To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
8 results ✕ Clear filters

The Term Structure of Interest Rates as a Random Field

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(2), 365-384
Forward rate dynamics are modeled as a random field. In contrast to multifactor models, random field models offer a parsimonious description of term structure dynamics, while eliminating the self-inconsistent practice of recalibration. The form of the drift of the instantaneous forward rate process necessary to preclude arbitrage under the risk-neutral measure is obtained. Forward risk-adjusted measures are identified and used to price a bond option when the forward volatility structure depends on the square root of the current spot rate. Several classes of tractable random field models are presented.

The Term Structure of Interest Rates as a Random Field

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(2), 365-384
Forward rate dynamics are modeled as a random field. In contrast to multifactor models, random field models offer a parsimonious description of term structure dynamics, while eliminating the self-inconsistent practice of recalibration. The form of the drift of the instantaneous forward rate process necessary to preclude arbitrage under the risk-neutral measure is obtained. Forward risk-adjusted measures are identified and used to price a bond option when the forward volatility structure depends on the square root of the current spot rate. Several classes of tractable random field models are presented.

Valuation of Bankrupt Firms

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 43-74
This study compares the market value of firms that reorganize in bankruptcy with estimates of value based on management's published cash flow projections. We estimate firm values using models that have been shown in other contexts to generate relatively precise estimates of value. We find that these methods generally yield unbiased estimates of value, but the dispersion of valuation errors is very wide-the sample ratio of estimated value to market value varies from less than 20% to greater than 250%. Cross-sectional analysis indicates that the variation in these errors is related to empirical proxies for claimholders' incentives to overstate or understate the firm's value.

Are There Economies of Scale in Underwriting Fees? Evidence of Rising External Financing Costs

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 191-218
This study examines the behavior of spreads paid in firm underwritten seasoned common stock offerings and straight bond offerings. Estimates indicate that up to 85% of the spread is variable cost and that the marginal spread is rising. Further, offerings that are likely to require greater underwriting services encounter higher marginal spreads. These findings are consistent with there being a family of U-shaped spreads, with lower quality offerings priced on higher spreads, unlike the economies of scale view of spreads. They agree with the views that underwriters provide valuable services and that the marginal cost of external finance is rising.

Valuation of Bankrupt Firms

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 43-74
This study compares the market value of firms that reorganize in bankruptcy with estimates of value based on management's published cash flow projections. We estimate firm values using models that have been shown in other contexts to generate relatively precise estimates of value. We find that these methods generally yield unbiased estimates of value, but the dispersion of valuation errors is very wide - the sample ratio of estimated value to market value varies from less than 20% to greater than 250%. Cross-sectional analysis indicates that the variation in these errors is related to empirical proxies for claimholders' incentives to overstate or understate the firm's value.

Hedging and Liquidity

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 127-153
This article develops a model for evaluating alternative hedging strategies for financially constrained firms. A key advantage of the model is the ability to capture the intertemporal effects of hedging on the firm's financial situation. We characterize the optimal hedge. A wide range of alternative hedging strategies can be specified and the model allows us to determine in each case if the hedging strategy raises or lowers firms value and by how much. We show that hedging firm value, hedging cash flow from operations and hedging sales revenue are not optimal. The article highlights the fact that every hedging strategy comes packaged with a borrowing strategy which requires careful consideration.

Hedging and Liquidity

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 127-153
This article develops a model for evaluating alternative hedging strategies for financially constrained firms. A key advantage of the model is the ability to capture the intertemporal effects of hedging on the firm's financial situation. We characterize the optimal hedge. A wide range of alternative hedging strategies can be specified and the model allows us to determine in each case if the hedging strategy raises or lowers firm value and by how much. We show that hedging firm value, hedging cash flow from operations and hedging sales revenue are not optimal. The article highlights the fact that every hedging strategy comes packaged with a borrowing strategy which requires careful consideration.

Are There Economies of Scale in Underwriting Fees? Evidence of Rising External Financing Costs

Review of Financial Studies 2000 13(1), 191-218
Journal Article Are There Economies of Scale in Underwriting Fees? Evidence of Rising External Financing Costs Get access Oya Altınkılıç, Oya Altınkılıç Virginia Tech Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Robert S. Hansen Robert S. Hansen Virginia Tech Address correspondence to Robert S. Hansen, Department of Finance, Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, or e-mail: [email protected]. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Review of Financial Studies, Volume 13, Issue 1, January 2000, Pages 191–218, https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/13.1.191 Published: 15 June 2015