Correlated implied volatility with jump and cross section of stock returns

I derive the option‐implied volatility allowing for nonzero correlation between price jump and diffusive risk to examine the information content of implied diffusive, jump risks and their implied covariance in the cross‐sectional variation of future returns. This study documents a strong predictive power of realized volatility and correlated implied volatility spread (RV ? IV_C) in the cross section of stock returns. The difference of realized volatility with the implied diffusive volatility (RV ? σ_C), jump risk (RV ? γ_C) and covariance (RV ? ICov) can forecast future returns. These RV ? σ_C and RV ? γ_C anomalies are robustly persistent even after controlling for market, size, book‐to‐market value, momentum and liquidity factors.     

Idiosyncratic volatility and cross‐sectional stock returns in Southeast Asian stock markets

We examine the role of idiosyncratic risk in five ASEAN markets of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Our research was motivated by the findings of Ang et al. (2006, 2009) of a ‘puzzling’ negative relation between idiosyncratic volatility and 1‐month ahead stock returns in developed markets and the suggestion of the ubiquity of these results in other markets. In contrast, we find no evidence of an idiosyncratic volatility puzzle in these Asian stock markets; instead, we document a positive relationship between idiosyncratic volatility and returns in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia and no relationship in the Philippines. The idiosyncratic volatility trading strategy could result in significant trading profits in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and to some extent in Indonesia. Our study underscores the fact that generalizing empirical results obtained in developed stock markets to new and emerging markets could potentially be misleading.     

Option strategies: Good deals and margin calls

We provide evidence that trading frictions have an economically important impact on the execution and the profitability of option strategies that involve writing out-of-the-money put options. Margin requirements, in particular, limit the notional amount of capital that can be invested in the strategies and force investors to close down positions and realize losses. The economic effect of frictions is stronger when the investor seeks to write options more aggressively. Although margins are effective in reducing counterparty default risk, they also impose a friction that limits investors from supplying liquidity to the option market.     

Incomplete information,idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns

When investors have incomplete information, expected returns, as measured by an econometrician, deviate from those predicted by standard asset pricing models by including a term that is the product of the stock’s idiosyncratic volatility and the investors’ aggregated forecast errors. If investors are biased this term generates a relation between idiosyncratic volatility and expected stocks returns. Relying on forecast revisions from IBES, we construct a new variable that proxies for this term and show that it explains a significant part of the empirical relation between idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns.     

The cross-section of average delta-hedge option returns under stochastic volatility

Existing evidence indicates that average returns of purchased market-hedge S&P 500 index calls, puts, and straddles are non-zero but large and negative, which implies that options are expensive. This result is intuitively explained by means of volatility risk and a negative volatility risk premium, but there is a recent surge of empirical and analytical studies which also attempt to find the sources of this premium. An important question in the line of a priced volatility explanation is if a standard stochastic volatility model can also explain the cross-sectional findings of these empirical studies. The answer is fairly positive. The volatility elasticity of calls and puts is several times the level of market volatility, depending on moneyness and maturity, and implies a rich cross-section of negative average option returns—even if volatility risk is not priced heavily, albeit negative. We introduce and calibrate a new measure of option overprice to explain these results. This measure is robust to jump risk if jumps are not priced.      

A new approach for option pricing under stochastic volatility

We develop a new approach for pricing European-style contingent claims written on the time T spot price of an underlying asset whose volatility is stochastic. Like most of the stochastic volatility literature, we assume continuous dynamics for the price of the underlying asset. In contrast to most of the stochastic volatility literature, we do not directly model the dynamics of the instantaneous volatility. Instead, taking advantage of the recent rise of the variance swap market, we directly assume continuous dynamics for the time T variance swap rate. The initial value of this variance swap rate can either be directly observed, or inferred from option prices. We make no assumption concerning the real world drift of this process. We assume that the ratio of the volatility of the variance swap rate to the instantaneous volatility of the underlying asset just depends on the variance swap rate and on the variance swap maturity. Since this ratio is assumed to be independent of calendar time, we term this key assumption the stationary volatility ratio hypothesis (SVRH). The instantaneous volatility of the futures follows an unspecified stochastic process, so both the underlying futures price and the variance swap rate have unspecified stochastic volatility. Despite this, we show that the payoff to a path-independent contingent claim can be perfectly replicated by dynamic trading in futures contracts and variance swaps of the same maturity. As a result, the contingent claim is uniquely valued relative to its underlying’s futures price and the assumed observable variance swap rate. In contrast to standard models of stochastic volatility, our approach does not require specifying the market price of volatility risk or observing the initial level of instantaneous volatility. As a consequence of our SVRH, the partial differential equation (PDE) governing the arbitrage-free value of the contingent claim just depends on two state variables rather than the usual three. We then focus on the consistency of our SVRH with the standard assumption that the risk-neutral process for the instantaneous variance is a diffusion whose coefficients are independent of the variance swap maturity. We show that the combination of this maturity independent diffusion hypothesis (MIDH) and our SVRH implies a very special form of the risk-neutral diffusion process for the instantaneous variance. Fortunately, this process is tractable, well-behaved, and enjoys empirical support. Finally, we show that our model can also be used to robustly price and hedge volatility derivatives.     

What is the correct meaning of implied volatility?

This paper presents a closed-form solution for the valuation of European options under the assumption that the excess returns of an underlying asset follow a diffusion process. In light of our model, the implied volatility computed from the Black–Scholes formula should be viewed as the volatility of excess returns rather than as the volatility of gross returns. Using the SPX and the OMX options data, we test whether implied volatility obtained from Black-Scholes option price explains the volatilities of excess returns better than gross returns, even though the result is not statistically significant.     

Earnings volatility,ambiguity, and crisis-period stock returns

Financial crises are marked by substantial increases in ambiguity where prices appear to decouple from fundamentals. Consistent with ambiguity-based asset pricing theories, we find that ambiguity concerns are more severe for firms with higher earnings volatility, causing investors to demand a higher ambiguity premium for such firms. While there is no relation between earnings volatility and stock returns under normal conditions, there is a significant negative relation between crisis-period stock returns and prior earnings volatility. The effect is stronger in firms with low institutional ownership and low analyst following, consistent with ambiguity concerns being greatest amongst firms with unsophisticated investors.     

Impact of idiosyncratic volatility on stock returns: A cross-sectional study

This paper proposes a new approach to estimate the idiosyncratic volatility premium. In contrast to the popular two-pass regression method, this approach relies on a novel GMM-type estimation procedure that uses only a single cross-section of return observations to obtain consistent estimates. Also, it enables a comparison of idiosyncratic volatility premia estimated using stock returns with different holding periods. The approach is empirically illustrated by applying it to daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, and annual US stock return data over the course of 2000–2011. The results suggest that the idiosyncratic volatility premium tends to be positive on daily return data, but negative on monthly, quarterly, and annual data. They also indicate the presence of a January effect.     

Do idiosyncratic jumps matter?

We show that idiosyncratic jumps are a key determinant of mean stock returns from both an ex post and ex ante perspective. Ex post, the entire annual average return of a typical stock accrues on the four days on which its price jumps. Ex ante, idiosyncratic jump risk earns a premium: a value-weighted weekly long-short portfolio that buys (sells) stocks with high (low) predicted jump probabilities earns annualized mean returns of 9.4% and four-factor alphas of 8.1%. This strategy’s returns are larger when there are greater limits to arbitrage. These results are consistent with investor aversion to idiosyncratic jump risk.     

Determinants of S&;P 500 index option returns

We analyze common factors that affect returns on S&P 500 index options and find that 93% of the variation in option returns can be explained by three factors, which respectively account for 87%, 4%, and 2% of the variation in option returns. Furthermore, we test diffusion option pricing models by using mean–variance spanning properties implied in the models. The spanning tests reject one-factor diffusion models, as well as the hypothesis that the underlying asset and an equally weighted option index span options. Our results fail to reject that the underlying asset and an at-the-money option can span out-of-the-money options, but does reject that they span in-the-money options.      

Idiosyncratic risk and the cross-section of stock returns: Merton (1987) meets Miller (1977)

Merton [1987. A simple model of capital market equilibrium with incomplete information. Journal of Finance 42, 483–510] predicts that idiosyncratic risk should be priced when investors hold sub-optimally diversified portfolios, and cross-sectional stock returns should be positively related to their idiosyncratic risk. However, the literature generally finds a negative relationship between returns and idiosyncratic risk, which is more consistent with Miller's [1977. Risk, uncertainty, and divergence of opinion. Journal of Finance 32, 1151–1168] analysis of asset pricing under short-sale constraints. We examine the cross-sectional effects of idiosyncratic risk while explicitly recognizing the confounding effects that dispersion of beliefs and short-sale constraints produce in the Merton framework. We find strong support for Merton's [1987. A simple model of capital market equilibrium with incomplete information. Journal of Finance 42, 483–510] model among stocks that have low levels of investor recognition and for which short selling is limited. For these stocks, the relation between idiosyncratic risk and expected returns is positive, as predicted by Merton [1987. A simple model of capital market equilibrium with incomplete information. Journal of Finance 42, 483–510].     

Dynamic analysis of stock return volatility in an integrated international capital market

This paper examines the dynamic behavior of the stock return volatility for Canada, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The evidence indicates that international stock return volatility is mainly influenced by the U.S. stock return volatility and the exchange rate volatility, supporting the international capital market integration hypothesis. There seems to be some correlation between stock return volatility and macroeconomic volatility, but the effect is relatively weaker. In addition to the economic fundamentals, the noise component is found to be time varying, confirming the AR(MA)CH specifications in the stock return models.     

Inter-industry wage differentials revisited: Wage volatility and the option value of mobility

Analysis of data from the PSID reveals that idiosyncratic wage volatility varies inversely with inter-industry wage differentials and is positively correlated with both returns to industry tenure and rates of inter-industry mobility. An incomplete markets life cycle model in which inter-industry mobility decisions and wage differentials are endogenously determined in equilibrium is then developed and shown to be capable of rationalizing these features of the data. In the model, the ability of worker to switch industries generates option value that is large enough to offset the standard risk premium that workers demand for exposure to excess wage volatility.     

The relationship between implied and realized volatility: evidence from the Australian stock index option market

This paper examines the relationship between the volatility implied in option prices and the subsequently realized volatility by using the S&P/ASX 200 index options (XJO) traded on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) during a period of 5 years. Unlike stock index options such as the S&P 100 index options in the US market, the S&P/ASX 200 index options are traded infrequently and in low volumes, and have a long maturity cycle. Thus an errors-in-variables problem for measurement of implied volatility is more likely to exist. After accounting for this problem by instrumental variable method, it is found that both call and put implied volatilities are superior to historical volatility in forecasting future realized volatility. Moreover, implied call volatility is nearly an unbiased forecast of future volatility.

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.     

Cross-section of option returns and volatility

We study the cross-section of stock option returns by sorting stocks on the difference between historical realized volatility and at-the-money implied volatility. We find that a zero-cost trading strategy that is long (short) in the portfolio with a large positive (negative) difference between these two volatility measures produces an economically and statistically significant average monthly return. The results are robust to different market conditions, to stock risks-characteristics, to various industry groupings, to option liquidity characteristics, and are not explained by usual risk factor models.     

The calm after the storm: implied volatility and future stock index returns

This article explores the predictive power of five implied volatility indices for subsequent returns on the corresponding underlying stock indices from January 2000 through October 2013. Contrary to previous research, very low volatility levels appear to be followed by significantly positive average returns over the next 20, 40 or 60 trading days. Rolling trading simulations show that positive adjusted excess returns can be achieved when long positions in the stock indices are taken on days of very low implied volatility. This may be a hint that market inefficiencies exist in some markets, especially outside the USA. The excess returns measured against a buy and hold benchmark are significant for the German and Japanese market when tested with a bootstrap methodology. The results are robust against a broad spectrum of specifications.