A Reinvestigation of Idiosyncratic Volatility
|
|
- Denis Small
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 A Reinvestigation of Idiosyncratic Volatility Nicholas Wilmes Western Kentucky University May 5, 2015 Abstract In updating Campbell et al. (2001) I find evidence that the level of idiosyncratic volatility, industry-specific volatility, and market volatility have increased to their highest level in 50 years during the 21 st century. I also find evidence that the average correlation among stocks has steadily increased as well. Finally, I find that the average R-squared is increasing, opposite the findings by Fama & French (2004) and Brown & Kapadia (2007) that the average R-squared is decreasing. I would like to thank Dr. Alex Lebedinsky for his generous support and guidance through this process. I would also like to thank Dr. Brian Goff and Dr. David Beckworth for their helpful feedback and comments.
2 1 Introduction In this paper, I investigate volatility patterns in U.S. stock market by decomposing aggregate volatility into idiosyncratic, market and industry volatilities. The paper closely follows Campbell et al. (2001) updating their work with more recent data. In this paper, I focus on the effect of major market events, changing market dynamics, and unique economic and financial position in which we currently reside on idiosyncratic volatility. Since the turn of the 21 st century, investors in the United States stock market have seen their fortunes change drastically. These fifteen years encompassed not only a strong bull market, but also two cataclysmic events that will forever define the decade in history books. These two events are the technology bubble and the Great Recession. These major events wreaked havoc on the stock market and major indices declined markedly, decimating the wealth of many. While it is obvious that the returns generated by firms during times of great financial distress in a weakening economy will be below their historical levels, an important question to ask is whether the resulting volatility is systematic or idiosyncratic in nature. Systematic volatility is defined here as volatility of the market as a whole on collective risk that is common to equities in general rather than specific firms. In contrast, idiosyncratic volatility is volatility that is unique to an individual firm due to risks and information that pertain solely to that firm rather than to the market as a whole. When levels of volatility are high for equities, investors place a higher risk premium on equity securities. This reduces the assets price by further discounting future cash flows because of the high risk associated with the increase in uncertainty about the future, or investors require a larger return. Measuring volatility not only in the aggregate, but also its industry and firm specific idiosyncratic components is important for investors. Idiosyncratic volatility of individual firms may be offset by other firms in a portfolio, but not necessarily their associated industry risk. Similarly, the various stocks in a given portfolio may be diversified as to their industry-specific risk but not necessarily their firm-specific idiosyncratic risk (Campbell et al. [2001]). Lastly, the prices of derivatives such as call or put options are dependent on the price of the individual stock
3 2 for which the option pertains, and the price is affected by the total of the market risk, industryspecific risk, and idiosyncratic risk. A prominent and widely cited study by Campbell et al. (2001) showed that from 1962 through 1997 idiosyncratic firm volatility increased and had a statistically significant upward trend and that the overall market volatility did not exhibit a similar trend. Campbell et al. (2001) also found that along with an increase in idiosyncratic risk, there was a decrease in the correlation among stocks over their sample, and that the industry-level volatility, and to a lesser extent market and idiosyncratic volatility, help to forecast economic activity. This paper extends Campbell et al. (2001) work by updating the data to include the rise and fall of stocks during the technology bubble, the years of growth during the mid-2000s, the Great Recession, and the current recovery. In updating Campbell et al. (2001) I find evidence that the level of idiosyncratic volatility, industry-specific volatility, and market volatility have increased to their highest level in 50 years during the 21 st century. I also find evidence that the average correlation among stocks has steadily increased as well. Related Literature As this study intends to update Campbell et al. (2001), it is substantially based upon their work. In their paper, Campbell et al. (2001) find that idiosyncratic volatility increased from 1962 through 1997 and had a significant upward trend. However, they did not find an upward trend for industry-specific volatility or market volatility. They also found that the average R-squared of the market model was decreasing over time and as a result, the number of stocks required to diversify a portfolio had increased. The upward trend in idiosyncratic volatility reported by Campbell et al. (2001) has been disputed by some. An alternative view put forward by Brandt et al. (2010) is that the increase in idiosyncratic volatility was an episodic phenomenon concentrated in low-priced stocks with high levels of retail ownership that reversed itself in the year 2000 and was not a time trend. However, many other researchers have also found an upward trend in idiosyncratic volatility including
4 3 Irvine & Pontiff (2009), Bartram et al. (2012), Brown & Kapadia (2007), and Comin & Philippon (2006). A great deal of the literature examines what has caused the change in the level of idiosyncratic volatility and characteristics of firm s that have high levels of idiosyncratic volatility. This literature will be discussed at length in the discussion section. Empirical Analysis In this paper I use daily stock returns from The Center for Research in Security Prices (CRSP) database. The sample ranges from July 1, 1962 to December 31, 2013 and includes all firms traded on the NYSE, NASDAQ, NYSE Market, and the NYSE Arca exchanges during the period. I also obtained each firm s SIC code and market capitalization (stock price multiplied by the number of outstanding shares) from the CRSP database at monthly intervals with the observation recorded on the final trading day of the month. I used the SIC codes to assign industry codes using the Fama & French (1997) scheme. This scheme classifies firms into 49 industries, including one other category. From this monthly data I dropped any observations that had missing values for market capitalization. Finally, I obtained 1-month Treasury bill data in monthly intervals from Kenneth French s Data Library for the sample period. My data differs slightly from the data Campbell et al. (2001) because I include firms that are traded on the NYSE Arca exchange. The NYSE Arca exchange did not begin actively trading securities until 1997, the final year included in Campbell et al. (2001). Because this study includes sixteen years of trading since the NYSE Arca became active, including stocks traded on this exchange is pertinent to investigating the volatility of equities in the United States as a whole. After deleting observations containing missing values, the sample used in this paper differed slightly from Campbell et al. (2001) in the number of firms. At the beginning of the period my sample contained 2,044 firms compared to the 2,047 in Campbell et al. (2001), and in the last month of Campbell et al. (2001) sample period my sample had 9,205 firms compared to their 8,927. However, even after excluding firms that traded on the NYSE Arca exchange the number of firms did not match perfectly. Even though the sample varied slightly from Campbell et al. (2001), my results very closely resemble theirs.
5 4 Figure 1 (see appendix) plots the number of firms in my sample over the period. Figures 2 and 3 show the distribution of the size of firms within my sample. Figure 2 graphs the median market capitalization, first and third quartiles, and mean market capitalization, all adjusted for inflation. This figure shows that since the early 1970 s the real mean market capitalization has been above the third quartile. Figure 3 shows the mean and values 1.96 standard deviations above and below the mean. This figure depicts where 95% of firms would fall if the market capitalization of stocks was normally distributed. It is obvious from these figures that the size of firms within the market is heavily right-skewed. To calculate a measure of overall aggregate volatility encompassing every stock traded, a scheme must be devised to weight the returns of each firm. The simplest possible weighting scheme would be to give each firm, regardless of its size, an equal weight such that the volatility of a small start-up influences the overall volatility to the same extent that the volatility of one of the largest firms does. Campbell et al. (2001) showed that weighted average of return volatilities can be decomposed as follows = + = = + + Equation (1) shows that the firm volatility is equal to the variance of firm specific residuals multiplied by the weight of firm j in industry i in period t,, and then summed for all firms within industry i. This is then multiplied by the weight of industry i in period t,, and summed for all industries. Using this method I can decompose return volatilities into their components without estimating betas for individual stocks or industries, which may change over the sample. Following Campbell et al. (2001), and the method by which market indices weigh component stocks, I assigned weights to firms based upon their market capitalization. I
6 5 calculated a firm s weight by dividing their market capitalization by the sum of the market capitalization for all firms in the sample during a particular month. For example, to calculate weighted return in March 2013, I used market caps from February Firms were re-weighted each month based upon their market capitalization on the last day of the previous month. I then merged these monthly weights with the daily return data and I calculated market-weighted average return for each day in the sample. I then subtracted the 1-month Treasury bill rate from the average weighted returns to calculate the daily excess average returns Rms, or the returns that were earned above the risk-free rate. 2 = = From the daily excess average returns I calculated the mean excess return of the market over the sample period µm for month t. Volatility for each month was calculated with daily data for that month using equation (2) above. Note, this equation measures variation around the mean for the entire sample rather than month-specific means. Figures 4 and 5 (see appendix) graph the market volatility and the 12-month moving average of volatility over time. It is clear from these figures that since Campbell et al. (2001), market volatility increased greatly and remained high for around five years, which coincides with the technology bubble. After this period, market volatility decreased back to normal levels until the financial crisis and the ensuing Great Recession. The market volatility reaches its maximum level in the sample around the end of 2008, surpassing the second highest month in the sample which contains the 1987 stock market crash. 3 = = = As with the weights of the individual firms within the market, the weight of each firm within its respective industry is based upon the firm s market capitalization. The weight of firm j
7 6 in industry i is equal to firm j s weight within the market divided by the sum of the weights of all firms within industry i. Using these industry weights and returns for each firm in the industry, I calculate weighted average returns for each industry. From the daily average returns by industry, the 1-month Treasury bill rate is subtracted to give the excess industry returns. The volatility for each industry is then calculated following equation (4) by subtracting the excess market returns from the excess industry returns and squaring the differences, denoted, and summing the squared differences by industry for each month. Average industry volatility is calculated using individual industry volatilities and weights of industries in the market, as shown in equation (5). The industry volatility series and its 12-month moving average are shown over time in the figures 6 and 7 (see appendix.) These graphs show that during both the technology bubble and the Great Recession, average industry volatility peaks at levels that are almost double the highest level observed during the period in Campbell et al. (2001). This increased level of industry-specific volatility persisted for multiple years surrounding both of these major events. However, between the technology bubble and the Great Recession industry-level volatility fell to its previous levels. Figure 7 is perhaps more striking because it shows that level of industry volatility at its peak during the technology bubble was about 5 times greater than the highest level in Campbell et al. (2001) = + = = 9 = Finally, to compute the idiosyncratic firm volatility I subtracted the average industry return from each firm s excess returns and squared the difference, resulting in from equation (7). Then, per equation (8), I summed the squared differences for each firm by month
8 7 and multiplied each firm s total squared differences by the firm s weight within its industry to result in average idiosyncratic volatility in industry i. Next, following equation (9), I calculate average idiosyncratic volatility for the all stocks as the weighted average of, where is weight of industry i within the total market in period t. and its 12-moth moving average are depicted in figures 8 and 9, respectively. Campbell et al. (2001) found that there was an upward trend in the idiosyncratic volatility but Brandt et al. (2010) found that by 2001 this trend ceased to exist. Post 2001 there does not appear to be any upward trend in the idiosyncratic volatility Brandt et al. (2010). As with the industry volatility, the 12-month moving average of idiosyncratic volatility in figure 9 peaks during technology bubble. This peak is approximately 2.5 times greater than the largest value in the period studied by Campbell et al. (2001). During the Great Recession, the peak in idiosyncratic volatility is slightly less than double the peak in Campbell et al. (2001). To further investigate the relationship among stocks, and the systematic risk in the market, I used the rolling regression method in Campbell et al. (2001). The dependent variable in each of these regressions is each individual firm s excess return with the market excess return used as the sole explanatory variable. For each month I used all firms with complete return data for the previous 12 months and saved the R-squared of each model. I then averaged the R- squared for all firms with complete data in each month and plotted the resulting equally weighted average R-squared in figure 10 (see appendix). Campbell et al. (2001) found that the average R-squared of individual firms was decreasing and thus the systematic risk was decreasing because stocks were less correlated with one another. Campbell et al. (2001) also calculated the average correlation among stocks by calculating all pairwise correlations and then averaging the correlations for each month. Interestingly, the average correlation perfectly mirrors the equally weighted average R-squared through the sample. During their sample period both the average correlation among stocks and the average R-squared declined. Campbell et al. (2001) states that the decrease in the correlation among stocks increases the number of randomly selected stocks required to hold a relatively diversified portfolio. This finding coincides with Comin & Philippon (2006) who document a decrease in the
9 8 correlation of shocks among sectors, which they find to be decreasing the overall volatility rather than a decline in sectoral volatility. Contrary to Campbell et al. (2001) and Comin & Philippon (2006), I found that beginning right after the period in Campbell et al. (2001), the average R-squared began increasing almost constantly for the next 10 years. A rising R-squared means that the stocks are becoming more correlated and the share of the systematic risk is increasing. The average R-squared of this market model peaks at an astonishingly high 40 percent. This means that for any given firm equally weighted within the market, the average market return can explain 40% of the variation in that firm s return. However it should be noted that there has been much debate about the validity of using R-squared as a measure of idiosyncratic volatility in recent literature both with matching the empirical findings of the firm profiles with high idiosyncratic volatility and the information content in prices using 1-R-squared Brown & Kapadia (2007.) Also, a recent article by Li et al. (2014) has shown that the firm variance and R-squared are not the same and demonstrates the difficulty in directly mapping between the two metrics. The difficulty stems in the calculation of R-squared, which has two components. 1-R-sqaured is equal to the variance of the error term (idiosyncratic volatility) divided by the total variance of the stock. Thus a change in either component changes the ratio, not just a change in the idiosyncratic volatility. Discussion The literature is filled with many explanations for the changes in the idiosyncratic volatility of the stock market, some contradictory and others supplemental. While there is much debate about the trend in idiosyncratic volatility, if one exists, I want to avoid that discussion and focus on the underlying factors that drive changes in idiosyncratic volatility. I feel that developing an understanding of the reasons why idiosyncratic volatility changes over time is crucial in attempting to understanding how idiosyncratic volatility in the U.S. has changed, and whether that change is positive or not. To understand how my results fit with the current literature and put them in context, I will discuss the explanations of the causes of changes in idiosyncratic volatility in the following six categories: small and low priced stocks, how new firms differ from
10 9 older firms, a firm s investor base, research and development, industry turnover, and market development. Small and Low-Priced Stocks In attempting to explain the apparent puzzle in idiosyncratic volatilities, Brandt et al. (2010) found the price of stocks to be very important in understanding idiosyncratic volatility. More specifically, they found that the increase and reversal in idiosyncratic volatility was concentrated in stocks that had low stocks prices and a high proportion of retail ownership. In their analysis, Brandt et al. (2010) controlled for the size of the firm to see if the significance of a low stock price was really just a proxy for the size of a firm. They found that after controlling for firm size, which was statistically significant, stock price was still highly statically significant and of a much larger magnitude than firm size. To further support their notion that low stock prices significantly contribute to an increase in idiosyncratic volatility, Brandt et al. (2010) examined stock splits. Interestingly, these events, which lower the stock price by issuing additional shares and do not change firm fundamentals, were shown to increase idiosyncratic volatility Brandt et al. (2010). While stock price may be a vital component in understanding idiosyncratic volatility, Brown & Kapadia (2007) found evidence that supports Brandt et al. (2010) finding that firm size matters as well. New Firms vs. Old Firms Another topic that has gained prominence in the literature is the change in the nature of public firms. Notably Fama & French (2004) document that new firms fundamentals are different than older firms and that newer firms are more left-skewed in profitability, more rightskewed in their growth, and overall have lower survival rates. The effect of new firms is investigated in depth by Brown & Kapadia (2007). They find that the increase in idiosyncratic volatility is due solely to new listings by riskier firms. The also conclude that the decline in R- squared in their sample is due to new listings of companies with higher idiosyncratic risk, and thus lower R-squared, thereby increasingly reducing the average R-squared as these firms become more prevalent in the market.
11 10 Brown & Kapadia (2007) also document that industries with higher levels of idiosyncratic volatility are industries that have a larger number of new firms in them. Brown & Kapadia (2007) also refute the notion that newer firms have higher idiosyncratic volatility because they list earlier in their life than firms of previous decades. To support their finding, Brown & Kapadia (2007) split stocks into groups of five year intervals with each group containing all stocks that were initially listed during its intervals. They find that each successive group had a higher starting level of idiosyncratic volatility and a lower average R-squared. They argue that if newer firm s idiosyncratic volatility was higher because they listed earlier, the increased idiosyncratic volatility would decline and the average R-squared would increase over time, but they found no evidence that either of these has occurred. Brown & Kapadia (2007) also found that newer firms have declining profit margins and tangible assets, but older firms profit margins and level of tangible assets have stayed almost the same. To further support their conclusion, Brown & Kapadia (2007) also documented that idiosyncratic volatility is inversely related to the average age of firms within an industry and directly related to the proportion of firms within an industry that are newly listed. Finally, Brown & Kapadia (2007) show that the risk of doing business has not changed over time by looking at default rates, to rule out the possibility that newly listed firms are more risky because they are listing in a period of increased risk of doing business. Investor Base Another aspect of firms with high idiosyncratic volatility that differs from firms with low idiosyncratic volatility is the investor base of the firm. Brandt et al. (2010) show that both the increase and decrease in idiosyncratic volatility that they find was concentrated in stocks with low prices and stocks that had a proportion of their shares owned by retail investors. Brandt et al. (2010) also investigated the characteristics of firms which are widely held by retail investors. These firms tended to have low market capitalization, low stock prices, low institutional ownership, and high idiosyncratic volatility. Part of this is due to the fact that retail investors significantly overweight low-priced stocks in their portfolios relative to a portfolio chosen at random based upon firms market capitalization Kumar (2009). In their study, Brandt et al. (2010) found large positive or negative returns, or high turnover, events which they term attentiongrabbing events attract the attention of retail investors and volatility moves around these
12 11 events. Further, Brandt et al. (2010) found that the increase in trading surrounding attentiongrabbing events by retail traders occurs regardless of the information content. This seems to imply that retail traders may not always trade on fundamentals and may be noise traders. Brandt et al. (2010) makes this point by saying that to a retail investor, a stock with a lower level of institutional ownership may be more enticing because they may see the stock as being on a more level playing ground without institutional investors who can appear to have superior information. However, taken with the findings of Jiang & Yao (2009), institutional investors may have superior information. More likely, institutional investors can do a better job reading between the lines and understanding the true fundamentals of a business through murky disclosures and are not distracted by attention-grabbing events that do not contain news. Bartram et al. (2012) found that disclosures were negatively related with idiosyncratic volatility, so it is plausible that retail investors need disclosures to understand the firm s they are trading. Jiang & Yao (2009) found that idiosyncratic volatility is inversely related to future earnings shocks and that the return predictive power stems from information content about future earnings. Jiang & Yao (2009) also found that this predictive power from idiosyncratic volatility was related to corporate selective disclosures and was strongest among stocks with a less sophisticated investor base. This fits with the findings in Brandt et al. (2010) that retail investors trade do not always trade on fundamentals, that institutional investors have a superior ability to read between the lines (when the quality of disclosures is low), and that the noise trading by retail investors pushes prices further away from their fundamentals allow there to be predictive power of future earnings shocks in the volatility. Finally, along with their finding that volatility increases following a stock split, Brandt et al. (2010) also found that institutional holdings of firms fell following a stock split. This further connects a firm s investor base to idiosyncratic volatility. Brandt et al. (2010) also include a term in their regressions interacting firms with low stock prices and low retail ownership, which was not statistically significant. From this they conclude that retail ownership is important and that its importance isn t due to retail investor s tendency to overweight low-priced stocks. Research and Development
13 12 As Bartram et al. (2012) point out, volatility isn t necessarily a good or bad thing. Rather, high volatility can be good or bad depending on its root causes. One of the positive characteristics they found to increase idiosyncratic volatility is the number of patents. Similarly, Comin & Philippon (2006) document that idiosyncratic volatility increase in industries that experience large increases in research and development, and that current volatility has a significant impact on future research and development that peaks three periods forward. They also found that past research and development spending effects current levels of volatility five periods back, and that the sign was always positive, statistically significant, and typically larger than the contemporaneous correlations between research and development and idiosyncratic volatility. Increases in volatility because of increased spending on research and development are positive for both the companies investing their money and for all of their stakeholders. Research and development is what spurs innovation and progress. While this may cause variations in cash flows and income, it is the only way to get ahead of competitors and increase returns to shareholders. Investment in research and development is a sign of a stable market because it shows that firms are confident enough in their future that they are willing to invest in developing new products and technology. Turnover Turnover in market shares, or alternatively, more competition in product markets, is what Comin & Philippon (2006) reports to be the main cause of the increase in idiosyncratic volatility. They found that the profiting margins of the industry leaders has not changed over time, but the average length of time that a firm is an industry leader has decreased dramatically. Brown & Kapadia (2007) also found changes in the composition of firms within an industry to an important factor in explaining idiosyncratic volatility, more important than the changing of the weights of industries within the market over time. Irvine & Pontiff (2009) further confirmed the positive relationship of turnover within an industry and future idiosyncratic volatility. I believe that these findings are intertwined with research and development. Increases in research and development mean that there will be more competition in the market and more differentiated products. In this environment it is harder to stay ahead of an entire industry, thus the average duration of a
14 13 market leader declines. Since the expected duration of a firm as an industry leader has dropped drastically, there is an increased incentive to innovate and invest in new technologies in aspiration of unseating the current market leader. Thus one creates incentives for the other, but while both increase volatility they also spur innovation and progress. Market Development The increased development of a stock market also increases the level of idiosyncratic volatility Bartram et al. (2012). Bartram et al. (2012) find that part of the reason the U.S. has experienced an increase in idiosyncratic volatility is due to an increase in investor protections. This reduces the overall riskiness of investing in stocks allowing them to trade on the risk of the individual companies rather than also pricing in general risks of holding equities. Comin & Philippon (2006) states that idiosyncratic volatility increases after deregulation and in industries that issue more debt and equity. These drivers in volatility are all due to the development of the market as a whole, and how this protects investors and allows equity prices to not incorporate risks that these protections take out of the market. Interestingly, Bartram et al. (2012) did not find evidence that measures of political risk or creditor rights are important in understanding idiosyncratic volatility in their cross-country analysis. Conclusion After decomposing aggregate volatility, I found that idiosyncratic risk has been at very high levels since the turn of the 21 st century. Much of the current literature uses data that does not include the end of the Great Recession and the current recovery, periods where idiosyncratic risk is twice as high as any other period in the last 50 years. I also showed that the average R- squared of equally weighted U.S. equities has increased substantially, peaking around 40 percent, its highest level in 50 years. Based on the finding by Campbell et al. (2001) that the graph of the average R-squared perfectly mirrors the average pairwise correlation among stocks, I conclude that stocks have become much more correlated over the last 15 years. This increased correlation makes diversifying a portfolio more difficult for an investor because they have an increased level of risk common to more stocks in their portfolio that cannot be hedged away by simply holding more stocks with the same level of correlation among them.
15 14 Given the vast array of explanations in the literature for idiosyncratic risk, many of which contradict one another, there are many veins for future researchers to explore. One of these is to further explore the size of firms and stock prices, and to see if the results found by Brandt et al. (2010), Brown & Kapadia (2007), and others still hold with current data. Another area for future research is a more in-depth study of various industries to see how they evolve over time and how research and development and industry leadership lead one another. Finally, given the strong evidence by Fama & French (2004) and Brown & Kapadia (2007) that new firms differ significantly from older firms, and that the average R-squared is decreasing, a finding for which I find opposite results, further research should investigate whether this trend is still continuing. References Bartram, S., Brown, G., & Stulz, R. (2012). Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile? The Journal of Finance, 67(4),
16 15 Brandt, M., Brav, A., Graham, J., & Kumar, A. (2010). The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes? Review of Financial Studies, 23(2), Retrieved April 9, 2015, from JSTORE. Brown, G., & Kapadia, N. (2007). Firm-specific risk and equity market development. Journal of Financial Economics, 84(2), Retrieved April 9, 2015, from Campbell, J., Lettau, M., Malkiel, B., & Xu, Y. (2001). Have Individual Stocks Become More Volatile? An Empirical Exploration Of Idiosyncratic Risk. The Journal of Finance, 56(1), Retrieved January 30, 2015, from JSTORE. Comin, D., & Philippon, T. (2006). The Rise in Firm-Level Volatility: Causes and Consequences. In NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2005 (Vol. 20). MIT Press. Fama, E., & French, K. (1997). Industry costs of equity. Journal of Financial Economics, 43(2), Fama, E., & French, K. (2004). New lists: Fundamentals and survival rates. Journal of Financial Economics, 73(2), Retrieved April 20, 2015, from Irvine, P., & Pontiff, J. (2009). Idiosyncratic Return Volatility, Cash Flows, and Product Market Competition. Review of Financial Studies, 22(3), Retrieved April 9, 2015, from JSTORE. Jiang, G., Xu, D., & Yao, T. (2009). The Information Content of Idiosyncratic Volatility. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 44(1), Retrieved April 9, 2015, from JSTORE. Kumar, A. (2009). Who Gambles in the Stock Market? The Journal of Finance, 64(4), Retrieved April 20, 2015, from JSTORE. Li, B., Rajgopal, S., & Venkatachalam, M. (2014). R2 and Idiosyncratic Risk Are Not Interchangeable. The Accounting Review, 89(6), Appendix Figure 1
17 Number of Firms in Sample 8000 Number of Firms m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 Time 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Figure Distribution of Market Capitalization Dollars m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 Time 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Average Market Cap First Quartile Median Market Cap Third Quartile Figure 3
18 Average Real Market Capitalization Dollars m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 Time Average Market Capitalization 1.96 Standard Deviations 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Figure 4 Market Volatility Volatility m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Time Figure 5
19 Month Moving Average of Market Volatility.015 Volatility m8 1967m m m2 1980m4 1984m6 1988m8 1992m10 Time 1996m m2 2005m4 2009m6 2013m8 Figure 6 Industry Volatility Volatility m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 Time 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Figure 7
20 Month Moving Average of Industry Volatility.006 Volatility m8 1968m2 1972m8 1977m2 1981m8 1986m2 1990m8 Time 1995m2 1999m8 2004m2 2008m8 2013m2 Figure 8 Firm Volatility Volatility m8 1966m8 1970m8 1974m8 1978m8 1982m8 1986m8 1990m8 Time 1994m8 1998m8 2002m8 2006m8 2010m8 2014m8 Figure 9
21 Month Moving Average of Firm Volatility.02 Volatility m8 1968m2 1972m8 1977m2 1981m8 1986m2 1990m8 1995m2 1999m8 2004m2 2008m8 2013m2 Time Figure 10
Market Efficiency and Idiosyncratic Volatility in Vietnam
International Journal of Business and Management; Vol. 10, No. 6; 2015 ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN 1833-8119 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Market Efficiency and Idiosyncratic Volatility
More informationFurther Evidence on the Performance of Funds of Funds: The Case of Real Estate Mutual Funds. Kevin C.H. Chiang*
Further Evidence on the Performance of Funds of Funds: The Case of Real Estate Mutual Funds Kevin C.H. Chiang* School of Management University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK 99775 Kirill Kozhevnikov
More informationFurther Test on Stock Liquidity Risk With a Relative Measure
International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 1 No. 3 March 2013 Further Test on Stock Liquidity Risk With a Relative Measure David Oima* David Sande** Benjamin Ombok*** Abstract Negative relationship
More informationin-depth Invesco Actively Managed Low Volatility Strategies The Case for
Invesco in-depth The Case for Actively Managed Low Volatility Strategies We believe that active LVPs offer the best opportunity to achieve a higher risk-adjusted return over the long term. Donna C. Wilson
More informationVolatility Patterns and Idiosyncratic Risk on the Swedish Stock Market
Master Thesis (1 year) 15 ECTS Credits Volatility Patterns and Idiosyncratic Risk on the Swedish Stock Market Kristoffer Blomqvist Supervisors: Hossein Asgharian and Lu Liu Department of Economics, Lund
More informationStock Delistings and Average Cross-Sectional Idiosyncratic Stock Volatility
Stock Delistings and Average Cross-Sectional Idiosyncratic Stock Volatility Serguey Khovansky Oleksandr Zhylyevskyy Northeastern University Iowa State University Annual Meeting of the Midwest Economics
More informationRisks and Returns of Relative Total Shareholder Return Plans Andy Restaino Technical Compensation Advisors Inc.
Risks and Returns of Relative Total Shareholder Return Plans Andy Restaino Technical Compensation Advisors Inc. INTRODUCTION When determining or evaluating the efficacy of a company s executive compensation
More informationOn the Link Between New Stock Listings and Stock Delistings and Average Cross-Sectional Idiosyncratic Stock Volatility
On the Link Between New Stock Listings and Stock Delistings and Average Cross-Sectional Idiosyncratic Stock Volatility Serguey Khovansky Oleksandr Zhylyevskyy Northeastern University Iowa State University
More informationDo Mutual Fund Managers Outperform by Low- Balling their Benchmarks?
University at Albany, State University of New York Scholars Archive Financial Analyst Honors College 5-2013 Do Mutual Fund Managers Outperform by Low- Balling their Benchmarks? Matthew James Scala University
More informationStatistical Understanding. of the Fama-French Factor model. Chua Yan Ru
i Statistical Understanding of the Fama-French Factor model Chua Yan Ru NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE 2012 ii Statistical Understanding of the Fama-French Factor model Chua Yan Ru (B.Sc National University
More informationDO INVESTOR CLIENTELES HAVE A DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT ON PRICE AND VOLATILITY? THE CASE OF BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY
Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research Volume 2 Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research Article 4 1-1-2015 DO INVESTOR CLIENTELES HAVE A DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT
More informationMonetary Economics Risk and Return, Part 2. Gerald P. Dwyer Fall 2015
Monetary Economics Risk and Return, Part 2 Gerald P. Dwyer Fall 2015 Reading Malkiel, Part 2, Part 3 Malkiel, Part 3 Outline Returns and risk Overall market risk reduced over longer periods Individual
More informationThe Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes?
The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: Time Trend or Speculative Episodes? Michael W. Brandt Duke University and NBER Alon Brav Duke University and NBER John R. Graham Duke University and NBER Alok Kumar
More informationDoes Portfolio Theory Work During Financial Crises?
Does Portfolio Theory Work During Financial Crises? Harry M. Markowitz, Mark T. Hebner, Mary E. Brunson It is sometimes said that portfolio theory fails during financial crises because: All asset classes
More informationIt s Closing Time. Trading Strategy. Volume Curves Shift More into the Close. Key Points
( ( Trading Strategy It s Closing Time Victor Lin Victor.lin@credit-suisse.com 1-86-76 Market Commentary 12 September 217 Key Points Over the past decade, an increasing proportion of stock volume has moved
More informationTHE PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF EQUITY VALUATION IN QUANTITATIVE VALUE INVESTING
THE PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF EQUITY VALUATION IN QUANTITATIVE VALUE INVESTING In this paper, the practice of value investing is explained and analyzed by drawing from the academic and applied literature
More informationEarnings Announcement Idiosyncratic Volatility and the Crosssection
Earnings Announcement Idiosyncratic Volatility and the Crosssection of Stock Returns Cameron Truong Monash University, Melbourne, Australia February 2015 Abstract We document a significant positive relation
More informationLiquidity skewness premium
Liquidity skewness premium Giho Jeong, Jangkoo Kang, and Kyung Yoon Kwon * Abstract Risk-averse investors may dislike decrease of liquidity rather than increase of liquidity, and thus there can be asymmetric
More informationHedging inflation by selecting stock industries
Hedging inflation by selecting stock industries Author: D. van Antwerpen Student number: 288660 Supervisor: Dr. L.A.P. Swinkels Finish date: May 2010 I. Introduction With the recession at it s end last
More informationThe Impact of Institutional Investors on the Monday Seasonal*
Su Han Chan Department of Finance, California State University-Fullerton Wai-Kin Leung Faculty of Business Administration, Chinese University of Hong Kong Ko Wang Department of Finance, California State
More informationWhy and How to Pick Tactical for Your Portfolio
Why and How to Pick Tactical for Your Portfolio A TACTICAL PRIMER Markets and economies have exhibited characteristics over the past two decades dissimilar to the years which came before. We have experienced
More informationPositive Correlation between Systematic and Idiosyncratic Volatilities in Korean Stock Return *
Seoul Journal of Business Volume 24, Number 1 (June 2018) Positive Correlation between Systematic and Idiosyncratic Volatilities in Korean Stock Return * KYU-HO BAE **1) Seoul National University Seoul,
More informationDeviations from Optimal Corporate Cash Holdings and the Valuation from a Shareholder s Perspective
Deviations from Optimal Corporate Cash Holdings and the Valuation from a Shareholder s Perspective Zhenxu Tong * University of Exeter Abstract The tradeoff theory of corporate cash holdings predicts that
More informationReal Estate Ownership by Non-Real Estate Firms: The Impact on Firm Returns
Real Estate Ownership by Non-Real Estate Firms: The Impact on Firm Returns Yongheng Deng and Joseph Gyourko 1 Zell/Lurie Real Estate Center at Wharton University of Pennsylvania Prepared for the Corporate
More informationThe Performance, Pervasiveness and Determinants of Value Premium in Different US Exchanges
The Performance, Pervasiveness and Determinants of Value Premium in Different US Exchanges George Athanassakos PhD, Director Ben Graham Centre for Value Investing Richard Ivey School of Business The University
More informationThe Value Premium and the January Effect
The Value Premium and the January Effect Julia Chou, Praveen Kumar Das * Current Version: January 2010 * Chou is from College of Business Administration, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199;
More informationFactor Performance in Emerging Markets
Investment Research Factor Performance in Emerging Markets Taras Ivanenko, CFA, Director, Portfolio Manager/Analyst Alex Lai, CFA, Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager/Analyst Factors can be defined
More informationExploiting Factor Autocorrelation to Improve Risk Adjusted Returns
Exploiting Factor Autocorrelation to Improve Risk Adjusted Returns Kevin Oversby 22 February 2014 ABSTRACT The Fama-French three factor model is ubiquitous in modern finance. Returns are modeled as a linear
More informationThe Liquidity Style of Mutual Funds
Thomas M. Idzorek Chief Investment Officer Ibbotson Associates, A Morningstar Company Email: tidzorek@ibbotson.com James X. Xiong Senior Research Consultant Ibbotson Associates, A Morningstar Company Email:
More informationApril The Value Reversion
April 2016 The Value Reversion In the past two years, value stocks, along with cyclicals and higher-volatility equities, have underperformed broader markets while higher-momentum stocks have outperformed.
More informationTHEORY & PRACTICE FOR FUND MANAGERS. SPRING 2011 Volume 20 Number 1 RISK. special section PARITY. The Voices of Influence iijournals.
T H E J O U R N A L O F THEORY & PRACTICE FOR FUND MANAGERS SPRING 0 Volume 0 Number RISK special section PARITY The Voices of Influence iijournals.com Risk Parity and Diversification EDWARD QIAN EDWARD
More informationArbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle
Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle Robert F. Stambaugh The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania and NBER Jianfeng Yu Carlson School of Management University of Minnesota Yu
More informationLeading Economic Indicators and a Probabilistic Approach to Estimating Market Tail Risk
Leading Economic Indicators and a Probabilistic Approach to Estimating Market Tail Risk Sonu Vanrghese, Ph.D. Director of Research Angshuman Gooptu Senior Economist The shifting trends observed in leading
More informationConcentration and Stock Returns: Australian Evidence
2010 International Conference on Economics, Business and Management IPEDR vol.2 (2011) (2011) IAC S IT Press, Manila, Philippines Concentration and Stock Returns: Australian Evidence Katja Ignatieva Faculty
More informationNasdaq s Equity Index for an Environment of Rising Interest Rates
Nasdaq s Equity Index for an Environment of Rising Interest Rates Introduction Nearly ten years after the financial crisis, an unprecedented period of ultra-low interest rates appears to be drawing to
More informationCore CFO and Future Performance. Abstract
Core CFO and Future Performance Rodrigo S. Verdi Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology 50 Memorial Drive E52-403A Cambridge, MA 02142 rverdi@mit.edu Abstract This paper investigates
More informationRESEARCH STATEMENT. Heather Tookes, May My research lies at the intersection of capital markets and corporate finance.
RESEARCH STATEMENT Heather Tookes, May 2013 OVERVIEW My research lies at the intersection of capital markets and corporate finance. Much of my work focuses on understanding the ways in which capital market
More informationCan Hedge Funds Time the Market?
International Review of Finance, 2017 Can Hedge Funds Time the Market? MICHAEL W. BRANDT,FEDERICO NUCERA AND GIORGIO VALENTE Duke University, The Fuqua School of Business, Durham, NC LUISS Guido Carli
More informationAustralia. Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
ISSN 1440-771X Australia Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/pubs/wpapers/ An analytical derivation of the relation between idiosyncratic volatility
More informationstarting on 5/1/1953 up until 2/1/2017.
An Actuary s Guide to Financial Applications: Examples with EViews By William Bourgeois An actuary is a business professional who uses statistics to determine and analyze risks for companies. In this guide,
More informationFACTORS INFLUENCING THE PERFORMANCE OF LISTED PROPERTY TRUSTS
FACTORS INFLUENCING THE PERFORMANCE OF LISTED PROPERTY TRUSTS ABSTRACT GRAEME NEWELL University of Western Sydney A variance decomposition procedure is used to assess the proportion of LPT volatility that
More informationWhat Drives the Earnings Announcement Premium?
What Drives the Earnings Announcement Premium? Hae mi Choi Loyola University Chicago This study investigates what drives the earnings announcement premium. Prior studies have offered various explanations
More informationVIX Fear of What? October 13, Research Note. Summary. Introduction
Research Note October 13, 2016 VIX Fear of What? by David J. Hait Summary The widely touted fear gauge is less about what might happen, and more about what already has happened. The VIX, while promoted
More informationOptimal Debt-to-Equity Ratios and Stock Returns
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2014 Optimal Debt-to-Equity Ratios and Stock Returns Courtney D. Winn Utah State University Follow this
More informationArbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle
Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle Robert F. Stambaugh, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania and NBER Jianfeng Yu, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota
More informationAN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION OF NEGATIVE ECONOMIC VALUE ADDED FIRMS
The International Journal of Business and Finance Research VOLUME 8 NUMBER 1 2014 AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION OF NEGATIVE ECONOMIC VALUE ADDED FIRMS Stoyu I. Ivanov, San Jose State University Kenneth Leong,
More informationThe Effect of Kurtosis on the Cross-Section of Stock Returns
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2012 The Effect of Kurtosis on the Cross-Section of Stock Returns Abdullah Al Masud Utah State University
More informationDo stock fundamentals explain idiosyncratic volatility? Evidence for Australian stock market
Do stock fundamentals explain idiosyncratic volatility? Evidence for Australian stock market Bin Liu School of Economics, Finance and Marketing, RMIT University, Australia Amalia Di Iorio Faculty of Business,
More informationMARKET COMPETITION STRUCTURE AND MUTUAL FUND PERFORMANCE
International Journal of Science & Informatics Vol. 2, No. 1, Fall, 2012, pp. 1-7 ISSN 2158-835X (print), 2158-8368 (online), All Rights Reserved MARKET COMPETITION STRUCTURE AND MUTUAL FUND PERFORMANCE
More informationIncome Inequality, Mobility and Turnover at the Top in the U.S., Gerald Auten Geoffrey Gee And Nicholas Turner
Income Inequality, Mobility and Turnover at the Top in the U.S., 1987 2010 Gerald Auten Geoffrey Gee And Nicholas Turner Cross-sectional Census data, survey data or income tax returns (Saez 2003) generally
More informationJournal Of Financial And Strategic Decisions Volume 10 Number 2 Summer 1997 AN ANALYSIS OF VALUE LINE S ABILITY TO FORECAST LONG-RUN RETURNS
Journal Of Financial And Strategic Decisions Volume 10 Number 2 Summer 1997 AN ANALYSIS OF VALUE LINE S ABILITY TO FORECAST LONG-RUN RETURNS Gary A. Benesh * and Steven B. Perfect * Abstract Value Line
More informationSENSITIVITY OF THE INDEX OF ECONOMIC WELL-BEING TO DIFFERENT MEASURES OF POVERTY: LICO VS LIM
August 2015 151 Slater Street, Suite 710 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5H3 Tel: 613-233-8891 Fax: 613-233-8250 csls@csls.ca CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF LIVING STANDARDS SENSITIVITY OF THE INDEX OF ECONOMIC WELL-BEING
More informationDo Value-added Real Estate Investments Add Value? * September 1, Abstract
Do Value-added Real Estate Investments Add Value? * Liang Peng and Thomas G. Thibodeau September 1, 2013 Abstract Not really. This paper compares the unlevered returns on value added and core investments
More informationDaily Stock Returns: Momentum, Reversal, or Both. Steven D. Dolvin * and Mark K. Pyles **
Daily Stock Returns: Momentum, Reversal, or Both Steven D. Dolvin * and Mark K. Pyles ** * Butler University ** College of Charleston Abstract Much attention has been given to the momentum and reversal
More informationReturns on Small Cap Growth Stocks, or the Lack Thereof: What Risk Factor Exposures Can Tell Us
RESEARCH Returns on Small Cap Growth Stocks, or the Lack Thereof: What Risk Factor Exposures Can Tell Us The small cap growth space has been noted for its underperformance relative to other investment
More informationCompensation of Executive Board Members in European Health Care Companies. HCM Health Care
Compensation of Executive Board Members in European Health Care Companies HCM Health Care CONTENTS 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 DATA SAMPLE 6 MARKET DATA OVERVIEW 6 Compensation level 10 Compensation structure
More informationCAPITAL STRUCTURE AND THE 2003 TAX CUTS Richard H. Fosberg
CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND THE 2003 TAX CUTS Richard H. Fosberg William Paterson University, Deptartment of Economics, USA. KEYWORDS Capital structure, tax rates, cost of capital. ABSTRACT The main purpose
More informationRESEARCH THE SMALL-CAP-ALPHA MYTH ORIGINS
RESEARCH THE SMALL-CAP-ALPHA MYTH ORIGINS Many say the market for the shares of smaller companies so called small-cap and mid-cap stocks offers greater opportunity for active management to add value than
More informationThe Consistency between Analysts Earnings Forecast Errors and Recommendations
The Consistency between Analysts Earnings Forecast Errors and Recommendations by Lei Wang Applied Economics Bachelor, United International College (2013) and Yao Liu Bachelor of Business Administration,
More informationAn Analysis of the ESOP Protection Trust
An Analysis of the ESOP Protection Trust Report prepared by: Francesco Bova 1 March 21 st, 2016 Abstract Using data from publicly-traded firms that have an ESOP, I assess the likelihood that: (1) a firm
More informationVolatility Lessons Eugene F. Fama a and Kenneth R. French b, Stock returns are volatile. For July 1963 to December 2016 (henceforth ) the
First draft: March 2016 This draft: May 2018 Volatility Lessons Eugene F. Fama a and Kenneth R. French b, Abstract The average monthly premium of the Market return over the one-month T-Bill return is substantial,
More informationEstimating the Current Value of Time-Varying Beta
Estimating the Current Value of Time-Varying Beta Joseph Cheng Ithaca College Elia Kacapyr Ithaca College This paper proposes a special type of discounted least squares technique and applies it to the
More informationHow Markets React to Different Types of Mergers
How Markets React to Different Types of Mergers By Pranit Chowhan Bachelor of Business Administration, University of Mumbai, 2014 And Vishal Bane Bachelor of Commerce, University of Mumbai, 2006 PROJECT
More informationCross-sectional performance and investor sentiment in a multiple risk factor model
Cross-sectional performance and investor sentiment in a multiple risk factor model Dave Berger a, H. J. Turtle b,* College of Business, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331, USA Department of Finance
More information1 Volatility Definition and Estimation
1 Volatility Definition and Estimation 1.1 WHAT IS VOLATILITY? It is useful to start with an explanation of what volatility is, at least for the purpose of clarifying the scope of this book. Volatility
More informationPremium Timing with Valuation Ratios
RESEARCH Premium Timing with Valuation Ratios March 2016 Wei Dai, PhD Research The predictability of expected stock returns is an old topic and an important one. While investors may increase expected returns
More informationSeeking Beta in the Bond Market: A Mathdriven Investment Strategy for Higher Returns
Seeking Beta in the Bond Market: A Mathdriven Investment Strategy for Higher Returns November 23, 2010 by Georg Vrba, P.E. Advisor Perspectives welcomes guest contributions. The views presented here do
More informationRevisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns. Fatma Sonmez 1
Revisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns Fatma Sonmez 1 Abstract This paper s aim is to revisit the relation between idiosyncratic volatility and future stock returns. There are three key
More informationInvestment Performance of Common Stock in Relation to their Price-Earnings Ratios: BASU 1977 Extended Analysis
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2015 Investment Performance of Common Stock in Relation to their Price-Earnings Ratios: BASU 1977 Extended
More informationFactor Investing: Smart Beta Pursuing Alpha TM
In the spectrum of investing from passive (index based) to active management there are no shortage of considerations. Passive tends to be cheaper and should deliver returns very close to the index it tracks,
More informationDiscussion of Trend Inflation in Advanced Economies
Discussion of Trend Inflation in Advanced Economies James Morley University of New South Wales 1. Introduction Garnier, Mertens, and Nelson (this issue, GMN hereafter) conduct model-based trend/cycle decomposition
More informationThe Importance of Cash Flow News for. Internationally Operating Firms
The Importance of Cash Flow News for Internationally Operating Firms Alain Krapl and Carmelo Giaccotto Department of Finance, University of Connecticut 2100 Hillside Road Unit 1041, Storrs CT 06269-1041
More information15 Years of the Russell 2000 Buy Write
15 Years of the Russell 2000 Buy Write September 15, 2011 Nikunj Kapadia 1 and Edward Szado 2, CFA CISDM gratefully acknowledges research support provided by the Options Industry Council. Research results,
More informationThe cross section of expected stock returns
The cross section of expected stock returns Jonathan Lewellen Dartmouth College and NBER This version: March 2013 First draft: October 2010 Tel: 603-646-8650; email: jon.lewellen@dartmouth.edu. I am grateful
More informationCHAPTER 2 RISK AND RETURN: Part I
CHAPTER 2 RISK AND RETURN: Part I (Difficulty Levels: Easy, Easy/Medium, Medium, Medium/Hard, and Hard) Please see the preface for information on the AACSB letter indicators (F, M, etc.) on the subject
More informationApplied Macro Finance
Master in Money and Finance Goethe University Frankfurt Week 2: Factor models and the cross-section of stock returns Fall 2012/2013 Please note the disclaimer on the last page Announcements Next week (30
More informationAustralian School of Business School of Accounting. Semester 1, Idiosyncratic return volatility, earnings quality, and firm age.
Australian School of Business School of Accounting School of Accounting Seminar Series Semester 1, 2013 Idiosyncratic return volatility, earnings quality, and firm age Brian Rountree Rice University Date:
More informationDisappearing Dividends in the Thai Capital Market: Changing Firm Characteristics or Lower Propensity to Pay
Journal of Economic and Social Policy Volume 1 Issue 1 Enterprising Finance Article 7 7-1-2 Disappearing Dividends in the Thai Capital Market: Changing Firm Characteristics or Lower Propensity to Pay Malinee
More informationThe Characteristics of Stock Market Volatility. By Daniel R Wessels. June 2006
The Characteristics of Stock Market Volatility By Daniel R Wessels June 2006 Available at: www.indexinvestor.co.za 1. Introduction Stock market volatility is synonymous with the uncertainty how macroeconomic
More informationOn the economic significance of stock return predictability: Evidence from macroeconomic state variables
On the economic significance of stock return predictability: Evidence from macroeconomic state variables Huacheng Zhang * University of Arizona This draft: 8/31/2012 First draft: 2/28/2012 Abstract We
More informationModule 6 Portfolio risk and return
Module 6 Portfolio risk and return Prepared by Pamela Peterson Drake, Ph.D., CFA 1. Overview Security analysts and portfolio managers are concerned about an investment s return, its risk, and whether it
More informationTrading Costs of Asset Pricing Anomalies Appendix: Additional Empirical Results
Trading Costs of Asset Pricing Anomalies Appendix: Additional Empirical Results ANDREA FRAZZINI, RONEN ISRAEL, AND TOBIAS J. MOSKOWITZ This Appendix contains additional analysis and results. Table A1 reports
More informationStock Price Behavior. Stock Price Behavior
Major Topics Statistical Properties Volatility Cross-Country Relationships Business Cycle Behavior Page 1 Statistical Behavior Previously examined from theoretical point the issue: To what extent can the
More informationIDIOSYNCRATIC RISK AND AUSTRALIAN EQUITY RETURNS
IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK AND AUSTRALIAN EQUITY RETURNS Mike Dempsey a, Michael E. Drew b and Madhu Veeraraghavan c a, c School of Accounting and Finance, Griffith University, PMB 50 Gold Coast Mail Centre, Gold
More informationIs Information Risk Priced for NASDAQ-listed Stocks?
Is Information Risk Priced for NASDAQ-listed Stocks? Kathleen P. Fuller School of Business Administration University of Mississippi kfuller@bus.olemiss.edu Bonnie F. Van Ness School of Business Administration
More informationECCE Research Note 06-01: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND THE COST OF EQUITY CAPITAL: EVIDENCE FROM GMI S GOVERNANCE RATING
ECCE Research Note 06-01: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND THE COST OF EQUITY CAPITAL: EVIDENCE FROM GMI S GOVERNANCE RATING by Jeroen Derwall and Patrick Verwijmeren Corporate Governance and the Cost of Equity
More informationA Study on the Short-Term Market Effect of China A-share Private Placement and Medium and Small Investors Decision-Making Shuangjun Li
A Study on the Short-Term Market Effect of China A-share Private Placement and Medium and Small Investors Decision-Making Shuangjun Li Department of Finance, Beijing Jiaotong University No.3 Shangyuancun
More informationEuropean Equity Markets and EMU: Are the differences between countries slowly disappearing? K. Geert Rouwenhorst
European Equity Markets and EMU: Are the differences between countries slowly disappearing? K. Geert Rouwenhorst Yale School of Management Box 208200 New Haven CT 14620-8200 First Draft, October 1998 This
More informationPricing and Mispricing in the Cross Section
Pricing and Mispricing in the Cross Section D. Craig Nichols Whitman School of Management Syracuse University James M. Wahlen Kelley School of Business Indiana University Matthew M. Wieland J.M. Tull School
More informationCHAPTER 2 RISK AND RETURN: PART I
1. The tighter the probability distribution of its expected future returns, the greater the risk of a given investment as measured by its standard deviation. False Difficulty: Easy LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
More informationA NOTE ON THE EFFECTS OF PREPAYMENT RISK ON MORTGAGE COMPANIES AND MORTGAGE REITs
Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research Volume 1 Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research Article 6 1-1-2014 A NOTE ON THE EFFECTS OF PREPAYMENT RISK ON MORTGAGE
More informationAn Online Appendix of Technical Trading: A Trend Factor
An Online Appendix of Technical Trading: A Trend Factor In this online appendix, we provide a comparative static analysis of the theoretical model as well as further robustness checks on the trend factor.
More informationPortfolio Management
Portfolio Management Risk & Return Return Income received on an investment (Dividend) plus any change in market price( Capital gain), usually expressed as a percent of the beginning market price of the
More informationPost-Earnings-Announcement Drift: The Role of Revenue Surprises and Earnings Persistence
Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift: The Role of Revenue Surprises and Earnings Persistence Joshua Livnat Department of Accounting Stern School of Business Administration New York University 311 Tisch Hall
More informationModels of Asset Pricing
appendix1 to chapter 5 Models of Asset Pricing In Chapter 4, we saw that the return on an asset (such as a bond) measures how much we gain from holding that asset. When we make a decision to buy an asset,
More informationRisk Premia of Aluminum Forwards: a Guide for the Trader in the Primary Aluminum Metals Market
Risk Premia of Aluminum Forwards: a Guide for the Trader in the Primary Aluminum Metals Market Abstract Clint Brown Industrial Engineering Manager, Sanden International Shekar Shetty Associate Professor
More informationDiversified Stock Income Plan
Joseph E. Buffa, Equity Sector Analyst Michael A. Colón, Equity Sector Analyst Diversified Stock Income Plan 2017 Concept Review The Diversified Stock Income Plan (DSIP List) focuses on companies that
More informationTHE PERFORMANCE OF U. S. DOMESTIC EQUITY MUTUAL FUNDS DURING RECENT RECESSIONS
THE PERFORMANCE OF U. S. DOMESTIC EQUITY MUTUAL FUNDS DURING RECENT RECESSIONS Dr. 1 Central Connecticut State University, U.S.A. E-mail: belloz@ccsu.edu ABSTRACT In this study, I investigate the performance
More informationThe Disappearance of the Small Firm Premium
The Disappearance of the Small Firm Premium by Lanziying Luo Bachelor of Economics, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics,2015 and Chenguang Zhao Bachelor of Science in Finance, Arizona State
More informationLong-run Consumption Risks in Assets Returns: Evidence from Economic Divisions
Long-run Consumption Risks in Assets Returns: Evidence from Economic Divisions Abdulrahman Alharbi 1 Abdullah Noman 2 Abstract: Bansal et al (2009) paper focus on measuring risk in consumption especially
More information