Quantitative Asset Pricing Implications of Endogenous Solvency Constraints

We study the asset pricing implications of an economy wheresolvency constraints are endogenously determined to deter agentsfrom defaulting while allowing as much risk sharing as possible.We solve analytically for efficient allocations and for thecorresponding asset prices, portfolio holdings, and solvencyconstraints for a simple example. Then we calibrate a more generalmodel to U.S. aggregate as well as idiosyncratic income processes.We find equity premia, risk premia for long-term bonds, andSharpe ratios of magnitudes similar to the U.S. data for lowriskaversion and a lowtime-discount factor.     

Asset Pricing with Dynamic Margin Constraints

This paper provides a novel theoretical analysis of how endogenous time‐varying margin requirements affect capital market equilibrium. I find that margin requirements, when there are no other market frictions, reduce the volatility and correlation of returns as well as the risk‐free rate, but increase the market price of risk, the risk premium, and the price of risky assets. Furthermore, margin requirements generate a strong cross‐sectional dispersion of stock return volatilities. The results emphasize that a general equilibrium analysis may reverse the conclusions of a partial equilibrium analysis often employed in the literature.     

Networks in Production: Asset Pricing Implications

In this paper, I examine asset pricing in a multisector model with sectors connected through an input‐output network. Changes in the network are sources of systematic risk reflected in equilibrium asset prices. Two characteristics of the network matter for asset prices: network concentration and network sparsity. These two production‐based asset pricing factors are determined by the structure of the network and are computed from input‐output data. Consistent with the model predictions, I find return spreads of 4.6% and ?3.2% per year on sparsity and concentration beta‐sorted portfolios, respectively.     

Labor Mobility: Implications for Asset Pricing

Labor mobility is the flexibility of workers to walk away from an industry in response to better opportunities. I develop a model in which labor flows make bad times worse for shareholders who are left with capital that is less productive. The model shows that firms face greater operating leverage by providing flexibility to mobile workers. I construct an empirical measure of labor mobility consistent with the model and document an economically significant cross‐sectional relation between mobility, operating leverage, and stock returns. I find that firms in mobile industries earn returns over 5% higher than those in less mobile industries.     

Investment Policy Implications of the Capital Asset Pricing Model

The results of previous generalized Security Market Line (SML) tests of the Mean Variance (MV) and Linear Risk Tolerance (LRT) Capital Asset Pricing Models indicate that the models are empirically identical. A very widely accepted, but technically incorrect, explanation for the results is that with normal return distributions all expected utility maximizing riskaverse investors will pick MV portfolios. The paper shows that the generalized SML tests cannot distinguish between the MV model and a much wider variety of power utility LRT models than has previously been entertained. On the other hand, with approximately normal, or real world, return distributions the investment policies of the various models are shown to be different from each other, and from the MV policy in particular. To the extent the results of the portfolio selection calculations are robust, the results of, and implications drawn from, the tests of the macro pricing relations are not based on firm micro foundations.     

Labor‐Technology Substitution: Implications for Asset Pricing

This paper studies the asset pricing implications of a firm's opportunities to replace routine‐task labor with automation. I develop a model in which firms optimally undertake such replacement when their productivity is low. Hence, firms with routine‐task labor maintain a replacement option that hedges their value against unfavorable macroeconomic shocks and lowers their expected returns. Using establishment‐level occupational data, I construct a measure of firms' share of routine‐task labor. Compared to their industry peers, firms with a higher share of routine‐task labor (i) invest more in machines and reduce more routine‐task labor during economic downturns, and (ii) have lower expected stock returns.     

The Implications of Nonmarketable Income for Consumption-Based Models of Asset Pricing

A new representation of nonmarketable (NM) income is introduced in this essay. Using this representation and continuous trading, there exists a set of individuals who do not participate in the asset market and who consume at the rate of nonmarketable income derived from human capital. Because these individuals remain nonparticipants for a range of stochastic processes governing the NM income, consumption betas are not generally unique in value and the consumption-based CAPM (CCAPM) does not obtain. However, the intertemporal CAPM (ICAPM) of Merton remains valid.     

Asset Pricing Implications of Nonconvex Adjustment Costs and Irreversibility of Investment

This paper derives a real options model that accounts for the value premium. If real investment is largely irreversible, the book value of assets of a distressed firm is high relative to its market value because it has idle physical capital. The firm's excess installed capital capacity enables it to fully benefit from positive aggregate shocks without undertaking costly investment. Thus, returns to equity holders of a high book‐to‐market firm are sensitive to aggregate conditions and its systematic risk is high. Simulations indicate that the model goes a long way toward accounting for the observed value premium.     

Trading Volume: Implications of an Intertemporal Capital Asset Pricing Model

We derive an intertemporal asset pricing model and explore its implications for trading volume and asset returns. We show that investors trade in only two portfolios: the market portfolio, and a hedging portfolio that is used to hedge the risk of changing market conditions. We empirically identify the hedging portfolio using weekly volume and returns data for U.S. stocks, and then test two of its properties implied by the theory: Its return should be an additional risk factor in explaining the cross section of asset returns, and should also be the best predictor of future market returns.     

Information Quality and Long‐Run Risk: Asset Pricing Implications

I study the asset pricing implications of the quality of public information about persistent productivity shocks in a general equilibrium model with Kreps–Porteus preferences. Low information quality is associated with a high equity premium, a low volatility of consumption growth, and a low volatility of the risk‐free interest rate. The relationship between information quality and the equity premium differs from that in endowment economies. My calibration improves substantially upon the Bansal–Yaron model in terms of the moments of the wealth–consumption ratio and the return on aggregate wealth.     

On the Importance of Measuring Payout Yield: Implications for Empirical Asset Pricing

We investigate the empirical implications of using various measures of payout yield rather than dividend yield for asset pricing models. We find statistically and economically significant predictability in the time series when payout (dividends plus repurchases) and net payout (dividends plus repurchases minus issuances) yields are used instead of the dividend yield. Similarly, we find that payout (net payout) yields contains information about the cross section of expected stock returns exceeding that of dividend yields, and that the high minus low payout yield portfolio is a priced factor.     

Assessing Asset Pricing Anomalies

The optimal portfolio strategy is developed for an investorwho has detected an asset pricing anomaly but is not certainthat the anomaly is genuine rather than merely apparent. Theanalysis takes account of the fact that the parameters of boththe underlying asset pricing model and the anomalous returnsare estimated rather than known. The value that an investorwould place on the ability to invest to exploit the apparentanomaly is also derived and illustrative calculations are presentedfor the Fama and French SMB and HML portfolios, whose returnsare anomalous relative to the CAPM.     

Comparing Asset Pricing Models

A Bayesian asset pricing test is derived that is easily computed in closed form from the standard F‐statistic. Given a set of candidate traded factors, we develop a related test procedure that permits the computation of model probabilities for the collection of all possible pricing models that are based on subsets of the given factors. We find that the recent models of Hou, Xue, and Zhang (2015a, 2015b) and Fama and French (2015, 2016) are dominated by a variety of models that include a momentum factor, along with value and profitability factors that are updated monthly.     

Asset Pricing without Garbage

This paper provides an explanation for why garbage implies a much lower relative risk aversion in the consumption‐based asset pricing model than National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) consumption expenditure: Unlike garbage, NIPA consumption is filtered to mitigate measurement error. I apply a simple model of the filtering process that allows one to undo the filtering inherent in NIPA consumption. “Unfiltered NIPA consumption” well explains the equity premium and is priced in the cross‐section of stock returns. I discuss the likely properties of true consumption (i.e., without measurement error and filtering) and quantify implications for habit and long‐run risk models.     

Multifactor Asset Pricing Models

Since the early 1960s, the mean-variance Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) has been a dominant paradigm in modern finance. Recently, the accumulation of anomalous evidence, and a realisation that empirical tests of the model are tautologically related to the efficiency of the market index, have pushed that paradigm to a point of crisis. This paper reviews alternative asset pricing models which coexisted with the CAPM and may provide plausible substitutes. The major distinguishing feature of these models is that they predict multiple risk factors and, with the exception of the Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT), are extensions of the CAPM.     

Asset Pricing with Garbage

A new measure of consumption, garbage, is more volatile and more correlated with stocks than the canonical measure, National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) consumption expenditure. A garbage‐based consumption capital asset pricing model matches the U.S. equity premium with relative risk aversion of 17 versus 81 and evades the joint equity premium‐risk‐free rate puzzle. These results carry through to European data. In a cross‐section of size, value, and industry portfolios, garbage growth is priced and drives out NIPA expenditure growth.     

Valuation Risk and Asset Pricing

Standard representative‐agent models fail to account for the weak correlation between stock returns and measurable fundamentals, such as consumption and output growth. This failing, which underlies virtually all modern asset pricing puzzles, arises because these models load all uncertainty onto the supply side of the economy. We propose a simple theory of asset pricing in which demand shocks play a central role. These shocks give rise to valuation risk that allows the model to account for key asset pricing moments, such as the equity premium, the bond term premium, and the weak correlation between stock returns and fundamentals.     

Tax Clienteles and Asset Pricing

Taxation of asset returns can create various clientele effects. If every agent is marginal on all assets, no clientele effects arise. If some (but not every) agent is marginal on all assets, there arises a clientele effect in quantities but none in prices. If no agent is marginal on all assets, there arise clientele effects in both quantities and prices. In the first two cases, standard asset pricing and martingale results extend to analogous aftertax results. In the third case, linear asset pricing works only on subsets of assets, and the standard martingale results become after-tax supermartingale results.     

Asset Pricing at the Millennium

This paper surveys the field of asset pricing. The emphasis is on the interplay between theory and empirical work and on the trade-off between risk and return. Modern research seeks to understand the behavior of the stochastic discount factor (SDF) that prices all assets in the economy. The behavior of the term structure of real interest rates restricts the conditional mean of the SDF, whereas patterns of risk premia restrict its conditional volatility and factor structure. Stylized facts about interest rates, aggregate stock prices, and cross-sectional patterns in stock returns have stimulated new research on optimal portfolio choice, intertemporal equilibrium models, and behavioral finance.