Paul H. Cootner, David H. Pyle, Capital Asset Pricing in a General Equilibrium Framework, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 13, No. 4, Proceedings of Thirteenth Annual Conference of the Western Finance Association, June 20-26, 1978 (Nov., 1978), pp. 613-624

This paper provides a direct test of the hypothesis that large January returns can be attributed to omitted risk factors. Data from 1926–1991 show that the January return in the smallest decile of NYSE firms dominates the January returns for all other deciles by the first-order stochastic dominance. Similarly, January returns in all deciles (with the exception of ninth and tenth deciles) dominate non-January returns by first-, second-, or third-order stochastic dominance. The presence of stochastic dominance by January returns suggests that the omitted risk factors are not likely to explain the January effect.

In a perfectly efficient market, after adjusting for drift, futures prices would follow a martingale model. The martingale property implies that the changes in futures prices should be serially uncorrelated. This study finds that the price changes of the S&P 500 futures contracts during 1983 and 1984 have negative serial correlation and are better described by a random walk model with reflecting barriers or by a random walk model with reflecting barriers and mean reversion.

Paul H. Malatesta, Measuring Abnormal Performance: The Event Parameter Approach Using Joint Generalized Least Squares, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Mar., 1986), pp. 27-38

Robert H. Litzenberger, Some Observations on Capital Structure and the Impact of Recent Recapitalizations on Share Prices, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Mar., 1986), pp. 59-71

The word revolution is entirely appropriate for describing the changes in financial institutions and instruments that have occurred in the past twenty years. The major impulses to successful financial innovations have come from regulations and taxes. The outlook for the future is for a slowing down of the rate of financial innovation, but much growth and improvement are still in prospect.

In this note, a loss shared by the security holders of merging firms is pointed out: separate corporate entities provide double protection against future negative cash flows that are partof any production process (e.g., when customer or employee liabilities exceed future income), independent of whether or not debt is used in the corporate capital structure. A merger involvesa relinquishment of this double protection in return for a less valuable single protection: limited liability in the merged corporation against combined negative cash flows.

Richard H. Bernhard, Risk-Adjusted Values, Timing of Uncertainty Resolution, and the Measurement of Project Worth, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Mar., 1984), pp. 83-99

Black and Scholes [1] derived the pricing equation for a European put when the stock price follows geometric Brownian motion. For this same case, Merton [5] derived the pricing equation for an American put with infinite time to maturity. Brennan and Schwartz [2], Rubinstein and Cox [7], and Parkinson [6] have developed numerical solutions for the price of an American put. Numerical solutions are expensive and do not provide much intuition. Naturally, an analytic solution would be much preferred; unfortunately, pricing the American put requires solving a formidable and presumably intractable boundary value problem.

Received monetary theory supports the existence of a strong relationship between monetary activity and stock prices. Following the work of Friedman and Schwartz [8], relating money supply to aggregate economic activity, some researchers have examined the more specific connection between changes in the rate of growth of money supply and associated movements in stock prices (see [6], [10], [11], [14], [17], [18], [19], [20], [22], and [28]). These studies use a variety of monetary aggregate measures to functionally relate the level of stock market indices to contemporaneous and lagged monetary growth rates. In general, the findings indicate a direct relationship between money supply and stock returns.