A Generalized Earnings‐Based Stock Valuation Model with Learning

We present a stock valuation model in an incomplete‐information environment in which the unobservable mean of earnings growth rate (MEGR) is learned and price is updated continuously. We calibrate our model to a market portfolio to empirically evaluate its performance. Of the 8.84% total risk premium we estimate, the earnings growth premium is 4.57%, the short‐rate risk contributes 3.38%, and the learning‐induced risk premium on the unknown MEGR is 0.89% (a nontrivial 10% of the total risk premium). This result highlights the significant learning effect on valuation, implying an additional risk premium in an incomplete‐information environment.     

A Dynamic Model of Firm Valuation

We propose a dynamic version of the dividend discount model, solve it in closed form, and assess its empirical validity. The valuation method is tractable and can be easily implemented. We find that our model produces equity value forecasts that are very close to market prices, and explains a large proportion of the observed variation in share prices. Moreover, we show that a simple portfolio strategy based on the difference between market and estimated values earns considerably positive returns. These returns cannot be simply explained either by the Fama‐French three‐factor model (even after adding a momentum factor) or the Fama‐French five‐factor model.     

A Reconsideration of Tax Shield Valuation

A quarter‐century ago, Miles and Ezzell (1980) solved the valuation problem of a firm that follows a constant leverage ratio L = D/S. However, to this day, the proper discounting of free cash flows and the computation of WACC are often misunderstood by scholars and practitioners alike. For example, it is common for textbooks and fairness opinions to discount free cash flows at WACC with beta input β _S = [1 + (1 ? τ)L]β_u, although the latter is not consistent with the assumption of constant leverage. This confusion extends to the valuation of tax shields and the proper implementation of adjusted present value procedures. In this paper, we derive a general result on the value of tax shields, obtain the correct value of tax shields for perpetuities, and state the correct valuation formulas for arbitrary cash flows under a constant leverage financial policy.     

Bond Option Valuation for Non‐Markovian Interest Rate Processes

The standard method for valuing a European option on a bond portfolio is developed by Jamshidian. He shows that under certain circumstances the payoff from a bond option can be expressed as a portfolio of payoffs on discount bond options, allowing the option to be valued as a portfolio of options. A limitation of this approach is that it cannot be applied to non‐Markovian interest rate processes. This paper develops a method for the valuation of a European option on a bond portfolio that can be applied to both Markovian and non‐Markovian interest rate processes.     

Portfolio Effects and Valuation of Weather Derivatives

In a mean‐variance framework, the indifference pricing approach is adopted to value weather derivatives, taking account of portfolio effects. Our analysis shows how the magnitude of portfolio effects is related to the correlation between weather indexes and other risky assets, the correlation between weather indexes, and the payoff structures of the existing weather derivatives in an investor's asset portfolio. We also conduct some preliminary empirical analysis. This study contributes to the weather derivative pricing literature by incorporating both the hedgeable and unhedgeable parts of weather risks in illustrating the portfolio effects on the indifference prices of weather derivatives.     

Risk‐based explanation for the book‐to‐market effect

This paper proposes a risk‐based explanation for the book‐to‐market (B/M) effect. I decompose B/M into net operating asset‐to‐market (NOA/M) and net financing asset‐to‐market (NFA/M) components. Portfolio analysis shows that (i) positive B/M, NOA/M and NFA/M are positively related to future returns and (ii) negative B/M, NOA/M and NFA/M are negatively related to future returns. To the extent that positive B/M, NOA/M and NFA/M act as measures of asset risk and negative B/M, NOA/M and NFA/M act as inverse measures of borrowing risk, the nonlinear relations between B/M, NOA/M and NFA/M and future returns provide some evidence to support the risk‐based explanation for the book‐to‐market effect in stock returns.     

A Breakdown of the Valuation Effects of International Cross‐listing*

It is well known that cross‐listing domestic stocks in foreign exchanges has significant valuation effects on the listed company's shares. Using a sample of firms with dual shares, we explore the differential effects of cross‐listing on prices and we are able to separate the different sources of the benefits of cross‐listing. These sources include market segmentation, liquidity, and the bonding of controlling shareholders to lower expropriation of firm resources. Our results show that even though the market segmentation and bonding effects are both statistically significant, the economic significance of segmentation is more than double that of bonding. Furthermore, we document an economically and statistically significant increase in the liquidity of both share classes after the listing. Overall, our results explain why less and less firms are willing to list in the USA: Sarbanes Oxley has increased the cost of adopting better governance while its benefits are not substantial; and market segmentation has decreased significantly in the last years.     

Regulatory Capital Charges for Too‐Connected‐to‐Fail Institutions: A Practical Proposal

The recent financial crisis has highlighted once more that interconnectedness in the financial system is a major source of systemic risk. I suggest a practical way to levy regulatory capital charges based on the degree of interconnectedness among financial institutions. Namely, the charges are based on the institution's incremental contribution to systemic risk based on a risk budgeting approach. The imposition of such capital charges could go a long way towards internalizing the negative externalities associated with too‐connected‐to‐fail institutions and providing managerial incentives to strengthen an institution's solvency position, and avoid too much homogeneity and excessive reliance on the same counterparties in the financial industry.     

A THEORY OF UNWINDING OF CROSS‐SHAREHOLDING UNDER MANAGERIAL ENTRENCHMENT

In this article I examine corporate strategies regarding cross‐shareholding and the unwinding of cross‐shareholding, and I present a rationale for corporate managers to unwind cross‐shareholding from the perspective of managerial entrenchment. Although cross‐shareholding enhances managerial entrenchment, the increased agency costs associated with managerial opportunism increase the incentives for a hostile takeover. To avoid a takeover, managers have to unwind cross‐shareholdings. The unwinding of cross‐shareholdings implies that managers will relinquish their entrenchment and thus will act to increase shareholders' wealth in the future. The model proposed here explains why cross‐shareholdings among Japanese firms declined during the 1990s, a decade during which the cost of takeovers decreased because of financial market deregulation.     

Valuation and Performance of Reacquisitions Following Equity Carve‐Outs

While existing literature reports a positive market reaction to parent companies conducting carve‐outs, we find that the response to carve‐outs that are ultimately reacquired is negative or insignificant. Reacquired units perform considerably worse than those that are not reacquired. Thus, parents may perceive that the market does not recognize the potential of these poorly performing units, and reacquires them to capitalize on the parents' private information. The reacquisition announcement results in a favorable market reaction for the parents and the units. However, parents experience negative long‐term buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns when they reacquire less than 100% of units' shares.     

On the Publicity of Two‐Stage Spin‐Offs and Equity Carve‐Outs

We investigate the effect of pre‐offer publicity on ownership, pricing, and aftermarket performance for equity carve‐outs (ECOs) and two‐stage spin‐offs (COSOs). Contrary to ECOs, for COSOs the parent firm's shareholders end up with free shares in the subsidiary. As the value of large share blocks is likely to be negatively affected by the emergence of new blocks after the divestiture, we hypothesize that parent firms undertaking COSOs may conduct more pre‐offer publicity to attract more retail investors, keeping outside ownership diffuse and inflating aftermarket performance until the distribution of the free shares. We find empirical support for our hypotheses.     

Partial Price Adjustments and Equity Carve‐Outs

We examine the extent to which market‐adjusted ex date returns reflect public information for 271 equity carve‐outs in 1988–2006. Although prior studies focus on ex post determinants of equity carve‐out and initial public offering returns, our study is the first to explore ex ante predictors of equity carve‐out returns. We use three primary variables: filing range adjustments, the percentage of the offering used to retire subsidiary debt or to pay dividends, and the CBOE Volatility Index (VXO) to predict initial returns. We show that 11–35% of the variation in market‐adjusted equity carve‐out returns can be predicted using public information known prior to the offer date.     

ADAPTIVE MESH MODELING AND BARRIER OPTION PRICING UNDER A JUMP‐DIFFUSION PROCESS

The computational burden of numerical barrier option pricing is significant, even prohibitive, for some parameterizations—especially for more realistic models of underlying asset behavior, such as jump diffusions. We extend a binomial jump diffusion pricing algorithm into a trinomial setting and demonstrate how an adaptive mesh may fit into the model. Our result is a barrier option pricing method that employs fewer computational resources, reducing run times substantially. We demonstrate that this extension allows the pricing of options that were previously computationally infeasible and examine the parameterizations in which use of the adaptive mesh is most beneficial.     

Performance Measures in Earnings‐Based Financial Covenants in Debt Contracts

This paper examines how performance measures are defined in major earnings‐based financial covenants in loan contracts to shed light on the economic rationales underlying the contractual use of performance measures. I find an earnings‐based covenant is typically based on a performance measure close to earnings before interest, tax, amortization, and depreciation expenses (EBITDA). However, my empirical analyses show that EBITDA is less useful in explaining credit risk than earnings before interest and tax expenses (EBIT) and even the bottom‐line net income. Thus, measuring credit risk cannot fully explain the choice of accounting performance measures in earnings‐based covenants. I conjecture that contracting parties choose an EBITDA‐related measure, instead of a measure calculated after depreciation and amortization expenses (e.g., EBIT), to make the performance measure less sensitive to investment activities, which can be controlled through other contractual terms, such as a restriction on capital expenditure, and provide empirical evidence consistent with this conjecture.     

Are Expected Inflation Rates and Expected Real Rates Negatively Correlated? A Long‐Run Test of the Mundell‐Tobin Hypothesis

Some empirical evidence suggests that the expected real interest and expected inflation rates are negatively correlated. This hypothesis of negative correlation is sometimes known as the Mundell‐Tobin hypothesis. In this article we reinvestigate this negative relation from a long‐term point of view using cointegration analysis. The data on the historical interest rate on T‐bills and the inflation rate indicate that the Mundell‐Tobin hypothesis does not hold in the long run for the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. We also obtain similar results using the real interest rate on index‐linked gilt traded in the United Kingdom.     

A Bayesian Model Comparison for Trend‐Cycle Decompositions of Output

We compare a number of widely used trend‐cycle decompositions of output in a formal Bayesian model comparison exercise. This is motivated by the often markedly different results from these decompositions—different decompositions have broad implications for the relative importance of real versus nominal shocks in explaining variations in output. Using U.S. quarterly real GDP, we find that the overall best model is an unobserved components model with two features: (i) a nonzero correlation between trend and cycle innovations and (ii) a break in trend output growth in 2007. The annualized trend output growth decreases from about 3.4% to 1.2%–1.5% after the break. The results also indicate that real shocks are more important than nominal shocks. The slowdown in trend output growth is robust when we expand the set of models to include bivariate unobserved components models.     

Optimal Mortgage Refinancing: A Closed‐Form Solution

We derive the first closed‐form optimal refinancing rule: refinance when the current mortgage interest rate falls below the original rate by at least In this formula W(.) is (the principal branch of) the Lambert W‐function, where ρ is the real discount rate, λ is the expected real rate of exogenous mortgage repayment, σ is the standard deviation of the mortgage rate, is the ratio of the tax‐adjusted refinancing cost and the remaining mortgage value, and τ is the marginal tax rate. This expression is derived by solving a tractable class of refinancing problems. Our quantitative results closely match those reported by researchers using numerical methods.     

Investor Recognition and Post‐Acquisition Performance of Acquirers

The literature has documented a negative relation between investor recognition and expected returns. This negative relation is consistent with the prediction in Merton (1987, Journal of Finance 42, 483–510). This paper investigates whether the changes in investor recognition of acquirers around the time of the acquisitions can explain the post‐acquisition underperformance of acquirer stocks. Using a large sample of U.S. acquisitions from 1980 to 2010, this paper finds that investor recognition, proxied by the number of institutional investors and the number of common shareholders, increases significantly during acquisitions. Once the increases in investor recognition are controlled for, the “puzzling” long‐run underperformances of acquirers disappears.