The High Idiosyncratic Volatility Low Return Puzzle

Similar documents
Variation in Liquidity, Costly Arbitrage, and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns

Volatility Appendix. B.1 Firm-Specific Uncertainty and Aggregate Volatility

Does market liquidity explain the idiosyncratic volatility puzzle in the Chinese stock market?

Variation in Liquidity and Costly Arbitrage

Price Shocks, News Disclosures, and Asymmetric Drifts. January 8, 2011

Stocks with Extreme Past Returns: Lotteries or Insurance?

Internet Appendix to Is Information Risk Priced? Evidence from Abnormal Idiosyncratic Volatility

Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle

Price Shocks, News Disclosures, and Asymmetric Drifts. Hai Lu, Kevin Q. Wang, and Xiaolu Wang. March 12, 2012

Asubstantial portion of the academic

What Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Tell Us About Future Stock Returns? Supplementary Online Appendix

Revisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns. Fatma Sonmez 1

Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle

This paper investigates whether realized and implied volatilities of individual stocks can predict the crosssectional

Online Appendix for Overpriced Winners

Betting against Beta or Demand for Lottery

Short Interest and Aggregate Volatility Risk

An Online Appendix of Technical Trading: A Trend Factor

Disagreement in Economic Forecasts and Expected Stock Returns

University of California Berkeley

Daily Winners and Losers by Alok Kumar, Stefan Ruenzi, and Michael Ungeheuer

Have we solved the idiosyncratic volatility puzzle?

Internet Appendix. Table A1: Determinants of VOIB

Credit Risk and Lottery-type Stocks: Evidence from Taiwan

Robustness Checks for Idiosyncratic Volatility, Growth Options, and the Cross-Section of Returns

Analyst Disagreement and Aggregate Volatility Risk

Economics of Behavioral Finance. Lecture 3

Which shorts are informed? Ekkehart Boehmer Charles M. Jones Xiaoyan Zhang

A Lottery Demand-Based Explanation of the Beta Anomaly. Online Appendix

Internet Appendix to The Booms and Busts of Beta Arbitrage

The Relationship between the Option-implied Volatility Smile, Stock Returns and Heterogeneous Beliefs

Size and Value in China. Jianan Liu, Robert F. Stambaugh, and Yu Yuan

Realization Utility: Explaining Volatility and Skewness Preferences

Variation in Liquidity and Costly Arbitrage

Decimalization and Illiquidity Premiums: An Extended Analysis

Online Appendix. Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle

High Idiosyncratic Volatility and Low Returns. Andrew Ang Columbia University and NBER. Q Group October 2007, Scottsdale AZ

Firm Complexity and Conglomerates Expected Returns

Institutional Ownership and Aggregate Volatility Risk

Is Economic Uncertainty Priced in the Cross-Section of Stock Returns?

The Next Microsoft? Skewness, Idiosyncratic Volatility, and Expected Returns + Nishad Kapadia * Abstract

Lecture Notes. Lu Zhang 1. BUSFIN 920: Theory of Finance The Ohio State University Autumn and NBER. 1 The Ohio State University

Liquidity Risk Management for Portfolios

Stock price synchronicity and the role of analyst: Do analysts generate firm-specific vs. market-wide information?

Internet Appendix for The Joint Cross Section of Stocks and Options *

Probability of Price Crashes, Rational Speculative Bubbles, and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns

Supplementary Appendix for Outsourcing Mutual Fund Management: Firm Boundaries, Incentives and Performance

Accruals, Heterogeneous Beliefs, and Stock Returns

Internet Appendix to The Evolution of Financial Market Efficiency: Evidence from Earnings Announcements

Internet Appendix for Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle *

Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Does Idiosyncratic Volatility Proxy for Risk Exposure?

Liquidity Variation and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns *

Speculative Betas. Harrison Hong and David Sraer Princeton University. September 30, 2012

Betting Against Correlation:

Market Efficiency and Idiosyncratic Volatility in Vietnam

Heterogeneous Beliefs and Momentum Profits

The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle and its Interplay with Sophisticated and Private Investors

Stocks with Extreme Past Returns: Lotteries or Insurance?

The Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle: A Behavioral Explanation

Prospect Theory and the Risk-Return Trade-off *

Dispersion in Analysts Earnings Forecasts and Credit Rating

Asset Pricing Anomalies and Financial Distress

Volatile realized idiosyncratic volatility

Turnover: Liquidity or Uncertainty?

Implied Funding Liquidity

Short Selling, Limits of Arbitrage and Stock Returns ±

Variation of Implied Volatility and Return Predictability

Internet Appendix. Do Hedge Funds Reduce Idiosyncratic Risk? Namho Kang, Péter Kondor, and Ronnie Sadka

Idiosyncratic Return Volatility, Uncertainty, and Asset Pricing Implications

Market Frictions, Price Delay, and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

in-depth Invesco Actively Managed Low Volatility Strategies The Case for

Skewness from High-Frequency Data Predicts the Cross-Section of Stock Returns

Dispersion in Analysts Earnings Forecasts and Credit Rating

University of Texas at Dallas School of Management. Investment Management Spring Estimation of Systematic and Factor Risks (Due April 1)

Separating Up from Down: New Evidence on the Idiosyncratic Volatility Return Relation

Applied Macro Finance

Idiosyncratic volatility and stock returns: evidence from Colombia. Introduction and literature review

Daily Winners and Losers a

Liquidity skewness premium

Disagreement, Underreaction, and Stock Returns

Return Reversals, Idiosyncratic Risk and Expected Returns

CONDITIONING INFORMATION AND IDIOSYNCRATIC VOLATILITY PUZZLE

Lottery Preferences and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle* Doina C. Chichernea University of Denver

Asset Pricing and Excess Returns over the Market Return

DIVIDENDS A NEW PERSPECTIVE

Cards. Joseph Engelberg Linh Le Jared Williams. Department of Finance, University of California at San Diego

Diversified or Concentrated Factors What are the Investment Beliefs Behind these two Smart Beta Approaches?

High Short Interest Effect and Aggregate Volatility Risk. Alexander Barinov. Juan (Julie) Wu * This draft: July 2013

The Volatility of Liquidity and Expected Stock Returns

What Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Tell Us About Future Stock Returns?

Appendix Tables for: A Flow-Based Explanation for Return Predictability. Dong Lou London School of Economics

Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Expected Idiosyncratic Skewness

Does Idiosyncratic Volatility Proxy for Risk Exposure?

Is Stock Return Predictability of Option-implied Skewness Affected by the Market State?

Foreign Fund Flows and Asset Prices: Evidence from the Indian Stock Market

Beta Anomaly and Comparative Analysis of Beta Arbitrage Strategies

The Role of Credit Ratings in the. Dynamic Tradeoff Model. Viktoriya Staneva*

Internet Appendix Arbitrage Trading: the Long and the Short of It

Transcription:

The High Idiosyncratic Volatility Low Return Puzzle Hai Lu, Kevin Wang, and Xiaolu Wang Joseph L. Rotman School of Management University of Toronto NTU International Conference, December, 2008

What is the puzzle? Ang, Holdrick, Xing, and Zhang, Journal of Finance, 2006 AHXZ find that high idiosyncratic volatility (ivol) stocks have low returns. It is about cross-sectional differences in stock returns. What is ivol (or how is it measured)? Constructed with the Fama-French three factor model Obtained by daily return regressions in each month Defined as the standard deviation of the residuals 1

The Basic Result of AHXZ: month-t ivol quintile 1 2 3 4 5 5-1 t-stat (5-1) month-(t + 1) return 0.96 1.05 1.09 0.75 0.06 0.91 2.74 FF-3 alpha 0.05 0.05 0.02-0.40-1.20 1.25 6.19 2

What do we do in this paper? Basic idea The effect is nonlinear - mostly concentrated in the highest ivol quintile. The highest ivol quintile contains two types of stocks: Stocks with regularly high ivol Stocks with temporarily high ivol 3

YAHOO INC (NasdaqGS) Range: 1d 5d 3m 6m 1y 2y 5y max Type: Bar Line Cdl Scale: Linear Log Size: M L Temporarily high ivol - An example Compare: YHOO vs S&P Nasdaq Dow Compare Want more control over the chart? Try our Interactive Chart. Splits:02-Sep-97 [3:2], 03-Aug-98 [2:1], 08-Feb-99 [2:1], 14-Feb-00 [2:1], 12-May-04 [2:1] 4 Last Trade: 26.71 Trade Time: Mar 14 Day's Range: 26.50-27.96 52wk Range: 18.58-34.08

What have we got? What are we trying to get? The highest ivol quintile contains two types of stocks: A group of small, illiquid, low-priced stocks display strong reversal. A group of relatively large and liquid stocks generates the puzzle. In particular, losing stocks in this group exhibit drift. Work-in-progress: What explains low return of the second group? Analysts forecasts dispersion and/or effects of corporate news 5

Why is it interesting? Two different views of the ivol effect: Very robust - AHXZ Not robust at all - Bali and Cakici (2008) Sensitive to weighting-scheme. Sensitive to data frequency used to estimate ivol. Our goal is to explain both. Now we can explain the sensitivity results of Bali and Cakici. We are trying to explain how the second group generates the AHXZ finding. 6

re reported in the lower panel. size represents the average stock market capitalization by the end of month t. eports the average book-to-market ratio. turnover reports the average monthly turnover. illiquidity reports the av onthly Amihud (2002) illiquidity measure. price reports the average stock price in each size group. Panel A is f tocks in the idiosyncratic volatility quintile 5. Panel B is for stocks with ranking-month (month t) return < 0. Pa s for stocks with ranking-month (month t) return > 0. Table 3 - Panel A A. All stocks in the idiosyncratic volatility quintile 5 value-weighted equally-weighted size rank number t t+1 t t+1 1 319 1.96 [3.34] 2.10 [4.44] 0.59 [0.98] 3.18 [6.32] 2 320 5.50 [8.62] 0.38 [0.86] 5.26 [8.30] 0.47 [1.05] 3 319 8.72 [11.12] -0.10 [-0.23] 7.53 [10.74] -0.06 [-0.14] size rank size B/M turnover illiquidity price 1 5.38 1.52 0.43 150.98 2.70 2 19.81 1.16 0.54 25.56 5.21 3 200.32 0.88 1.01 5.06 12.96 7

t+1). Panel B reports the equally-weighted portfolio returns. Panel C reports the average idiosyncratic volatility in roup. Table 6 - Panel A A. Value-weighted portfolio returns size rank 1 2 3 4 5 ivol rank t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 1-0.63 1.16-0.36 1.31 0.00 1.37 0.49 1.23 1.15 0.95 2-1.58 1.62-0.71 1.64 0.06 1.57 0.95 1.51 1.75 1.00 3-2.05 1.66-0.67 1.68 0.60 1.48 1.86 1.30 2.43 1.01 4-2.02 1.89 0.29 1.27 2.02 1.12 3.33 0.86 3.46 0.52 5 3.25 1.44 6.18 0.16 7.62-0.15 8.35-0.28 10.11-0.19 5-1 3.88 0.28 6.54-1.15 7.62-1.52 7.86-1.51 8.98-1.14 [7.17] [0.85] [11.22] [-3.63] [11.84] [-4.88] [11.01] [-4.40] [9.07] [-2.84] B. Equally-weighted portfolio returns size rank 1 2 3 4 5 8

5 1.70 2.47 6.04 0.19 7.58-0.12 8.38-0.31 9.00-0.21 5-1 2.38 1.24 6.42-1.09 7.60-1.51 7.94-1.56 8.13-1.29 [4.40] [3.55] [11.04] [-3.44] [11.90] [-4.89] [11.37] [-4.63] [9.20] [-3.24] Table 6 - Panel C C. Average idiosyncratic volatility size rank 1 2 3 4 5 ivol rank t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 1 0.83 1.68 0.87 1.42 0.90 1.34 0.93 1.28 0.94 1.17 2 1.58 2.33 1.58 2.10 1.57 1.97 1.56 1.82 1.53 1.59 3 2.25 2.98 2.24 2.69 2.23 2.49 2.21 2.27 2.17 2.00 4 3.23 3.81 3.20 3.36 3.16 3.06 3.11 2.77 3.06 2.45 5 6.88 6.05 5.71 4.65 5.29 3.97 5.10 3.45 5.01 2.91 9

Table 9 (Continued) Table 9 - Panels C and D C. Returns (using the group of small stocks in the quintile 5) L N 1 3 6 12 1 0.33 [0.85] 0.47 [1.14] 0.62 [1.47] 0.75 [1.75] 3 0.46 [1.15] 0.62 [1.50] 0.76 [1.79] 0.85 [1.96] 6 0.65 [1.63] 0.79 [1.89] 0.90 [2.13] 0.96 [2.22] 9 0.76 [1.90] 0.91 [2.18] 0.99 [2.35] 1.02 [2.38] 12 0.86 [2.14] 0.99 [2.38] 1.07 [2.53] 1.07 [2.50] D. FF-3 alphas (using the group of small stocks in the quintile 5) L N 1 3 6 12 1-0.29 [-1.24] -0.18 [-0.74] -0.05 [-0.21] 0.07 [0.27] 3-0.18 [-0.78] -0.04 [-0.17] 0.08 [0.31] 0.15 [0.60] 6-0.02 [-0.09] 0.09 [0.39] 0.19 [0.78] 0.25 [0.99] 9 0.08 [0.37] 0.19 [0.80] 0.28 [1.11] 0.33 [1.31] 12 0.17 [0.75] 0.28 [1.16] 0.36 [1.45] 0.40 [1.57] E. Returns (using the group of large stocks in quintile 5) L N 1 3 6 12 1-1.03 [-3.16] -1.14 [-3.04] -1.23 [-3.17] -0.95 [-2.32] 10

3-0.18 [-0.78] -0.04 [-0.17] 0.08 [0.31] 0.15 [0.60] 6-0.02 [-0.09] 0.09 [0.39] 0.19 [0.78] 0.25 [0.99] 9 0.08 [0.37] 0.19 [0.80] 0.28 [1.11] 0.33 [1.31] 12 0.17 [0.75] 0.28 [1.16] 0.36 [1.45] 0.40 [1.57] Table 9 - Panels E and F E. Returns (using the group of large stocks in quintile 5) L N 1 3 6 12 1-1.03 [-3.16] -1.14 [-3.04] -1.23 [-3.17] -0.95 [-2.32] 3-0.77 [-2.43] -0.90 [-2.47] -0.88 [-2.32] -0.68 [-1.70] 6-0.65 [-2.05] -0.72 [-2.01] -0.70 [-1.84] -0.57 [-1.41] 9-0.53 [-1.67] -0.59 [-1.64] -0.59 [-1.55] -0.53 [-1.33] 12-0.46 [-1.44] -0.51 [-1.41] -0.52 [-1.36] -0.50 [-1.26] F. FF-3 alphas (using the group of large stocks in the quintile 5) L N 1 3 6 12 1-1.36 [-6.52] -1.48 [-6.44] -1.58 [-6.65] -1.36 [-5.46] 3-1.09 [-5.80] -1.26 [-5.85] -1.26 [-5.46] -1.11 [-4.50] 6-1.01 [-5.75] -1.13 [-5.33] -1.12 [-4.92] -1.00 [-4.09] 9-0.90 [-5.23] -1.02 [-4.93] -1.03 [-4.55] -0.95 [-3.95] 12-0.85 [-4.96] -0.96 [-4.71] -0.96 [-4.29] -0.91 [-3.88] 11

For the second group in the ivol quintile 5, both winning and losing stocks have negative holding period returns. Disagreement = Overpricing What can generate disagreement? Hong and Stein (2007, JEP): Gradual information flow Limited attention Heterogeneous priors Miller (1977), Harrison and Kreps (1978), and Scheinkman and Xiong (2003) Opinion divergence and short-sale constraint lead to overpricing. Trading volume and the degree of overpricing are positively correlated. 12

ranking and the holding month. Robust Newey-West t-statistics are reported in square brackets. The bottom panel reports average stock size and average number of forecasts ( est ) made by analysts in a given month The sample period is from January 1976 to December 2006. Panel B reports the results for first sorting o idiosyncratic volatility, and on analyst forecast Table dispersion. 10 - Panel B B. Stocks with at least three analysts making forecasts analyst dispersion rank 1 2 3 4 5 value-weighted portfolio return ivol rank t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 1 1.45 1.12 1.03 1.06 0.98 1.26 0.82 1.23 0.55 1.42 2 1.85 1.14 1.57 1.14 1.43 1.17 1.26 1.25 0.87 1.65 3 2.20 0.96 1.69 1.08 1.80 1.17 1.89 1.31 1.57 1.08 4 2.88 0.98 2.41 1.06 2.45 1.48 2.54 1.39 2.41 0.65 5 4.65 0.99 3.57 0.80 3.64 0.88 3.83 0.63 5.07 0.23 5-1 3.20-0.13 2.53-0.26 2.66-0.38 3.01-0.60 4.52-1.19 [4.84] [-0.40] [5.23] [-0.91] [5.64] [-1.25] [5.67] [-1.88] [6.54] [-2.82] equally-weighted portfolio return ivol rank t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 t t+1 1 1.08 1.29 0.86 1.27 0.71 1.38 0.41 1.35-0.45 1.63 2 1.68 1.33 1.25 1.36 1.08 1.45 0.63 1.45-0.50 1.70 13

Summary We find that the division of the highest ivol quintile is useful. Sensitivity to variation of the empirical procedure is annoying. It should be understood in any serious attempt to explain the effect. What to do next? Focus on shocks to explore temporarily high volatility. In fact, we have a new paper: The Long Memory in Stock Price Shocks 14