICAPM explanation for the empirical success of the Fama–French portfolios.     

International diversification strategies: Revisited from the risk perspective

Following Roll [Roll, R., 1992. Industrial structure and comparative behaviour of international stock market indices. Journal of Finance 47, 3–42] and Heston and Rouwenhorst [Heston, S.L., Rouwenhorst, G.K., 1994. Does industrial structure explain the benefits of international diversification. Journal of Financial Economics 36, 3–27], researchers have decomposed stock returns into country and industry components. Evidence suggests that industry components have become more important in recent years, but the reasons for this are unclear. Existing research concentrated mainly on stock returns in industrial countries. In this paper we consider instead the decomposition of stock risks within emerging equity markets. We provide a rationale for this procedure and its relationship to return decompositions. The results provide new firm-specific evidence on the debate over country and industry components, their stability over time, and the implications for portfolio diversification.     

Barriers to international investing and market segmentation: Evidence from Indian GDR market

In this paper we evaluate market segmentation and its effect on the pricing of cross-listed securities using Indian Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs). When international capital markets are segmented, cross-listed securities may trade at different prices. We test this market segmentation hypothesis using a theoretical and empirical model developed along the lines of Hietala [Hietala, P.T., 1989, Asset pricing in partially segmented markets: Evidence from the Finnish market, Journal of Finance 44, 697–718]) and Foerster and Karolyi [Foerster, S.R., Karolyi, A.G., 1999, The effects of market segmentation and investor recognition on asset prices: Evidence from foreign stocks listing in the United States, Journal of Finance 54, 981–1013; Foerster, S.R., Karolyi, A.G., 1999, The long-run performance of global equity offerings, Working Paper, Ohio State University]. Our model looks at a specific type of market segmentation in India, where capital flow barriers are such that domestic investors are allowed to invest only in domestic securities, while the foreign investors can invest in dollar-denominated Indian GDRs as well as other foreign securities. Tests on these GDRs indicate that foreign investors, who hold these depositary receipts, estimate the expected returns at a lower level than the domestic investors do. This leads to the GDRs being priced at a premium over the exchange rate adjusted prices of the underlying Indian securities. GDR index returns are affected by both domestic and international factors, while the underlying Indian securities are affected only by domestic variables.     

In America's thrall: the effects of the US market and US security characteristics on Australian stock returns

Can Australian equity returns be modelled by ‘home‐grown’ factors? We examine the indigenous capital asset pricing model, the indigenous Fama–French three‐factor model, and extensions to the latter, and find them all wanting. We find evidence of domestic market segmentation in Australia. For the smallest firms, all the models we study fail. For the largest Australian firms, we find that the US Fama–French three factors (downloaded from French's website: http://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/ ) provide a successful model of Australian returns. It is as if the largest firms in the Australian market are simply part of the larger US market.     

An intertemporal capital asset pricing model with bank credit growth as a state variable

An ICAPM which includes bank credit growth as a state variable explains 94% of the cross-sectional variation in the average returns on the 25 Fama–French portfolios. We find compelling evidence that bank credit growth is priced in the cross-section of expected stock returns, even after controlling for well-documented asset pricing factors. These results are robust to the inclusion of industry portfolios in the set of test assets. They are also robust to the addition of firm characteristics and lagged instruments in the factor model. Bank credit growth is important because of its ability to predict business cycle variables as well as future labor income growth. These findings underscore the relevance of bank credit growth in stock pricing.     

Structural models of credit risk are useful: Evidence from hedge ratios on corporate bonds

Structural models of credit risk provide poor predictions of bond prices. We show that, despite this, they provide quite accurate predictions of the sensitivity of corporate bond returns to changes in the value of equity (hedge ratios). This is important since it suggests that the poor performance of structural models may have more to do with the influence of non-credit factors rather than their failure to capture the credit exposure of corporate debt. The main result of this paper is that even the simplest of the structural models [Merton, R., 1974. On the pricing of corporate debt: the risk structure of interest rates. Journal of Finance 29, 449–470] produces hedge ratios that are not rejected in time-series tests. However, we find that the Merton model (with or without stochastic interest rates) does not capture the interest rate sensitivity of corporate debt, which is substantially lower than would be expected from conventional duration measures. The paper also shows that corporate bond prices are related to a number of market-wide factors such as the Fama-French SMB (small minus big) factor in a way that is not predicted by structural models.