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

Fields:
5 results ✕ Clear filters

Mispricing Factors

Review of Financial Studies 2017 30(4), 1270-1315
A four-factor model with two "mispricing" factors, in addition to market and size factors, accommodates a large set of anomalies better than notable four- and five-factor alternative models. Moreover, our size factor reveals a small-firm premium nearly twice usual estimates. The mispricing factors aggregate information across 11 prominent anomalies by averaging rankings within two clusters exhibiting the greatest return co-movement. Investor sentiment predicts the mispricing factors, especially their short legs, consistent with a mispricing interpretation and the asymmetry in ease of buying versus shorting. A three-factor model with a single mispricing factor also performs well, especially in Bayesian model comparisons.

Optimal Long-Term Contracting with Learning

Review of Financial Studies 2017 30(6), 2006-2065
We introduce uncertainty into Holmstrom and Milgrom (1987) to study optimal long-term contracting with learning. In a dynamic relationship, the agent's shirking not only reduces current performance, but also increases the agent's information rent due to the persistent belief manipulation effect. We characterize the optimal contract using the dynamic programming technique in which information rent is the unique state variable. In the optimal contract, the optimal effort is front-loaded and stochastically decreases over time. Furthermore, the optimal contract exhibits an option-like feature in that incentives increase after good performance. Implications about managerial incentives and asset management compensations are discussed.

Mispricing Factors

Review of Financial Studies 2017 30(4), 1270-1315 open access
A four-factor model with two "mispricing" factors, in addition to market and size factors, accommodates a large set of anomalies better than notable four-and five-factor alternative models. Moreover, our size factor reveals a small-firm premium nearly twice usual estimates. The mispricing factors aggregate information across 11 prominent anomalies by averaging rankings within two clusters exhibiting the greatest return co-movement. Investor sentiment predicts the mispricing factors, especially their short legs, consistent with a mispricing interpretation and the asymmetry in ease of buying versus shorting. A three-factor model with a single mispricing factor also performs well, especially in Bayesian model comparisons.

Inflation Bets on the Long Bond

Review of Financial Studies 2017 30(3), 900-947
The liquidity premium theory of interest rates predicts that the Treasury yield curve steepens with inflation uncertainty as investors demand larger risk premiums to hold long-term bonds. By using the dispersion of inflation forecasts to measure this uncertainty, we find the opposite. Since the prices of long-term bonds move more with inflation than short-term ones, investors also disagree and speculate more about long-maturity payoffs with greater uncertainty. Shorting frictions, measured by using Treasury lending fees, then lead long maturities to become overpriced and the yield curve to flatten. We estimate this inflation-betting effect using time variation in inflation disagreement and Treasury supply. Received September 3, 2014; editorial decision August 5, 2016 by Editor Andrew Karolyi

Optimal Long-Term Contracting with Learning

Review of Financial Studies 2017 30(6), 2006-2065 open access
We introduce uncertainty into Holmstrom and Milgrom (1987) to study optimal long-term contracting with learning. In a dynamic relationship, the agent’s shirking not only reduces current performance, but also increases the agent’s information rent due to the persistent belief manipulation effect. We characterize the optimal contract using the dynamic programming technique in which information rent is the unique state variable. In the optimal contract, the optimal effort is front-loaded and stochastically decreases over time. Furthermore, the optimal contract exhibits an option-like feature in that incentives increase after good performance. Implications about managerial incentives and asset management compensations are discussed. Received August 31, 2015; editorial decision October 20, 2016 by Editor Francesca Cornelli.