An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

In recent years a major controversy has formed in the finance literature regarding the empirical evidence of the informational content of dividends. Despite considerable support for the position of dividend nontriviality by various studies, the work by Watts [13] represents a formidable challenge. Because of the close proximity of the firm's earnings and dividend announcement dates, the major issue of the dispute has centered on the identification and control of contemporaneous earnings information. In an attempt to settle this controversy, the present study evaluates and extends Watts' methodology.

A perfect capital market is a key assumption in recent theories of security pricing. It is assumed that the costs of transactions, information-gathering, and portfolio management are all zero, and that no investor is so large as to exert an appreciable effect on either the risk-free interest rate or the yield on risky securities. If, in this perfect capital market, investors have identical decision horizons and homogeneous expectations, then there is a unique optimal portfolio of risky securities. Since this unique portfolio must include every security in proportion to its relative valuation in the capital market, it is referred to as the “market” portfolio. When the capital market reaches equilibrium, the expected return of every security will be a linear function of the expected return of the market portfolio. From this relationship Lintner and Mossin have separately derived valuation formulas that express the market price of a security as a function of the security[s end-of-period expected value, its risk as measured by the variance and covariances of this end-of-period value, the market price of risk within the portfolio, and the risk-free rate of interest.

Markowitz's [2] portfolio selection model was originally concerned with financial investments, but the model's implications for capital budgeting are now well recognized. Markowitz's basic idea is that the optimal portfolio for an investor is not simply any collection of good securities, but a balanced whole, providing the investor with the best combination of “return” and “risk.” Return and risk are to be measured by the expected value and variance of the probability distribution of portfolio return. Although financial writers have generally accepted Markowitz's measure of return, they have not been completely satisfied with his suggested measure of risk [1]. In fact, Markowitz himself had reservations about choosing variance as a measure of risk.1 Besides variance, he considered five other alternative measures of risk:(1) The expected value of loss;(2) The probability of loss;(3) The expected absolute deviation;(4) The maximum expected loss; and(5) The semivariance.

T. C. Langetieg, M. C. Findlay, L. F. J. da Motts, Multiperiod Pension Plans and ERISA, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 17, No. 4, Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Western Finance Association, June 16-19, 1982, Portland, Oregon (Nov., 1982), pp. 603-631

Abstract The proliferation of electronic limit order books operating without dealers raises questions regarding the need for intermediaries with affirmative obligations to maintain markets. We develop a simple model of dealer participation and test it using a sample of less liquid firms that trade on the Paris Bourse. The results indicate that firms with designated dealers exhibit better market quality, and that younger firms, smaller firms, and less volatile firms choose a designated dealer. Around the announcement of dealer introduction, stocks experience an average cumulative abnormal return of nearly 5% that is positively correlated with improvements in liquidity. Overall, these findings emphasize the potential benefits of designing better market structures, even within electronic limit order books, and suggest that purely endogenous liquidity provision may not be optimal for all securities.

This study is an ex post performance test comparing the accuracy of an American model to a European model for valuing listed options. Specifically, the Geske and Johnson American put valuation model is compared with the Black and Scholes European put model. On average, both models undervalue, relative to market prices, put options. However, the Geske and Johnson model values are significantly closer to market prices than are the Black and Scholes values.

Many empirical studies find that the distribution of stock returns departs from normality. In such cases, it is desirable to employ a statistical estimation procedure that may be more efficient than ordinary least squares. This paper describes various robust methods, which have attracted increasing attention in the statistical literature, in the context of estimating beta risk. The empirical analysis documents the potential efficiency gains from using robust methods as an alternative to ordinary least squares, based on both simulated and actual returns data.

This paper presents an empirical analysis of firms that are delisted from a major stock exchange. The delisting process is described and stock price movements surrounding delisting are analyzed. For firms with prior announcements, equity values decline by approximately 8.5 percent on announcement day. For firms without prior announcements, a similar adjustment takes place between the last day of trading in the initial market and the close of the first day of trading in the new market. Four hypotheses concerning the decline in firm value are examined. These are the liquidity hypothesis, the management signalling hypothesis, the exchange certification hypothesis, and the downward sloping demand curve hypothesis. Evidence consistent with the liquidity hypothesis is presented in the paper. Unlike evidence onstock exchange listings, returns in the post-delisting period do not appear to be anomalous. © 1990, School of Business Administration, University of Washington. All rights reserved.

This paper examines the pricing of exchange-traded long-term corporate bond portfolios. Observable instruments measuring the term structure of interest rates, levels of bond and stock prices, and a January dummy are found to predict excess returns on corporate bonds. An intertemporal asset pricing model with changing expectations and unobservable factors is then estimated for the predictable excess returns using Hansen's Generalized Method of Moments. The results show that a multibeta linear time-varying model of con? ditional expected returns with constant betas can successfully value corporate bonds. Spe? cifically, the tests indicate the presence of two time-varying hedge portfolios. The data, however, support a single latent variable specification when all January observations are excluded. This result suggests the existence of a strong January seasonal in one of the latent variables.