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.     

The impact of the introduction of the Euro on foreign exchange rate risk exposures

This paper tests whether significant changes in stock return volatility, market risk, and foreign exchange rate risk exposures took place around the launch of the Euro in 1999. The experiment analyzes weekly returns for 3220 nonfinancial firms from 18 European countries, the United States, and Japan. We find that though the Euro's launch was associated with an increase in total stock return volatility, significant reductions in market risk exposures arose for nonfinancial firms both in and outside of Europe. We show that the reductions in market risk were concentrated in firms domiciled in the Euro area and in non-Euro firms with a high fraction of foreign sales or assets in Europe. The Euro's introduction led to a net absolute decrease in the foreign exchange rate exposure of nonfinancial firms, but these changes are statistically and economically small. We interpret our findings in the context of existing theories of exchange rate risk management.     

The relation between stock returns and short-term interest rates

This study examines the relation between the expected returns on common stocks and short-term interest rates. Using a two-factor model of stock returns, we show that the expected returns on common stocks are systematically related to the market risk and the interest-rate risk, which are estimated as the sensitivity of common-stock excess returns to the excess return on the equally weighted market index and to the federal fund premium, respectively. We find that the interest-rate risk for small firms is a significant source of investors' portfolio risk, but is not properly reflected in the single-factor market risk. We also find that the interest-rate risk for large firms is “negative” in the sense that the market risk estimated from the single-factor model overstates the true risk of large firms. An application of the Fama-MacBeth methodology indicates that the interest-rate risk premium as well as the market's risk premium are significant, implying that both the market risk and the interest-rate risk are priced. We show that the interest-rate risk premium explains a significant portion of the difference in expected returns between the top quintile and the bottom quintile of the NYSE and AMEX firms. We also show that the turn-of-the-year seasonal is observed for the interest-rate risk premium; however, the risk premium for the rest of the year is still significant, although small in mangitude.     

Liquidity and asset pricing: Evidence from the Hong Kong stock market

This study investigates the role of liquidity in pricing stock returns in the Hong Kong stock market. Our results show that liquidity is an important factor for pricing returns in Hong Kong after taking well-documented asset pricing factors into consideration. The results are robust to adding portfolio residuals and higher moment factor in the factor models. The results are also robust to seasonality, and conditional-market tests. We also compare alternative factor models and find that the liquidity four-factor model (market excess return, size, book-to-market ratio, and liquidity) is the best model to explain stock returns in the Hong Kong stock market, while the momentum factor is not found to be priced.     

Equity market valuation of human capital and stock returns

We investigate whether and how well firms’ stock market valuations reflect their employees’ collective skills and effectiveness relative to that of their industry peers and competitors. We devise a relative stock market valuation measure of human capital intangibles (EVHC) and find that portfolios of low EVHC firms systematically outperform portfolios of high EVHC firms by an average 1.34% per month. However, this is primarily a small firms effect, because for large firms the excess returns of the arbitrage portfolio that is long on the low EVHC stocks and short on the high EVHC stocks is zero. Our results suggest that reliance on human capital intangibles may proxy for risk not fully accounted for by conventional asset pricing models, or alternatively, that the market cannot correctly price human capital intangibles for small size firms.     

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.     

Do accurate earnings forecasts facilitate superior investment recommendations?

We find that analysts who issue more accurate earnings forecasts also issue more profitable stock recommendations. The average factor-adjusted return associated with the recommendations of analysts in the highest accuracy quintile exceeds the corresponding return for analysts in the lowest accuracy quintile by 1.27% per month. Our findings provide indirect empirical support for valuation models in the accounting and finance literatures (e.g., Ohlson, 1995) that emphasize the role of future earnings in predicting stock price movements. Our results also suggest that imperfectly efficient markets reward information gatherers, such as security analysts, for their costly activities in generating superior earnings forecasts.     

The empirical risk–return relation: A factor analysis approach

Existing empirical literature on the risk–return relation uses relatively small amount of conditioning information to model the conditional mean and conditional volatility of excess stock market returns. We use dynamic factor analysis for large data sets, to summarize a large amount of economic information by few estimated factors, and find that three new factors—termed “volatility,” “risk premium,” and “real” factors—contain important information about one-quarter-ahead excess returns and volatility not contained in commonly used predictor variables. Our specifications predict 16–20% of the one-quarter-ahead variation in excess stock market returns, and exhibit stable and statistically significant out-of-sample forecasting power. We also find a positive conditional risk–return correlation.     

The effect of exchange rate variability on US shareholder wealth

We examine the relationship between financial crisis exchange rate variability and equity return volatility for US multinationals. Empirical analysis of the major financial crises of the last decades reveals that stock return variability increases significantly in the aftermath of a crisis, even relative to the increase in stock return volatility for other firms belonging to the same industry and market capitalization class. In conjunction with this increase in total volatility, there is also an increase in stock market risk (β) for multinational firms. Moreover, trade and service oriented industries appear to be particularly sensitive to these changing exchange rate conditions.     

Financial Sector Risk and the Stock Returns: Evidence from Tokyo Stock Exchange Firms

We investigate whether the activity of financial firms creates value and/or risk to the economy within the asset pricing framework. We use stock return data from nonfinancial firms listed in the first section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange. The value-weighted index that is solely composed of nonfinancial firms is augmented with the index of the firms from the financial sector, and we estimate multivariate asset pricing model with these two indices. We note that our procedure can simultaneously take into account the cross-holding phenomena among Japanese firms, especially between the financial sector and the nonfinancial sector. Our augmented index model performs well both with cross-sectional Fama and MacBeth regression test and GMM test. Our two index model with additional Fama and French's HML factor can capture cross-sectional variations of the returns of sample portfolios better than the original Fama and French model can, when measured by Hansen and Jagannathan distance measure. We find that this additional new sector variable can be a substitute for Fama and French's size factor, but not related to the bond index return. This variable has similar factor characteristic as money supply growth or the term structure, but the latter variables contain more information than the former. Morever, our financial sector model helps explain the return and risk structure of Japanese firms during the so-called bubble period.     

Firm characteristics and long-run stock returns after corporate events

The well-documented abnormal long-run buy-and-hold returns to firms issuing equity in initial public offerings and seasoned equity offerings, firms bidding in mergers, and firms initiating dividends can be attributed to imperfect control-firm matching. In addition to firm size and market-to-book ratio, event firms on average differ from control firms in terms of idiosyncratic volatility, liquidity, return momentum, and capital investment, each of which also explains returns. We propose a simple regression-based approach to control for differences in firm characteristics across event and control firms, and we show that long-run abnormal returns do not differ significantly from zero for event firms in the 1980 to 2005 period. The returns to event firms are, therefore, consistent with patterns known to exist for the broad stock market and do not require event-specific explanations.     

Overreaction in the thrift IPO aftermarket

We study the initial returns and long-run performance of a unique sample of thrifts that have recently converted from mutual to stock form. In addition to a full claim on all IPO proceeds, new investors in a converted thrift also receive a claim on all pre-conversion market value at no cost. Thus, the average firm in our sample has a degree of underpricing automatically built into its offer price. We find that after removing the large initial returns, cumulative excess returns for the firms in our sample are positive for 12 months after the IPO. Beginning in the second year after the IPO, the average firm in our sample undergoes a significant price correction that lasts approximately 18 months and which produces negative cumulative abnormal returns for up to 5 years post-issue. Differences in risk-adjusted returns also indicate negative long-run returns, with poor performance concentrated in the second and third years following the IPO. The return differences are most pronounced among the small thrifts in our sample, and are broadly consistent with investor overreaction at the time of the IPO that continues for 6–12 months before prices begin reverting back to fundamental value.     

Is There a Size Effect in the Pricing of Stocks in the Chinese Stock Markets?: The Case of Bull Versus Bear Markets

Size effect studies generally suggest that a return premium exists for small firms. While the size effect has mostly disappeared in recent years in mature markets (e.g., US and UK), it remains mostly strong in developing markets. The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between firm size and excess stock returns in the Chinese stock markets, and to examine this effect in both a bull and bear market. No studies have previously examined these relationships in the Chinese markets. The results of the study indicate that a size effect exists in the Chinese stock markets over the 6-year period from 1998 to 2003. We find small firms have significantly greater excess returns than large firms. Moreover, small firms are found to have a stronger reaction to the direction of the market than large firms. Small firms have significantly greater positive excess returns than large firms during the bull market. However, small firms have significantly greater negative returns (using total market value), or no significant difference in returns (using float market value) during the bear market period.     

IS THE BOOK‐TO‐MARKET RATIO A MEASURE OF RISK?

We develop a leverage‐based alternative to traditional asset pricing models to investigate whether the book‐to‐market ratio acts as a proxy for risk. We argue that the book‐to‐market ratio should act as a proxy because of the expected relations between (1) financial risk and measures of capital structure based on the market value of equity and (2) asset risk and measures of capital structure based on the book value of equity. We find no relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in all‐equity firms after controlling for firm size, and an inverse relation between average stock returns and the book‐to‐market ratio in firms with a negative book value of equity.     

Saving the Euro: Mitigating Financial or Trade Spillovers?

This paper analyzes through what channels the euro crisis affected firms and the efficacy of policies to mitigate the crisis. It analyzes stock price responses for 3,045 nonfinancial firms in 16 countries to four key policy events during 2010–11. Using precrisis benchmarks, it separates financial effects from trade effects and examines how bank and trade linkages propagated shocks. It finds that policy measures affected financially dependent firms more, particularly in creditor countries with greater bank exposure to peripheral euro countries, in statistically and economically significant ways. Trade linkages with peripheral countries played little role, although euro movements meant some differential effects.     

Measuring investor sentiment with mutual fund flows

We investigate a proxy for monthly shifts between bond funds and equity funds in the USA: aggregate net exchanges of equity funds. This measure (which is negatively related to changes in VIX) is positively contemporaneously correlated with aggregate stock market excess returns: One standard deviation of net exchanges is related to 1.95% of market excess return. Our main new finding is that 85% (all) of the contemporaneous relation is reversed within four (ten) months. The effect is stronger in smaller stocks and in growth stocks. These findings support the notion of “noise” in aggregate market prices induced by investor sentiment.     

The market reaction to debt announcements: UK evidence surrounding the global financial crisis

We examine the stock market response to announcements of public, bank and privately placed debt issuance by large UK firms surrounding the global financial crisis of 2008. Prior to the crisis, we find that stock prices respond positively to announcements of bank debt issuance only. This is restricted to the sub-sample of syndicated bank loans and this is suggestive of the certification from multiple lenders conveying a signal of creditworthiness. We find that abnormal returns on the announcement of bank loans have declined since the financial crisis, both in absolute terms and in comparison to alternative borrowing sources. Overall, our results suggest that surrounding the global financial crisis of 2008, bank loans have become less informative as a signal of the creditworthiness of borrowing firms.     

The Volatility of Bid‐Ask Spreads

This study tests whether the volatility of bid‐ask spreads is positively related to expected returns. After controlling for market‐risk factors, we find that the average risk‐adjusted excess return for stocks in the highest spread volatility quintile is around 50 basis points per month. In a variety of multivariate tests, we find robust evidence of a return premium associated with spread volatility that is both statistically significant and economically meaningful. Our results are robust to controls for a variety of stock characteristics, different tick‐size regimes, and other measures of liquidity volatility.     

Bank M&A: A market power story?

This paper analyzes capital market reactions to international bank M&A. We investigate the combined stock return patterns of targets, bidders, and their peers upon takeover announcement, and closing or withdrawal. We distinguish five common M&A hypotheses and relate characteristic and mutually exclusive abnormal stock return patterns to each hypothesis. The findings show that there are more investors who believe in gains through the exploitation of market power by the post-merger entity than investors who believe in any of the other motives tested in the paper. In a multinomial logistic model we show that patterns related to market power significantly concur with large relative target size, intra-industry mergers, and increasing market concentration, suggesting a substantial lessening of competition through M&A.