This paper examines the pricing performance of the valuation equation for American call options on stocks with known dividends and compares it with two suggested approximation methods. The approximation obtained by substituting the stock price net of the present value of the escrowed dividends into the Black-Scholes model is shown to induce spurious correlation between prediction error and (1) the standard deviation of stock return, (2) the degree to which the option is in-the-money or out-of-the-money, (3) the probability of early exercise, (4) the time to expiration of the option, and (5) the dividend yield of the stock. A new method of examining option market efficiency is developed and tested.

Both the Roll and the Geske equations for the valuation of the American call option on a stock with known dividends are incorrectly specified. This note presents the corrected valuation formula, explains the misspecifications and provides a numerical example.

This study focuses on the ex-dividend stock price decline implicit within the valuation of American call options on dividend-paying stocks. The Roll (1977) American call option pricing formula and the observed structure of CBOE call option transaction prices are used to infer the expected ex-dividend stock price decline as a proportion of the amount of the dividend. The relative decline is shown to be not meaningfully different from one, confirming some recent evidence from studies which examined stock prices in the days surrounding ex-dividend.

Recent empirical work by Banz (1981) and Reinganum (1981) documents abnormally large risk-adjusted returns for small firms listed on the NYSE and the AMEX. The strength and persistence with which the returns appear lead both authors to conclude the single-period, two-parameter capital asset pricing model is misspecified. This study (1) confirms that total market value of common stock equity varies inversely with risk-adjusted returns, (2) demonstrates that price per share does also, and (3) finds that transaction costs at least partially account for the abnormality.

Most models of market volatility use either past returns or ex post volatility to forecast volatility. In this paper, the dynamic behavior of market volatility is assessed by forecasting the volatility implied in the transaction prices of Standard & Poor's 100 index options. We test and reject the hypothesis that volatility changes are unpredictable. However, while our statistical model delivers precise forecasts, abnormal returns are not possible in a trading strategy (based on daily out-of-sample volatility projections) which takes transaction costs into account, suggesting that predictable time-varying volatility is consistent with market efficiency.

The need to understand and measure the determinants of market maker bid/ask spreads is crucial in evaluating the merits of competing market structures and the fairness of market maker rents. This study develops a simple, parsimonious model for the market maker's spread that accounts for the effects of price discreteness induced by minimum tick size, order-processing costs, inventory-holding costs, adverse selection, and competition. The inventory-holding and adverse selection cost components of spread are modeled as an option with a stochastic time to expiration. This inventory-holding premium embedded in the spread represents compensation for the price risk borne by the market maker while the security is held in inventory. The premium is partitioned in such a way that the inventory-holding and adverse selection cost components, as well as the probability of an informed trade, are identified. The model is tested empirically using Nasdaq stocks in three distinct minimum tick size regimes and is shown to perform well both in an absolute sense and relative to competing specifications.