Knowledge that Transforms

We provide the first systematic asset pricing analysis of one of the main safe asset categories, the repurchase agreement (repo). Based on the temporal and cross-sectional variation in short-term rates, we form a carry that, together with a market factor, prices these near-money assets in a linear pricing model. The carry depicts heterogeneity in nonpecuniary convenience yields of collateral assets and increases in the safety premium and the liquidity premium reflecting opportunity cost. Our carry helps explain the cross-section of short-term rates, as well as of long-term bond returns after accounting for standard bond pricing factors.

This paper investigates the firm-level, asset pricing implications of government expenditures. Higher government sales dependency (GD), unconditional on political partisanship cycles, significantly predicts positive future returns, and a GD-weighted portfolio substantially improves the tangency portfolio’s ex post Sharpe ratio. Conditionally, the results are stronger during Republican presidencies. Higher returns do not stem from political connections or political and regulatory risks. The underlying economic channel is higher expected cash flow from increased profitability. Atypical provisions of government contracts and information asymmetry likely drive higher profit margins. A risk versus a mispricing analysis elicits more convincing evidence for mispricing as an explanation for abnormal returns.

The value effect and the idiosyncratic volatility (IVol) discount arise because growth firms and high IVol firms beat the CAPM during periods of increasing aggregate volatility (market volatility and average IVol), that makes their risk low. All else equal, growth options’ value increases with volatility, an effect that is stronger for high IVol firms, for which growth options take a larger fraction of the firm value and firm volatility responds more to aggregate volatility changes. The factor model with the market factor, the market volatility risk factor, and the average IVol factor explains the value effect and the IVol discount.

This paper explores the impact of product market competition on the positive relation between labor mobility (LM) and future returns. We develop a production-based model and formalize the intuition that low exposure to systematic risk in a concentrated industry limits LM’s amplifying effect on operating leverage. Therefore, the model predicts a stronger positive relation between LM and expected returns for firms in competitive industries. Consistent with the model’s prediction, we empirically find that LM predicts returns only among firms in competitive industries. This evidence suggests that the intensity of competition in firms’ product market potentially drives the positive LM-return relation.

I find that short interest significantly and negatively predicts aggregate stock returns in 24 of 32 countries examined. This predictability survives out-of-sample tests, persists outside of recessions, and is not subsumed by other well-known return predictors. The results indicate that short interest contains valuable information for forecasting international market returns that is distinct and more powerful than that of other available predictors. However, the predictive power of short interest varies over time and across regions. It is higher around economic downturns when margin requirements tighten and in regions where short selling is constrained by regulations or equity lending market frictions.

In contrast with theoretical predictions, high-fee active equity funds generate worse net-of-expenses performance. We show that this fee-performance puzzle is driven by the preference of high-fee funds for stocks with low operating profitability and high investment rates, characteristics associated with low expected returns. After controlling for exposures to profitability and investment factors, we find high-fee funds significantly outperform low-fee funds before expenses and achieve similarly poor net-of-fees performance. In resolving the fee-performance puzzle, our findings provide support to the theoretical prediction that net alphas are unrelated to fees and challenge the common advice to prefer low-fee funds over high-fee counterparts.

The distribution of long-run compound returns to portfolio strategies is greatly affected by periodic rebalancing. Over time, buy-and-hold portfolios gradually lose diversification as extreme long-run skewness in individual stock returns leads to increasingly concentrated holdings. For long investment horizons, small rebalanced portfolios holding only a fraction of all stocks therefore achieve better diversification than much larger marketwide buy-and-hold portfolios. Consequently, over long horizons, rebalanced portfolios tend to outperform buy-and-hold portfolios, and risk-averse investors prefer the former. Empirical results strongly support the theoretical predictions and add further evidence to the strong empirical performance of (small) equal-weighted portfolios.

Classic option pricing theory values a derivative contract via dynamic delta hedging and treating the contract as redundant relative to the underlying security. Dynamic delta hedging proves highly effective in practice, but the remaining risk is still large because of the practical limits of arbitrage. Derivatives can play primary roles in risk allocation. This paper quantifies the percentage variance reduction of delta hedging on U.S. stock options, proposes a top-down return attribution framework to identify the remaining risk sources of the delta-hedged option investment, and constructs a statistical return factor model to explain the variations of the delta-hedged option returns.