Asset pricing in China's domestic stock markets: Is there a logic?

China's stock markets have grown rapidly since their inception and have become an increasingly important emerging market for international investors. However, there are few systematic studies on how asset prices are formed in Chinese domestic equity markets; popular financial media even depict the market as irrational. In this paper, we study the asset pricing mechanism in the nascent Chinese stock markets, with the objective of identifying variables that capture the cross-sectional variation in average stock returns. We focus on the effects of various market imperfections in China. We find that while the market risk (beta) is not priced, there is a significantly negative relationship between firm-specific risk and expected returns. Chinese investors are willing to pay a significant premium for more liquid stocks or for dividend-paying stocks. Furthermore, investors value local A-shares more if there are offshore counterparts (e.g., B- and H-shares) for foreigners, implying that a Chinese firm with a foreign shareholder base has a lower cost of capital, ceteris paribus. Lastly, as with U.S. and other mature markets, firm size and the book-to-market ratio are systematically related to stock returns. Given market imperfections, stocks are priced rather rationally in China, despite the widespread perception to the contrary.     

Empirical Evidence of the Existence of Investable Premiums in Emerging Market Investable Stocks

This paper shows that portfolios of more investable securities bear a premium when compared to portfolios of less investable stocks, reflecting compensation for local risk factors. The investable premium is overwhelmingly priced across 3,782 companies traded in 29 emerging markets from 1988 to 2006. The investable premium impacts stock returns at least as much as other fundamental premiums such as size, value, momentum, and loads on political, economic, and financial risk factors. The impact of the investable premium on emerging stocks returns has increased in strength, implying that foreign ownership has greater influence on local markets in recent years.     

Return dispersion and expected returns

This paper proposes a two-factor asset-pricing model that incorporates market return and return dispersion. Consistent with this model, we find that stocks with higher sensitivities to return dispersion have higher average returns, and that return dispersion carries a significant positive price of risk. In particular, the return dispersion factor dominates the book-to-market factor in explaining cross-sectional expected returns. The return dispersion model outperforms the CAPM, MVM, IVM, and FF-3M when using a set of 5×5 test portfolios constructed from NYSE and AMEX stock returns from August 1963 to December 2005. Return dispersion continues to play an important role in explaining the cross-sectional variation of expected returns, even when market volatility, idiosyncratic volatility, size, book-to-market factors, and a momentum factor are included. This study sheds some light on the ability of return dispersion to explain expected returns beyond the standard asset-pricing factors. Our finding suggests that return dispersion captures two dimensions of systematic risk: the business cycle and fundamental economic restructuring.     

Does Risk Seeking Drive Stock Prices? A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Aggregate Investor Preferences and Beliefs

We use various stochastic dominance criteria that account for(local) risk seeking to analyze market portfolio efficiencyrelative to benchmark portfolios formed on market capitalization,book-to-market equity ratio and price momentum. Our resultssuggest that reverse S-shaped utility functions with risk aversionfor losses and risk seeking for gains can explain stock returns.The results are also consistent with a reverse S-shaped patternof subjective probability transformation. The low average yieldon big caps, growth stocks, and past losers may reflect investors’twin desire for downside protection in bear markets and upsidepotential in bull markets.     

The asset growth effect: Insights from international equity markets

Firms with higher asset growth rates subsequently experience lower stock returns in international equity markets, consistent with the U.S. evidence. This negative effect of asset growth on returns is stronger in more developed capital markets and markets where stocks are more efficiently priced, but is unrelated to country characteristics representing limits to arbitrage, investor protection, and accounting quality. The evidence suggests that the cross-sectional relation between asset growth and stock return is more likely due to an optimal investment effect than due to overinvestment, market timing, or other forms of mispricing.     

A closer look at return predictability of the US stock market: evidence from new panel variance ratio tests

This paper examines the return predictability of the US stock market using portfolios sorted by size, book-to-market ratio and industry. We use novel panel variance ratio tests, based on the wild bootstrap proposed in this paper, which exhibit desirable size and power properties in small samples. We have found evidence that stock returns have been highly predictable from 1964 to 1996, except for a period leading to the 1987 crash and its aftermath. After 1997, stock returns have been unpredictable overall. At a disaggregated level, we find evidence that large-cap portfolios have been priced more efficiently than small- or medium-cap portfolios; and that the stock returns from high-tech industries are far less predictable than those from non-high-tech industries.     

Mispricing and risk of R&D investment in European firms

We study whether R&D-intensive firms earn superior stock returns compared to matched size and book-to-market portfolios across several financial markets in Europe. Mispricing can arise if investors are not able to correctly estimate the long-term benefits of R&D investment or whether R&D firms are more risky than others. The results confirm that more innovative firms can earn future excess returns. Stocks listed on continental Europe markets and operating in high-tech sectors are more prone to undervaluation. This can be caused in the first case by information asymmetries that are more severe in bank-based countries. No evidence is found for a different risk pattern of R&D-intensive stocks.     

Price-based return comovement

Similarly priced stocks move together. Stocks that undergo splits experience an increase in comovement with low-priced stocks and a decrease in their comovement with high-priced stocks. Price-based comovement is not explained by economic fundamentals, firm size, or changes in liquidity or information diffusion. The shift in comovement following splits is greater for large stocks, high-priced stocks, and when investor sentiment is high. In the full cross-section, price-based portfolios explain variation in stock-level returns after controlling for movements in the market and industry portfolios as well as portfolios based on size, book-to-market, transaction costs, and return momentum. The results suggest that investors categorize stocks based on price.     

Value versus Growth: The International Evidence

Value stocks have higher returns than growth stocks in markets around the world. For the period 1975 through 1995, the difference between the average returns on global portfolios of high and low book-to-market stocks is 7.68 percent per year, and value stocks outperform growth stocks in twelve of thirteen major markets. An international capital asset pricing model cannot explain the value premium, but a two-factor model that includes a risk factor for relative distress captures the value premium in international returns.     

Jump risk,stock returns,and slope of implied volatility smile

In the presence of jump risk, expected stock return is a function of the average jump size, which can be proxied by the slope of option implied volatility smile. This implies a negative predictive relation between the slope of implied volatility smile and stock return. For more than four thousand stocks ranked by slope during 1996–2005, the difference between the risk-adjusted average returns of the lowest and highest quintile portfolios is 1.9% per month. Although both the systematic and idiosyncratic components of slope are priced, the idiosyncratic component dominates the systematic component in explaining the return predictability of slope. The findings are robust after controlling for stock characteristics such as size, book-to-market, leverage, volatility, skewness, and volume. Furthermore, the results cannot be explained by alternative measures of steepness of implied volatility smile in previous studies.     

Momentum and Autocorrelation in Stock Returns

This article studies momentum in stock returns, focusing onthe role of industry, size, and book-to-market (B/M) factors.Size and B/M portfolios exhibit momentum as strong as that inindividual stocks and industries. The size and B/M portfoliosare well diversified, so momentum cannot be attributed to firm-or industry-specific returns. Further, industry, size, and B/Mportfolios are negatively autocorrelated and cross-seriallycorrelated over intermediate horizons. The evidence suggeststhat stocks covary "too strongly" with each other. I argue thatexcess covariance, not underreaction, explains momentum in theportfolios.     

Relations Between Stock Returns and Fundamental Variables: Evidence from a Segmented Market

This study examines relations between stock returns and potential explanatory factors in Korea, an important and segmented emerging market. Our results show that Korean stock returns in general and returns on stocks listed in Section 1 in particular are significantly positively related to book-to-market, sales-price, and debt-equity ratios, but not significantly related to market value of equity. Returns on stocks listed in Section 2 are, however, negatively related to market value of equity and not significantly related to the other three variables. Among the variables investigated by us, book-to-market ratio has the greatest explanatory power for stock returns and it indicates superior returns for value stocks. Our findings strengthen the international evidence of the role of book-to-market ratio in explaining stock returns by demonstrating its significance even in the segmented Korean 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.     

Explaining the Cross‐Section of Stock Returns in Japan: Factors or Characteristics?

Japanese stock returns are even more closely related to their book-to-market ratios than are their U.S. counterparts, and thus provide a good setting for testing whether the return premia associated with these characteristics arise because the characteristics are proxies for covariance with priced factors. Our tests, which replicate the Daniel and Titman (1997) tests on a Japanese sample, reject the Fama and French (1993) three-factor model, but fail to reject the characteristic model.     

Book Assets,Real Estate,and Returns on Common Stock

Since real estate is common to most firms, this study examines whether there is a real estate factor in common stock returns that is not completely captured by existing asset pricing models. The three-factor model of Fama and French (1993), hereafter FF, is extended to incorporate a unique real estate factor. Using his extended-FF model, we examine the returns on 53 industry portfolios of common stocks over the 1972 through 1995 time period. The results indicate that a significant 19 percent of the industries are systematically related to the real estate factor. Most interestingly, we show that the loading of the real estate factor in common stock return is related to the loading of the book-to-market equity factor in these returns. We also construct decile portfolios of common stocks based on historical sensitivities of common stock returns to the real estate factor. The coefficients on the real estate factor vary systematically across the decile portfolios. The results of our analysis suggest that portfolio managers should manage their exposure to real estate.     

Tracking down distress risk

This paper shows that exposure to aggregate distress risk is the underlying source of the premiums for the Fama-French size (SMB) and value (HML) factors. Using a unique data set of aggregate business failures of both private and public firms from 1926 to 1997, I build portfolios that track news about future firm failures. These tracking portfolios optimally hedge aggregate distress risk and earn a Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) alpha of approximately −4% a year. Both HML and SMB predict changes in future failure rates. Small stocks have lower returns than large stocks and value stocks have lower returns than growth stocks when the market expects an increase in future failure rates. Finally, a two-factor model with the market and the tracking portfolio for aggregate distress as factors does as well as the Fama-French three-factor model in pricing the 25 size and book-to-market sorted portfolios.     

The January effect for individual corporate bonds

We examine the presence, magnitude and determinants of a January effect for individual corporate bonds. Our results provide empirical evidence of positive and statistically (but not economically) significant abnormal returns in January across different event windows and models. Our results suggest that, in the addition to the term and default factors, the excess stock returns, size and book-to-market factors are priced for individual bond returns. We investigate a number of determinants of the January abnormal returns for individual bonds. Our findings suggest that the reversal and tax-loss selling effects are important determinants of the abnormal returns on individual bonds.     

Ambiguity and asset pricing: An empirical investigation for an emerging market

This study explores the impact of ambiguity on returns of both individual stocks and stock portfolios in an emerging market setting. First, an ambiguity index is derived and then the sensitivity of stock returns to ambiguity is analyzed while controlling for the other risk factors commonly cited in the literature. Results show that stocks with a high (low) sensitivity to ambiguity generate higher (lower) excess returns. These results are intuitive in the sense that investors seem to ask for lower returns from those stocks that serve as a natural hedge against ambiguity. Our findings are also in line with the earlier studies that provide similar evidence from the US stock markets.     

The investment value of the value premium

Value investment strategies are premised on research that value stocks outperform growth stocks. However, the research findings are dependent on the portfolio classification method that is used to sort stocks using the attributes of size and book-to-market ratios. Different stock markets contain different distributions of stocks, and in many markets, illiquidity concerns combined with a lack of investment scale, effectively create barriers to practical portfolio formations that align with the research. This study conducts a case study on one such market (Australia) and demonstrates that different methods of portfolio formation lead to different conclusions. For example, previous studies in Australia find evidence of the value premium only being present in the largest stocks, in contrast to the results from the US market. However, we find a value premium that is systematic across all size categories and generally increases inversely with size. Further, we find the well-documented size premium largely disappears once portfolios are formed that better represent feasible investment sets and once ‘penny dreadfuls’ are removed. Finally, asset pricing tests support the existence of a value premium in Australian stock returns when a more appropriate portfolio formation method is employed.     

Cash, investments and asset returns

We use an investment-based asset pricing model to examine the effect of firms’ investments relative to cash holdings on stock returns, assuming holding cash lowers transaction costs. We find that mimicking portfolios based on investments relative to non-cash capital and based on investments relative to cash capital are priced for various testing portfolios. On average, momentum stocks and growth stocks are more sensitive to the factor constructed using investment relative to cash.