The Cross‐Section of Credit Risk Premia and Equity Returns

We explore the link between a firm's stock returns and credit risk using a simple insight from structural models following Merton ( 1974 ): risk premia on equity and credit instruments are related because all claims on assets must earn the same compensation per unit of risk. Consistent with theory, we find that firms' stock returns increase with credit risk premia estimated from CDS spreads. Credit risk premia contain information not captured by physical or risk‐neutral default probabilities alone. This sheds new light on the “distress puzzle”—the lack of a positive relation between equity returns and default probabilities—reported in previous studies.     

Financial Distress and the Cross‐section of Equity Returns

We explicitly consider financial leverage in a simple equity valuation model and study the cross‐sectional implications of potential shareholder recovery upon resolution of financial distress. Our model is capable of simultaneously explaining lower returns for financially distressed stocks, stronger book‐to‐market effects for firms with high default likelihood, and the concentration of momentum profits among low credit quality firms. The model further predicts (i) a hump‐shaped relationship between value premium and default probability, and (ii) stronger momentum profits for nearly distressed firms with significant prospects for shareholder recovery. Our empirical analysis strongly confirms these novel predictions.     

Financial Intermediaries and the Cross‐Section of Asset Returns

Financial intermediaries trade frequently in many markets using sophisticated models. Their marginal value of wealth should therefore provide a more informative stochastic discount factor (SDF) than that of a representative consumer. Guided by theory, we use shocks to the leverage of securities broker‐dealers to construct an intermediary SDF. Intuitively, deteriorating funding conditions are associated with deleveraging and high marginal value of wealth. Our single‐factor model prices size, book‐to‐market, momentum, and bond portfolios with an R² of 77% and an average annual pricing error of 1%—performing as well as standard multifactor benchmarks designed to price these assets.     

Sparse Signals in the Cross‐Section of Returns

This paper applies the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) to make rolling one‐minute‐ahead return forecasts using the entire cross‐section of lagged returns as candidate predictors. The LASSO increases both out‐of‐sample fit and forecast‐implied Sharpe ratios. This out‐of‐sample success comes from identifying predictors that are unexpected, short‐lived, and sparse. Although the LASSO uses a statistical rule rather than economic intuition to identify predictors, the predictors it identifies are nevertheless associated with economically meaningful events: the LASSO tends to identify as predictors stocks with news about fundamentals.     

Organization Capital and the Cross‐Section of Expected Returns

Organization capital is a production factor that is embodied in the firm's key talent and has an efficiency that is firm specific. Hence, both shareholders and key talent have a claim to its cash flows. We develop a model in which the outside option of the key talent determines the share of firm cash flows that accrue to shareholders. This outside option varies systematically and renders firms with high organization capital riskier from shareholders' perspective. We find that firms with more organization capital have average returns that are 4.6% higher than firms with less organization capital.     

Failure Risk and the Cross‐Section of Hedge Fund Returns

Modeling a hedge fund's probability of failure with a dynamic logit regression, I find that the probability of a fund's failure has a significantly negative effect on the fund's future returns. A quintile portfolio with the highest failure probability underperforms a quintile portfolio with the lowest failure probability by 5% to 6% per year from 1997 to 2012. The results are robust to the definition of hedge fund failure and controlling for a large set of risk factors and fund characteristics. Moreover, the negative effect of failure probability on future fund returns is stronger for funds with weak share restrictions.     

Good‐Specific Habit Formation and the Cross‐Section of Expected Returns

I study asset prices in a general equilibrium framework in which agents form habits over individual varieties of goods rather than over an aggregate consumption bundle. Goods are produced by monopolistically competitive firms whose elasticities of demand depend on consumers' habit formation. Firms that produce goods with a high habit level relative to consumption have low demand elasticities, set high prices for their product, have low expected returns on their stock, and have low asset pricing betas and stock return volatilities. I find supportive evidence for these predictions in the data.     

Luck versus Skill in the Cross‐Section of Mutual Fund Returns

The aggregate portfolio of actively managed U.S. equity mutual funds is close to the market portfolio, but the high costs of active management show up intact as lower returns to investors. Bootstrap simulations suggest that few funds produce benchmark‐adjusted expected returns sufficient to cover their costs. If we add back the costs in fund expense ratios, there is evidence of inferior and superior performance (nonzero true α) in the extreme tails of the cross‐section of mutual fund α estimates.     

Expected versus Ex Post Profitability in the Cross‐Section of Industry Returns

Asset pricing theory predicts a positive cross‐sectional relation between expected profitability and expected returns. However, empirical studies typically use lagged ex post profitability as a proxy for expected profitability. In this article, we use out‐of‐sample combination forecasts to estimate expected industry‐level operating profit, gross profit, operating cash flow, and net income. We then construct real‐time industry‐rotation strategies based on high and low expected profitability. For each measure except gross profit, these predicted‐profitability strategies earn significant alpha net of transaction costs and outperform strategies based on ex post profitability.     

Cross‐Section of Expected Returns and Extreme Returns: The Role of Investor Attention and Risk Preferences

Previous work finds a negative and significant relation between the maximum daily return over the past one month and expected future stock returns. We determine that this effect is more pronounced for stocks that achieve their maximum daily returns toward the end of the month and stocks that are associated with capital losses show greater reversals. These results suggest the effect is related to investor attention and risk preferences.     

Industry‐Specific Human Capital,Idiosyncratic Risk,and the Cross‐Section of Expected Stock Returns

Human capital is one of the largest assets in the economy and in theory may play an important role for asset pricing. Human capital is heterogeneous across investors. One source of heterogeneity is industry affiliation. I show that the cross‐section of expected stock returns is primarily affected by industry‐level rather than aggregate labor income risk. Furthermore, when human capital is excluded from the asset pricing model, the resulting idiosyncratic risk may appear to be priced. I find that the premium for idiosyncratic risk documented by several empirical studies depends on the covariance between stock and human capital returns.     

Intraday Patterns in the Cross‐section of Stock Returns

Motivated by the literature on investment flows and optimal trading, we examine intraday predictability in the cross‐section of stock returns. We find a striking pattern of return continuation at half‐hour intervals that are exact multiples of a trading day, and this effect lasts for at least 40 trading days. Volume, order imbalance, volatility, and bid‐ask spreads exhibit similar patterns, but do not explain the return patterns. We also show that short‐term return reversal is driven by temporary liquidity imbalances lasting less than an hour and bid‐ask bounce. Timing trades can reduce execution costs by the equivalent of the effective spread.     

Connecting Optimal Capital Investment and Equity Returns

Economic theory predicts a contemporaneous correlation between equity returns and investment growth that is only weakly present in the data. By modifying the firm's production function to include a lag between investment decisions and expenditures, and after correcting for the temporal aggregation of investment, I find the predicted correlation to be present in the data. I estimate the model for 31 industries and find that investment returns are highly correlated with the industry portfolio equity returns. Further, the portion of investment returns orthogonal to equity returns is associated positively with changes in profitability and negatively with lagged differences between equity and investment returns.     

Institutional Trade Persistence and Long‐Term Equity Returns

Recent studies show that single‐quarter institutional herding positively predicts short‐term returns. Motivated by the theoretical herding literature, which emphasizes endogenous persistence in decisions over time, we estimate the effect of multiquarter institutional buying and selling on stock returns. Using both regression and portfolio tests, we find that persistent institutional trading negatively predicts long‐term returns: persistently sold stocks outperform persistently bought stocks at long horizons. The negative association between returns and institutional trade persistence is not subsumed by past returns or other stock characteristics, is concentrated among smaller stocks, and is stronger for stocks with higher institutional ownership.     

Consumption, Dividends, and the Cross Section of Equity Returns

We show that aggregate consumption risks embodied in cash flows can account for the puzzling differences in risk premia across book‐to‐market, momentum, and size‐sorted portfolios. The dynamics of aggregate consumption and cash flow growth rates, modeled as a vector autoregression, are used to measure the consumption beta of discounted cash flows. Differences in these cash flow betas account for more than 60% of the cross‐sectional variation in risk premia. The market price for risk in cash flows is highly significant. We argue that cash flow risk is important for interpreting differences in risk compensation across assets.     

Market Expectations in the Cross‐Section of Present Values

Returns and cash flow growth for the aggregate U.S. stock market are highly and robustly predictable. Using a single factor extracted from the cross‐section of book‐to‐market ratios, we find an out‐of‐sample return forecasting R² of 13% at the annual frequency (0.9% monthly). We document similar out‐of‐sample predictability for returns on value, size, momentum, and industry portfolios. We present a model linking aggregate market expectations to disaggregated valuation ratios in a latent factor system. Spreads in value portfolios’ exposures to economic shocks are key to identifying predictability and are consistent with duration‐based theories of the value premium.     

Multivariate Models of Equity Returns for Investment Guarantees Valuation

Abstract

In this paper we investigate the valuation of investment guarantees in a multivariate (discrete-time) framework. We present how to build multivariate models in general, and we survey the most important multivariate GARCH models. A direct multivariate application of regime-switching models is also discussed, as is the estimation of these models using maximum likelihood and their comparison in a multivariate setting. The computation of the CTE provision is further presented. We have estimated the models with a multivariate dataset (Canada, United States, United Kingdom, and Japan), and we compared the quality of their fit using multiple criteria and tests. We observe that multivariate GARCH models provide a better overall fit than regime-switching models. However, regime-switching models appropriately represent the fat tails of the returns distribution, which is where most GARCH models fail. This leads to significant differences in the value of the CTE provisions, and, in general, provisions computed with regime-switching models are higher. Thus, the results from this multivariate analysis are in line with what was obtained in the literature of univariate models.     

The Cross‐Section of Managerial Ability,Incentives, and Risk Preferences

I estimate a dynamic investment model for mutual managers to study the cross‐sectional distribution of ability, incentives, and risk preferences. The manager's compensation depends on the size of the fund, which fluctuates due to fund returns and due to fund flows that respond to the fund's relative performance. The model provides an economic interpretation of time‐varying coefficients in performance regressions in terms of the structural parameters. I document that the estimates of fund alphas are precise and virtually unbiased. I find substantial heterogeneity in ability, risk preferences, and pay‐for‐performance sensitivities that relates to observable fund characteristics.     

Private Equity and Long‐Run Investment: The Case of Innovation

A long‐standing controversy is whether leveraged buyouts (LBOs) relieve managers from short‐term pressures from public shareholders, or whether LBO funds themselves sacrifice long‐term growth to boost short‐term performance. We examine one form of long‐run activity, namely, investments in innovation as measured by patenting activity. Based on 472 LBO transactions, we find no evidence that LBOs sacrifice long‐term investments. LBO firm patents are more cited (a proxy for economic importance), show no shifts in the fundamental nature of the research, and become more concentrated in important areas of companies' innovative portfolios.     

Implications of Keeping‐Up‐with‐the‐Joneses Behavior for the Equilibrium Cross Section of Stock Returns: International Evidence

This paper tests the cross‐sectional implications of “keeping‐up‐with‐the‐Joneses” (KUJ) preferences in an international setting. When agents have KUJ preferences, in the presence of undiversifiable nonfinancial wealth, both world and domestic risk (the idiosyncratic component of domestic wealth) are priced, and the equilibrium price of risk of the domestic factor is negative. We use labor income as a proxy for domestic wealth and find empirical support for these predictions. In terms of explaining the cross‐section of stock returns and the size of the pricing errors, the model performs better than alternative international asset pricing models.